Briefly introducing myself: I've been reading this forum for about a month now, figured it's high time to start posting. I've been into RPG design for about six years now. When I first started role-playing (AD&D and Rifts) I was always miffed that I could never afford to have my own copies of gamebooks. My solution was to make my own RPG. That set many wheels in motion, that have remained so ever since.

At the moment I'm working on a game called Living Darkness. It's a modern-day horror RPG, with the focus on tension and creepy atmosphere. Details on the setting can be found here.

The combat system has been meticulously tested, and seems to work very well. I've gone to some (you might say ridiculous) lengths to ensure realistic handling of many modern firearms. My chief play-testers and I have had so much fun with the combat system that we even started playing team table-top wargame skirmishes with the rule set.

I won't go into detail in my opening post, but the defining characteristics of the combat rules are that it is smooth, quick and deadly. This fits well with how I want it to play as an RPG. The key element in the atmosphere of the game is the evident mortality of the characters. I want players to fear for their character's life at every moment. And if a character survives the first couple of games, I want the player to fear for their character's sanity.

Having permanent character death as a frequent occurence requires a number of counter-balances. First, having the storylines focus around very short scenarios. It also makes perfect sense in the setting for a character to want to get in and out of a Dark Zone as quickly as possible. A typical game session could then comprise of three or four hour-long missions. This way a character who is killed early can make a new character and quickly join in again.

So naturally, a quick and simplistic system of character creation would be favourable. But for the elements of suspense and psychological horror to work effectively, a player has to be able to identify with their character. At least enough to become seriously worried for their character's safety.

This provides a dilemna. Namely, how to work a character creation system that is flexible enough for players to make an avatar they find favourable, yet do so in as little as ten minutes.

With the extended synopsis out of the way, I'm begging for suggestions or references to ways this has been handled before.

I love the concept. Dark Inheritance has a similar feel to it, but is tied to a weird zone popping up around Jerusalem. I prefer your back drop which is more open ended. And, also, the fact that the living darkness is *growing* makes it more urgent for people to get some data from within the pockets.

Anyway, on to Character Creation...

I'd say for a high lethality game with any type of character nuance, you *have* to go with templates. It allows you to support a system with lots of character stat crunchiness without requiring the players to spend an hour or two on a PC that could very possibly die within that same amount of gaming time.

There are many, many examples of template driven character design out there, but I'd say the best application is some generic templates with say a half dozen possible tweaks to hard characteristics...and maybe a GURPS like mechanic to get some other small character effectiveness benefit by defining "quirks".

I always thought quirks were the best element of GURPS character creations design. Attach a small character effectiveness benefit to adding flavor and personality to that character.

Anyway, that's just some very broad brushstrokes.

Cheers,
Tom

May I suggest a system similar to TSRs "Amazing Engine"? Basically all players get a "core" they call build up and add on to and every time they generate a new character it is built upon this core. This way you get the sense of achievement you get from advancing the story and your character without having to start over completely. Generally speaking it is easier to advance your current character than the core but it is worth it.

I was heading towards a template sort of system.
There's two ideas I'm working with at the moment. The first is a career-based skill set. The more useful skills are obviously going to be found in police or military career slots, but that's balanced by the fact that Dark Runners are more likely to come from those kinds of backgrounds.

I was leaning far away from a point-based creation for two reasons. Firstly it takes a lot of writing, playtesting and revising to make it balanced; and secondly it will inspire players to spend more time tweaking their character's skills. Instead I was looking at an age-based system. The more career slots you take, the older your character. Older characters will have more skills to start with, but will tire more quickly and learn slowly.

But a person doesn't learn everything they know from working. So in addition to career skill sets (CSS), I'd have to add recreational skills sets (RSS). Trouble with that is that some RSSs (like gym training or sport hunting) will have much more obvious game-mechanic advantages over others. The only way I can see to balance these out is a point-based system, which just brings me back to square one.

The other idea I'm going to implement is the perk/penalty. Basically, the player states an advantage they would like their character to have, and the GM replies with a disadvantage that is (hopefully) relevant. But here's the catch: Once a player has requested a perk, they're stuck with it no matter what penalty the GM has counter-offered.

eg.
PLAYER: My character comes from a very rich family, and so has access to a much larger pool of resources.
GM: Okay, but your aristocratic upbringing has made you a very arrogant person. Every time your character speaks, you must pass a charisma roll to avoid offending people, no matter what it is you've said.
PLAYER: ... shit.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that in my opinion. When I run games I rarely let a player choose their own disadvantages. At best I pick three I think are suitable and let them choose only between them.

I like the template systems and the age based systems. I think you should mix the two. Make a few charts for skills akin to the 1st edition Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RPG if you're familiar with it.

arete66 wrote: I prefer your back drop which is more open ended.

jc_madden wrote: I like the template systems and the age based systems. I think you should mix the two. Make a few charts for skills akin to the 1st edition Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RPG if you're familiar with it.

Gurnard wrote: At the moment I'm working on a game called Living Darkness. It's a modern-day horror RPG, with the focus on tension and creepy atmosphere.

The combat system has been meticulously tested, and seems to work very well. I've gone to some (you might say ridiculous) lengths to ensure realistic handling of many modern firearms.

My chief play-testers and I have had so much fun with the combat system that we even started playing team table-top wargame skirmishes with the rule set.

Gurnard wrote:
The idea was that players anywhere could use their own neighbourhoods and familiar surroundings as specific campaign settings.

jc_madden wrote:
Could you give me a general overview of how these skill charts work, what values are used, etc.?

greyorm wrote:
You lost my interest right there. What the heck does meticulously-handled handgun combat have to do with "tension and creepy atmosphere"? How do the above rules create the stated focus instead of detracting from it?

jc_madden wrote: Been a while but I'll try. Bascially there were several lists of skills; Collegate, Technical, Military, Secondary (hobbies), etc. You rolled an a chart and it would give you your level of education. You were given X amount of skill packages and Y amount of idividual skills. So you could roll and get 1-4 years of college, a BA, PhD, Militray background etc. Each one comming with more specific skills and less hobbies. Usually folks with just high school education got 1 technical package and about 10 individually chosen Secondary skills. Packages were specific skill sets that couldn't be changed but often time you couldn't cherry pick the skills within those pacakages. (eg. you could not get the "Surgery" skill without picking a medical package as one of your PhD choices). The longer the training the more years you added on to your starting age.

Gurnard wrote: My thinking is that a few little details like this will make the game just that little bit more real, so as to enhance the atmosphere.

Gurnard:

Playtest versions of the in-development-hereabouts-on-the-Forge Capes is one such option - minimal mechanics of the right sort can allow quick character generation and player identification with said characters.

Burning Wheel has an awesome 'lifepaths' based system - though to be honest it takes more than just 10 minutes. However, you end up with balanced (mostly) characters at the end of the day with a highly detailed background generated along the way.

The free game FATE (aka Fantastic Adventures in Tabletop Entertainment) has a very, very slick character generation system that needn't take long at all, and definitely inspires player identification.

However, as with most things, none of these ideas can be plucked from their homes and fully dropped into another system.

For example, FATE has some of the best weapons rules (in terms of actual play balance, if not in terms of 'realism'), but that only works because of how that relates to the concept of Aspects, which only works because of the phased character generation, etc. You should get the idea.

You might be able to glean thought-starters from the above that can help direct your own system.

Hope that helps.

Cheers.