Greetings Forge,

I've not been around long, and this is my first post about something I made... so thanks for reading it, and please try to keep critiques or comments jargon-light. Thanks!

I'm working on a game called (as you can likely guess from the title of this thread) Disparate World. The game is sort of an overarching RPG that jumps around in the characters' lives and allows them to play in great detail parts of those characters' lives which usually go ignored. The game mechanics are all radically different for different parts of the world, and essentially compose a gallery of mini-games which are linked together under one overarching system.

For example, the first game that I made for this system (I say made, but it's really far from finished) is called Mutant Zombie Fighting Pits. I've been working on and off on it for a number of years- it involves mutated zombies controlled by necromancers fighting each other, and that's pretty much it. So you can include it in a campaign in that if your character is a necromancer, you can use your own zombie, or if your character is very rich he can bankroll a young necromancer and take part in the game as well.

What I'm working on now is a combat system for the general game (the arena style strategy of Mutant Zombies is too complex and slow for player combat- I want their normal fights to be a lot more fast paced and instinctual, modelling the heightened difficulty and tension of fights irl as opposed to less risky arena fights.) I also wanted a magic system which allowed for a certain amount of skill to be involved, as I like magic to be a rarefied and difficult thing in the game world, and printing "magic is rarefied and difficult" in the player's guide doesn't really seem to aptly do that.

So here's the mechanic I actually want critiqued- instead of publishing a spell list or any such thing, I publish a list of correspondences. This would link numbers (numerology) to major arcana (tarot) to types of rock (geomancy) to the position of the planets (astrology). Then the mage would have to sit down and figure out exactly what spell effect he wanted, and articulate it using those symbols (and others, that was an incomplete list up there.) Then, depending on how many symbols are worked into the spell, to what degree those symbols are worked in, and the specificity of the command, the spell has a varying degree of effect.

For example, let's say that 7=death=mars=red. To attack an orc, a mage might write "Magic, kill the orc standing before me" (seven words) in blood (red/death), on a plaque angled precisely at Mars (...Mars). This would achieve the spell with four symbols, but each only in the first degree (the degree might be thought of as how 'clever' the spell is, or how many times it reiterates the effect- using seven lettered words with "g", the seventh letter of the alphabet would get you two more degrees of numerology in there).

Here are points that I wondered about this:

A) Do you think it's too complicated?

-Note that it should be time consuming to write spells, since they are reasonably powerful and the combat takes place in real time (if not precisely real time, bad things do happen to people who take too long, I haven't worked out physical attack system yet but it will also be time based)

B) I was thinking that certain schools would have certain natures of effect- astrology could be linked with time effects, geomancy with natural effects, etc. And this would give a bit more quantifiable a guide for how powerful each spell should be. (Naturally, there will be tables in there to give you an idea of it's power regardless). Does this seem good or should all the schools just be quantified and then totalled up (in which case degree would probably be worth whatever the square of itself in points.)

C) Any other questions, comments or critiques? I know it's a little vague in places, but if you ask me pointed questions I'd be happy to flesh out anything that's confusing.

Thanks for sticking with me all the way down to the bottom, leave me your thoughts,

Nick

Hey,

I think it's all really great stuff- it's innovative and I like that a lot. The system of correspondences and linkage seems like a great way for players to create their own intended effects. I like that amount of player control. However, I do have a few problems or at least questions that need to be clarified before I could fully accept the system.

1- It limits the people who can play Wizards in the full sense. On one hand one part of your game might be fairly simple- game mechanics and mini-games allowing for a player to be a wizard and simply cast spells within the mini-games rules. However, once they are in the real world, they may not be clever enough (or perhaps even too clever) for the system itself. Is the entire spells effect left up to the discretion of the GM? Does he ultimately decide how clever he believes it to be? I think this puts some kind of freedom-strain on the player/DM relationship. For example- stupid players and smart DMs as well as smart players and stupid DMS. Hypothetically, we don't want either of these- but this means that some people simply won't be able to play the wizard class in the overarching RPG due to their natural god given aptitudes (or in this case.. lack thereof). I don't know if this means you should change it- I just know it's theres.

2- Real time combat, I know you addressed this. I'm just curious as to how you'll work it out. I'm sure it has to have been done before, in fact in several DnD games I've had if the DM decides players are taking too long realistically to plan actions he'll simply continue on with the action taking place. Not fully real-time, but it was getting there. I'd just like to know how you'd plan to handle that.

3- Overpowered spells? hypothetically an incredibly clever wizard could just create a spell out of the ether with this system. It apears there is no limitation save your actual real life limitations. Your spells will only get better as you get better at using them as a person. This isn't good or bad- but it does leave itself open to a first level character (if there are even levels of experience) destroying the world simply because he knew how to. Obviously this leaves a lot up to the DM and the characters. The players must respect the model of the game and if they don't there's... not much we can do about it. They'll have fun either way. I just thought you should be aware of the observation of the potential abuses.

All great stuff, I think. Keep it up! And let me know about this Mutant Zombie game, it sounds really cool.

-architect