I was planning on making a game called Gaterunners. I have some of the game mechanics and some of the game settings. The interesting thing about this game will be how it blends science fiction and fantasy aspects of the game. I was thinking of making this as different from DnD as possible while still maintaining the same functionality. That is, I'll fiddle with things like skills, items, and classes, while completely changing the races, maps, and theme. Those aren't the only things I'm changing. I'm just giving an example.

To give a glimpse of the things I'm adding completely, I'm thinking of adding these things to it:

Part 1. The ebb and the flow. I will add a field effect that response inversely as you cast an ebb or flow spell. The more ebb spells cast, the stronger the flow will be in that area, and vice versa. Likewise, the type of magic in the area affects the life, whereas the type of spell cast affects you. Casting an ebb spell will make you turn more ebb but drain the area of its flow, thus making future flow spells more powerful. Furthermore, everything around you will turn more flow, which makes it hostile to ebb. Now at first you will mostly be using flow spells, but over time you will balance it with ebb spells, perhaps overbalancing at first, but then balancing equally later.

Part 2. Planetary facilities. Each planet will have unique facilities which give you things that aid your party. I've described this in another thread. However, I'll describe this here too. On the fire planet, the collection of highly flammable gasses, and possibly material, will be emphasizes. On the water planet, the collection of water, for farming and for lubrication, will be emphasized. On the life planet, the genetic alteration of the party, otherwise known as changes in stats, will be emphasized. On the spirit planet, the disciplining and honing of your spirit will be emphasized. On the air planet, the collection of energy in both magic and technological forms will be emphasized. On the earth planet, the storage and documenting of typical futuristic items will be emphasized. On each world there are various sizes of technolgical and magical databases, and various troop, weapon, armor, item, vehicle, and even magic testing and training will occur.

Part 3. Strategy. I will somehow make it possible for large armies to be used in the game. Probably up to 1000, but maybe more. The grid size will accomidate the larger than normal groups, and the dice will be rolled differently. I might make a new dice for this, as 100 will probably not be enough. I will make morale and discipline be factors of the army, and I will make it so that you roll for batallions rather than individuals. Furthermore, I won't ignore the role that magic and technology will play. I hope to make this close enough to real battle so that if I make this into a video game, there won't be anything lacking. At least, not as far as anyone could tell.

You see how much thought has been put into this? If you want a link to information like this - possibly conflicting information but we'll be using this version - then I will post a link for you. However, as I want to make this as simple as possible, I'll wait until later to post the links.

The races, of course, will be as follows: Armadillo for fire planet, Otter for water planet, Monkey for life planet, Lizard for spirit planet, Bird for air planet, Gargoyle for earth planet. Each will have their own stats. There will be no baseline character, which is difficult for some, but easy enough for me, as all the characters will be unique.

Oh, yeah, and there are six worlds and a nexus each linked by a bunch of gates.

So, what do you think?

Welcome to The Forge!
Do you have a real name we can call you by? Short of having had really eccentric hippy parents, I assume Starblade isn't your real name. (oh god, if it is I apologize!!!)

First and foremost: you describe mechanical elements to your game, but a lot of what The Forge stresses is the why behind these mechanical elements. The premise of your game.
Two very important articles that helped me when I joined:
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=5564.0
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=16996.msg180335#msg180335

I, personally, would like to know a little bit more about your design goals for this game: what is its purpose?

Part 1. The ebb and the flow. I will add a field effect that response inversely as you cast an ebb or flow spell. The more ebb spells cast, the stronger the flow will be in that area, and vice versa. Likewise, the type of magic in the area affects the life, whereas the type of spell cast affects you. Casting an ebb spell will make you turn more ebb but drain the area of its flow, thus making future flow spells more powerful. Furthermore, everything around you will turn more flow, which makes it hostile to ebb. Now at first you will mostly be using flow spells, but over time you will balance it with ebb spells, perhaps overbalancing at first, but then balancing equally later.

I hope to make this close enough to real battle so that if I make this into a video game, there won't be anything lacking. At least, not as far as anyone could tell.

I agree with the strategy wargame comment - don't get me wrong, I love the notion of having layers of gameplay, normal character driven play on the one level, that then influences a larger strategic game (battles, colonisation, all that good stuff). The question is, how much value are you putting on the strategy level on character driven play? If it is ever-present, that is a LOT of book-keeping. So basically, how are these two things interrelated? I would love to see a game that had these two scales of gameplay work complementarily and seamlessly - but I have never seen anything that came close to the mark on this.

I think your notion to make magic different from D&D preconceptions is laudable, as is the way you want to tie it into sci-fi without juxtaposing it aimlessly (I am trying to do similar myself). Might I recommend an article that some other Forgites sent me when I was thinking about magic systems - it is very very good and should be read by everyone who is designing such a system:

http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/magic/antiscience.html

Also, another couple of articles that I found useful, especially when tackling this sort of concept, are Ron's essays on Fantasy Heartbreakers (it almost broke my heart when I realised the sci-fi/fantasy crossover I was making was indeed, such a heartbreaker.... and a lot of good work has come out of that realisation):
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/9/
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/articles/10/

Otherwise, some more information on what the players/GM/characters/system etc. does would be good. As per joepubs links.

A good exercise to help answering some of the questions that undoubtedly will be cropping up can be found at the top of the Game Design Forum here: a fictional text of interaction between a set of players and a GM.
What do the players, as humans in the real world, DO while playing? Do they simply take in the GM's word and respond occasionally? How proactive are they? How many points do they want to do something must they consult the system to see if it happens? And likewise with the GM: What kind of overarching powers does he/she have? How much authority does he/she hold? Just a sample clip of the dialouge would be great, doesn't need to be a blow for blow account of all die rolls and everything involved, but a good structure to it will show us, and possibly even you, where things are needed and what is needed to ensure a smooth interaction.

Heya Starblade,

Welcome to the Forge!  I wouldn't worry about the whole Heartbreaker thing yet.  In fact, I'd advise putting the whole thing out of your head for right now.

From what I've read, you've got the beginings of a game that sounds like a whole heck of a lot of fun to play.  I totally dig your spell system.  I think that's a key feature of your game.  I would encourage you to emphasise it greatly, perhaps more than any other facet of your system.

Now, I've got a few good ideas about some of the mechanics you plan to use- niffty spell system, multiple and wildly different planets with monolithic environments, and combat on a large scale.  Kind of a mix between Birthright and Planescape, which isn't a bad thing!  I have three questions I typically ask newer desiginers just to get the ball rolling.  Perhaps you could answer them for me :)

1.  What is your game really about?  Like if you had to sum up what the point of play in your game is in a paragraph or two, what would it be?

2.  What do the characters do?  I don't want an answer like "go on adventures" or "level up" or anything like that.  What I want to know is what the characters do in your game that is unique to your game.

3.  What do the players do?  What the characters do in the game setting is one thing, but I also want to know what freedoms, responsiblities, and challenges your game assigns to the players.  How much narrative power do they have?  Do they set the agenda or does the GM set the agenda for the campaign?  Stuff like that.

I look forward to discussing more of your game as we go. :)

Peace,

-Troy

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya Starblade,

Welcome to the Forge!  I wouldn't worry about the whole Heartbreaker thing yet.  In fact, I'd advise putting the whole thing out of your head for right now.

From what I've read, you've got the beginings of a game that sounds like a whole heck of a lot of fun to play.  I totally dig your spell system.  I think that's a key feature of your game.  I would encourage you to emphasise it greatly, perhaps more than any other facet of your system.

Now, I've got a few good ideas about some of the mechanics you plan to use- niffty spell system, multiple and wildly different planets with monolithic environments, and combat on a large scale.  Kind of a mix between Birthright and Planescape, which isn't a bad thing!  I have three questions I typically ask newer desiginers just to get the ball rolling.  Perhaps you could answer them for me :)

1.  What is your game really about?  Like if you had to sum up what the point of play in your game is in a paragraph or two, what would it be?

2.  What do the characters do?  I don't want an answer like "go on adventures" or "level up" or anything like that.  What I want to know is what the characters do in your game that is unique to your game.

3.  What do the players do?  What the characters do in the game setting is one thing, but I also want to know what freedoms, responsiblities, and challenges your game assigns to the players.  How much narrative power do they have?  Do they set the agenda or does the GM set the agenda for the campaign?  Stuff like that.

I look forward to discussing more of your game as we go. :)

Peace,

-Troy

Hi!
  Well, a couple of things come to my mind:
1) Why armadillo? Seems like Salamander or an energy based being might be more appropriate...
2) OK, The elemental thing is cool, but you might be approaching it with too narrow of a scope. You said you want to have/include a strategic game, but there is no conflict between the worlds and no common ground either. Consider making the planets more diverse. Maybe the fire world is only 40% armadillos and the rest is split between the others. they are still the dominant species, but the otters rule the small lakes and seas that dot the fire world. Maybe the armadillos oppress the otters, maybe they ignore them, maybe they revere them forr the abilities the armadillos do not possess...
3) More word choice isues: Life. Calling one planet the Life Planet implies that the other planets are lifeless. Wood is acceptable as an element. Or barring that chlorophyl?
4) Wel, think about the whole strategic combat thing. Most games I have played ignore the strategic options. Furthermore, Strategic game play can minimize a single character's role in the battle. Was it your character that won the day or the 100's who lost there lives in the battle?
5) Consider adding a robot race, either connected or not connected to the AI. Would be fun to play a highly specialized and focused character
6) Consider more advanture ideas. The game description so far sounds like a great description for a Video Game, but seems to have limited possibilities for role playing. What do the characters do besides rest, repair and buy stuff between gate intervals? Adding a little more backstory and history to your game world will add all kinds of possibilities. Maybe the Otter player needs to assess Fire World technology during his next visit to the fire world station...
7) Consider adding other worlds to the cluster that these rival governments might want to control for their resources...
8) If you can broaden the scope of the backstory, the players might be interested in playing roles that aren't the six heroes of the cluster...
9) What about half-breeds? Is there such a thing as a half-Otter? It might be interesting to explore the character conflicts of being torn between two worlds...
10) Think about adding more layers of complexity to your elemental theme. As an example, did you know that the four houses of Hogwarts are based on the elemenats? Many people do not, because there are so many layers between the idea and the presentation. And those layers add diversity, opportunity and mystery. If Rowling had just said, Slytherin is the house based on the element of water, everyone would have yawned them away. But when you add all the other layers on top, they become an enigma...
  Anyways, it seems like you have the basis for a very good game, just feels too much loke a board game or video game to me so far, but you have a lot of great stuff to build off of, good luck!

dindenver wrote:
Hi!
  Well, a couple of things come to my mind:
1) Why armadillo? Seems like Salamander or an energy based being might be more appropriate...
2) OK, The elemental thing is cool, but you might be approaching it with too narrow of a scope. You said you want to have/include a strategic game, but there is no conflict between the worlds and no common ground either. Consider making the planets more diverse. Maybe the fire world is only 40% armadillos and the rest is split between the others. they are still the dominant species, but the otters rule the small lakes and seas that dot the fire world. Maybe the armadillos oppress the otters, maybe they ignore them, maybe they revere them forr the abilities the armadillos do not possess...
3) More word choice isues: Life. Calling one planet the Life Planet implies that the other planets are lifeless. Wood is acceptable as an element. Or barring that chlorophyl?
4) Wel, think about the whole strategic combat thing. Most games I have played ignore the strategic options. Furthermore, Strategic game play can minimize a single character's role in the battle. Was it your character that won the day or the 100's who lost there lives in the battle?
5) Consider adding a robot race, either connected or not connected to the AI. Would be fun to play a highly specialized and focused character
6) Consider more advanture ideas. The game description so far sounds like a great description for a Video Game, but seems to have limited possibilities for role playing. What do the characters do besides rest, repair and buy stuff between gate intervals? Adding a little more backstory and history to your game world will add all kinds of possibilities. Maybe the Otter player needs to assess Fire World technology during his next visit to the fire world station...
7) Consider adding other worlds to the cluster that these rival governments might want to control for their resources...
8) If you can broaden the scope of the backstory, the players might be interested in playing roles that aren't the six heroes of the cluster...
9) What about half-breeds? Is there such a thing as a half-Otter? It might be interesting to explore the character conflicts of being torn between two worlds...
10) Think about adding more layers of complexity to your elemental theme. As an example, did you know that the four houses of Hogwarts are based on the elemenats? Many people do not, because there are so many layers between the idea and the presentation. And those layers add diversity, opportunity and mystery. If Rowling had just said, Slytherin is the house based on the element of water, everyone would have yawned them away. But when you add all the other layers on top, they become an enigma...
  Anyways, it seems like you have the basis for a very good game, just feels too much loke a board game or video game to me so far, but you have a lot of great stuff to build off of, good luck!

Heya Starblade,

Quick question for you, sort-of as an add-on to the three Troy asked:

What do you]/i] think is the coolest thing about your game?  What is the thing that keeps you wanting to work on it, when you get no interest from other people?  Because that's your focus, and should be the core of your game.  The stuff that keeps your interest, is what is going to get your best attention, and the bulk of the work, so make that the bulk of the game.  Your game will be the better for it, I promise.

Now, I'm going to hazard a guess here, but you keep mentioning how it can be played freeform or scenario... is one of those more appealing to you, or do you keep flip-flopping back and forth?

James

Blankshield wrote:
Heya Starblade,

Quick question for you, sort-of as an add-on to the three Troy asked:

What do you]/i] think is the coolest thing about your game?  What is the thing that keeps you wanting to work on it, when you get no interest from other people?  Because that's your focus, and should be the core of your game.  The stuff that keeps your interest, is what is going to get your best attention, and the bulk of the work, so make that the bulk of the game.  Your game will be the better for it, I promise.

Now, I'm going to hazard a guess here, but you keep mentioning how it can be played freeform or scenario... is one of those more appealing to you, or do you keep flip-flopping back and forth?

James

Hi!
  OK, that sounds cool, there are two points I want to revisit though:

2. There are gates connecting the worlds. This is where most of the conflict is, at least for now. The races will have more conflict with eachother as their technological level increases and are more able to bear life on the other world.

4. It would be a combination of the forces. The higher level characters couldn't have done it alone, nor the 100s who were with them.

dindenver wrote:
Hi!
  OK, that sounds cool, there are two points I want to revisit though:

2. There are gates connecting the worlds. This is where most of the conflict is, at least for now. The races will have more conflict with eachother as their technological level increases and are more able to bear life on the other world.

  OK, so I wasn't off the wall with the idea that the planets were at odds with each other. So, what I was trinyg to say is: What do Otters want with a Fire World? What's the point of any strategic-level conflict? Sure there can and should be philosophical differences, but are they so strong that one side or the other would go to war? There may be rare resources, but those are useless if you can't live there to gather them. If the worlds aren't so exreme, its more plausible that the winners could live there when they achieve that victory. I think cross-pollenated races on each of the main planets would raise interesting political, social and roleplaying issues as well. Say, on the Fire world there is a colony of Otters from a war from over 200 years ago. They exist peacefully with the armadillos and would defend the fire planet from invaders. Take a look at the Saxon invasion of England to get an idea of invading cultures clashing and meshing with defenders cultures.

4. It would be a combination of the forces. The higher level characters couldn't have done it alone, nor the 100s who were with them.

  Right, that is the answer anyone would expect from a strategic engagement. BUT, the game is about the PLAYER's characters. In a board game where the player is not invested in the past or future of any one character, it is great to see the interplay between hero characters and swarms. But in an RPG, the emphasis is on the individual and their efforts. I am not saying the war has to be won or lost by them, but that the story you are telling should be ABOUT them.

  I am not sure if I am right, but that was my gut instinct when I saw that. Sounds like there is a lot more in your head that needs to be put to paper, maybe you should concentrate on that for a bit while these ideas fly around the forums?

Starblade, there are two things I want to address quickly:

6. I haven't even gone into detail about the history, but I have something resembling a history written up. There will be the main quest, the one I described, the subquests, which are personal quests that involve individual characters, and there will be side quests, the typical off the wall quests that are more for exp gaining than for advancing the storyline.

Oh, there's a very easy way to deal with that. Simply make the players the commanders of the forces. I'm not sure if this is the answer you were looking for, but it's the only answer I can give at this point. Also, you wouldn't just have armies appear on the side of the party just like that. You'd have to raise and develop the army. That is, I'd be making the armies a hands on thing, so that the players aren't just waiting for dices to be rolled and all that, but you get to see your effort put into works, and roll to see how good you comand, and all that.

Oh, there's a very easy way to deal with that. Simply make the players the commanders of the forces.

joepub wrote:
Starblade, there are two things I want to address quickly:

6. I haven't even gone into detail about the history, but I have something resembling a history written up. There will be the main quest, the one I described, the subquests, which are personal quests that involve individual characters, and there will be side quests, the typical off the wall quests that are more for exp gaining than for advancing the storyline.

The way this is written (and maybe it is just the word choice, not the intent), it gives me the distinct impression that you are designing a PLOT for the game.
In my experience, albeit limited it is, this is not the way that RPGs are structured. It is the way that video games, strategic games, and board games are developed.

Why have "off the wall" quests, if its just for gaining EXP? Why make higher experience values just so that you have to jump through hoops?

And if there is a main quest, that makes it seem like the game is a win/lose affair. Is that what you are after?

Oh, there's a very easy way to deal with that. Simply make the players the commanders of the forces. I'm not sure if this is the answer you were looking for, but it's the only answer I can give at this point. Also, you wouldn't just have armies appear on the side of the party just like that. You'd have to raise and develop the army. That is, I'd be making the armies a hands on thing, so that the players aren't just waiting for dices to be rolled and all that, but you get to see your effort put into works, and roll to see how good you comand, and all that.

To expand on this a little bit, I want to offer some further ideas for running wartime characters:
-If you are aiming for a d&d-like game, which your posts lean towards, check out Heroes of Battle. they present different ideas for warbased roleplaying.
-Have the characters be a squadron of men. They fight as a detachment of the army.
-Have the characters be seperate commanders of the units.
-Use characters as specialist troops.

No matter what the structure is, there is one thing I want to stress: Winning the battle does not necessarily constitute a win for the players. If this is an RPG about individual characters, the battle (including its successes) turns into a backdrop and part of the world around them.

If you don't want to, there is no reason to roll dice or narrate anything that the characters don't want to focus on. The 44th division's attack percentage doesn't need to matter to the 23rd division.

Also - Is the game about the individual struggles of the characters?

Oh, there's a very easy way to deal with that. Simply make the players the commanders of the forces.

I get the sense you are looking at the army's success as integral to the character successes. That isn't the ONLY way to go about it. Maybe it is your top pick, and htat's fine, I just wanted to stress options.

Some thoughts:

Powerful godlike characters affecting the worlds by raising huge armies - Yay! Bring it on! Goodbye to trudging through first level!

You say you want to be as different as possible from D&D while keeping the same functionality. Do you worry that keeping the same functionality means that players who are used to D&D will essentially play it just like a minor variant?

You said that you want the game to be about the effect that the character's actions have on the worlds they travel to. How does that work? Is it simply through conquest or ebb and flow or are there more variables that the characters can influence, like technology and culture and general magical ability.

I really like the sound and feel of the ebb and flow - but I worry that a binary representation of the mood of the world is a bit too direct. How do imbalances in ebb and flow affect the world? Is ebb all quiet and dying and flow all fire and action?

Where do the gate monsters come from? Are they just random travellers from other worlds who are perceived as monsters because of their extreme difference?

The PCs are the ONLY ones who can travel between worlds on purpose? I mean sure, godlike, special, but don't you need some sort of foil who can act against the PCs on their own terms?

And.... only five worlds? Have you read Diana Wynne Jones' Chestromanci series? I mention it because it's an awesome series in its own right and as gaming material, but also because it proposes a very cool alternate worlds setup that resembles what you have going on here.

Heya,

You do? That's cool.

Basically so far all I have is the effect it has on the environment and the effect it has on the character. As you've probably read, they are opposite. So far the only thing I can remember that I left out is the part where it's described how it affects the environment. I was thinking of making it default to affecting everything within a radius of the player, which is determined by the level, which means the higher level you are, the more you can spread out the effects, and the less likely that a creature will be affected near to you, though the general likelyness is about the same. As for you, the effect on you of using a spell with the ebb or flow property is to have that energy on you. The emnity of having a character with, say, flow, and the environment with, say, ebb, is something I definately want to emphasize.

The game is set in a SF/F setting, but I'm sure you already know that. It's about the forces of change, their impact on the balance of the ebb and flow, and about the effect of the gates, and how they change how civilization advances. The nexus is really only accessible to the six main characters and whoever they so chose to bring along with them. However, each gate is timed for open and close. I'll explain this more in the next question.

It really depends on if you want to play freeform or scenario.

you have to deal with the 'monsters' that come through the gates.

If you want to know more about the main character's quest, I'll tell you. They have access to the facilities, and can USE them, rather than just maintain them, which is what the NPCs do, or if you want to play as them, your character in a freeform game. I've described the facilities, and how they work together with the nexus at times. The nexus is what is used to try to communicate with the ancients, and otherwise house the party, not completely safe, but safer than when adventuring.

You get to chose what to do, but you have the AI program to tell you what you should do, which agrees with what is happening in the rest of the world. Since the GM plays the hologram, that gives the GM power over what the hologram says, though that doesn't negate the responsibility to the rest of the world.

most particular in that the freeform setting is too lax and the scenario setting is too strict

TonyPace wrote:
Some thoughts:

Powerful godlike characters affecting the worlds by raising huge armies - Yay! Bring it on! Goodbye to trudging through first level!

You say you want to be as different as possible from D&D while keeping the same functionality. Do you worry that keeping the same functionality means that players who are used to D&D will essentially play it just like a minor variant?

You said that you want the game to be about the effect that the character's actions have on the worlds they travel to. How does that work? Is it simply through conquest or ebb and flow or are there more variables that the characters can influence, like technology and culture and general magical ability.

I really like the sound and feel of the ebb and flow - but I worry that a binary representation of the mood of the world is a bit too direct. How do imbalances in ebb and flow affect the world? Is ebb all quiet and dying and flow all fire and action?

Where do the gate monsters come from? Are they just random travellers from other worlds who are perceived as monsters because of their extreme difference?

The PCs are the ONLY ones who can travel between worlds on purpose? I mean sure, godlike, special, but don't you need some sort of foil who can act against the PCs on their own terms?

And.... only five worlds? Have you read Diana Wynne Jones' Chestromanci series? I mention it because it's an awesome series in its own right and as gaming material, but also because it proposes a very cool alternate worlds setup that resembles what you have going on here.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

You do? That's cool.

Basically so far all I have is the effect it has on the environment and the effect it has on the character. As you've probably read, they are opposite. So far the only thing I can remember that I left out is the part where it's described how it affects the environment. I was thinking of making it default to affecting everything within a radius of the player, which is determined by the level, which means the higher level you are, the more you can spread out the effects, and the less likely that a creature will be affected near to you, though the general likelyness is about the same. As for you, the effect on you of using a spell with the ebb or flow property is to have that energy on you. The emnity of having a character with, say, flow, and the environment with, say, ebb, is something I definately want to emphasize.

-This is all great.  But the reason I like it so much is because it can apply to so much in your game.  Why limit it to just spells?  Why not create combat feats that warrior types and rogue types can use that also have an ebb and flow?  This way, everyone gets to participate and destabalization is more likely.  BTW, destabalization is what you want the PCs to have to deal with in your game, right?  Cause that's just cool stuff!

The game is set in a SF/F setting, but I'm sure you already know that. It's about the forces of change, their impact on the balance of the ebb and flow, and about the effect of the gates, and how they change how civilization advances. The nexus is really only accessible to the six main characters and whoever they so chose to bring along with them. However, each gate is timed for open and close. I'll explain this more in the next question.

-This is a lot of stuff about your setting- which is fine- but it doesn't tell me what your game is really about at all.  Do the PCs wish to cause the changes in Ebb and Flow?  Why, what's their goal?  Are they trying to prevent change?  Why?  What's their goal?

It really depends on if you want to play freeform or scenario.

-Okay, let me just talk about this for a sec.  It may sound like you are giving the players a lot of freedom by making your game capable of these two functions, but trust me you're not.  The last thing players want from a game design is no direction.  They do want to be told what play should look like and what their motivations should be.  Saying "Here's a bunch of setting and system information, go adventure!" is a lousey way to design a game.  You've got some great stuff here.  I recomend you choose just the "scenario" package for your game and stick with that.  In the end, you'll be much much happier with the design.

you have to deal with the 'monsters' that come through the gates.

-Why do the PCs want to kill the monsters?  Are they threatening something they care about?  Do the PCs gain some sort of control over their environment if they do?  IE, what's the reward that Player-Characters receive for killing the beasties?

If you want to know more about the main character's quest, I'll tell you. They have access to the facilities, and can USE them, rather than just maintain them, which is what the NPCs do, or if you want to play as them, your character in a freeform game. I've described the facilities, and how they work together with the nexus at times. The nexus is what is used to try to communicate with the ancients, and otherwise house the party, not completely safe, but safer than when adventuring.

-This is all good stuff.  Focus on it as a major aspect of your game.

You get to chose what to do, but you have the AI program to tell you what you should do, which agrees with what is happening in the rest of the world. Since the GM plays the hologram, that gives the GM power over what the hologram says, though that doesn't negate the responsibility to the rest of the world.

-Okay, let me see if I understand.  The GM (through the hologram) tells the players what needs to happen to fix the world/nexus/gate system.  The players then choose to attempt to do so or choose to further their own personal goals.  Is that close?  I can see a great game here if the players all have to choose a couple personal goals for their characters that often conflict with what the AI is telling them.  Making the PCs make those hard choices can lead to some really great game play.

most particular in that the freeform setting is too lax and the scenario setting is too strict

-The scenario probably isn't as strict as you think, and freeform never lives up to its billing IMHO.  So go full on with the scenario you've outlined and I think you'll end up with a pretty decent game.

Peace,

-Troy

My personal feeling is that making the players wait for the good stuff and suffer the huge likelihood of random character death with all the associated problems of bringing in a new character a la The Gamers is a recipe for crap play. Lots of my friends beg to differ and say that surviving all that gives your characters meaning, but it always sounded like masochism to me. Suffering the random deaths of several characters who were beginning to get that 'developing from a schmeal into a hero' thing really working hammered the point home.

If you're worried about D&D functionality bringing about D&D play, then the obvious answer is to drop a lot of the functionality that doesn't directly attend to what this game is about.

I don't like the 'vile' and 'good' interpretations of ebb and flow as basic effects. That short definition is what people are going to latch onto when they are coming to grips with the setting, and that in turn is going to drive how they deal with things in play. All the deeper meaning will get eliminated through the way it actually plays out. Maybe the local interpretation of good and evil changes on different worlds and so 'good' civilizations can base their societies off of either ebb or flow? Then they can see with their own eyes several radically different interpretations of good and evil before getting a more balanced picture of the truth. Show, don't tell, in other words.

But this still doesn't get to the basic question. How would a major imbalance in ebb/flow actually manifest in a locale?

The built in story is fine with me - in practise a group can always walk off the path if that's what they decide to do. Nobody needs to hold your hand for that. A real story can provide a lot of useful ideas about direction of play. And I do think it's central to the setting and situation of play of your game, so you should talk about it a little more.

There are definitely ways to make the technology and magic levels of the societies change in play, made even easier by using scenarios. You just have a little statblock for each society with sliders for magic vs. technology and military vs culture and ebb vs. flow, and maybe raising magic will drop tech (just like ebb and flow). As players, you can change those values by introducing certain technological tricks, maybe even very basic stuff at the extreme (just by showing the locals some of the possibilities on the other end of the spectrum). A little like the humanity mechanics in Vampire, where really easy actions will call for a roll to change at one extreme, but at the other end it takes a massive effort to push it farther.

The gates sound cool. My offhand thought is one gate per major society, which adds up to a lot. Alternately, you could start with one gate per world and then give them the resources relatively early on to construct more gates, perhaps through a device at first and later under their own steam.

Chestromanci: Hard to sum it up simply, but essentially there are an infinite series of alternate histories. However, the paths between these worlds are channeled so that it is much easier to travel to a few of them. Several of these worlds are aware of the others and can communicate, but few can actually travel between them. One such world has an office of government called the Chestromancer, who is a very powerful dimensional traveller who is appointed to deal with troubles on alternate worlds. He has a spell on him that lets him hear you if you speak his name three times, no matter where you are.

Howl's Moving Castle is based off her work, if you've seen that.

Another good resource would be Vincent Baker's Ars Magica Knockoff, which deals with similar issues of a home base and dimensional connections. It's not a finished game or anything, but it's got some cool ideas.

TonyPace wrote:
My personal feeling is that making the players wait for the good stuff and suffer the huge likelihood of random character death with all the associated problems of bringing in a new character a la The Gamers is a recipe for crap play. Lots of my friends beg to differ and say that surviving all that gives your characters meaning, but it always sounded like masochism to me. Suffering the random deaths of several characters who were beginning to get that 'developing from a schmeal into a hero' thing really working hammered the point home.

If you're worried about D&D functionality bringing about D&D play, then the obvious answer is to drop a lot of the functionality that doesn't directly attend to what this game is about.

I don't like the 'vile' and 'good' interpretations of ebb and flow as basic effects. That short definition is what people are going to latch onto when they are coming to grips with the setting, and that in turn is going to drive how they deal with things in play. All the deeper meaning will get eliminated through the way it actually plays out. Maybe the local interpretation of good and evil changes on different worlds and so 'good' civilizations can base their societies off of either ebb or flow? Then they can see with their own eyes several radically different interpretations of good and evil before getting a more balanced picture of the truth. Show, don't tell, in other words.

But this still doesn't get to the basic question. How would a major imbalance in ebb/flow actually manifest in a locale?

The built in story is fine with me - in practise a group can always walk off the path if that's what they decide to do. Nobody needs to hold your hand for that. A real story can provide a lot of useful ideas about direction of play. And I do think it's central to the setting and situation of play of your game, so you should talk about it a little more.

There are definitely ways to make the technology and magic levels of the societies change in play, made even easier by using scenarios. You just have a little statblock for each society with sliders for magic vs. technology and military vs culture and ebb vs. flow, and maybe raising magic will drop tech (just like ebb and flow). As players, you can change those values by introducing certain technological tricks, maybe even very basic stuff at the extreme (just by showing the locals some of the possibilities on the other end of the spectrum). A little like the humanity mechanics in Vampire, where really easy actions will call for a roll to change at one extreme, but at the other end it takes a massive effort to push it farther.

The gates sound cool. My offhand thought is one gate per major society, which adds up to a lot. Alternately, you could start with one gate per world and then give them the resources relatively early on to construct more gates, perhaps through a device at first and later under their own steam.

Chestromanci: Hard to sum it up simply, but essentially there are an infinite series of alternate histories. However, the paths between these worlds are channeled so that it is much easier to travel to a few of them. Several of these worlds are aware of the others and can communicate, but few can actually travel between them. One such world has an office of government called the Chestromancer, who is a very powerful dimensional traveller who is appointed to deal with troubles on alternate worlds. He has a spell on him that lets him hear you if you speak his name three times, no matter where you are.

Howl's Moving Castle is based off her work, if you've seen that.

Another good resource would be Vincent Baker's Ars Magica Knockoff, which deals with similar issues of a home base and dimensional connections. It's not a finished game or anything, but it's got some cool ideas.

Heya,

The reason for this is because ebb and flow are both aspects of mana. I suppose I could create pseudomagic that also takes mana.

That's what I was going to do, but someone I know in person suggested otherwise. Though it may have been someone here. At any rate, that's what I wanted to do in the first place. Thanks for your support.

Really though, I was thinking that you could earn money for killing the beasts, and they might have spell components on them. There will be some searching for spell components in this game.

There will be plenty of drama in this game. I would hate to see people forced to chose what the GM wants them to do, but I would also hate for there to be no reprocussions for ones actions. The GM will represent the real world and cause and effect, whereas the players represent the free will and ability to judge their actions.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

The reason for this is because ebb and flow are both aspects of mana. I suppose I could create pseudomagic that also takes mana.

-Well, mana is just a power source, right?  So who says spell casters are the only ones who know how to use it, eh?  And who says everyone who knows how to use magic casts spells?  Your game doesn't *have* to adhere to those rules.

That's what I was going to do, but someone I know in person suggested otherwise. Though it may have been someone here. At any rate, that's what I wanted to do in the first place. Thanks for your support.

-Consider my support vehement.

Really though, I was thinking that you could earn money for killing the beasts, and they might have spell components on them. There will be some searching for spell components in this game.

-All the more reason to make sure that more than just the spell casters can use "magic" or whatever you choose to call it.  That is unless all characters are spell users of some sort.  Is that the case in your game?

There will be plenty of drama in this game. I would hate to see people forced to chose what the GM wants them to do, but I would also hate for there to be no reprocussions for ones actions. The GM will represent the real world and cause and effect, whereas the players represent the free will and ability to judge their actions.

-That's good.  What kind of mechanics do you have in mind that will let the players set the agenda and judge their own actions?

Peace,

-Troy

Good point. But what other ways than casting spells are there to use magic?

Heya,

Good point. But what other ways than casting spells are there to use magic?

As for setting their own agenda... given that it's a pen and paper game, I could just let them explore the world as they pleased.

I'll explain this to the players and GM, but I suppose I should write a thing or two about sociology, biology, and all that, and let them interpret it as they may.

For Joe's questions:

We already discussed this a bit privately, but my suggestion is that "mana" is tied intrinsically to all actions. Everything we do in real life if fed off of this intrinsic mana - we just don't realize this.

Thus, all actions shift ebb and flow - however so minutely that it is often hard to measure.

Planting a seed requires some small amount of this intrinsic mana running through our veins, and boosts flow slightly.

And it is only big actions, and "magic", that offset ebb and flow drastically.

Heya,

Well, think of them more as natural abilities.  Haste can be a natural ability, not just a spell.  A brief bonus to a stat can be a natural ability.  Speaking with animals, visions, climbinb walls can all be special abilities.  In fact, many of the things we call spells, could work just the same as Feats in DnD.  Also, where do magic items come from?  Perhaps any character can make a magic sword or wand or gun or whatever if they permanently sacrifice mana in the process.  That's a crafting skill not a spell.  Also, perhaps a player with a high mana total affects the environment of the nexus and gates in some way.  Again not a spell.

Nah, just tossing characters in a setting then saying, "Okay, you guys figure out what's suposed to happen" really leaves the players hanging.  Instead, create some sort of dire situation that they must address in some way.  For instance, say the gates are collapsing, there's monsters everywhere, a new cult is taking over that is demonising the AI so it's under threat, and the PCs are all caught in the middle of it.  It's up to them what they do about it, then the GM can react to that.

Use that to describe the situation the characters are dropped in.  You have great stuff, it just needs to be a bit edgier.  It's okay to force the players do deal with a specific secenario so long as you don't dictate HOW they deal with it.  If you have a chance to think about the situation for your setting, I'd love to hear what you come up with.

Peace,

-Troy

PS:  Joe wrote something very interesting.

Heya,

I like that, but why would it take mana to plant a seed? Perhaps it always takes mana to plant a seed, to move, and even to think.

Suppose the seed grows, it takes energy to grow, so it takes mana. So the flow builds up. Or perhaps mana is somewhat of an enigmatic force, that tethers everything together, so that any change from a simpler order to a more complex order reflects an increase in mana. Something that is inanimate does not really affect mana all that much. Simple life forms affect mana a bit more, and as the life forms increase in complexity, they affect more and more mana, until we get into sentient life forms.

One of the things we should avoid is directly correlating ebb and flow with good or evil. I had a talk with you about this earlier, but I think I should share it:  If the focus of the cost-benefit is inwardly favored, it's ebb, and if it's outwardly favored, it's flow.

So far, I've got five plot points: The nexus, the party, the ebb and flow, conflict within the planetary cultures, and conflict between the planetary cultures. Out of these, even if I don't force the characters to go in a specific direction, something is bound to come up.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

I like that, but why would it take mana to plant a seed? Perhaps it always takes mana to plant a seed, to move, and even to think.

-I think you answered your own question :)

Suppose the seed grows, it takes energy to grow, so it takes mana. So the flow builds up. Or perhaps mana is somewhat of an enigmatic force, that tethers everything together, so that any change from a simpler order to a more complex order reflects an increase in mana. Something that is inanimate does not really affect mana all that much. Simple life forms affect mana a bit more, and as the life forms increase in complexity, they affect more and more mana, until we get into sentient life forms.

-Great stuff.  I might propose that when a thing grows it *creates* mana.  However, that might not jive with what you're going after here.  What do you think about that idea?

One of the things we should avoid is directly correlating ebb and flow with good or evil. I had a talk with you about this earlier, but I think I should share it:  If the focus of the cost-benefit is inwardly favored, it's ebb, and if it's outwardly favored, it's flow.

-Very good.  Have you thought about the mechanics you'll use to represent this yet?

So far, I've got five plot points: The nexus, the party, the ebb and flow, conflict within the planetary cultures, and conflict between the planetary cultures. Out of these, even if I don't force the characters to go in a specific direction, something is bound to come up.

-Okay, I think that's a good start.  Just make that some how, some way you make each of these matter to the characters.  And by that I mean, create mechanics and rules that encourage the players to care about these "plot points."

-Overall, I think you're progressing just fine.  At this point, I think we need to start seeing some actual mechanics from you concerning how you'll accomplish all this.  So, I have another set of questions for ya :)

1.  How does the Character Creation of your game reinforce what your game is about?  In otherwords,  when the players make a character, how do you weave the plot points you mentioned into their character sheets?

2.  What types of behaviors/styles of play does your game reward (and punish if necessary)?  In otherwords, of all the things the players and characters can do, which ones are you wanting them to focus most on?

3.  How are behaviors and styles of play rewarded or punished in your game? Like, what do the players and characters get for doing what you want them to focus on?

If these or any other questions I've asked don't make sense, let me know.  I'll be more than happy to clarify them :)

Peace,

-Troy

1.  How does the Character Creation of your game reinforce what your game is about?  In otherwords,  when the players make a character, how do you weave the plot points you mentioned into their character sheets?

Actually, if we do it scenario wise, there will only be character development. The characters will be pre-created. Unless of course you think this is too strict.

3.  How are behaviors and styles of play rewarded or punished in your game? Like, what do the players and characters get for doing what you want them to focus on?

It's the GM's job to determine if what they've done is something intelligent or something stupid. However, the main theme is that failing to do justice to yourself and others has negative consequences. The world, and you yourself, cannot rely on ebb or flow alone.

Heya,

Starblade Wrote:

Actually, if we do it scenario wise, there will only be character development. The characters will be pre-created. Unless of course you think this is too strict. However, since development at the beginning stages, in the nexus, will exist, perhaps I will let them alter their character more in the nexus than elsewhere. What do you think? Each of the six characters will start off with fairly basic and reasonable stats, which can be modified to a fair extent in the nexus.

Oh. I didn't know you were planning to do pre-generated characters. May I ask if there's a specific reason for this?
Does it represent, say, the "nexus" picking who shall be a "gaterunner"?

Yeah, somewhat. I was thinking of a bar that represents internal ebb and flow, and using a maplike format to demonstrate the ebb and the flow in the area. Though that might be too complicated for pen and paper play,

It's the GM's job to determine if what they've done is something intelligent or something stupid.

However, the main theme is that failing to do justice to yourself and others has negative consequences.

If you want the specific answer to that question, well, that takes us too far into the plot. However, given that there is a plot...To the best of the game's abilities, actions occur in real time.

Though I may not have been able to answer them properly.

To Joe:

Oh. I didn't know you were planning to do pre-generated characters. May I ask if there's a specific reason for this?
Does it represent, say, the "nexus" picking who shall be a "gaterunner"?

Um... I think there's more to this question than "who's responsibility is it to determine rewards and punishments".

For example, you say you want to reward creativity and good roleplaying. That's a behaviour set you want to reward.
If you set up a mechanic to reward this, then you're on your way.
However, if yuo instead reward people "experience" for fighting in combat, that could potentially draw players away from the desired gameplay style.

I'm reading into what you're saying, but it seems like these are the things you want to reward players and characters with: characterization, ingenuity, exploration, discovery, decision making.

Heya,

Erm, ok I'll go with you on the pre-generated characters thing.  But here's my advice on that.  Create way more than just six characters for the players to choose from in the begining.  Like 15 or so at least.  Then, provide ways for them to immediately start changing the characters to make them their own.  This way they take ownership of the game right away and each time they play it, it will be different.  Even though this is a "scenario" as you put it, it is important to give the players as much freedom of choice and development as possible.

Dang, that's good Joe.  It's an honor to be teaming up with you in helping Starblade on this.  Pay attention to what he said, Starblade.

Bah, that's part of the GM's job.  Anyway, he should be taking his ques on what to introduce to the characters based on the ebbs and flows of various places.  It might require more bookwork, but every game is different.  So I think you're okay there.

That's bad.

This is good!  The GM's job is never to tell the player's their stupid or that the choice they made was "wrong" in some way.  He is to react to what the players do.  That means consiquences.  If the players decide to have their characters do something destructive, then the GM shows them the destruction they caused (and then also gives them a way to fix it and/or stop the harm from spreading).  This won't wreck your game.  You'll just have to trust the players to play in their best interest.  That's all any designer can do :)

I'd like to you to explain this to me just a bit more.  I don't want what the Plot is, but what I'm looking for is what the mechanical function of the Plot is.  In otherwords, what is role of the Plot in your game?  And what do you mean by Real Time?

Eh, you're doing better than I did when people first ask me the same ones :)

Peace,

-Troy

Starblade Wrote:

Quote
It's the GM's job to determine if what they've done is something intelligent or something stupid.

-That's bad.

Um... I think there's more to this question than "who's responsibility is it to determine rewards and punishments".

For example, you say you want to reward creativity and good roleplaying. That's a behaviour set you want to reward.
If you set up a mechanic to reward this, then you're on your way.
However, if yuo instead reward people "experience" for fighting in combat, that could potentially draw players away from the desired gameplay style.

I'm reading into what you're saying, but it seems like these are the things you want to reward players and characters with: characterization, ingenuity, exploration, discovery, decision making.

joepub wrote:

Um... I think there's more to this question than "who's responsibility is it to determine rewards and punishments".

For example, you say you want to reward creativity and good roleplaying. That's a behaviour set you want to reward.
If you set up a mechanic to reward this, then you're on your way.
However, if yuo instead reward people "experience" for fighting in combat, that could potentially draw players away from the desired gameplay style.

I'm reading into what you're saying, but it seems like these are the things you want to reward players and characters with: characterization, ingenuity, exploration, discovery, decision making.

dungeons and dragons wanted to reward fighting dangerous villains and awesome monsters.
As such - they developped Challenge Ratings, Party Levels, Effective Character Levels, and elaborate experience charts.

Fate gives rewards in cycles - what influences them most is life accomplishments, shifts of focus, and story development.

I take it that this game focuses on 3 major things:
-Characterization
-Exploration
-Decision Making

Exploration awards you access to new tools, new facilities, and new spell components. That's a good mechanism for rewards.
Characterization lacks rewards at this point. If I take pregen character #4, what reward do I have for living up to character #4's vision? If 4 is violent and foolhardy, do I gain a bonus for playing her this way?
If not, why would I do that over playing #4 smart and reserved?

Decision Making seems especially lacking in reward mechanisms. I'm going to tell you a bit about a Decision Making mechanism I use in my own games - struggles. This does NOT apply to your game, I just want to give you an example of what I mean.
Struggles are self-chosen by players. They are a scale that ranges from 5 to 0 to 5:
5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5. One end represents a concept, the other end a diametrically opposed concept.
If the scale was at Love 2 / Hate... then Love actions are at +2, and hate actions at -2.

After an action, the scale shifts towards the concept that was used in the action.
This is, in a way, rewarding a certain behaviour decision by putting it at a higher bonus next time.

Your game rewards consistency, not actual decision making.

I suppose I'll put forking plotlines in my game, or something like that, which could determine the difference between being praised as a hero or condemned as a fool. Or if it's the GM's job to do that, I'll write guidelines for that.

The only thing I can think of is if you start doing something out of character, the GM says it's out of character, either as just a suggestion or an actual prohibition. But what's to keep the GM in line?

It's the GM's job to determine if what they've done is something intelligent or something stupid.

joepub wrote:

Your game rewards consistency, not actual decision making.

Well, actually - if one ever hits 5 on either end of the scale, they fall victim to their own decisions.
Thus the game is about finding a balance in your struggle: deciding when to recess, when to push.
THAT'S the decision-making reward.

I suppose I'll put forking plotlines in my game, or something like that, which could determine the difference between being praised as a hero or condemned as a fool. Or if it's the GM's job to do that, I'll write guidelines for that.

This might just be me, but I don't think you should ever depend on Plotlines.
It's not your job, and its not the GM's.

It's a collaborative process. If EVERYONE isn't involved in where the plot goes, then it ceases to really be roleplaying.

The only thing I can think of is if you start doing something out of character, the GM says it's out of character, either as just a suggestion or an actual prohibition. But what's to keep the GM in line?

It's the GM's job to determine if what they've done is something intelligent or something stupid.

Both of these statements are indicating a gap to me.

Think about this: the GM arbitrates rules, not value statements. The GM is there to narrate the rest of the world, not the players themselves.

By mechanic, we are not talking "GM Guidelines". We are talking about a reward for staying in character.

An example: FATE has a character element called Aspects. Aspects are character chosen, but in the case of Gaterunner would be pregenerated.
These are statements that represent the character. They can be "strong", "weak", "Tough as Nails", "Armed Soldier" or "Best Chili Chef in Texas".
If you are playing off that aspect, you can check off an aspect box to gain a re-roll.

Plus, when you throw yourself in harm's way in order to live up to your aspect, you gain Fate Points, whereas going against your aspect costs Fate Points.

This is one example of how playing in character can be rewarded mechanically.

Heya,

It's hard for me to imagine a way that I, as the gamer, could do that, unless someone else or I wrote a guidebook for the DM, and that's quite a bit of work. At any rate, I could do it this way: Different spell components are located at different parts of the world. In order to find them, you'd have to explore them. Furthermore, the gates open and close periodically, so if you are going to make it through the gates, you have to time it. Also, there will be times where you must only use one character in the party. This encourages people to use all six characters rather than just one. I could make multiple storylines and make the story itself so rewarding that people would prefer to do that than to just do the regular DnD stuff like fighting monsters, and doing cheap mini-missions.

I want to teach people to use what they've got. I'll try to make the six characters as varied as possible, but it is necessary storywise to start off with just six. You get more characters as you progress through the game anyway, and if you ever get too many, you can put some in the nexus to train with the AI program.

I guess it makes sense to leave that to the GM. I can worry about a map of the ebb and flow if and when I create a computer game version, which will differ only in that the computer is the GM.

The role of the plot in the game is to give some idea of what the world is like, and of what the AI has asked the characters to solve. It's to structure gameplay so that people don't go off JUST boosting their stats or whatever system I should so choose to use.

As for characterization... that's going to be a difficult one. The only thing I can think of is if you start doing something out of character, the GM says it's out of character, either as just a suggestion or an actual prohibition. But what's to keep the GM in line? I guess I kind of expect there to be a kind of inherent joy in keeping the characters in character. That's part of the reason one roleplays, rather than simply playing video games.

I don't really want to reward character mechanically. Except possibly this way: Each character has a set of 'fans', if you will. These are people who know the person, or have heard of the person, and agree with the person's style. They will occasionally help out in the game. The catch is this: They're only helping you out because they like who you are. If you play out of character, less people will like you. Basically it's a reputation thing.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

It's hard for me to imagine a way that I, as the gamer, could do that, unless someone else or I wrote a guidebook for the DM, and that's quite a bit of work. At any rate, I could do it this way: Different spell components are located at different parts of the world. In order to find them, you'd have to explore them. Furthermore, the gates open and close periodically, so if you are going to make it through the gates, you have to time it. Also, there will be times where you must only use one character in the party. This encourages people to use all six characters rather than just one. I could make multiple storylines and make the story itself so rewarding that people would prefer to do that than to just do the regular DnD stuff like fighting monsters, and doing cheap mini-missions.

-Ooooooooh!  The characters are cumunal.  I get it.  Far out!

I want to teach people to use what they've got. I'll try to make the six characters as varied as possible, but it is necessary storywise to start off with just six. You get more characters as you progress through the game anyway, and if you ever get too many, you can put some in the nexus to train with the AI program.

-This is quite different.  I like it.  What are the mechanics for picking up a new character in-game?

I guess it makes sense to leave that to the GM. I can worry about a map of the ebb and flow if and when I create a computer game version, which will differ only in that the computer is the GM.

-Yeah, that's true.  But for now, one thing at a time.  Let's get this hammered out first.

The role of the plot in the game is to give some idea of what the world is like, and of what the AI has asked the characters to solve. It's to structure gameplay so that people don't go off JUST boosting their stats or whatever system I should so choose to use.

-Okay.  But who gives the AI the problems for the characters to solve?  The GM or the Players?  My vote would be that the players submit something to the AI and then the GM modifies it with complications.  For instance.  The players tell the AI "I need spell component X to help stabalize this gate over here.  Where can I get some?"  That's a priorty (goal) set by the player.  The GM then has the AI say, "Well, there's a lot of X over here on planet Z.  But the problem is there's this cult there that's realyl messing with the ebb and flow.  If they keep it up, the gate will collapse.  I'd like you to do something about it if you could."  At this point it's up to the player(s) to decide if they want to tackle the cult, or just storm in and grab what they need.  Either way, the GM gets to set up the scenario.  How's that sound?

As for characterization... that's going to be a difficult one. The only thing I can think of is if you start doing something out of character, the GM says it's out of character, either as just a suggestion or an actual prohibition. But what's to keep the GM in line? I guess I kind of expect there to be a kind of inherent joy in keeping the characters in character. That's part of the reason one roleplays, rather than simply playing video games.

-I think the issue you had here, you resolved here:

I don't really want to reward character mechanically. Except possibly this way: Each character has a set of 'fans', if you will. These are people who know the person, or have heard of the person, and agree with the person's style. They will occasionally help out in the game. The catch is this: They're only helping you out because they like who you are. If you play out of character, less people will like you. Basically it's a reputation thing.

-Characters change through Status.  They can use their Status to get things they need like training, spell components, access to wise old men, mana potions, and so on.  It's sorta like XP and Gold put together in one reward mechanism.  That's something I totally dig and I don't think I've played a game like that yet.  Cool!  It would be up to the players to keep track of the Status earned and the Status spent for each individual character, which is a little bit of bookkeeping.  But hey, it's not that bad and it will be something they want to do.  Nice.

Peace,

-Troy

Heya,

Do you mean communal?

I was thinking that depending on your reputation in the city from which you want to recruit, you get bonuses or penalties. At the beginning, you have a reasonable ability to pick up party members. However, as your reputation increased in some areas, you could hypothetically amass armies, and as your reputation decreased in other areas, you'd be lucky to pick up one in a whole month of recruiting. It also depends on the reasons for picking up people. At the beginning, I'm assuming you're just going to do some exploring and learning about the ancients. This is something that at least a few people are likely going to want to help you on.

Actually I have a plot: First you have to prove to the AI that you're the best, then when you get out of the nexus the first thing that you'll want to do is gather information about the ancients. This will help you figure out more about the ebb and the flow, and give you proof to offer adventurers in that quest. Then you can infiltrate areas and gain info on ebb creatures and/or flow creatures, and when you collect more evidence, you're ready to start the next phase: Getting people to actually change their customs and how they treat magic.

I was talking with Joe, and he didn't like the idea of 'fans'. However, I suppose some other form of status is something to which he might not be so opposed. How do you think the whole status thing works? I was still going to use six kinds of currencies, and experience in specific skills rather than overall experience, but status might add to the whole thing. The question is this: Does it make sense for ones status to depend on characterization?

Joe and I were talking and I came up with the idea that, if we used stats, and if we used charisma as one of the stats, something he was kinda iffy about, to say the least, then since charisma represents the force of ones personality, one would have to act in character to have a good charisma stat. The better one acted in character, the higher the charisma. I've noticed that people of all personality types can have charisma, at least within specific groups, so it's not really that off. However, I think Joe has some issues with charisma, as he says it detracts from roleplaying. However I think I have that solved. What do you think?

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

Do you mean communal?

-Eek!  Yes.  I appologize for my spelling.

I was thinking that depending on your reputation in the city from which you want to recruit, you get bonuses or penalties. At the beginning, you have a reasonable ability to pick up party members. However, as your reputation increased in some areas, you could hypothetically amass armies, and as your reputation decreased in other areas, you'd be lucky to pick up one in a whole month of recruiting. It also depends on the reasons for picking up people. At the beginning, I'm assuming you're just going to do some exploring and learning about the ancients. This is something that at least a few people are likely going to want to help you on.

-Okay, I'm seeing the need here for two mechanics.  First, you need one for the players to earn additional PCs to play.  This way they can generate their own personal characters and express their creativity.  One thing you do want to make sure of, though, is that the origonal six will always be better than a new character when it first comes into play.  The Second mechanic you need is something where the PCs can add a "Soldier" to their army.  This needs to be different from a PC.  It wouldn't be a "playable" character; it would be more like a minion.  Basically, the player would just fill in a bubble or add a number somewhere on his character sheet denoting what kind of soldier he has added- not fill out a whole new character sheet.  Is that in line with what you are thinking?

Actually I have a plot: First you have to prove to the AI that you're the best, then when you get out of the nexus the first thing that you'll want to do is gather information about the ancients. This will help you figure out more about the ebb and the flow, and give you proof to offer adventurers in that quest. Then you can infiltrate areas and gain info on ebb creatures and/or flow creatures, and when you collect more evidence, you're ready to start the next phase: Getting people to actually change their customs and how they treat magic.

-The last sentence is really the key one.  That's where the players will really have the most fun.  If you present the others as brief, ritual challenges, then I think they'd work out.  I'd have to see it in a larger context to be able to tell, though.

I was talking with Joe, and he didn't like the idea of 'fans'. However, I suppose some other form of status is something to which he might not be so opposed. How do you think the whole status thing works? I was still going to use six kinds of currencies, and experience in specific skills rather than overall experience, but status might add to the whole thing. The question is this: Does it make sense for ones status to depend on characterization?

-To answer your last question:  For me, yes it does.  The kind of person you are determines how well you will be liked.  The kinds of deeds you do, will determine how well you are treated.  To answer the Status thing:  I see Status as working as both Advancement Points (XP basically) and as Gold.  You can spend the Status points you earn (say 3-5 per night unless you do something really heroic) to improve your skills- by training with famous masters, buy equipment- in the form of gifts by worshiping fans/friends, or add new PCs/Soldiers- through recruitment.  Status would be the ultimate currency in the game for the PCs.  As far as coins and cash on other planets, yeah each can have its own form of money.  But the PCs probably won't care about it much.  Don't you think the AI would provide all the food and biological supplies they would need?

Joe and I were talking and I came up with the idea that, if we used stats, and if we used charisma as one of the stats, something he was kinda iffy about, to say the least, then since charisma represents the force of ones personality, one would have to act in character to have a good charisma stat. The better one acted in character, the higher the charisma. I've noticed that people of all personality types can have charisma, at least within specific groups, so it's not really that off. However, I think Joe has some issues with charisma, as he says it detracts from roleplaying. However I think I have that solved. What do you think?

-If you want to represent character advancement and/or status as a function of increased Charisma, then I think that's fine.  It might take some real work to make it turn out the way you wanted, but hey, that's part of designing a game, right?

Peace,

-Troy

Starblade, it's customary to use real names here.
I'm wondering if you go by anything besides Starblade Riven Darksqall.

The way I'd do the whole personal characters thing is to make it so that you'd be given some basic givens, but that they could also change. I would imagine backround would not change at all, personality would be difficult to change, stats would be changable with some effort, and preferred style of adventuring would be easily changeable, and as for equipment, IE weapons, armor, and items, that you would HAVE to give them.

Heya,

Joe Wrote:

Wait - so if I'm correct, this is more pregenerated characters? Suggestion: the original characters were selected by the AI personally, so giving the players little choice on who they were made sense.

However, these new recruits are being chosen by the characters/players. Isn't if fair to offer them the chance to build their own characters?
That also gives them a reason to - you build slightly less powerful new characters, but they are YOUR OWN.

And, they've now got a strong enough grip on the game that it makes sense for them to build new characters.

The thing is, status isn't gold or XP. I imagine it working alongside gold and XP. I'm going to be doing the 'gold' and 'XP' differently enough so that there will be room for status. There won't be 'gold' per se, there will be 'currency'. You get it off the bounties of the monsters you kill, though you might not need it, not because the AI provide you, but because certain types of facilities might provide you. Also, there won't be 'XP' per se, there will be 'SP', or skill points. You gain skill points just by doing anything, and your skill in that area will increase. How does that sound?

No, I want to use status, but I also want to use charisma. It's better if there are just a few redundancies in the game, so that the players have a choice. Just a few. The thing I see is this: Status will reward good decision making, whereas charisma will reward characterization. Or something like that.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

Joe Wrote:

Wait - so if I'm correct, this is more pregenerated characters? Suggestion: the original characters were selected by the AI personally, so giving the players little choice on who they were made sense.

However, these new recruits are being chosen by the characters/players. Isn't if fair to offer them the chance to build their own characters?
That also gives them a reason to - you build slightly less powerful new characters, but they are YOUR OWN.

And, they've now got a strong enough grip on the game that it makes sense for them to build new characters.

-I gotta back Joe on this.  Take that for what you will, you don't have to do what we suggest.  But his view and mine are near identical on this subject.

Starblade Wrote:

The thing is, status isn't gold or XP. I imagine it working alongside gold and XP. I'm going to be doing the 'gold' and 'XP' differently enough so that there will be room for status. There won't be 'gold' per se, there will be 'currency'. You get it off the bounties of the monsters you kill, though you might not need it, not because the AI provide you, but because certain types of facilities might provide you. Also, there won't be 'XP' per se, there will be 'SP', or skill points. You gain skill points just by doing anything, and your skill in that area will increase. How does that sound?

-Cool.  I'd love to see some specifics and examples of how SP's will be earned wile playing.  I'd point out that Gold is often useless in D&D3e, so I'd like to know how you might make Currency useful in your game.  Is it tied to Mana in some way?  Can it be a spell component?  Does it have any sort of in-game mechanical value besides buying goods and services?

No, I want to use status, but I also want to use charisma. It's better if there are just a few redundancies in the game, so that the players have a choice. Just a few. The thing I see is this: Status will reward good decision making, whereas charisma will reward characterization. Or something like that.

-I'd like ya to go into more detail on what you mean here, if you could.  How will Status and Charisma be earned?  What effects do they have both on the characters and the game world?

-I can tell you're putting a lot off thought into this, Starblade.  Often by now a newer designer would have flaked out.  Good to see you're sticking with it through so many posts.

Peace,

-Troy

Actually, they are not pregenerated. They are generated when you ask for them. HOWEVER, you have to roll a dice or something to see what they're like. I'm also thinking of making it so you could write out personal ads, so if you're patient enough timewise, but stubborn enough statwise, you can get a character that is basically of your own making. Well, close enough.

Cool.  I'd love to see some specifics and examples of how SP's will be earned wile playing.  I'd point out that Gold is often useless in D&D3e, so I'd like to know how you might make Currency useful in your game.  Is it tied to Mana in some way?  Can it be a spell component?  Does it have any sort of in-game mechanical value besides buying goods and services?

joepub wrote:

Actually, they are not pregenerated. They are generated when you ask for them. HOWEVER, you have to roll a dice or something to see what they're like. I'm also thinking of making it so you could write out personal ads, so if you're patient enough timewise, but stubborn enough statwise, you can get a character that is basically of your own making. Well, close enough.

What we're suggesting is this: Let the players make their own characters up that they want to encounter.
Just like you or I would make a character when we entered a d&d campaign.

It allows them freedom in terms of creative involvement, how their party functions, and player priorities.

And it keeps it from being limiting to players.

Cool.  I'd love to see some specifics and examples of how SP's will be earned wile playing.  I'd point out that Gold is often useless in D&D3e, so I'd like to know how you might make Currency useful in your game.  Is it tied to Mana in some way?  Can it be a spell component?  Does it have any sort of in-game mechanical value besides buying goods and services?

Just to reiterate this:

You aren't starting wars, you're leading them.
             people would likely join due to patriotism, bloodthirst, their own protection, fighting for ideals,....
You have facilities, and your position is like an access pass in ways.
             you can just have characters gain access to new facility sectors, and thus bypass buying equipment if you'd like.
You have status, authority, knowledge, power.
             do you really need money to get ends met?

I'm not saying money is inherently a bad thing. However, I know its rarely useful in d&d, and your game is of a similar design in a lot of ways.
Thoughts?

Heya,

Actually, they are not pregenerated. They are generated when you ask for them. HOWEVER, you have to roll a dice or something to see what they're like. I'm also thinking of making it so you could write out personal ads, so if you're patient enough timewise, but stubborn enough statwise, you can get a character that is basically of your own making. Well, close enough.

The thing is... while I like character generation, I don't know how it fits in with this game's setting. I suppose it would work if you DON'T automatically associate this character with the Gaterunners, and each time you built a new character, you'd have to sorta bump into them.

I think money will be cultural. It will be a way to get involved with a culture, and it will help gain status amongst your peers, and amongst the whole culture. I think that the whole getting involved with the culture idea will work as a way for money to be used in the game. I know, I could just do without money, but what is a culture without its currency? How do people judge something's value?

Charisma is a stat, however you can boost rolls that use charisma quite easily, by how well you take care of your body, by what you wear, in terms of magical items or also in terms of just the right level of decoration that you look good, but you don't look gaudy. Furthermore, as I've said before, acting IN character makes your personality more potent. This means if you're gonna decorate yourself, it has to be fitting of the character. A person can be disliked but have high charisma, because people RESPECT the force of your personality.

Status can be improved simply by making choices that make sense.

What may lose your reputation in one city will gain your reputation in others.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

Actually, they are not pregenerated. They are generated when you ask for them. HOWEVER, you have to roll a dice or something to see what they're like. I'm also thinking of making it so you could write out personal ads, so if you're patient enough timewise, but stubborn enough statwise, you can get a character that is basically of your own making. Well, close enough.

The thing is... while I like character generation, I don't know how it fits in with this game's setting. I suppose it would work if you DON'T automatically associate this character with the Gaterunners, and each time you built a new character, you'd have to sorta bump into them.

-I'm not saying that pregenerating the initial player-characters is a bad thing at all.  In fact, I view it as a great thing.  It cuts down on startup time and will prevent people from getting screwed from the get-go because they made a few "less than optimum" choices during character creation.  So keep that idea.  What I am suggesting is the the players be allowed to alter the Pre-gened characters once they start playing AND be allowed to generate from the ground up new Player-characters that will be shared by the whole group once they start playing.  It's something that not many games do at all and I think it would be fun to try.  Let me know if I need to explain this more fully :)

I think money will be cultural. It will be a way to get involved with a culture, and it will help gain status amongst your peers, and amongst the whole culture. I think that the whole getting involved with the culture idea will work as a way for money to be used in the game. I know, I could just do without money, but what is a culture without its currency? How do people judge something's value?

-Oh I can definately see the different cultures have money.  That's totally cool.  And if the PCs have to get some to use as a resource to pay off mercenaries or topple dictators or whatever, that's awesome too!  What Joe and I are talking about is making money important to the PCs gaining personal resources for themselves.  Buying equipment and food doesn't make much sense in your game IMO.  They should start with armor and weapons as you said earlier, and anything that would upgrade those initial items should be found on Monsters and Villains that the PCs face in the campaign. 

Charisma is a stat, however you can boost rolls that use charisma quite easily, by how well you take care of your body, by what you wear, in terms of magical items or also in terms of just the right level of decoration that you look good, but you don't look gaudy. Furthermore, as I've said before, acting IN character makes your personality more potent. This means if you're gonna decorate yourself, it has to be fitting of the character. A person can be disliked but have high charisma, because people RESPECT the force of your personality.

-Okay cool.  So let me understand this correctly: You can raise your charisma by A) Maintaining your body, B) Attaining ornamented Magic Items, C) Wearing Fancy Clothes, and D) Initimidating people.  Is that right?  If so, then I think it's totally cool.

Status can be improved simply by making choices that make sense.

-Is it the GM that decides this?  If so, do you give him any guidelines to go by to help him jeduge the "make sense"-ness of a decision?

What may lose your reputation in one city will gain your reputation in others.

-I like this, but it might be hard to keep track of in-game.  Perhaps you could include a spot on the Ebb/Flow tracking sheet for character Status too.  So the GM can tell what all the conditions of an area will be like for the PCs if they go there.  I don't know, just thinking out loud.  It's something for you to consider :)

Peace,

-Troy

Heya,

I suppose. I still want the players to EARN the ability to generate new characters. How about this: Depending on whether or not the city is on good terms with you will determine whether the characters you generate are independent, on the side of the gaterunners, or on the other side. Furthermore, each city will have its own variant of characters that are likely to be generated, if that's not too much to ask.

I don't see why you ignored my other idea. I don't even know what you think of it. Was it a bad idea? You can tell me.

None of the monsters will have actual weapons, armor and items on them. However, that's not to say that slags of metal or rough tree branch or whatever makes sense as far as material components for weapons and armor aren't going to get caught in their skin and fur every once in a while. :P

As for villains, I suppose they'd have weapons, armor, and items on them. Though they'd have to be for the same species, and all that.

Also, I don't see how you read D intimidating people out of what you said. At the times where it is appropriate, yeah you'll get a bonus for that, but at other times where it is inappropriate, you'll get a penalty.

I was also thinking that the whole 'wearing fancy clothes' thing would affect people more if what you wore were appropriate for your status level. However I don't want to get charisma and status too intertwined, so I might not do that.

By open peg alignment system I mean, certainly some of the things you do will please some 'nations' and displease other 'nations'. So how well you acted in the favor of a 'nation' or against the favor of a 'nation' would also play into effect.

Well I think I've got it. There will be a globe, and on that globe will be sectors. This is for ebb and flow. There would be pieces you could put on the globe to indicate ebb or flow. A black piece means ebb, a white peace means flow. Now this globe will probably be one of the more modern 'flattening' methods where you have a rectangular map that preserves land areas. The map will be pretty big. You could probably just paint dimes and that would work.

Some will actually be nations. Some will actually be cities. Some may even be tribes. If you want to know more, I could tell you about them.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

I don't see why you ignored my other idea. I don't even know what you think of it. Was it a bad idea? You can tell me.

-I might have just missed it.  Could you restate it and highlight exactly why you liked it?  In longer threads like this, something it's possible for something to get overlooked.  It's no big deal, and I'm glad you were courageous enough to point it out.  Let me see it again, and I'll try to comment on it this time.

By open peg alignment system I mean, certainly some of the things you do will please some 'nations' and displease other 'nations'. So how well you acted in the favor of a 'nation' or against the favor of a 'nation' would also play into effect.

-Will there be nations that are on opposing ends of a scale similar to the way Ebb and Flow are opposing?  For instance, high Status with one will translate to negative Status with the other.

Well I think I've got it. There will be a globe, and on that globe will be sectors. This is for ebb and flow. There would be pieces you could put on the globe to indicate ebb or flow. A black piece means ebb, a white peace means flow. Now this globe will probably be one of the more modern 'flattening' methods where you have a rectangular map that preserves land areas. The map will be pretty big. You could probably just paint dimes and that would work.

-That might be a little hard to get into a game book, but that's something you can worry about waaaaaaaaaaaaay down the road.  I think you have a solid begining idea right there.

Some will actually be nations. Some will actually be cities. Some may even be tribes. If you want to know more, I could tell you about them.

-Hold off on Setting information for right now.  Let's work on your System first.  Sound cool? :)

Peace,

-Troy

Heya,

Basically, it involved worshiping at the religious facilities, and doing what your intuition tells you, and getting fate points, which could then be spent on things involving drawing the right people toward you, and if you had enough, you could create a new character from scratch that would somehow bump into the party, or whatnot.

Hm... I hadn't thought of that. However, people aren't like the natural forces. There are some things that both would naturally like, so I doubt there will be any direct negative correlations (or direct positive correlations for that matter) except possibly as the circumstances will permit. Though the statuses won't be COMPLETELY independent of eachother. For example, being well liked by one MIGHT translate into some of being disliked by the other and vice versa, or being well liked by one might translate into some of being liked by the other and the same for being disliked. However, in general, they are independant of eachother, and only dependant on the actions of the party.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

Basically, it involved worshiping at the religious facilities, and doing what your intuition tells you, and getting fate points, which could then be spent on things involving drawing the right people toward you, and if you had enough, you could create a new character from scratch that would somehow bump into the party, or whatnot.

-That idea sounds like it would work.  Include it in your playtest version and we'll see how it works out.

Hm... I hadn't thought of that. However, people aren't like the natural forces. There are some things that both would naturally like, so I doubt there will be any direct negative correlations (or direct positive correlations for that matter) except possibly as the circumstances will permit. Though the statuses won't be COMPLETELY independent of eachother. For example, being well liked by one MIGHT translate into some of being disliked by the other and vice versa, or being well liked by one might translate into some of being liked by the other and the same for being disliked. However, in general, they are independant of eachother, and only dependant on the actions of the party.

-That's fine.  But it will require you (the designer) to create some very good cheat sheets for the GM and players to use.  A game can be as complex as you want, so long as you make it user-friendly for all the players.  Make sense?

-Let me ask you a couple other important questions about your game:

1.) What are the Take or Conflict resolution mechanics of your game like?

2.) How do the resolution mechanics reinforce what your game is about?

3.) Instead, are you going to make it a D20 game?

Peace,

-Troy

Oh, and in case I didn't make it clear enough in my previous thread, that's just a possibility of me using dice. I certainly want some kind of random number generating method, but dice seemed easiest. If there are suggestions you'd like to make, go ahead. I personally think I could do better than what I already suggested, but that may depend on me getting feedback. :P

Also, I've noticed that there are questions at the beginning of this thread that weren't answered. If they weren't answered so far, through the course of this thread, then please re-ask them. I'm sure they were important. Not re-asking them means you've dropped the question, either because it's already been answered, or you don't consider the question, in the context of the game, important. ^^

I have been reading other threads in the forum, and I think I see why I hadn't been getting any responses from Troy recently. He was right not to respond. I had no idea what was meant by 'resolution system'. Anyway, I read up on a few things, and I have a basic understanding of what was being asked.

I wanted to present you with a chat log, but Joe said that it would be better if I express the ideas behind the chat rather than the chat itself. Anyways, here it is.

Joe and I were discussing the whole GNS system of gaming and he told me that it was Gamist and/or Simulationist, and I suggested that it was possible to make it all three. He then told me that each game has portions of each. I then asked if my game was lacking, like, perhaps it was lacking Narrativist aspects, and he told me it would depend on the mechanics. This is where I got my first idea of how I believed the mechanics should be oriented.

In my words, I said: "I want the focus to be that each character has his or her own self interest to pursue in a real world, where the values are as real as the setting. If I present the correct focus, it will be a smooth blend of GNS."

I also suggested that, depending on the context, a Drama, Karma, or Fortune mechanic would play into the effet. He then suggested conflict resolution for the game, though earlier I had suggested I wanted a blend and at about that time he said that most games that tried to blend ended up as task resolution.

Now that brings me back to the question at hand: Which resolution system was I going to use? Here's an idea: I want to moderate how vague or specific an action is. I don't want the actions to be too specific, nor do I want them to be too vague. However, I'd need a system on top of the resolution system to determine which type of actions are appropriate.

I was thinking, then, to have the player announce what his goals are, and how he hopes to achieve them, and if they are impossible, the GM will tell the player that it is impossible. It may be strictly impossible, meaning nobody could do it, or it may be that the player doesn't have the stats. Or it could be that given the stats, the player only has a CHANCE at doing the action. If the player wants to change the action to one where his stats give assured victory, the player may make another suggestion. Or he may take the chance.

I also want to impress the idea that this is simply the character thinking to themself, so that depending on instinct or intelligence, or both, or something like that, there will be a given time compression. Thinking will not be 100% free. Nor will talking, for that matter. This is the basis for my mechanics. It is context driven.

What do you think?

BTW, the stats are as follows:
Strength: Capacity to affect change physically through sheer brute force.
Constitution: Capacity to resist physical change to oneself.
Dexterity: Capacity to influence other objects manually via finesse.
Agility: Capacity to influence the way one is oriented relative to self and other things.
Intelligence: Capacity to reason and acquire knowledge rationally.
Wisdom: Capacity to recall data and acquire knowledge empirically.
Charisma: Capacity to affect other people through force of personality.
Instinct: Capacity to react mentally to sudden change and call upon preprogrammed responses.

What are the purposes of each stat? I can answer that one.

You may think that there isn't any reason I can't have more, or less, stats. However, I want to stress that there is a balance between body and mind, and that's why there are eight. Why not six? Why not ten? Well I wanted a more accurate portrayal of the person the player controls, and I felt that adding two to the traditional six of DnD, at least the six of the version I play, made sense.

Okay, now I can give an example of how something may rely on two stats. Someone's speed depends on how much force they can put into running, and how they actually run. So that's Strength and Agility. How quickly someone can get out of the way of a speeding arrow depends on how quickly they can move and how quickly they can think. So that's Agility and Instinct. How well one can pull out an arrow without causing damage relies on ones knowledge on arrows and how good they are with their hands. So that's Wisdom and Dexterity. The list goes on.

If you have any good examples of how one can combine stats, or have an issue with my system, let me know, okay? Like, stamina, which would be a strength/constitution mix, or engage in argument, which might be three, which are Charisma, Intelligence, and Wisdom... though it might not be, and might be only two of those three. Thoughts?

Alright, now comes the hard part. What stats do each of the characters have? This is a work-in-progress, so let me tell you of the races. They are, in order of hottest home planet to coldest home planet:
Armadillo.
Otter.
Monkey.
Lizard.
Bird.
Gargoyle.

Now I might switch Monkey and Lizard in terms of their mid-range heat things, but that depends on what their homeworld looks like.

Their planets are:
Desert (both sand and red rock)
Ocean (with the occasional island)
Forest (tropical, temperate, and boreal)
Grasslands (including plains and savanna)
Alpine (along with tundra and glaciers)
Cavern (subterrainain, with a surface of dead rock)

I've pretty much described every terrain type there is. If I'm missing any, feel free to tell me!

Heya,

I have been reading other threads in the forum, and I think I see why I hadn't been getting any responses from Troy recently. He was right not to respond.

I also want to impress the idea that this is simply the character thinking to themself, so that depending on instinct or intelligence, or both, or something like that, there will be a given time compression. Thinking will not be 100% free. Nor will talking, for that matter. This is the basis for my mechanics. It is context driven.

Heya,

However, I have thought of this: As long as the probabilities stay the same, whatever dice you use, or random number generator, or pulling cards, doesn't matter.

This is the hard part. This is where I have to choose between tradition and making my game unique.

Of course, here's another option I've been thinking of: A d4, d6, or d8 for simple 'succeed/fail' rolls, a d10 or d20 for 'horrible/poor/fair/good/excellent' and similar type rolls, a d12 for gateway related things, and a d100 for strategy related rolls, so that each number represents a unique outcome.

I was also thinking something along the lines of this: a agility vs dexterity roll would determine if you hit and where, and a strength + weapon vs constitution + armor would determine how hard you hit, and whether you pierce the armor, do damage to the armor, or just glance off or bounce back.

For talent, BTW, I was thinking of combining skills and feats in a way, such that skills would only go up to a certain amount, some high, some low, and on the upper end it goes up to something like 20 or 30, and on the lower end it goes only to 1, meaning either you have it or you don't, and the ones that went up to 1 would be like feats. Also, some talents would be stat based, and some wouldn't be. This is also kinda like skills and feats. However, some talents will be easier to learn, and some more difficult.

Joe and I were discussing the whole GNS system of gaming and he told me that it was Gamist and/or Simulationist, and I suggested that it was possible to make it all three.

I also suggested that, depending on the context, a Drama, Karma, or Fortune mechanic would play into the effet. He then suggested conflict resolution for the game, though earlier I had suggested I wanted a blend and at about that time he said that most games that tried to blend ended up as task resolution.

I was thinking, then, to have the player announce what his goals are, and how he hopes to achieve them, and if they are impossible, the GM will tell the player that it is impossible. It may be strictly impossible, meaning nobody could do it, or it may be that the player doesn't have the stats. Or it could be that given the stats, the player only has a CHANCE at doing the action. If the player wants to change the action to one where his stats give assured victory, the player may make another suggestion. Or he may take the chance.

I also want to impress the idea that this is simply the character thinking to themself, so that depending on instinct or intelligence, or both, or something like that, there will be a given time compression. Thinking will not be 100% free. Nor will talking, for that matter.

Strength: Capacity to affect change physically through sheer brute force.
Constitution: Capacity to resist physical change to oneself.
Dexterity: Capacity to influence other objects manually via finesse.
Agility: Capacity to influence the way one is oriented relative to self and other things.
Intelligence: Capacity to reason and acquire knowledge rationally.
Wisdom: Capacity to recall data and acquire knowledge empirically.
Charisma: Capacity to affect other people through force of personality.
Instinct: Capacity to react mentally to sudden change and call upon preprogrammed responses.

Armadillo.
Otter.
Monkey.
Lizard.
Bird.
Gargoyle.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

However, I have thought of this: As long as the probabilities stay the same, whatever dice you use, or random number generator, or pulling cards, doesn't matter.

-You wouldn't believe how big of a step that is, Starblade.  That's awesome.  Some people never make it to this realization.  There's one step further, though, that you can go.  I'll write it here,"The dice/cards/randomizers you use in this game directly reinforce what the game is about, otherwise they dilute its content."  Keep that in the back of your mind as we talk about things further.

This is the hard part. This is where I have to choose between tradition and making my game unique.

-Okay.  Let me just say upfront that there is nothing wrong with using d20.  If ultimately that's the way you decide to go, that's a fine choice in my book.  I'm not saying you have to, I'm just saying it's okay to.  Make sense?

Of course, here's another option I've been thinking of: A d4, d6, or d8 for simple 'succeed/fail' rolls, a d10 or d20 for 'horrible/poor/fair/good/excellent' and similar type rolls, a d12 for gateway related things, and a d100 for strategy related rolls, so that each number represents a unique outcome.

-I like lots of different dice, but let's see if we can give them a point here.  If 1-2 is a success on a d4, it's no different from a 1-4 on a d8 or 1-10 on a d20.  So why use different die?  Perhaps it is tied to culture.  Say the number 4 is significant to the Otter Religion.  Therefore it would make sense that they use 1d4 for their rolls.  Say the Armadillo people have 10 seasons on their planet.  They would use a d10.  Extrapolate this further to other parts of the game.  The otters are weak and only do a 1d4 dmg.  the Armadillos are strong, so they do a 1d10.  BUT, the Otters are fast so would roll a 1d4 for their initiative (say the lowest result is best) while the slow armadillos would roll a 1d10.  These are just some random thoughts.  But I'd like to see you alaborate further on the context of all these different die types in your game.

I was also thinking something along the lines of this: a agility vs dexterity roll would determine if you hit and where, and a strength + weapon vs constitution + armor would determine how hard you hit, and whether you pierce the armor, do damage to the armor, or just glance off or bounce back.

-Are these opposed rolls or one roll and then a check against a value?

For talent, BTW, I was thinking of combining skills and feats in a way, such that skills would only go up to a certain amount, some high, some low, and on the upper end it goes up to something like 20 or 30, and on the lower end it goes only to 1, meaning either you have it or you don't, and the ones that went up to 1 would be like feats. Also, some talents would be stat based, and some wouldn't be. This is also kinda like skills and feats. However, some talents will be easier to learn, and some more difficult.

-My tendancy is towards consistancy, but for your game this might work.  Definately get some feedback once you start playtesting this.

Joe and I were discussing the whole GNS system of gaming and he told me that it was Gamist and/or Simulationist, and I suggested that it was possible to make it all three.

I also suggested that, depending on the context, a Drama, Karma, or Fortune mechanic would play into the effet. He then suggested conflict resolution for the game, though earlier I had suggested I wanted a blend and at about that time he said that most games that tried to blend ended up as task resolution.

-These are noble intentions, but as most people who know about Forge theory and have published a game can tell you, it's best to just focus on one aspect of each.  If you're Gamist, go after being a Gamist with everything you've got.  If it's a Drama mechanic you're going to use, make that mechanic matter in every instance it's used.  But honestly, I wouldn't worry about all that stuff right now.  Just concentrait on making a fun game, and then come back and look at theory later.

I was thinking, then, to have the player announce what his goals are, and how he hopes to achieve them, and if they are impossible, the GM will tell the player that it is impossible. It may be strictly impossible, meaning nobody could do it, or it may be that the player doesn't have the stats. Or it could be that given the stats, the player only has a CHANCE at doing the action. If the player wants to change the action to one where his stats give assured victory, the player may make another suggestion. Or he may take the chance.

-That's fine. How about making a mechanic that gives a character a bonus for trying something that is only just *barely* possible but at the same time increases the negative consiquences if he fails.  This will encourage players to take chances to do something cool :)

I also want to impress the idea that this is simply the character thinking to themself, so that depending on instinct or intelligence, or both, or something like that, there will be a given time compression. Thinking will not be 100% free. Nor will talking, for that matter.

-This is interesting.  Could you talk about it more?

Strength: Capacity to affect change physically through sheer brute force.
Constitution: Capacity to resist physical change to oneself.
Dexterity: Capacity to influence other objects manually via finesse.
Agility: Capacity to influence the way one is oriented relative to self and other things.
Intelligence: Capacity to reason and acquire knowledge rationally.
Wisdom: Capacity to recall data and acquire knowledge empirically.
Charisma: Capacity to affect other people through force of personality.
Instinct: Capacity to react mentally to sudden change and call upon preprogrammed responses.

-This is fine.  I never get caught up in what the stats are for a game anyway.  In the end, they're just value place holders.

Armadillo.
Otter.
Monkey.
Lizard.
Bird.
Gargoyle.

-Are these also the PC races or are they something else?

Peace,

-Troy

Heya,

Since we might have to make a program to track ebb and flow, it makes sense to use a randomizer in this circumstance. Using the computer to calculate stuff is probably better, since there's a lot of stuff that's going to be too complicated to do manually. They will be simple programs that merely assist gameplay, and don't take it over.

Well I prefer to only roll when someone is doing something active. So it will probably be a check against a value.

Perhaps there is an emotion attribute to the game, and if you suceed in something you can just barely do, you feel pride, and if you fail, you'll feel a bit foolish. Of course, since you could just barely make it, you'd probably feel good for trying. You might get hurt more, though. As for failing to do something that you were very likely to be able to do, you would definately feel more foolish, and probably get hurt just a little, since if you succeeded, well there's not much pride in doing something you knew you were likely to be able to do anyway. :P

Of course, I only have a general idea of how this will work. The details elude me for the moment, but with enough thinking on my part, and perhaps a bit of collaboration, I might be able to figure out the rest. Basically, though, any unit of time that something happens is similar to a turn. Also, you have stamina in this game. Stamina is to physical things as concentration is to mental things. I'll elaborate on this more later.

These are all the PC races, yes. Like them?

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

Since we might have to make a program to track ebb and flow, it makes sense to use a randomizer in this circumstance. Using the computer to calculate stuff is probably better, since there's a lot of stuff that's going to be too complicated to do manually. They will be simple programs that merely assist gameplay, and don't take it over.

-This is way out of my area of expertise, so I'll trust you to make it all work :)

Well I prefer to only roll when someone is doing something active. So it will probably be a check against a value.

-Good, that will save you a lot of trouble.

Perhaps there is an emotion attribute to the game, and if you suceed in something you can just barely do, you feel pride, and if you fail, you'll feel a bit foolish. Of course, since you could just barely make it, you'd probably feel good for trying. You might get hurt more, though. As for failing to do something that you were very likely to be able to do, you would definately feel more foolish, and probably get hurt just a little, since if you succeeded, well there's not much pride in doing something you knew you were likely to be able to do anyway. :P

-This is one of the most interesting things you've said yet.  This is what could really make your game hum.  Emotions- foolishness and pride, are driving factors in the charcter's life.  It also sets up a very nice paralel to the Ebb Flow of magic.  I highly suggest that you incorperate this into your game somehow.

Of course, I only have a general idea of how this will work. The details elude me for the moment, but with enough thinking on my part, and perhaps a bit of collaboration, I might be able to figure out the rest. Basically, though, any unit of time that something happens is similar to a turn. Also, you have stamina in this game. Stamina is to physical things as concentration is to mental things. I'll elaborate on this more later.

-That's fine.  Once you get all the details hammered out, you should make a post about it.

These are all the PC races, yes. Like them?

-Yes.  Very much.  Btw, does a Gargoyle's stone cycle change once he leaves his home planet?

-There's still a couple things I'm a little unclear on.  And it could be that you haven't developed it yet.  But could you tell me the following:

1) Do characters in your game advance? If so, how?

2.) How does the character advancement (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?

Peace,

-Troy

Heya,

So, maybe on the gargoyle's planet there are light producing fungi or insects, or perhaps both, or some combination. Like, the insects eat the fungi which causes them to emit light, the fungi go away temporarily, the insects leave, the fungi grow back, the insect come back, and so on. The light warms up their outer body which makes them softer but more easy to move. Of course, this is much less light than is even on the surface of their planet, so they'd be tough, yet slow. They wouldn't be any lighter or heavier though so they could still glide. The magic part might assist in their defense during 'night' and their agility during 'day'.

Likewise, on the armadillo's planet, there are vents that spew out a substance at such a high velocity that it easily mixes in with the oxygen, and causes flames to erupt. This chemical exists underground, and overground, such as in water pools. When you drink water, you drink this chemical. It doesn't hurt you because you're immune to poisons, especially of that sort. So you're capable of spewing it out at high velocities. It may be that without the magic, you wouldn't spew it out at high enough velocity, so it'd just be like throwing up. However, magic helps you spew it out fast enough to cause fire.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

So, maybe on the gargoyle's planet there are light producing fungi or insects, or perhaps both, or some combination. Like, the insects eat the fungi which causes them to emit light, the fungi go away temporarily, the insects leave, the fungi grow back, the insect come back, and so on. The light warms up their outer body which makes them softer but more easy to move. Of course, this is much less light than is even on the surface of their planet, so they'd be tough, yet slow. They wouldn't be any lighter or heavier though so they could still glide. The magic part might assist in their defense during 'night' and their agility during 'day'.

Likewise, on the armadillo's planet, there are vents that spew out a substance at such a high velocity that it easily mixes in with the oxygen, and causes flames to erupt. This chemical exists underground, and overground, such as in water pools. When you drink water, you drink this chemical. It doesn't hurt you because you're immune to poisons, especially of that sort. So you're capable of spewing it out at high velocities. It may be that without the magic, you wouldn't spew it out at high enough velocity, so it'd just be like throwing up. However, magic helps you spew it out fast enough to cause fire.

-It seems to make sense mechanically.  It seems that magic use is pretty heavy in your game.  Is that a correct assumption?

-Everything you've written seems to be coming along just fine.  You're definately headed towards a playtestable product.  I just have a few more questions to fire at ya. 

1.) What areas of your game receive extra attention and color?  Why?

2.) Which part of your game are you most excited about or interested in? Why?

3.) Where does your game take the players that other games can’t, don’t, or won’t?

Peace,

-Troy

I like that idea.  Sounds really cool.

oneofthesedays wrote:
I like that idea.  Sounds really cool.

Heya,

I'm not sure at this point, but to judge from my current mindframe, it's all pretty much balanced. I haven't lingered on any particular topic too long, but the closest I'm probably going to get is the whole ebb/flow thing.

That would be the ebb/flow, the facilities, and the triple battle mechanic (War/Combat/Duel). The names are pretty apt, though I'm hoping to make them more apt. If you'd like to comment on any of those things here, I suggest you do so. The ebb/flow we've talked about, but since it's going to receive more attention (at least for now) we might as well talk about it here too. It's part of the magic aspect of the game. The facilities, which are the gates and the other things I mentioned, are part of the the science fiction aspect of the game.

While the basic settings, which will definately be more typical than the advanced campaign settings, dubbed Gaterunners, won't include it all, like it will be historical and set hundreds of years before the Gaterunners, it will still be quite new, particularly since the part I will be focusing on will be the triple battle mechanic. The ebb and flow will exist, but will be a mystery, and the facilities will be nonfuntional, but that won't detract from the game. The advanced campaign settings, will take you to a six worlds and a space station where magic and science are blended smoothly

I guess I did go a bit overboard. I also hope I answered your questions correctly

The problem: It may take as much time setting up the augmented dice rolls as it does to simply roll them. If anybody wants to suggest an easier way to do the quickroll, one that pays attention to detail but does not overly complicate things, let me know. Or if they have another suggestion for a non-task non-conflict resolution system, let me know. I plan on making mine distinct from both of them, while having elements of both, so it's called augmented resolution, or AR for short. I could probably make a version that doesn't involve as much mathematics or thinking about how to combine possibilities, but I'd like your feedback first.

What do you all think?

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

I'm not sure at this point, but to judge from my current mindframe, it's all pretty much balanced. I haven't lingered on any particular topic too long, but the closest I'm probably going to get is the whole ebb/flow thing.

-I'd say yeah.  Or if it isn't yet where you've put the most thought, it needs to be.  This is one of the most dynamic parts of your game.

That would be the ebb/flow, the facilities, and the triple battle mechanic (War/Combat/Duel). The names are pretty apt, though I'm hoping to make them more apt. If you'd like to comment on any of those things here, I suggest you do so. The ebb/flow we've talked about, but since it's going to receive more attention (at least for now) we might as well talk about it here too. It's part of the magic aspect of the game. The facilities, which are the gates and the other things I mentioned, are part of the the science fiction aspect of the game.

-That's a good answer.  Though I'd also say that what interested *me* was the Emotions/Attempting the Nearly Impossible gives you a bonus chance and greater consiquences if you fail thing.  That's what would be really fun for the players to use.

While the basic settings, which will definately be more typical than the advanced campaign settings, dubbed Gaterunners, won't include it all, like it will be historical and set hundreds of years before the Gaterunners, it will still be quite new, particularly since the part I will be focusing on will be the triple battle mechanic. The ebb and flow will exist, but will be a mystery, and the facilities will be nonfuntional, but that won't detract from the game. The advanced campaign settings, will take you to a six worlds and a space station where magic and science are blended smoothly

-I'm not sure how you're using the word "setting" in this paragraph.  Are you meaning "worlds" or are you meaning Setting with a big "S"?  As in, are you going to include multiple self-contained Setting in your game to go with your one System?  Or am I just totally missing you here?  Argh, let me just make it simple hehe.  What did you mean by "setting" when you wrote that?

I guess I did go a bit overboard. I also hope I answered your questions correctly

-Nah, you didn't go overboard.  That's the kind of thing I'm looking for.  My friend Vincent always says "use more words" when I try to describe something to him.  So you're doing just fine.

The problem: It may take as much time setting up the augmented dice rolls as it does to simply roll them. If anybody wants to suggest an easier way to do the quickroll, one that pays attention to detail but does not overly complicate things, let me know. Or if they have another suggestion for a non-task non-conflict resolution system, let me know. I plan on making mine distinct from both of them, while having elements of both, so it's called augmented resolution, or AR for short. I could probably make a version that doesn't involve as much mathematics or thinking about how to combine possibilities, but I'd like your feedback first.

What do you all think?

-My advice is to playtest, playtest, playtest.  Thinking about how a thing *might* work is all well and good, but until you play with it you'll never know.  And when I say playtest, I don't mean just once.  I mean multiple times with different people.

Peace,

-Troy

Heya,

The ebb/flow might not even be stationary.

You've got a good point there. Emotions and how they relate to success/failure vs likelyness of success/failure are going to be fun, and also emotions relate to other things in the game, such as morale/discipline, social situations, and the whole Mystery part of the game, that will hopefully be RIFE with emotions. Assuming I'm using the word 'rife' correctly. :P

By setting I mean what worlds to which you have access and what's going on in the world at that time. Everything else pretty much remains the same, unless I'm forgetting something. Something big, probably.

Troy_Costisick wrote:
Heya,

The ebb/flow might not even be stationary.

-Sweet!

You've got a good point there. Emotions and how they relate to success/failure vs likelyness of success/failure are going to be fun, and also emotions relate to other things in the game, such as morale/discipline, social situations, and the whole Mystery part of the game, that will hopefully be RIFE with emotions. Assuming I'm using the word 'rife' correctly. :P

-Heh, yes you used it correctly.  I'm glad that you were receptive to that suggestion.  I think it will make a difference for your game.

By setting I mean what worlds to which you have access and what's going on in the world at that time. Everything else pretty much remains the same, unless I'm forgetting something. Something big, probably.

-Good, we're on the same page.  I was worried there for a minute.  This all looks good.

-I have a couple more questions for you about your goals for your game.  This isn't so much about mechanics or setting, but what your plans are.

1.) What are your publishing goals for your game?

2.) Who is your target audience?

-I really look forward to your answer to these.  Oh, and btw, I'm going on another trip this weekend so don't expect a reply until Monday.  Good luck to ya! :)

Peace,

-Troy

Heya,

I'm not even sure how I'm going to do it yet. I might have to develop a dynamics of ebb and flow. Like, how it moves through different substances, different elevations, et cetera.

Well I'm planning on making a notepad file, then a PDF when I learn how. I hope to one day make it into 'regular' publishing with books and all, but that's a high goal and I'm not likely to meet it.

Hey, one more thing.  I also recomend checking out my Blog Socratic Design for additional resources.  It's really aimed at designers like you.

Peace,

-Troy