Topic: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Started by: ghostwolf
Started on: 4/9/2004
Board: Indie Game Design
On 4/9/2004 at 4:53pm, ghostwolf wrote:
[Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Hi all. I'm in the initial throws of designing a game for publication via web-site or pdf. Following is an example of play and a synopsis of the system:
Example of play:
<GM> Ok, after loading the shuttle, you detache from the docking bay and glide down toward the planned landing area.
<Sam> I run a radar scan of the area as John begins final approach.
<Sam rolls d% against his Computer(system operations) specialty, comes up with a 73>
<GM> Ok, 73, your skill in systems is 82, so you succeed admirably. The landing area appears clear, you can see the radar outlines of several immobile objects, the paint profile looks like Buildings and ground vehicles. No movement. John, you have a visual on the site now, burned out buildings and husks. This is the layout of the compound. (GM pulls out a wet-erase marker, draws out a map on a sheet of laminate, marks the location of the buildings.)
<John> Ah, shit. The colony's been hit guys! I'm going to come in hot, in case there's still hostiles here. I want to put down close to one of the buildings, for cover. (points out the building he's landing next to)
<GM> Ok, roll against your Pilot(General) since you don't have a specialization in small crafts. I'm not going to apply any modifiers since you're not under fire.
<John>(rolls d%, hits 23, needs under 52) Succeeded, I swoop the shuttle down and in a last second burn, touch down lightly right beside the building I was aiming for. Gonna leave the engines hot and grab my pulse pistol as I head back to join the others in the airlock.
<Chris> Glad I packed my Rifle on this trip, eh? I spend a moment tightening the straps on my Ceram-Armor and checking my weapon and head to the airlock too.
<Sam> (grumbling) You and your guns. I grab the medkit, hope we don't need it. Also, I'll bring my 'deck with me, maybe the computer systems are still up and I can pull some survellance data.
<GM> Everyone gathers at the airlock. Who's opening it?
<Chris> That would be me, since I'm armored. I pull the lever and take up a firing position near the door as it slowely opens.
<GM> (secretly rolls d% against Chris's perception trait, 72 over 34) As the airlock opens you catch a burst of foul smelling smokey air. John has landed the shuttle near the edge of a building, airlock facing a wall about 3 meters away. The wall is scorched and pocked with weapons fire. You don't see or hear anything unusual. (GM secretly rolls perception for Sam and John, they both fail also) The compound is silent except for the low hum of the shuttle.
<Chris> I sidle out of the shuttle airlock and crouch down, facing south and scan the area.
<GM> (rolls d%) As you sidle out the airlock you hear a familiar sound coming from behind you. The sound of a pulse rifle firing...and hitting it's target.
<Chris> (groans) Let me guess, roll to resist damage?
<GM> Bingo!
<Chris> (rolls d% against Brawn trait) Let's see, I'm in ceram, so I get +10% to my brawn, I need under 45% (groans again) Scored a 54.
<GM> You grunt as the pulse rifle strikes you dead in the back, inflicting 2 wounds. Everyone go ahead and roll for initiative.
End example of play
What I'm going for is a gritty, Sci-fi universe. After the initial push out into the galaxy from Earth, humanity ran up against a brick wall, in the form of another race. Gameplay revolves around the characters as soldiers, outlaws, war-profiteers and what have you in the fringe colonies of humanity. There may also be playable alien races, still in concept stage right now. There will be cybernetics, matrix running, and starship rules also.
The character is based on a set of traits, rated in percentages. The traits are fall into catagories of Physical, Mental and Social.
Physical: Brawn
Agility
Reflexes
Mental: Perception
Aptitude
Intellect
Social: Empathy
Confidence
Reputation
Human characters are limited to a total of 40% in each trait. Aliens and cybernetically enhanced characters may go higher.
The traits trickle down in formulas to main skill areas. For example, Melee Weapons is based off (Brawn + Agility)/2. Players will have a pool of skill points on creation applied either Free-form or in packages (similar to classes or archetypes). Skill points can be applied to broad skills, such as Bladed weapons, giving a 5% bonus per skill point.
Skills can be further specialized, such as Katana under bladed weapons, with an additonal 5% bonus. A character can specialize up to 6 levels in each skill, for a 30% bonus to broad skills and an additiona 30% bonus to Specializations. Specializations cannot exceed 2x the base skill (Must have Bladed weapons at 3 to have Katana at 6).
Now, what I'm having issues with is applying the mental skills. My original idea was to have aptitude apply to using High-tech/alien weaponry and tools, and intellect apply to using raw science and knowledge. When talking with another friend, he had problems seeing the difference between Aptitude and intellect, and went into a tangent that pretty much ended with suggesting that aptitude would apply to EVERY type of tool/weapon/etc. I don't want a meta-trait that every player is going to max out automatically. I need suggestions on how to work this concept in correctly.
On 4/9/2004 at 9:10pm, FredGarber wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
How about changing the Mentals to
Perception
Analysis
Memory
That way you have some players who are good at Seeing Things. The Sniper without a lot of education could specialize here. (Perception)
You have some players who are good at Putting Things Together. The Experimental Scientist could develop here. (Analysis)
And you have some players who are good at Facts. That's things like "How much does an Altarian Sun-Diamond cost?" sorts of things. Academics or Merchants would need that. (Memory)
But it seems, from both your example of play and in my experience, that you might have "pay-to-suck." In other words, if I knew that as a character I had only a 34% of noticing the guy getting ready to shoot me as I entered a hostile zone, and only a 50% chance of not getting hurt even while wearing armor, I'd stay on board the ship, and not take point!
Heck, even "John" who was piloting the ship only knew what he was doing half (52%) the time! Would you fly anywhere with a pilot who only had a 50-50 shot of getting you there safely?
On 4/10/2004 at 12:20am, Andrew Martin wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
FredGarber wrote: But it seems, from both your example of play and in my experience, that you might have "pay-to-suck." In other words, if I knew that as a character I had only a 34% of noticing the guy getting ready to shoot me as I entered a hostile zone, and only a 50% chance of not getting hurt even while wearing armor, I'd stay on board the ship, and not take point!
Heck, even "John" who was piloting the ship only knew what he was doing half (52%) the time! Would you fly anywhere with a pilot who only had a 50-50 shot of getting you there safely?
From:
http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm
Odds of being killed on a single airline flight
Top 25 airlines with the best records
1 in 7.71 million
Bottom 25 airlines with the worst records
1 in 558,000
With "John", the chance of getting killed seems to be about: 1 in 2.
On 4/10/2004 at 12:25am, ghostwolf wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Ok, I like the replacements you suggested for mental attributes :)
I've never heard of the term 'pay-to-suck' before. It does seem to apply though, with the example you gave. Perhaps you can suggest an alternative. What I was aiming for with the system was a Trickle down from Traits to skills, and a dice mechanic that doesn't require a handful of dice to do anything. I originally settled on the d% system, but if you allow the traits to go from 1-100% for everything, there would be no need for Skill points, that allow the characters to specialize instead of just having a set of 9 traits.
I want to stick with using just 1 type of die, in small quantities...
On 4/10/2004 at 1:05am, Andrew Martin wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
ghostwolf wrote: ...
Perhaps you can suggest an alternative. What I was aiming for with the system was a Trickle down from Traits to skills, and a dice mechanic that doesn't require a handful of dice to do anything. I originally settled on the d% system, but if you allow the traits to go from 1-100% for everything, there would be no need for Skill points, that allow the characters to specialize instead of just having a set of 9 traits.
I want to stick with using just 1 type of die, in small quantities...
Let's assume that you've all ready created the perfect system for your game. What happens when two (or more) players conflict in their descriptions of what happens to the characters and the setting, and all parties turn to the game system to resolve the conflict?
On 4/10/2004 at 1:27am, ghostwolf wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Andrew Martin wrote:
Let's assume that you've all ready created the perfect system for your game. What happens when two (or more) players conflict in their descriptions of what happens to the characters and the setting, and all parties turn to the game system to resolve the conflict?
Ok, the perfect system I envision for resolution of conflict is:
Player A rolls his dice against a target number determined by his traits and skill levels, modified up or downward by situational modifiers. Must roll under the target number.
If Player A's roll succeeds, Player B rolls to resist the effect that Player A was attempting with a target number determined by his traits and skill levels, Modifed upward or downward by situation modifiers. Again, must roll under target number.
Example:
Lance, a human soldier, is embroiled in hand to hand combat with an outlaw. He is using a vibro-axe, a high tech weapon that he has trained extensivly in. His target number to attack is determined by his Brawn and Agility and his specialization with that weapon. Situationaly, he was wounded in the last round of combat, so there is a small penalty to his attack roll. Lance rolls against the target number and scores a hit.
The outlaw is fighting back with a simple knife. At this point, he can choose to give up his attack and completely dodge the blow, with a target number based off his Reflexes, Agility and Perception, Parry the blow based on his Reflexes, Brawn and Perception, and take a situational modifier on his next attack, or just take the hit and hope that he can resist the damage based on his Brawn and armor modifiers. If he chooses to Dodge or Parry and the blow hits anyway, he still can make the Brawn roll to resist the damage.
On 4/10/2004 at 1:29am, Jeph wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
ghostwolf wrote: ...
Perhaps you can suggest an alternative.
It looks like simply upping the mean by 50% would do you wonders.
On 4/10/2004 at 2:34am, Andrew Martin wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
ghostwolf wrote:Andrew Martin wrote:
Let's assume that you've all ready created the perfect system for your game. What happens when two (or more) players conflict in their descriptions of what happens to the characters and the setting, and all parties turn to the game system to resolve the conflict?
Ok, the perfect system I envision for resolution of conflict is:
Player A rolls his dice against a target number determined by his traits and skill levels, modified up or downward by situational modifiers. Must roll under the target number.
If Player A's roll succeeds, Player B rolls to resist the effect that Player A was attempting with a target number determined by his traits and skill levels, Modifed upward or downward by situation modifiers. Again, must roll under target number.
How about using Chaosium's BRP system for your game? Here's a link to some old versions available on the web: http://basicrps.narod.ru/index-wow.html And here's another take on the system: http://www.met.rdg.ac.uk/~sws99dsc/d100system.html
And here's some more of BRP: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Basic%20Role-Playing
If BRP proves unsuitable, then exploring the differences between BRP and your ideal game system will help you get the game you want.
On 4/10/2004 at 3:03am, ghostwolf wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Andrew Martin wrote:
How about using Chaosium's BRP system for your game? Here's a link to some old versions available on the web: http://basicrps.narod.ru/index-wow.html And here's another take on the system: http://www.met.rdg.ac.uk/~sws99dsc/d100system.html
And here's some more of BRP: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Basic%20Role-Playing
If BRP proves unsuitable, then exploring the differences between BRP and your ideal game system will help you get the game you want.
Chaosium's BRP is the system used for Call Of Cthulhu, which I own and have run. Not what I'm looking for. In the system I'm trying to design, the Traits actually delve down to a meaning for every skill, and every action that the characters take that's not trivial hinges in some way upon them. BRP doesn't model that. No, I take that back... Dex does delve down to the Dodge skill. In any case, it's not really what I had in mind.
On 4/10/2004 at 3:07am, ghostwolf wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Jeph wrote:
It looks like simply upping the mean by 50% would do you wonders.
Currently, the range for humanity would be from 20-40% base, then modified by skill and specialization. Upping this by 50% would seriously trivialize the dice mechanics, wouldn't it? What fun is a game where there's almost no risk of failure at any task you set your hand to?
I will admit that the examples I used had abnormally low numbers. Bumping the baseline up will probably occur...just need to boggle out how far and tweak the skill point system...
On 4/10/2004 at 4:20am, Ravien wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Upping this by 50% would seriously trivialize the dice mechanics, wouldn't it? What fun is a game where there's almost no risk of failure at any task you set your hand to?
What fun is there playing a game where there is almost always a high risk of failure? We're not talking popping coins into a slot machine here (51% chance of winning), we're talking getting killed. Would anyone put coins in slot machines if losing meant you got shot?
I think it's been mentioned before, but I'd suggest thinking about how often you think is reasonable for a person to succeed at a task they know how to do, and how often they are likely to fail, and model your mechanics on that. If this pilot was a total noob who had only ever watched someone fly a ship maybe once or twice, then 50% might be an acceptable risk, but if that's his job, then I think the risk should be more like 0%, and only increase according to unusual circumstances, like he is drunk, or he's been flying for 3 days straight, or there's fog or whatever.
Perhaps it might help if you considered how a "typing" skill might work. Would characters have a high chance of failing to type? But typing is just another skill that people can learn, just like piloting a ship and firing a gun.
On 4/10/2004 at 5:10am, Andrew Martin wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
ghostwolf wrote: In the system I'm trying to design, the Traits actually delve down to a meaning for every skill, and every action that the characters take that's not trivial hinges in some way upon them.
Why is this important to your game design? Is it because this is more "realistic"? Or some other reason?
On 4/10/2004 at 7:10pm, ghostwolf wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Andrew Martin wrote:
Why is this important to your game design? Is it because this is more "realistic"? Or some other reason?
I feel that the Phys/Ment/Social Traits as I've laided them out (many thanks for the suggeted improvements) will help the player create a unique feel and (yes) reality for his character, and that by mapping the traits directly down to the skills as I've described, the character becomes more fully fleshed out, and his strengths and weaknesses in the trait department will carry over to his skills.
I prefer to use the d% because it is easy to create target numbers with, the math is generally more simple, and it doesn't require a pouch of dice, as so many of the games I've been playing lately do.
I'm very focused on actually creating the system I've envisioned, because nothing else I've played or read does exactly what I want. Hopefully with the tweaks that have been suggested here it will turn out to be playable and fun.
On 4/15/2004 at 6:01pm, FredGarber wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
I've never heard of the term 'pay-to-suck' before. It does seem to apply though, with the example you gave. Perhaps you can suggest an alternative.
Well, as it might show up in the Glossary, I misused it. In full, it usually refers to a System that requires a character to pay reward points for a skill, but rewards him with an low chance of success that was even worse than random chance.
Example : My character has no SpaceShip Gunnery Skill. But if somebody sat him in a Star Wars turret and said "get the blip in the middle of the screen, and pull the trigger," I might do sort of OK. But pay points for it, and instead of increasing from my natural hand-eye coordination, I get a 10% chance for it.
The situation I think you have doesn't have terminology for it directly, except for "Low Effectiveness in Early Sessions of the Game," which is a fairly common game Design element.
Possible Solution : I think your example was just low numbers. For the Pilot roll, change the stakes. Rather than "you set it down where you want it to go, or you crash" make it "you set it down where you want it to go, or where I want it to go." And if you win, put the spaceship on the ground so that exiting characters are lined up for your hidden sniper, or they have to trek across the camp to get between the plot-interesting building and the space ship.
But I would be careful about making any one skill the most needed as to recommended style of play. It seems that you're making it far more important to go first, and have a high combat awareness. For example, the stereotype of a Dumb Brawny Slow guy. Does your combat system make him equally effective? Or will Quick Alert guy beat him every time?
And I think that the point about conflict resolution comes with things like this: A player with a successful Sneaking attempt is attempted to be spotted by a character with a successful roll in Finding Sneaky People. Does the Perception roll negate the sucessful Hide roll? What sorts of behavior do your skills and action order reward?
Just things to think about. This sounds like you really have a handle on things, and have a good grasp of what you want. I like a lot of theory and statistics and such. However, just like in the real world, "sketch it out and eyeball it" beats Algebriac formulas some of the time.
On 4/15/2004 at 6:26pm, ghostwolf wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Fred,
Thanks again for the excellent and helpful reply! I'm working on a second draft of the stats system for posting right now. I've been discussing this game with several of my gaming friends the last 2 weeks and refining the character systems to be in line with my goals and simplifiying things, plus adding in a way to handle difficulty of tasks.
On 4/15/2004 at 8:36pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Ever seen BattleLords of the 23rd century? Here's a review.
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_7263.html
Mike
On 4/16/2004 at 12:43am, quozl wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
Mike Holmes wrote: Ever seen BattleLords of the 23rd century? Here's a review.
http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_7263.html
Mike
And if you want a copy, PM me. I got a mint copy I'm looking to unload.
On 4/16/2004 at 6:20am, RaconteurX wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
ghostwolf wrote: In the system I'm trying to design, the Traits actually delve down to a meaning for every skill, and every action that the characters take that's not trivial hinges in some way upon them. BRP doesn't model that.
Scrounge up a copy of Chaosium's old Ringworld ... you might find that more suitable. It remains one of my favorite game systems for hard science-fiction. There is a copy up for auction currently, although it is going for over $70 as of this writing and has less than eighteen hours remaining before the auction closes.
On 4/16/2004 at 2:07pm, ghostwolf wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
I'm not sure if the 'look at this game' posts are meant to give me ideas to enhance my concept or to drop it and use a different system. If the first case is true, thank you for pointing these games out.
I've actually completely revamped most of the foundation that my OP was based on in the last 2 weeks. Currently, I'm working on finalizing the character creation method and writing it up for posting and commentary here. The only things that survived from the first draft are the trickle down effect from traits to skills and some of the trait names. I think what I have now is much tighter, more coherent and less..well...sucky, for lack of a better word, than my original post.
Anyway, would it be more appropriate to post the 2nd draft in this thread or start a new one?
On 4/16/2004 at 10:16pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: [Eschaton]: example of play and synopsis
New thread.
Mike