Mythos Saga A TRPG

[DarkHawkPro]

Hey folks.   
Alright, i'm new to "The Forge" but my current group of helpers have become greatly unavailable to help with with development.  So i'm turning to the online community.   
I currently have a system that is near completion.  i would say, between 70%-80%. 
I need Help with Layout and some editing.  I'm really good at game mechanics and tiering them into the system.   However i'm not that good with Fluff and  filing in the gaps.   
I need people to read, return constructive criticism and advice. 
The core mechanics aren't going to change from how they are now, i just need the help making them easy to understand and to improve book flow. 
right now i'm at 106 pages with cover page and index.  I don't have art yet, i'm still looking for artists that can do the right style.

If you would like to read through what I can e-mail you a copy.

Thank you.

[DarkHawkPro]

also if you have any questions about the system itself. 

First off, it's a D6 system with Variable dice pool and Target number, depending on task. 
It uses a battle map, hex grid. 
Right now it's primary setting it fantasy; mainly due to that being the easiest to relate to, but the system should be able to handle different genres without a problem, even inner-mixing them.   It has a Hero/Follower style of system.   The Player plays a small group, with Main focus on the Hero, of units akin to Japanese Tactical-RPGs  like Suedoken, Final Fantasy Tactics, etc... 

Any questions, just post here. 
I'm a stay at home dad and have lots of time. so expect pretty rapid responses.

[DarkHawkPro]

Alright, since there hasn't been any response thus far..   i'll do this


http://fbosley.webs.com/Mythos41.pdf

if the PDF file of the system, thus far.   If you opt to play test, let me know i'll love to hear any feedback. 
As a note, i don't have a character sheet yet, we've been using just on pieces of paper.
Enjoy and post some feedback. 

[F33]

At first glance, it looks like a good system. I have always liked Final Fantasy Tactics Advanced, and it seems to follow similar rules. The simple D6 system seems easy enough to learn, which is important for good gameplay. The STAT system as well is unique to me and intuitive. I think, for variety's sake, there should be more Follower races, although the player races are all impressively different.
The rulebook is organized well, but the massive amount of information is slightly awkward for a PnP RPG. Personally, I would play this, but only if it was simplified for more casual occasions. Other than the complexity, it is a very well-thought-out amd professional game.

[DarkHawkPro]

Thank you for the positive feedback, much appreciated.  As followers go any race can be a follower as well as monsters. 
As it goes for info, I did try to put as much info into it as possible to make sure players/gms would have all the resources they needed.  Any suggestions to trim or simplify?

[Thriff]

Hey DHP,

I found a .pdf of your Mythos Saga. I see that you've opened this thread for editing and general feedback.

I think you've done a great job developing an intricate and intensely detailed mechanics system, which is great. The quantity and quality of the work is impressive. However, I want to preface my comments by alerting you to my preferences--I tend towards accessible systems that are mechanically minimalistic. I strongly suspect that (as a consumer) I wouldn't be the target audience for your game, but I hope to provide some feedback that may help you attract individuals that prefer games as I do.

1.) A question: what is the purpose of having 10 races? Is it for narrative purposes, to help build and maintain the style of your world? Or is it for mechanical reasons, so as to provide players with choices? I prefer to have a game where my character's species will not adversely affect the mechanics of how I interact with the world. That's because I may find a stylistically perfect species that doesn't have the specific skill set or unique moves that I want to use. Or, conversely, I find a cool move but I have to choose a species that I am not enthralled with. Either way, bad news bears. I believe this is a danger that too many designers gloss over.

My advice: be aware of the effect choosing a species will have on your players-- are you willing to bind them narratively, mechanically, neither or both? This video helped me better understand the differences between Choice and Conflict in games. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2590-Choice-and-Conflict][/http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2590-Choice-and-Conflict]

2.) You need a character sheet. It's absurdly difficult to interpret what is really going on without a character sheet. The character sheet is the medium through which I, as a player, interact with your game. Without it I can't visualize S.T.A.T.s or 5 personal inventory slots. Even if its more than 1 side, a character sheet will make this game much more accessible.

Hope this helps,

Thriff

[DarkHawkPro]

Thanks thriff I appreciate the feedback. 

I agree that at first glance, and partially due to a lack of character sheet, the system seems to bombard you with a huge amount of data without any structure to help narrow it feels heavy.  I assure you, though, I've trimmed a lot out of the system to make it very minimalist.   I do think a character sheet helps a lot, as I'm also the type that will look over a sheet and it will determine how I react to the system.  I've had about five or six incarnations of the character sheet and just haven't found the one that gives me and playtest the "this is what the system is" feel. 

As it goes for the ten races, its actually mostly a "launch point" for newer players.  The advantages and disadvantages are really only any good at the beginning as the power scale starts to even everyone out in time.   The distinct differences in each races "fluff" and statistics gives any type of player build options that fit, while more experienced players can do as they please. 
In example I could say that if a power game wanted a character that just slashes everything then they could play a gargoyle.   
If a player wants to play the scholar persona they can play an elf. 
While those examples are within fluff and mechanics any style is possible.
Hell, one of my players in test played a pixie whose aspirations was to be a lich and was building an army of undead as followers.  I had a gargoyle that reissued to fight physically and chose magic because he viewed physical violence as "barbaric".  Along with an Anterior that wanted to be a vassel to the Bursham that wanted to subjugate his village. 

All those are contradiction in some fashion or another to the race builds but when played out felt natural and unhindered. 

The races aren't written to be a restriction to the players but to give them a "world" feel through different perspectives and backgrounds.


I will get on an incarnation of a character sheet, at the very least to get something to work with.

Thank you again.

[DarkHawkPro]

Alright, well here

http://fbosley.webs.com/MythosSheet.pdf

is an incarnation of a character sheet.   It contains only the basics you need for the hero.  But enough to see how things break down in the character and such.   Most of the things on the sheet itself is designed for "every" kind of hero so it seems like a lot, but most of it won't be used by a starting character, but may be used as the character gets stronger. 

it's not pretty
it's got not style/flare.   
But it would work for getting a good idea. 


I"ll work on putty together a sample adventure.  just a one shot, one fight type of situation for people that want to see it in action.  I'm working on putting together a local playtest as well so i can put an "actual" play example up here too; but like i said my locals aren't very open most of the time.
again, any questions or comments, I'm here.

[DarkHawkPro]

i put together a small test adventure.  Just one battle and purpose. 
http://fbosley.webs.com/FateofAbon.pdf
bare with me though, i'm not much of a creative writer so it's not that good.

[Ckelm]

DarkHawk,

While reading the PDF a few things sprang to mind.

1.) The writing and effort placed into this game: Excellent.
2.) Reminds me of a video game.
3.) Reminds me of an alternate universe where the later editions of D&D kept the table-top wargaming in the forefront rather than the narrative aspects of D&D.

I will admit that I do not have much experience with heavily tactical games but will forward this to a friend who does have experience. I will add that I find the magic system awesome and I cannot wait to see the end result.

[DarkHawkPro]

Thank you, I'm excited to see you excited. 
Number 2 was actually one of the big feelings I was going for. 
The feeling of the video game but the freedoms of a PnP-RPG. 
Just let me know if there needs to be any further explanation on any of the sections.

[Callan S.]

Hi DHP,

I was looking at the GM section and was wondering, have you played in a game where the principles behind it were "So, in essence, for them to win, you have to lose." and "Scripting a good adventure is like writing good book/Running an adventure is like producing and directing a play."?

If you did play under those principles (rather than GM via those principles), what did you find enjoyable about those elements? I suppose for myself I might find them nice to GM by, but not really enjoyable as a player. So from my own experience, maybe there is an inconsistancy there, or maybe you enjoy them in some way I currently don't (and there isn't an inconsistancy).

[DarkHawkPro]

Well, in all essence i've always played in games under those principles. 

-"So, in essence, for them to win, you have to lose."

Basically, that statement means that as a GM, with control over the desires and drive of the NPCs, you have to lose encounters with the players to further the players stories.  For example.  The players are attacking a small group of slavers to save a group of kidnapped children. 
If the players win.  Kids go back to village and everyone is happy.
If the GM wins, kids are taken into slavery and players are killed. 

so..  For the players to "win" the GM has to lose and be ok with that as part of the story. 

"Scripting a good adventure is like writing a good book"  "...running and adventure is like directing a play..."
First off..   i doubled up there and the should have stuck with one analogy, not sure why i jumped around there but i'll fix that.

Otherwise I wanted to put into the minds of the potential GM (assuming they have never played) that they have control over the world and they have the ability to create a story arc of things happening in the world and that all the important NPCS have a "Who, What and Why" just like the players do.  I went with the best example I knew personally and that was theater.  The following section go into detail breaking that down further. 
the "Overall Story Arc" has been a basic  concept that i've always played under and run under and never had any complaints so i figured i'd promote, again, What i know. 

[Callan S.]

Righto - but just with the first part, it seems a 'legacy' issue - like, did you decide a party that loses to the slaver (as an example) must die? I mean your reasons for having the PC's win is only because of you deciding they must die if they lose? Maybe your just used to the idea of losing only occuring with them all dying and have never thought about other design options before?

I mean, off the top of my head, the group is beaten back and retreats through a prearranged escape route (who knows? The old run through the valley then set the detonators so the valley fills with rubble, cutting off pursuers trick? Or similar?). The kids are taken into slavery, but there is still hope - yet those kids will see things they otherwise wouldn't, so at an emotional level this is a result (even if the PC's rescue them the very next session).

It seems losing could contribute uncertainty to the story? If it seems compatable with your design goals, anyway.

[DarkHawkPro]

As a GM i've had many situations where the players have lost and not been killed. 
In that section I'm mostly stating that the Gm must be willing to accept that he will lose an encounter or lose in the long run, as the players are the focus of the adventure.  It's not how much damage the GM can do to the players, not if the GM can kill a player or how complicated the GM can make the players lives.   
Death, also is not the best example i could have used, being an extreme example.

Think about reading that section as a NEW GM.  Someone who has never played an PnP RPG ever before and you are picked to run the story. 

Thats who that section is written for. 
Now, any new GM will have the "I can do cool stuff too" complex after a while of running a game.  If that Newbie Gm wants to be a good GM they first need to accept that fact that it's a story for the players and their big GMPCs will lose in the end. 

Again, my example was poor. 
the type of situation you are talking about is just as likely, the GM wins and captures the players to sell as slaves themselves, etc... and the story goes on in that direction without a hitch.  That is a ROLEPLAY thing and a STORY element and entirely upto the GM.  Thats part of the "things don't always go as planned" stuff.