Time's system - Release the Hounds!

[Time]

[Time]

One thing I forgot - how I forgot this in The Forge I have no idea....

My goal with this system is:
A fast playing system with easy conflict resolution and the ability to create unique characters (e.g. no "fighter class") that allow the players to have characters that are personal enough that they care about them.  I don't want to be stuck in a genre/setting if I can help it.

I would call this (when looking as the G/N/S model), most likely either G or N.  I enjoy both styles of game so I may be touching both camps on this.

If there is a need for futher clarificaion on what I'm shooting for let me know.

-Time

[ This Message was edited by: Time on 2001-10-26 16:39 ]

[Zak Arntson]

My goal with this system is:
A fast playing system with easy conflict resolution and the ability to create unique characters (e.g. no "fighter class") that allow the players to have characters that are personal enough that they care about them. I don't want to be stuck in a genre/setting if I can help it.

I'm not sure why you don't use a current system, or simple modifications to one.  But then, I'm more of a cool System tied to Premise guy myself.  I'm just curious ... why don't you want to be stuck in a genre/setting?  What benefits do you see in a generic system?  (maybe that deserves its own thread ...)

Anyhow, before my personal shift towards this, I did do a lot of thinking on generic systems.  Mostly "fixes" to make d20/AD&D 2nd ed. less of a class-based game (my background is in Planescape, which focuses more on character psychology than class).  So here's my constructive criticism for you ...

Character Creation
With a point system, especially where points can be spent on different things, BE VERY CAREFUL with balance.  How can you be sure that 1 Stat point = 3 Broad Skill points = 1 point of Advantage/Disadvantage?  This is a tough one, and you will always have to worry about players looking for best-buys (see Ron's discussions on Champions, a game I've only played once and got BURNED when I character-created for fun and the other players min/maxed).

Magic
I wonder why you have the Wizard/Priest split.  This seems limiting and somewhat arbitrary.  Could this be an artifact of D&D?  Try offering a Cast Spell Advantage that is extremely costly, and is often balanced by different Disadvantages.  Disadvantages like "Magic by Study" and "Magic by Faith."  This way, enterprising Players and campaign-world creators can come up with entirely new types of magic-user ... "Magic by Tattoo" for example ... without resorting to bending current rules (the analog to this would be every new magic-user in D&D requires a new Class or Prestige Class, blech).

I'm interested in seeing more of your game, but I'd much rather see your creative juices go into cool Premise and you hash it out with a good System here on the Forge.

[Mike Holmes]

The corrallary to Zak's point is, why should I use this system instead of Hero System (generic Champions), Fuzion, Risus, GURPS, FUDGE, Tri-Stat, CORPS, JAGS, or any of a plethora of other generic systems I can name (Universalis)? Does it improve upon these? How so? I doesn't at first glance seem to have any more problems than any other system. But I already have resources for many of these other games as well as experience in how to handle them well. Why would one want to switch unless there was some improvement?

Mike

[Mithras]

Mike's right, you need a central kick (that is if you want to disseminate your game ... if its for personal use, then I can see plenty of benefits in using your own system over GURPS, FUDGE et al).

The nifty tag line 'can be used in a variety of different genres and settings' isn't new anymore. BESM is generic, but it angles itself toward a cinematic and high action genre; GURPS is different, a generic game that sails as close to 'realism' as your ever likely to get. My little generic game The Ladder is short and very easy to memorize, its a generic game that dispenses with most rules and wraps everything up around a single 5 rung ladder. None of these games do everything well. They focus on a partiular style, or chose a certain line.

What's yours?

Best Regards

[Mike Holmes]

Also, your game has very traditionally Simulationist/Gamist mechanics, Is there going to be something in a later chapter that heads it off into Narrativism?

Mike

[Time]

If I'm reading you all correctly, the general ideas you are throwing to me are:

1. why not use GURPS, FUDGE or another generic system?
2. I may need something special - a setting - to really kick this idea into action.
3. This is much more G/S than N - so if I want more N, things might need to change.

I'm going to see if I can work through these issues with some more explanation.  Here goes...


My original reason for thinking of the system came up durring a GURPS campaign I was running.  The problem I was having was that I'm not too happy with the way that the skills, advantages and such are listed in GURPS - I wanted a set of guidlines that allow the players to design their own skills, advantages, etc. so that they can personalize thier characters.

I don't want a list of skills and such because everytime I have such a list, my players say "Well, I want to do X, but the closest thing I can find is XX - will you let me change it?"
Not that I mind doing that, I just figgued that with a list of guidelines this question and "on the spot" work wouldn't be necessary.  If you want skill X, that's fine - use the guidelines and make skill X.

I also wanted even faster combat.  I don't like/want a lot of emphasis on combat.  Sure, you can get into a slobberknocker or two, but I don't want a two hour (real time) battle.  I want fast combat that allows for more naration - similar to Amber and Sorcerer.  Not exactly like Amber and Sorcerer, but similar.  While I love both of those games I want a little more of a "Gamist" feel - not much!  Just a little.

The setting that I was using in the GURPS game that started me thinking about this was my setting of Avalon.  My first thought was to custom the game to that setting - but then I thought that perhaps a generic system would be better.  I guess I've stuck with that thought and it hasn't really been challenged until now.
I have a good write up of what the Avalon world is like - perhaps I should post that and then we can tweak, bend, twist the rules to fit that setting?


Thank you all for the first round of thoughts.  It's good to have your ideas challenged - makes me think and work harder.

-Time

[Mike Holmes]

On 2001-10-29 10:17, Time wrote:
My original reason for thinking of the system came up durring a GURPS campaign I was running.  The problem I was having was that I'm not too happy with the way that the skills, advantages and such are listed in GURPS - I wanted a set of guidlines that allow the players to design their own skills, advantages, etc. so that they can personalize thier characters.

I don't want a list of skills and such because everytime I have such a list, my players say "Well, I want to do X, but the closest thing I can find is XX - will you let me change it?"
Not that I mind doing that, I just figgued that with a list of guidelines this question and "on the spot" work wouldn't be necessary.  If you want skill X, that's fine - use the guidelines and make skill X.

OK, this might be an advantage over GURPS. But there are other systems that allow you to define your own skills and disadvantages. But, like Paul (Mithras) said, if this is just for your own consumption, then, as a fix of GURPS, you may have exactly what you want. Would you like us to consider it from that POV? In that case we can just consider the ramifications of the system on your particular goals.

I also wanted even faster combat.  I don't like/want a lot of emphasis on combat.  Sure, you can get into a slobberknocker or two, but I don't want a two hour (real time) battle.  I want fast combat that allows for more naration - similar to Amber and Sorcerer.  Not exactly like Amber and Sorcerer, but similar.  While I love both of those games I want a little more of a "Gamist" feel - not much!  Just a little.

Well, we'll have to wait for chapter two to comment on that at all.

The setting that I was using in the GURPS game that started me thinking about this was my setting of Avalon.  My first thought was to custom the game to that setting - but then I thought that perhaps a generic system would be better.  I guess I've stuck with that thought and it hasn't really been challenged until now.
I have a good write up of what the Avalon world is like - perhaps I should post that and then we can tweak, bend, twist the rules to fit that setting?

If that's what you want. If you mean Avalon in the Arthurian sense, I'd suggest looking at Pendragon for potential inspiration.

Mike

[Valamir]

Actually Time, I would DEFINITELY make your game fit you conception of Avalon.  My recommendation would be to find something about Avalon that makes Avalon unique, and make that a central (not just present in the peripheral, but central) mechanic to your game world.

How is Avalon different from any of the myriad other fantasy settings available.  Whatever it is...active presence of divine influence, daily relationship with faeries, a particular feudal-esque social system, everyones a lycanathrope, talking animals, the land itself is magical...whatever...take that thing and find a way to make it take up a large chunk of real estate on your character sheet.

To my way of thinking, you'll know you have succeeded at the point where your game couldn't be used for anything BUT playing in Avalon.

Trying to answer this question and the quest for how to represent it in the game mechanics...will also provide the other issue raised here...the hook for the game.

[Time]

Mike,
This is basically for my own use, or to give to others for free - but I still want it to be the best it can be.

My Avalon isn't Arthurian - I would use Pendragon for inspiration if it was (I've played Pendragon before and enjoyed it).  Avalon is a dark fantasy world in a Fritz Leiber/Theive's World/Thief (the computer game) type of feel.

I'll get chapter two posted later today to see what you think of the conflict resolution.  I think that area needs the most help to get the feel I want it to have.

Zak,
Very good thoughts on the Magic and Character point aspects.  Thank you.
I especially like the idea of simply using Disadvantages like "Magic by Study" and "Magic by Faith."  I think that does offer more options.

Mithras,
Your idea of focusing on a particular sytle or a certain line is a good one - I hadn't thought of it in that way.  Thanks for the assist.


-Time

[Time]

"To my way of thinking, you'll know you have succeeded at the point where your game couldn't be used for anything BUT playing in Avalon." - Valamir

After reading that, Valamir, I think I may have tried to use too broad of a brush at the start - reinforcing the "stay focused" advice that Mithras gave.

Let me digest this for a bit.

-Time

[Mike Holmes]

On 2001-10-29 11:04, Valamir wrote:
To my way of thinking, you'll know you have succeeded at the point where your game couldn't be used for anything BUT playing in Avalon.

Well, that's an odd statement for a guy writing a game that can be used for ANY setting. Or are you trying to move other cntenders out of our market? Hmmm..  :wink:

Anyhow, I'm personally of the belief that the system should be "generic" enough to handle well everything that the game intends to cover, and maybe just a teensy bit more just in case the GM wants to add something new. That having been said, there is no reason why NOT to go for a very setting specific system if that is what he wants. But this is a decision to make.

Also, there is the subject of Realism. I understand that this is a fantasy game, but how realistic do you want the action in the game to be, Matt? Also, is the game combat focused, or is combat just one of many equal methods of conflict resolution in the game?

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

On 2001-10-29 11:12, Time wrote:
This is basically for my own use, or to give to others for free - but I still want it to be the best it can be.

"Best it can be" from what POV? Just you and your players? Or to some market segment? The answers may be vastly different? What are your players like? Have you discussed GNS with them? Or can you tell their preferences just from experience? You mention that you want the game to be G/N. These have some similarities, but there are also a lot of polar differences? In the end, which side would you prefer to end up on? Sounds like G to me with a bit of N powers just for kicks.

Check out Paul Elliot's (Mithras) Zenobia for a cool take on combat that might just fit your bill.

Mike

[Valamir]

On 2001-10-29 11:04, Valamir wrote:
To my way of thinking, you'll know you have succeeded at the point where your game couldn't be used for anything BUT playing in Avalon.

Well, that's an odd statement for a guy writing a game that can be used for ANY setting. Or are you trying to move other cntenders out of our market? Hmmm..  :wink:

Heh...nope, but I'll tell you why I don't think Universalis violates my total disdain for general purpose gaming systems.  Universalis has a very specific focus: to tell collaborative stories while completely dispersing Game Master authority among the players where the primary mechanic serves to regulate how much power over the story a player has at a given point in time.  You really CAN'T use Universalis to play any other type of game...it is very very specialized.  It is merely the nature of "telling stories" that stories can be told about any time or setting that allows the game to be used for any setting.

Anyhow, I'm personally of the belief that the system should be "generic" enough to handle well everything that the game intends to cover, and maybe just a teensy bit more just in case the GM wants to add something new.

Well I've come to the decision that "but I want to play a..." statements are usually best met with "then play something else"

[Mike Holmes]

Hijack Alert!

Now returning you to your regularly scheduled thread.

Where's chapter two!

Mike