Hi all, I'm developing my own (universal) system. I'd like to use it diceless but also give a d6 option. Here's the core.

Attribute: from 0 to 6 (average 3)
Skill: from 0 to 6 (average 3)

Attribute + Skill + Effort >= Difficulty

Diceless option:
A player can spend up to 3 points of Effort. Each of them add a +3 to the outcome.

Dicefull option:
A player can spend up to 3 points of Effort. Each of them add a d6 to the outcome.

Would you prefer a range from 1 to 6 for attribute or skill?
Why?
Is this system quite simple?

Hi, welcome to the Forge!

Jediblack wrote: Hi all, I'm developing my own (universal) system. I'd like to use it diceless but also give a d6 option.
...
Would you prefer a range from 1 to 6 for attribute or skill?
Why?
Is this system quite simple?

Hi Jediblack (Davide, is it?) and welcome to the Forge!

Suppose I were to ask you the following:



I've invented a new tool. It has a plastic handle with a countour grip, attached to a 1/2-meter-long 1cm square hollow steel rod, in the center of which is a bearing that acts as a hinge on which a 10-cm diameter round aluminum disk can flip up or down. The disk is painted black.

My question is, should it have a sharp point? Would it be better if the disk were red? And what do you think about the idea of adding a bracket that can hold a pen or pencil?



I imagine you'd say something like, "I can't possibly answer those questions, unless you tell me what the heck the tool is supposed to do!"

Your questions have the same basic problem. No one will be able to answer them intelligently, unless you explain more about what you want to accomplish with your system.

What kind of play do you envision players using your system for? A really good way of describing the kind of play you have in mind is described on this thread (just click here). It takes some work, but it's worth it.

In what ways do you want your system to be different from other systems that are available?

More specifically, is the decision of whether or not to use dice something you expect players or gamemasters to decide once for a whole game? Or do you want them to decide for each situation that comes up in play? Either way, on what basis do you think the decision should be made? That is, when do you think players should use the diceless option and when should they use the dice?

People here really do want to help each other design games. Questions like these aren't intended to be discouraging or hostile. Addressing them is a key part of the design process that simply cannot be skipped.

Best,

Walt

You two are right... so here is some explanations.

Goals
Modularity: core system will take about 10 pages, not plus. People will be able to write their own add on to the system. Such sanity rules, settings, magic systems and so on. The result? Many little book that can be combined by GMs and players.

Simplicity: Cippa will be easy. In fact the action resolution is quite simple, don't you think?

GNS
Speaking about GNS model, Cippa will be more Narrativist. But this is my preference. A friend of mine is writing a magic system that is so detailed and much more Simulationist. We haven't yet tested it, but I think it will work fine.

Options
Diceless or Dicefull? A GM decide whatever he wants, but if his group likes dice, they will use always the dice option. I'd choose that diceless, cause to me is faster.

So, I wonder if the core resolution mechanic will work well...

Incidentally, this system is similar somewhat to the Active Exploits diceless system, which is free. In any case, those mechanics do work, so I would assume that yours would as well. (I'd recommend an effort represents either +4 or a d6, OR having a different difficulty ladder for dicefree/diceful.)

Shall I assume that effort comes from a resource pool? (This in particular is handled differently in Active Exploits.)

Also, what does this system, in itself, encourage and reward? It seems:


• transparent and intuitive mechanics: rules focused mainly on fast resolution of success/failure, rather than concern with "tactics", "realism", "crunch", etc.
• a model where abilities and skills are equally important, so a generalist has no more or less advantage than a specific expert
• the effort pool being a major factor in gameplay


And on this third point - the effort pool (still assuming it's a resource pool) is a big deal. How big is it? When do you get more? This will change players behavior - they may spend it whenever they dare, or save up for burning all at once for the big climactic scenes. This is your big motivator/incentive/reward mechanic - the choices here will be a big deal in affecting the kind of gameplay you want! I'm eager to hear what you think.

On a similar point, I feel that these mechanics don't necessarily facilitate Narrativism; but again, the decisions you make regarding the effort pool can play a big part here. (For example: have you addressed the Premise? Or challenged your character's psyche? Or something? Then refresh the pool...)

Shall I assume that effort comes from a resource pool?

transparent and intuitive mechanics: rules focused mainly on fast resolution of success/failure, rather than concern with "tactics", "realism", "crunch", etc.

a model where abilities and skills are equally important, so a generalist has no more or less advantage than a specific expert

What kind of reward system does this game use? Specifically, what behavior does it reward, and what comprises that reward? I ask because reward systems are in my opinion an important but often overlooked area of game design.

-Dan Vince

What kind of reward system does this game use?

:-)

Jediblack, maybe you should point out that 'cippa' means 'cock' in Northern Italy...

[OT]

I'm a programmer and, you know, when I debug my code I always use "cippa" as a guard variable and so on... So, this system has no name and it's still in progress... so I called it Cippa System. But it meant no offense. It's just a funny name that I've been using for several years. :)

[OT]