Well its almost tied up. I have <7 hours left to clean it and add a little more color and editing/fixes.

Here it is so far:

http://greyearth.com/24HourRPG/karbon.pdf

In summary:

Karbon is a blade runner inspired RPG where the players are hunters of the program (behind the scenes power) dropped into RUSA (the Ruins of the USA) on old earth to eliminate escaped karbons (gene engineered copies). The catch: The hunter themselves may be karbons that have infiltrated the ranks of the program...

It features a simple mechanic (that can get a bit twisted), laced up super killers, a police state of crime that spans the lands of RUSA, and some nifty cool clockwork orange elements.

I'm going to suggest a bunch of grammar and punctuation corrections, because I'm anal like that.

Page 3, under Edge: You state "Omniedge is often something claimed by hunters for an wide, 'the ultimate ability'." That makes no sense. Was it supposed to be far and wide?

Should the chapter heading definitions use the same font as the "Karbon" definition on page 1, or did you set that off intentionally?

Page 5: "The only specific terms Karbon uses over and over are: daemon to reference the gamemaster which runs the game, and hunter to reference the player's characters." I think this would flow a little better (and the grammar might be better) if it was changed to "The only specific terms Karbon uses over and over are daemon, to reference the gamemaster who runs the game; and hunter, to reference the players' characters." I deleted the colon, added a semi-colon and some commas, and corrected the singular player's to the plural players'.

A paragraph later, it says: "This is also known as KISS- Keep It Simple Stupid." In proper typesetting, you should use an em-dash (Alt+0151 in Windows), rather than the hyphen that's found on the keyboard. I believe whether to use no spacing around the em-dash or one space before and one space after is a matter of preference, but it should be symmetrical. Also, you're missing a comma. So: "This is also known as KISS — Keep It Simple, Stupid."

"When chance factors into the equation we use a simple dice roll" -- Should be die. Then, "a total roll value." There appears to be a double-space before "total."

In your example of play (What the hell is [trans]?), you say, "The daemon informs him that a fire exit is probably one story down and at the end of the hall." This seems a little awkward. I would change it to "The daemon informs him that there is probably a fire exit one story down and at the end of the hall."

Page 6: "To succeed fully you need to beat the LoE by 10. If you beat the LoE but not by 10 its a partial save. If you don't even beat the LoE is a failure." Its is possessive -- you forgot an apostraphe. There also appears to be a typo in the third sentence, and you need more commas. Let me suggest: "To succeed fully you need to beat the LoE by 10. If you beat the LoE, but not by 10, it's a partial save. If you don't even beat the LoE, it's a failure."

The trans paragraph that follows also seems to use "is" in place of "it is" in a couple places.

"Deadly weapons cause a level of stun if you save, a level of wound if you partial save, and a serious wound if you fail." This may have been intentional since partial save is a game term, but this would sound a lot more natural and be just as clear if you said partially save.

"Playing with all out press to become a karbon is perfectly valid play however, if you don't mind the other player's hunters coming after you." Need an extra comma, and you forgot to use the plural possessive again. Hence: "Playing with all out press to become a karbon is perfectly valid play, however, if you don't mind the other players' hunters coming after you."

"This is discussed in more depth under section untitled 'daemon' later." Er, did you mean titled or entitled? Because "untitled" would mean it didn't have a title...

Several problems in the last paragraph: "Thats it for mechanics. We have chance (rolls), saves (resistance), and press (roll bonus) to remember. The rule chart is listed on the charsheet so that a non-learning issue. Now onto making hunters..." Missed an apostraphe, dropped an "is," and could use another comma. So: "That's it for mechanics. We have chance (rolls), saves (resistance), and press (roll bonus) to remember. The rule chart is listed on the charsheet so that is a non-learning issue. Now, on to making hunters..." While onto is a valid word, I don't think it applies here, as it refers to putting something onto something else, not moving on to somewhere else.

Page 8: If "Edge" is calculated last, maybe it should be the last one when you list or talk about the traits too?

I had to re-read the description of the Heavy to make sense of it. I think you need at least one comma aadded, but I'm not quite sure where.

There was a problem in every sentence of the last paragraph, so let's take them one by one: "If you a want you can also just spend 20 picks freeform, where traits picks cost double." Traits should be singular here. You also should consider sticking a comma after want.

"I don't recommend this however, since the balance above actually have reasoning behind them." Balance is not plural, so: "the balance above actually has reasoning behind it."

"In addition the choice of a type gives more depth to the kind of shake and bake characters made for the short term games karbon lends itself too." Too means also -- you wanted to. In addition, I'd also think about putting a comma after "In addition."

Page 9, first paragraph -- I'm getting tired, so I'll just give you the corrected version without explaining the changes in detail: "For Trait picks you can either roll the die for each of the four mutable traits, or place 5, 7, 12, and 16 between them. You always roll the die for edge[color=red], however. We do that last, so don't worry about it yet. First figure out the four. If [color=red]you're rolling, roll four times and place the final scores where you want them. You can add 5 to any one (just one) roll under six, [color=red]as a safety." Note that I deleted several unnecessary words, but that's harder to indicate clearly than additions are. Also, you flip-flop between [color=red]dice and [color=red]die here -- I'm assuming you meant [color=red]die and changed it accordingly, since you say at the outset that the game only requires one die. The same thing happens in the trans section that follows, as does an [color=red]its that should be an [color=red]it's.

Change for clarity: "The first pick in a score gives +3, second gives +2 and the remaing +1 each. In this way 2 picks [color=red]add up to +5, and each pick after that [color=red]adds an additonal one."

Last paragraph before the example: "This is a die roll plus the total of all save bonuses. Just write that down and [color=red]you're finished with traits!"

Page 10: "Fiber costs five times as much as [color=red]liquid."

"Liquid loses effect as [color=red]it's used" -- Missing apostraphe.

"Here are the cost[color=red]s and their action bonuses:"

Page 11: "Sounds confusing[color=red], eh? Well[color=red], [color=red]it's not. Here[color=red], I'll make a gun[color=red]: [color=red]It's gonna be a 5/9 gun, so I put 3 in damage, 3 in range, and 3 in accuracy[color=red], for a total of 9 levels."

Page 12: "You [color=red]CAN NOT spend more than 2 picks on one element." And I would take out the underline. Underline hasn't been in fashion in years.

"[color=red]We'll spend the rest of the page giving various examples of 'good' history elements."

Either "Took juice [color=red](and probably still is)" or "Took (probably still [color=red]is taking) juice."

"Usually [color=red]any element that add[color=red]s to edge"...

I don't have time to read the rest of it right now, but it looks cool. I like the idea, and the graphic design and word choices for stats, etc., seem to compliment it well.

Yea, well I knew the editing would be an issue. I'm the kind that can't see any errors until the next day, and by then I'm out of time...

Thats for the help, I'll go back and correct that stuff as I clean it up for a more complete, non-24 hour version.

I did set the chapter definitions off like that intentionally. :D

I'm glad you liked what you read of it, I think it could be fleshed out into a nice full RPG when I get the chance.

Thanks!

Yeah, I can't see such errors until the next day too.

I'll have a look at it.

Kirk

Before I go any further in the corrections and layout, I'd like to see what people think of the design:

http://greyearth.com/24HourRPG/Karbon_1.1.pdf

The playtest had some bugs, but overall if was fun. I'm planning on working it up fully now :)

Looks good. The only thing for me is the light orange coloured font under the image of the chappie holding up the world - the colour is too light in my view. I recckon a darker scarlet, like the image itself might look better.

Simon W
http://www.geocities.com/have_a_go_heroes2004/

Okay I really like the layout you've worked up for this game, but my problems with it go far beyond any minor spelling errors. You have made the cardinal error any moder new-wave science fiction game can make. You have made Traveler heartbreaker.

Or maybe a Cyberpunk 2020 heartbreaker. We have never really nailed down exactly what a science fiction heartbreaker is, but I'll tell you what I think one is.....

Its a game thats nothing but a setting and a combat system. That's the problem with Karbon. It's just another way to shoot an android, and a backdrop to shoot it in front of.

This s an error a numberr of the 24 hr games have made. But I will focus on Karbon because I am a big fan of the Blade Runner film and really love the base idea behind this game.

I mean we have enough ways to shoot and android already, 6 flavors of Traveler, Cyberpunk 2020, D20 future, Hero games, and innumerable others. Unless you have something to offer other than all these frankly Karbon won't even be worth picking up.

Now here are some things you can do:

1. Investigation
Karbon is supposed to be a game of investigation, but you have no support for it in the rules. This is an important omission as investigation gives th best opportunity to reveal setting and color ,big draws for a game of this type.....
The issue of investigation in skills-based games is something I have discussed before Cthulhu's Clues for instance....), put simply the standard model for this in rpgs is broken. If you can find a way to actually make investigative exploration in Karbon actually relevant by supporting it in an a creative way, Karbon could be a real contender....

2.Indentity

Right now the issue of 'Am I or am I not a Karbon' is handled pretty much like a saving roll in D&D. Miss a roll and the magic wand changes you into an android. Ho hum....... The minute the character is sure he's a Karbon all the 'juice' about a charcter in this setting is drained out, the character is effectively dead. And since it's just a roll it has nothing to do with anything done by the player or characters

Really the issue of identity is something that should be played out in the mind of the characters. By never resolving it except at the dramatic climax of the game you make the 'unveiling ' something special.

There are a number of games to look at when considering rules for this. The 'Devil'' in the game Dust Devils is a central character issue which alters character effectiveness in various ways particularly at the climax of the story. Indeed it would be possible to do a Dust Devil's variant set in the Karbon world with all characters having the same Devil, "Am I a Karbon"? , in fact you might do so as an exercise in redesigning your own game.....
Riddle of Steel has it's Spiritualy Attibutes, which affect play also, again it wou ld be simpler to do a Karbon game using a similar mechanic as the attributes are the central issue of play. I also might reccomend Inspectres as an investigative game that relies on a lot of player authorship to 'make the mystery' .....

It seems I'm asking a lot of a 24 hour game, but I think the problem isn't creating game in 24 hours it's rethinking the habits of numerous other games that's hard. Virtually anybody hanging out on the Forge could give you another way to shoot an android in 24 hours after all....But a game that gave us a new way to think about androids would be a game for the ages.....

It's hard to make a fleshed out game that would cover campaign length play in 24 hours, I believe Karbon is mainly a one shot deal, or perhaps a couple of games. I"ve played it, and it is very fun for a one shot. Give Jason time to expand it and it will cover more.

BTW: What's wrong with Hunt down and Shoot the android? It's fun.

BTW2: I LIKE the save or be a Karbon thing. I really, really, wanted to become a Karbon in the one shot.

I guess I would say this is a... beer and pretzels game? Not sure, but sitting down with your buddies and hunting Karbons until you find out one of them is a Karbon, then hunting him, etc, until everyone is dead, sounds fun.

Okay I really like the layout you've worked up for this game, but my problems with it go far beyond any minor spelling errors. You have made the cardinal error any moder new-wave science fiction game can make. You have made Traveler heartbreaker.

Or maybe a Cyberpunk 2020 heartbreaker. We have never really nailed down exactly what a science fiction heartbreaker is, but I'll tell you what I think one is.....

Its a game thats nothing but a setting and a combat system. That's the problem with Karbon. It's just another way to shoot an android, and a backdrop to shoot it in front of.

1. Investigation
Karbon is supposed to be a game of investigation, but you have no support for it in the rules.

2.Indentity
Right now the issue of 'Am I or am I not a Karbon' is handled pretty much like a saving roll in D&D. Miss a roll and the magic wand changes you into an android.

b_bankhead wrote:
2.Indentity

Right now the issue of 'Am I or am I not a Karbon' is handled pretty much like a saving roll in D&D. Miss a roll and the magic wand changes you into an android. Ho hum....... The minute the character is sure he's a Karbon all the 'juice' about a charcter in this setting is drained out, the character is effectively dead. And since it's just a roll it has nothing to do with anything done by the player or characters

I must say are you reading the same work as I? He spells out quite explicitly that the game was written in 24 hours. It has more substance than my personal disliked Fantasy Heartbreaker (Paladin) , (as in Paladins who are little more than D&D ripoffs/Star Wars ripoffs and little substance beyond that meme), he's also developing more to it. Maybe I'm biased I've played the game and the tension created from worrying about pushing too hard, or doing to well revealing I'm not what I think I am, and that my history may or may not be a sham, are pretty valid design elements that did come up.

This is why /exactly/ why I don't like this place and don't come here anymore--snap judgements with little substance, and erroneous assumptions from brief read throughs. Some people seem to be reading it which is a good thing--and for those of you that have I applaud you for bothering.


I came here /solely/ because I know of Karbon, and have read and played it and now how on paper yes its flawed and needs improvemennt, but does when the creator utilizes it ask the relevant questions inn the relevant way and that with time will improve to be a complete and worthy game.

No it isn't there yet, but it will be.

Why not suggest ways to /add/ to the design? Why not give a reason why and how he can improve asking the questions?

Hi Sidhain,

Here's another reason for you not to like "this place" - it's me, the moderator, telling you to be decent to the other folks here, especially when you disagree.

Everyone, please carry on with the Karbon discussion.

Best,
Ron

Question: How is attacking a /view/ somehow being undecent to a person?

Sidhain,

You did not attack a view. You attacked the person. My judgment on that is settled.

Don't derail this thread into a discussion of your behavior. You can can take your inquiry to Site Discussion or private message.

Best,
Ron

Demada wrote:

BTW: What's wrong with Hunt down and Shoot the android? It's fun.

BTW2: I LIKE the save or be a Karbon thing. I really, really, wanted to become a Karbon in the one shot.

I guess I would say this is a... beer and pretzels game? Not sure, but sitting down with your buddies and hunting Karbons until you find out one of them is a Karbon, then hunting him, etc, until everyone is dead, sounds fun.

Sidhain wrote:

This is why /exactly/ why I don't like this place and don't come here anymore--snap judgements with little substance, and erroneous assumptions from brief read throughs. Some people seem to be reading it which is a good thing--and for those of you that have I applaud you for bothering.

Why not suggest ways to /add/ to the design? Why not give a reason why and how he can improve asking the questions?

1.The problem with Karbon is that all it tells you how to do is shoot the android. ... How DO they hunt down Karbons?

2. If you really want to be a Karbon then why don't you just declare yourself one? It might be fun to have your fellow players hunt you down, but where do Karbons go to hide?

... Since the modifiers for the 'Karbon saving roll' are cumulative eventually everybody is going to be a Karbon if they play long enough,so there is no real mystery to the question of 'am I a Karbon?". ...

This game does seem to be headed for a whole "Blade Runner meets Judge Dread in Escape from New York" kinda feel. But the key thing -- the really neat thing -- is the "am I a Karbon?" I think that's the mechanic to work on. Let angsty self-doubting goodness pervade the whole game.

Sydney,

That is exactly where I want to go. The expanded version of the game is now featuring more doubt issues, and even as far as a character succumbing to the belief that they are a karbon.

As far as feel is concerned, I'm moving more towards a Ghost in the Shell feel now. The program is distinctly japanese-american in nature, and the specialty tech. is really far out. I want a universe that just seems impossible to grasp, one that is out of control.

Yes, the "am I a Karbon?" issue will always dominate the game though. I'm open to suggestions on how to accomplish this better without having to tear down the feel I'm building though.

Jason Petrasko wrote: The expanded version of the game.....

Sydney,

The game is in a state of constant evolution, and I've decided to mark of major changes with the .X naming system. The version is now 1.2, which I'm testing with my group. The 1.3 version will introduce a stat for 'doubt', and this might be the final change I need to make (I hope). This stat will make up for the fact that as the game moves away from a one-shot style, players are less likely to want their hunters to become karbons. Instead doubt offers mental slips, and possibly the conclusion that one is a Karbon even if they are not.

Here is a link to a page where you can get access to the ever updating .pdf:

http://karbon.greyearth.com/down.html

Wicked cool layout. I am impressed.

The actual text probably needs another edit, as I found some of it confusing (and, less important) there are minor mistakes of grammar & spelling. (Suggestion: Find a friend whose writing skills you respect and ask them to read through; it's impossible to edit your own stuff really well).

As for the system itself, it's way more layered than is my taste, but it looks like you're trying to build a crunchy, combat-oriented Gamist game, and for such games lots of moving parts to manipulate is probably a positive thing for players.

Finally, I'd still like to see more emphasis on the identity/becoming-a-Karbon aspect of the game. Currently there are bits scattered throughout the rules about accumulating Karbon Points and such, but I think it deserves a strong central focus.

Sydney,

Thanks! I like the layout too, but it may be too cluttered at some points.
Yes indeed, I need more editing :)

I'm confused by your use of 'layered'. Do you mean stacking traits/history/lace? If so I didn't think the system was too layered really, I mean three types of score for characters. I just wanted some way to let character individuality come out.

In the new (yet unreleased since its untested) 1.3 version there is an entire section that deals with Doubt, Karbon Points, and Identity issues.

Thanks!,
Jason

Jason Petrasko wrote: I'm confused by your use of 'layered'. Do you mean stacking traits/history/lace?