Topic: Lost to the mists(working title)
Started by: DarkAsmodeous
Started on: 2/24/2006
Board: First Thoughts
On 2/24/2006 at 3:37am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
Lost to the mists(working title)
Hello, this is my first post! Anyway, me and my best friend/lacky have been working on an indie project, and I have decided to have a sort of design journal here, only it's intent is to have communication with other people about my idea's. I will state here that our process is as follows, come up with setting and character type concepts apropriate for gaming, then elaborate on them and their foe's, work on what we wish to be run in a game, and then work out the system to suport it.
Thus far we have come up with a basic concept, in ancient times their were older races lost to the memory of man and events happened, this may not sound very descriptive, but we intend to have each of the character types tell their own legends and accounts of what happened.
Our character types so far are the dons, don taken from british scholar, who through moments of un-obfuscated knowledge of the world around them are aproached by one of two groups, the watchers: a group who seek these people out a provide them with an ancient ability that is inherant in themselves but is held back and clouded by the other group I mentioned, the rancarium: a group who while hiding this power from man, also aproach those who are fit to recieve the power, and grant them it, as well as madness. This naturaly serves as a generic enemy for adventures.
The other character type we currently have concieved are the aerials, who use shards who's origin is steeped in legend, that they insert into their palms, representing one of five "mirriors" their game names are undetermined but they represent space-time, life, fate, mind, and natural forces. These shards hold powers, the more specific it is, the easier it's use will be, so the aerials combine the abilities in creative ways, for example Tim has a shard alowing him to spark a flame, another to move flame, and another to increase it's size but not intensity, now with these he could control shapes of fire, but say he had a shard capable of turning fire into ice, he would have control of fire shapes AND ice shapes. These shards are forged from untapped shards that are useless, so the as of now unamed makers form them basing their ability on their size and potency, these men will be rare. Now the ability to use the shards is hereditary, and the families like to remain within themselves as clans, with hundreds of small clans, and a handful of massive globe spanning ones. An aeronite can't have infinite shards or power however, as he grows in experience, he can "liquidate" more of the shards, allowing him to use more and larger shards, now if aerial uses more energy then he can handle, he overburns
I realize that all this text is daunting, but please post responses, and if enough people are interested, I'll posy what we have of each of the character types backgrounds, and other things we have worked out already.
On 2/24/2006 at 3:43am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
OH, I'm sorry, I forgot to post what the dons do! They have a small amount of control of reality around, mostly on their own bodies, as they progress they gain the ability to become more and more superhuman while exerting their power, and at a slower pace also gain minute control on the world around them, like softening metal with a touch.
On 2/28/2006 at 11:02pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
OK, I have now done some work on the system. The dice system I am using is a dice pool. now the main portions of a character are:
skills- attributes that take away from the difficulty of a roll
attributes- inherent capabilities that allow for easier attempts at skills and other actions by adding more dice, used in almost all checks
feats- generally specific abilities that add more dice to your efforts
effects- special capabilities that vary based on character type, usually with their own rules
quirks- generally small abilities that add little to actual gameplay other than maybe a few less difficulty or the occasional dice, that serve to help create a unique character
movement- the characters base speed in meters
run movement- double the normal movement, actions done during this time suffer a -4 dice penalty, DM's discretion as to what can be done while running
initiative- the bonus applied to dice rolls for movement, if you have over 5 init higher than opponent then you automatically go first
On 2/28/2006 at 11:05pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Now for the attributes
All attributes come in pairs, you may not have one attribute at 5 unless it's pair is at 3+
attributes-
AF [awarness- a character's alertness
focus- ability to stay on task, drive twords completing a task]
SE [strength- a characters sheer brawn
endurance- their ability to soak of pain, stamina]
SI [social- capbility to use social interaction to once advantage
intelligence- smarts]
AP [apearance- physical apearance
pois- composure]
RD [reflexes- reaction speed and ability
dexterity- deftness of the body and hands]
Feats- A feat cannot have more ranks than the lowest attribute of it's pair. A feat adds more dice to a relevant roll.
On 2/28/2006 at 11:05pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
I know I havn't posted a question, but I have gotten no replies, could I get some feedback if you have the chance?
On 3/1/2006 at 12:32pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
DarkAsmodeous wrote:
I know I havn't posted a question, but I have gotten no replies, could I get some feedback if you have the chance?
Questions would be nice, but I will try to give some feedback anyway.
I see you have a setting that could turn out to be very interesting. And then I see the beginning of a system that have nothing to do with that setting.
The characters are scholars that can control reality and people with magical abilities, then why is attributes like 'strength' and 'appearance' necessary? Why is movement necessary?
Here is what I see being important elements in the setting:
• The dons have moments of un-obfuscated knowledge.
• The dons can receive ancient abilities.
• The dons can risk receive power and madness.
• The dons can control reality.
• The aerials have shards that give them power (space-time, life, fate, mind, and natural forces)
• The aerials inherits this power from their family.
• The aerials lives in clans.
• The aerials can risk using to much power and overburn.
I would rather see you making mechanics/ rules that support these elements of the game. After that it is easier to determined what attributes is necessary.
And one question about the setting: The dons and the aerials seem to support to different types of stories. Is there something that connects these to character types?
I hope I don't sound to negative here. I actually like many of the ideas in your setting. I just want you to focus on the interesting ideas, and not wasting time on rules that is really not important for your game.
Oh, and even though i am a newcomer myself, I should properly say: Welcome to the Forge!
- Anders
On 3/1/2006 at 11:39pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Thanks for the feedback!
And as for that, to be honest, as I made the system, we were still in the phases of fleshing out the other 3 character types
There are the keepers and guardians, who both are members of the oath clans, a group steeped in ritual and ceremony who also act as a sort of "police" ensuering that magical beings and the like aren't exposed to the public. These character types use more traditional magic in the area's of air, water, fire, earth, life, and wind, however the keepers focus on the more dramatic damage inflicting area's of earth fire and water and are your traditional wizards. The Guardians are more physically and defensively based, focusing on air, life, and wind; These guys spend years honing their body as well as their magic and tend to Cary a weapon that they focus in, and as a result have access to more weapon based feats. And neither one may have more than to ranks in a magical are that they do not specialize in. The guardians and keepers work together towards the goals of the oath clans, policing the use of magic and keeping the peace, as of now the number of clans is undetermined, I'm thinking four or five, keep it small and simple.
The fifth and final character type are currently unarmed(we call them reapers for now) are your 'Witch' type characters, using blood and souls to work their will, the darker side of magic. Needless to say, they are not popular with the oath clans, I'm considering making a sort of "inquisition" style character.
Appearance and strength are for situations when magic would be unacceptable, or you are not skilled in that area of the game.
The setting is modern day, but we are considering having an area, maybe a nuclear wasteland, that only the supernaturals dwell in.
My question is, do you think that the skills and feats are redundant? And also, is their anything else you think should be changed?
On 3/1/2006 at 11:42pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
OH! I didn't answere your last question, I have noticed that there is no real goal for any of the character types besides the keepers and guardians, so we are thinking mysteries and problems that they must deal with that will form them together, as well ans the enemy types that I will cover in my next post. And the different groups sometimes band together in combat against the others, as well as the ancient being that turned against humanity.
And thanks for the welcome!
On 3/2/2006 at 9:08pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
My question is, do you think that the skills and feats are redundant? And also, is their anything else you think should be changed?
I will comment on these question shortly. But first...
Try to answer the three famous question:
1) What is your game about?
2) What do the characters do?
3) What do the players do?
But before you answer them, read <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=16996.0">this. It is not obvious how to answer these question. You may think that you have answered the first question in you first post, but that is properly not what you game really is about. An example of an answer could be: "The game is about the responsibility of handling great power," or maybe "The game is about the stress of possessing dangerous knowledge." Properly it's something completely different, but well ... You tell me.
These question is designed to get you focused on what you what to achieve with the game. What feeling you are going for. What kind of roleplaying experience you want.
But on to your questions. To tell the truth, I can not really give you any answers. Because i do not know (yet) what you what with your game. But I will give you my take on skills.
Most game should properly have a list of abilities that shows what the character can do. But there should not be any skills that a character can not use to participate in a conflict. The important part in a game is the conflicts the characters face. So if there is something on the character sheet that cannot be used in a conflict, then why is it there?
My favourite example is cooking. Many game have a cooking skill. But I would feel cheated if I had spend point on cooking, for it can not be used to anything important. If a player want cooking he can say it, or write it on the back of his sheet, and then he can cook. Don't force him to spend point on it.
I am not quite sure what Feats are (your description is a little vague). But at this point I think you should tell me if they are important for the game.
- Anders
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 16996
On 3/2/2006 at 11:10pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Once again, thanks for the reply!
Question one, what is the point of my game.
On 3/2/2006 at 11:18pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
oops, that posted while I was typing :/
Anyway, Question one
My game is about the pursuit of power within the hierarchy of the world, whilst attempting to learn the mysteries of the past and keep order, amongst themselves, and the darker beings that roam just out of sight.
Question 2, what do the characters do
Depending on their type, they hunt down that which gives them power, work for their corresponding organizations, seek knowledge to alleviate the curses and pains that each one suffers(not yet established) and to work towards defeating the darker organizations and beasts, or even eachother.
Question 3, what do the players do
At first, simply deciding what their characters are going to work towards, be it order, chaos, power, or knowledge, as this will effect the game to suit them at higher points of development, and to make moral decisions, as the GM will often present the need to remain compassionate and the like or to disregard it(considering working that in rule wise) and at higher points in the game, to point the organizations to or against war, or to forever change the world.
As for skills and feats
their are only a few skills that will be pretty broad, that make rolls easier by lowering the target number, whilst feats are more specific, and some have restrictions as to who can have them, and they add more dice to the rolls.
On 3/3/2006 at 1:14am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
I am now questioning whether or not I want to stick with this system, but I have been doing some work on it, I have reduced the attributes to 8, and made a list of 3 skills per pair of attributes for a total of 12 skills.
Attributes
Dexterity
Reflexes
Strength
Endurance
Appearance
Social
Awareness
Composure
Skills
DE [Aim
Drive
Precision]
SE [Melee
Weaponry
Intimidate]
AS [Seduction
Persuade
Gather Information]
AC [Senses
Resolve
Focus]
On 3/3/2006 at 1:30am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
I am considering making the game a little less traditional style by perhaps using a less skill based system. Possibly one with character beliefs goals quirks and paradigms fitted into the rules, do you think this would be possible to implement without sucking the fun of choice from the players?
On 3/3/2006 at 8:33pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
You have some good answers to the three questions. I will see these answers as being what is important in your game. Just one thing: What do you see as being the main conflict(s) in the game. If there are more that one please prioritise them. And please keep the list below five conflicts.
I am now questioning whether or not I want to stick with this system, but I have been doing some work on it, I have reduced the attributes to 8, and made a list of 3 skills per pair of attributes for a total of 12 skills.
Just one thing: Don't panic! Take it slowly, and keep the focus on what you want with your game. All that I write is just my opinion.
But I will try to justify my opinion here.
I was seeing that you where beginning to make a general system[sup]1[/sup], that could be used for any setting, and not specially focused on your setting.
There is a problem with general systems. Let's take the d20 system as an example. If you have a cool setting and use the d20 system, you will risk that your players will play the d20 system, with some added colour that happen to be you setting.
On the other hand, if you have a system that reinforce what your game is about, that support the concepts in the game and that reward the roleplaying experience you want, the players will play your game (and setting) from start to end; the rules wouldn't have it otherwise.
Now, I would bet that most game designers want to go for the second option. It is more true to the game, and it will lead to more intense gameplay.
I am considering making the game a little less traditional style by perhaps using a less skill based system. Possibly one with character beliefs goals quirks and paradigms fitted into the rules, do you think this would be possible to implement without sucking the fun of choice from the players?
I see a system of character beliefs to be essential for any modern game design. Not only does it make character play more intense, it is also a way for the player to tell the GM what he want with the character.
There is different ways a beliefs system can be handled.
Maybe the character have a list of beliefs that works like Feats. If my character have the belief: "I will always protect the weak", then I will get a bonus when I use a skill to protect a weak person.
A belief can be a way to gain XP. Every time you follow your beliefs you will get XP, or better: Every time your beliefs get you in trouble, you will get XP.
Thing that is important in a beliefs system is, that the beliefs is dynamic - they can be changed (but properly, a character type in your game should have some beliefs that can not be changed). And there should be a good number of beliefs, or the character should be able to write his own beliefs.
Maybe each character type have each a list of beliefs. The player can then choose to or three beliefs from the list and make up on or two himself.
So if you do this right it will be more fun for the players, even though it may limit the characters.
I was also going to make some comment about your setting, but I have to do that later.
- Anders
----
[sup]1[/sup] I don't believe that there exists truly general systems, but that is an other discussion.
On 3/3/2006 at 9:39pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Thank you, your comments on beliefs and Exp have got me thinking, I am going to be using a small amount of Exp system so I wouldn't want players just focusing on hoarding that, so I decided to make it a DM call. If a player has adequately roleplayed his beliefs into good situations, he gets 1-2 Exp at the end of the adventure, if he does the same for negative consequences then an additional 1-2 is given. I am undecided as to how beliefs will effect game rolls.
As for conflicts I'm not sure whether you mean things that players overcome, or between groups in the game.
On 3/3/2006 at 10:13pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
DarkAsmodeous wrote:
Thank you, your comments on beliefs and Exp have got me thinking, I am going to be using a small amount of Exp system so I wouldn't want players just focusing on hoarding that, so I decided to make it a DM call. If a player has adequately roleplayed his beliefs into good situations, he gets 1-2 Exp at the end of the adventure, if he does the same for negative consequences then an additional 1-2 is given. I am undecided as to how beliefs will effect game rolls.
Be careful to give XP at the end of an adventure, because then the player will not be sure what he did to earn them. If XP is given the moment the player earns them, it will be more clear to him what to do to earn more, and then the game will be more intense.
As for conflicts I'm not sure whether you mean things that players overcome, or between groups in the game.
I mean the conflicts the player (or characters) have to overcome. (Does the players not take part in the conflicts between groups?)
- Anders
On 3/3/2006 at 10:34pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Perhaps at the end of an adventure the DM can ask what the player thinks he did to earn the experience, and when he is done the DM awards it if necessary and explains why some things worked and other didn't.
As for conflicts
~ Friction between families and organizations that turn to conflict of some sort(not always violent0
~Older darker creatures seeking to harm them or others
~Grappling with the curses and problems of their existence
~Pursuit of ancient knowledge and the dangers involved in doing so
~Characters own existence and place in society, including the contrast between magical and mundane society
On 3/3/2006 at 11:46pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
A little rant about XP:
The thing you reward the player for, is what the character is going to do. The thing the player can use there XP on, is where the character is going to advance.
Now, this is very important, because this is tied into what the game is about. Actually the reward system is properly the most important system, so you have to be very careful when you design it.
The players get rewarded when they are acting on there beliefs. That is fine, because it is flexible, so it is easy to direct the character to what is important for the game.
You will give 1-2 XP at the end of an adventure. I don't know how long you expect an adventure to be, but 1-2 XP seems to me to be very few. But I believe you are thinking about XP the wrong way.
You properly see XP as something to be used to advance in skill or attributes. But look at what the game is about. The game is NOT about character advancing their skills and attribute. The game is about "pursuit of power within the hierarchy of the world" and "seek knowledge to alleviate the curses and pains that each one suffers" and "Pursuit of ancient knowledge". So maybe it should be possible to us XP to achieve these thing.
Maybe it will help if you use an other term than XP. Maybe story point or hero point or something.
Don't get me wrong. It should properly be possible for the character to advance there skills and attributes. But there is other hing that is more important for the game.
btw. I like the idea of letting the player state, when he think he should earn XP.
- Anders
On 3/4/2006 at 12:01am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Hmm.. This is very interesting, I was considering a system that also uses relationship points with the different groups, affecting rolls realted to it, but dismissed it as needlessly complex. Perhaps I can use a Rank point aspect, that when you rise in power you gain "advancement points" and when you find secrets you also gain "advancement points", about buying secrets, I think that should be something the adventure does, not points, however perhaps you can use them to increase your status by having a numbered status withing groups?
I need to ponder this.
Thank you for the EXELENT feedback
On 3/4/2006 at 1:36am, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Thank you for the EXELENT feedback
Thanks, I am glad you can use it.
but on to the comments about the setting. I will also comment some more on the rules. But it can be argued that setting and rules can not be separated.
I am going to make a lot of assumptions. You can see them as suggestions.
Ok, lets first take a look on the character types:
Dons: scholars - they seek knowledge - they gain power to controlling reality - they risk madness. They have the role of being the wisemen and they seek transcendence by changing reality.
Aerials: clans people - They control the cosmic powers - they risk overburn. They have the role of being the people of the land(?). But what do they seek, what is there goal?
Keepers: Offencive combat - Inflects damages by fire and water. They have the role of being the police for magical beings and the using of magic. There goal is the goal of the clan, and to keep peace.
Guardians: Defencive combat - Defending with are, life and wind. They have the role of being the police for magical beings and the using of magic. There goal is the goal of the clan, and to keep peace.
Reapers: The witch - Use the dark side of magic. They have the role of being the inquisition. Their goals?
I see the keepers and guardians as being to much the same thing. When I read your first post I was concerned that the character types was too different - had too different goals. But I actually thing that this could be a strength of the game.
I am thinking, maybe there could be a mythology for how the character types fit together. They could represent the different aspects of life, and when they are together, they form a powerful unity. This unity may be necessary to find the true meaning of the ancient knowledge.
To empathise the different aspect of the character types, there could be different rules for the different types. Not only do they have different magic systems, and of course different beliefs, but they could have different sets of attributes. The dons may not have Strength or Endurance, and Keepers may not have Social. The reward system could also be different for the different types. And there could be a unique character sheet for each type.
The myth could be that one person from each character type unified onto true cooperation, could make great thing happen. And the rules should reflect this.
Of course it can be hard to get a group to play one of each type (there may be more or less that five people in the group). But reality of today could be that the five character types rarely work together because of conflicts. But sometimes a random collection of the different types put their conflicts behind them and tries to regain some of their former power and, even though they are not one of each type, tries to find the unity. And these groups could be the player characters.
You should be careful with having to many conflict between the player characters. Personal conflicts, and conflicts between characters can be fun, but they risk dominating the game play. And I am not sure that it is what you want with you game.
The reason why I suggest that the group the player characters form tries to put their conflict behind them, is to prevent to much time spent on character arguing among each other.
I have not worked all the conflicts into this, and there should properly be a little more focus on what the game is about, but as I said: This is only suggestions.
- Anders
On 3/4/2006 at 2:55am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Alright, I am now going to adress this last feedback, yes the dons serve as scholarly characters, but occasionaly there are dons that decide that their power makes them invincible, or that they need ot administer justice, this is being reflected in the belief system that me and my partner are drafting up, we are also implementing a fears system. I have also noticed that the Aerials do not have much of a goal, so I have been working on making the shards a blessing as well as a curse. The use of shards is now addictive, and the characters risk subcumming to it for short amounts of time depending on the power they use, and we are creating creatures that for whatever reason we form, and they seek strentgh to battle of these creatures, as well as free their clans from ancient duties that now serve as shackles that cannot be broken.
In regards to the group mythology, I like the idea, however I do not want to punish the players for not having one of each type, perhaps since the players for the most part will not be working on large skale politics(kept very simple) until mid-level, there are places known as havens that characters gather at to seek aid in the jobs given by those of more power, and political differences have little sway on oppinions at the street level parties can form fairly easily, you wouldn't of course get a Aerial of the clan McGregor to bomb his house right? So this will allow for reasonable limitations there, and at mid to high level, characters will be thrust together for whatever political, life-threatening, mystery solving, or odd adventure the DM can toss due to common goals. Now DM's run games of only Aerials of the clan Akihiro and work soley from that groups view, it would all be up to the DM and players.
And I think I may have not done a good job of portraing the dons, yes they do have a thirst for knowledge greater than any other group, however their ability to warp reality has it's greatest effects on their own bodies, allowing for super-human abilities rather than magical seeming ones, they can alter reality in a limited way around them such as softening metal, or helping a tree to grow.
On 3/4/2006 at 12:50pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
There have been some different things that I have wanted to write, but never got around to. So I will collect them here.
First some links
You may want to take a look at <a href="http://www.anvilwerks.com/?The-Shadow-of-Yesterday">Shadows of Yesterday by Clinton R. Nixon. In that game there is a system of beliefs, called Keys. It is properly not what you are going for, but there you can at least see how a beliefs system can be done.
I resently got pointed out <a href="http://bankuei.blogspot.com/2006/02/flag-framing_03.html">this article about Flagging. A beliefs system can be used as Flags. But it is also possible to have a dedicated flagging mechanic.
Little more about the setting
In your first post you have this:
Thus far we have come up with a basic concept, in ancient times their were older races lost to the memory of man and events happened, this may not sound very descriptive, but we intend to have each of the character types tell their own legends and accounts of what happened.
I was thinking: Instead of you, the game designer, write down what each character type believed happened. You can make some guidelines about how the types perceives different things, and then you can let the players write down what they believe happened in ancient time. The GM can then use this to structure the adventures around. That is, you are making the frame, and the GM and the player can fill out the content.
It have two advantages: You don't have to write a lot setting materiel, and the GM and players have the possibility of making the setting there own.
Something about conflicts
Is should tell you why I asked for the most important conflicts. It is actually just another way of asking what the game is about and what the characters do. Because the conflicts the characters is facing is what everyone at the gaming table will be concerned about; nothing happens if there is no conflict.
It is also dangerous to have too many conflicts: The more conflicts there is the less important will the single conflict be. And it is dangerous to have conflicts the wrong places (having conflicts that is not important for the game), because it will slow down the game; making it less intense.
Final note
Hmm.. This is very interesting, I was considering a system that also uses relationship points with the different groups, affecting rolls realted to it, but dismissed it as needlessly complex. Perhaps I can use a Rank point aspect, that when you rise in power you gain "advancement points" and when you find secrets you also gain "advancement points", about buying secrets, I think that should be something the adventure does, not points, however perhaps you can use them to increase your status by having a numbered status withing groups?
You have some very interesting ideas here. I can not make any "insightful" comments before your ideas are more structured. But I believe you are going in the right direction.
- Anders
On 3/4/2006 at 9:11pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
To help me get things in perspective, I have made a preliminary outline, let me know if I missed anything. oh, and I named the reapers Anointed.
Intro
Short story set in world, not focusing on any one type
Introduction
Setting
Opening lore
World
Character types
Creature types
Aerials
Description
Society
Beliefs/religion
Magic
Goals
Anointed
Description
Society
Beliefs/religion
Magic
Goals
Dons
Description
Society
Beliefs/religion
Magic
Goals
Guardians
Description
Society
Beliefs/religion
Magic
Goals
Keepers
Description
Society
Beliefs/religion
Magic
Goals
Characters
Creation
Templates
Aerials
Anointed
Dons
Guardians
Keepers
Magic
Shards/Aerials
Rituals/Anointed
Perceptions/Dons
Spells/Guardians/Keepers
Taints
Aerials
Anointed
Dons
Guardians
Keepers
Running the game
Rules
General
Combat
Flavor
Creation/Running
Advice
Concept
Planning
Preparation
Play
Reward
Sample
Introduction/overview
Adventure
Rewards
NPC stats
Glossary
Index
Credits
On 3/4/2006 at 9:43pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
I can not see anything obvious you have missed. But I have some questions.
What is "Templates". Is something to do with character sheets? And "Taints". It sounds cool, but what is it? And "Flavor"?
And a comment: I can see you have a chapter about combat. Why? All the character types are magic users, and for what I can see, the game is not about combat; where is combat important? You may want to have something about magical combat, though.
- Anders
On 3/4/2006 at 9:45pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
Templates has to do with the character creation for that type of character, taints are the curses involved with having the magical abilities, still working on those. Flavor rules are optional rules having to do with more narative play and the like.
On 3/4/2006 at 9:48pm, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
I keep hitting tab then enter, and it makes me post :\
Anyway, combat is their for several reasons, it will not be very rule intensive, and it will use integrated rolls, but sometimes the use of magic just isn't acceptable or the player wants to have a crossbow, who knows? Also, the guardians as I said often have a weapon of choice which also sets them apart from the keepers, for all their magic is generally clerical or augments their weapon. And magical combat will have some information on it in both the combat and magic sections.
On 3/4/2006 at 11:09pm, anders_larsen wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
I am sorry, but I am going to go into one of my rants again. I should properly just let you get on with your game in peace.
The reason I asked you why you have a combat system, is not that I necessarily think that you should not have a one. But I see too many games include a combat system, just because most other game have one.
And thats really not a very good justification!
First I will collect here what you game is about:
The three questions
1) My game is about the pursuit of power within the hierarchy of the world, whilst attempting to learn the mysteries of the past and keep order, amongst themselves, and the darker beings that roam just out of sight.
2) Depending on their type, they hunt down that which gives them power, work for their corresponding organizations, seek knowledge to alleviate the curses and pains that each one suffers(not yet established) and to work towards defeating the darker organizations and beasts, or even eachother.
3) At first, simply deciding what their characters are going to work towards, be it order, chaos, power, or knowledge, as this will effect the game to suit them at higher points of development, and to make moral decisions, as the GM will often present the need to remain compassionate and the like or to disregard it(considering working that in rule wise) and at higher points in the game, to point the organizations to or against war, or to forever change the world.
The conflicts
~ Friction between families and organizations that turn to conflict of some sort(not always violent)
~Older darker creatures seeking to harm them or others
~Grappling with the curses and problems of their existence
~Pursuit of ancient knowledge and the dangers involved in doing so
~Characters own existence and place in society, including the contrast between magical and mundane society
Let us call this the Foundation, because this is what you feel is important for your game.
When you are making the system, you have to use this Foundation to justify every single rule. And you should seek to make mechanics that support this Foundation.
If you have a rule that don't have any direct connection with the Foundation, you should properly drop that rule. If you have too many role in the system that don't have anything to do with your game, you risk the players will begin to play your game like they play any other game. And then they are really not playing your game.
So if you use justifications like "the player wants to have a crossbow" (I know I take this quote out of context, but it is just to make a point), then you are on a sliding slope. The player may want all sorts of thing that have nothing to do with your game, and you will end up with just another general game system.
If you keep the focus on what you what with the game (keep the focus on the Foundation), the game play will be much more intense, and the gaming experience will be much more unique. Everyone will know when they are playing your game.
And remember. You may not always sit in the GM chair when this game is on the table. The day you hand this over to strangers, they too have to understand what the game is about to really play your game.
Again, I am not saying you should not have a combat system, but you should just be able to justify it with the Foundation.
But don't do it now. Just think about it. you properly want to get on with your game, rather that responding to my annoying rants.
- Anders
On 3/5/2006 at 1:41am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
We have determined that we want to simplify the attribute system, the new attributes are
Body
Mind
Social
Reflex
On 3/5/2006 at 1:48am, DarkAsmodeous wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
And your rants are very helpful, my partner is lazy, and as competent as a retarded orangutan
On 3/5/2006 at 2:32am, TheineLD50 wrote:
RE: Re: Lost to the mists(working title)
DarkAsmodeous wrote:
And your rants are very helpful, my partner is lazy, and as competent as a retarded orangutan
Why thank you! I do love orangutans...
Me and DA (DarkAsmodeous) have been discussing the creation of another separate character archetype representing magic in the traditional sense, incorporating nature reverence and spiritual focuses. This type of casting depends more upon lengthy ritual and most spontaneous casting relies upon pre-charged items. Although magic can be performed outside of a prepared place and without rituals, the effects are variable and outside energies may alter its form.
An antagonist archetype will be the Creatures of Decay, which are created and maintained by the Rancourium Don's energy. They are also believed to feed off of major human faults, such as greed, lust, envy, etc. and thrive in times of chaos. When things are not chaotic, they work hard towards the goal of creating chaos, using the limited magic they are capable of. Each type of Creature of Decay feeds of a different human fault, or toys with another aspect of the mind or body. These creatures act against every type of player character, but they play a larger role in the Oath Clan's (keepers/guardians) role in the game. The Oath Clan's goal of suppressing potentially dangerous or obvious magic from mortals includes the destruction and suppression of the creatures of decay.