Okay, here's a really old design of mine:

http://www.io.com/~xiombarg/SOPLARP.html

The idea here was to create a LARP system that was simple enough to fit on one page, yet capable of handling virtually every action (including combat) easily and simply, while encouraging social interaction over combat. Didn't quite work, tho it wasn't too bad.

There's a second edition that isn't online. The difference are the attributes and the resolution mechanic, mainly, IIRC. (I'm away from my home machine at the moment, which has the 2nd ed on it.) IIRC in the 2nd edition attributes vary from 1-4 and are divided up as follows:

EARTH passive, physical stuff (endurance)
AIR active (intellectual) mental stuff
FIRE active, physical stuff
WATER emotional (passive mental) stuff

Resolution was through Undercut: Each person holds up one to five fingers at the same time, and adds that number of fingers to the appropriate attribute UNLESS one person holds up exactly one finger less than the other, in which case the person holding up less fingers adds the total number of fingers held up by both people to their attribute and the opponent adds 0. Higher total succeeds, in case of tie, go with higher attribute or re-throw.

(Example: My Air is 3 and Joe's Air is 2. We're trying to outwit each other. I hold up three finger and Joe holds up five. Joe's total is seven and mine is six -- Joe wins. But if I held up four fingers and Joe held up five, I'd undercut him, and I'd add 9 (4+5) to my total and Joe would add 0. In that case, I win.)

Obviously I like the 2nd ed better but I don't think either really meets my goals fully. This design waaaaaay pre-dates my hanging out on the Forge -- note the '96 imprint. How might I apply some Forge know-how to improve this game? I like the undercut mechanic, but I think the way of calculating the score when you undercut someone should perhaps be different, while still giving you the advantage.

How about a successful undercut gets the opposing player's score plus one? So in the example you would get 5+1 = 6 instead of 5+4 = 9. Important as otherwise there is no 6 or 8 result.

Mike

And with the five finger thing, why wouldn't I want to hold up five fingers everytime? That would give me the max, right?

I don't understand that... but interesting stuff!

I like to see old game design stuff... Cool!

Thanks,
Nathan

And with the five finger thing, why wouldn't I want to hold up five fingers everytime? That would give me the max, right?

But if you did it too predictably, your opponent would hold up four and undercut you every time.

This is a very interesting and usable mechanism. If you assume that people will rarely shoot 1 or 2, then the fingers mechanism is actually equivalent to rock-paper-scissors: 3 beats 4, 4 beats 5, 5 beats 3. But the option of using 1 or 2, and the attributes' effects make it a bit more complicated.

- Walt

Aren't you just SOL if their attribute is 5 higher than yours? If you have a 2, and I have a 7, no matter what I can just hold up one finger and even if you hold up five, it means you lose - and you can't undercut me (unless you are saying you could hold up no fingers, but then you wouldn't get antything out of it unless you made it a special case).

I mean if you are going for Simulationism I guess it works just fine, I am much better that you are, so I will beat you. If you were going for something other than Sim you would want there to be some way to fix this (which might just mean attributes can only be between 1 and 5 - I haven't read the rules yet, this might be the case).

-Shane

Buddha Nature wrote: I mean if you are going for Simulationism I guess it works just fine, I am much better that you are, so I will beat you. If you were going for something other than Sim you would want there to be some way to fix this (which might just mean attributes can only be between 1 and 5 - I haven't read the rules yet, this might be the case).