Topic: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Started by: gobi
Started on: 7/1/2003
Board: Indie Game Design
On 7/1/2003 at 12:52am, gobi wrote:
Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
I'm starting to work on the lycanthropunk section of PUNK. The problem is that there are a lot of animals on earth and I don't want to write up a bunch of space-wasting descriptions. I figure I'll just do writeups on animals people would actually be interested in playing. So, without bothering going into the details of setting or anything...
What kind of werecreature would you play and why?
On 7/1/2003 at 2:58am, buddha wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Hmmm...
I'd have to say, going with the Punk idea, you'd wanna play unusual, on-the-fringe were-types. Man, I gotta say the first thing that sprang to mind was... Oy... the were-platypus. Seriously.
But I loved the idea of a "were-amoeba", and personally, I dunno, maybe just a were-dog or a were-gator or, oooh, yeah, a gorilla!
Hmm, if you’ve got ‘em, the old Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles sourcebooks have a lot of critter stats and ability ideas, as well as some very unusual critters.
Buddha
P.S.- I also loved the Godpunk idea.
On 7/1/2003 at 4:06am, Bob McNamee wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Flamingos
On 7/1/2003 at 4:09am, Lxndr wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
I like snakes and spiders (though I hate what white wolf did with snakes).
Beyond that, scruffy mangy dogs and cats feel "punkish"... and I too imagined the platypus.
On 7/1/2003 at 12:26pm, gobi wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Thanks for the tip, Buddha. :)
Great stuff, everyone. Keep it coming, I thnk maybe 30-40 animals would cover enough of a variety for most people's taste or provide a template for augmentation.
Speaking of which, part of the setting is that the second generation of lycanthropes are technically were-chimera, possessing some traits of both parents.
Subquestion: If you could play a were-creature combining two different types of animals, what would you play and why?
On 7/1/2003 at 1:15pm, xiombarg wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Ferrets. There's a punk animal for you. ;-D
On 7/1/2003 at 1:29pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Seems to me that letting the player decide on his animal is somewhat like a personal totem. I'd be for some system that let the player create his own animal stats. Otherwise I'm sure someone's favorite will not be on the list.
For example, I can tell you right now that Jared will be disapointed if he can't play a were-sloth. :-)
Me, I like the were-lemur idea. Spiders would be creepy. One I really like, but might not be Punky enough would be the were-shark.
Mike
On 7/1/2003 at 2:15pm, Jack Aidley wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Gotta agree with Mike. Any list will be defficent, so if you're going to provide more than a small set of choices you need to provide rules for all of them. Me, I want to play a were-ocelot...
On 7/1/2003 at 2:28pm, xiombarg wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Yeah, you're best off with a short list of "punkish" examples, that that players can use as a springboard.
On 7/1/2003 at 2:38pm, Lxndr wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Porcupines.
What is punk if not prickly?
On 7/1/2003 at 3:36pm, Little_Rat wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Rats. I love rats and they are perfect for any *punk setting. But don't make them to "ebil"- rats might be mangy sewer dwellers but they also thrive in human enviroments, are very very intelligent and resourcefull.
White Wolf did so-so with the Ratkin as do most gaming books but resist the "conniving son of a rat backstaber terrorist destroy everything" stereotype, it doesn't make playing one flexible or allowing for a variety of concepts.
Also, neat shifters could be owls, bats, ravens- face it, who wouldn't love to fly?
p.s. cats are ok, but don't make them into sexy hornballs ala WW's Bastet. Cats are wild and unpredictable. Make them cute one mintue and ripping out your throat the next.
On 7/1/2003 at 5:19pm, cruciel wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
As far as personal interest goes, I lean towards dogs, cats and bears. Hmmm...for some reason elk is appealing - must be the big frickin' antlers.
Chiming in with the build yer own werecritter. Kinda depends on how much detail you want and what mythos for werecritters you're going with (turn into a wolf on the full moon, WW-ish I can turn into a half-man-half-beast thingy, possession by an animal spirit, etc). But, it could be as simple as:
Distribute X points among stat bonuses, movement modifiers (wings, amphibious), weapons (claws, teeth, quills), armor (carapace, regeneration, specific immunities), and functionality (serpentine, extra limbs, tail).
On 7/1/2003 at 9:33pm, M. J. Young wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Mike said it first: you really should have a way to custom design your own were animal. I'm thinking some sort of menu system is probably viable, in which the player and the referee create a basic template for the wererace and then build the individual within it.
I think the presence of other were creatures in the book is more a shortcut for the referee to populate those corners of the world than anything else. Give the player flexibility in this area.
--M. J. Young
On 7/1/2003 at 9:54pm, Simon W wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
A were-puffin. Or a were-toad. But the important question is what do these were-creatures do? And how do they get to be the were-creatures that they are. Is this a humorous thing or a serious thing? I can only see it being humorous, I'm afraid (given the choice of were-creature on here so far).
On 7/1/2003 at 10:00pm, gobi wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Thanks for the help, everyone! Keep it coming :)
Mike Holmes wrote: Jared will be disapointed if he can't play a were-sloth. :-)
Among the many were-creatures in the setting, some will in fact be prehistoric animals like dinosaurs and, yes, giant sloths. Just for Jared. :D
cruciel wrote: Distribute X points among stat bonuses, movement modifiers (wings, amphibious), weapons (claws, teeth, quills), armor (carapace, regeneration, specific immunities), and functionality (serpentine, extra limbs, tail).
The format I'm working with is something like this. I have a list of abstracted abilities like "claw," "striker," or "bite." As well as a variety of funky things like camoflage, speed and so forth. I'm trying to be as general as possible without missing fun little abilities like "high-impact spit," "venom," or "webs."
Further, the lycanthropes in this setting have more exaggerated versions of the abilities possessed by their natural animal counterparts, so I took some artistic license with the description and effectiveness of some powers. I actually recommend to players that they check out some of the nature documentaries on the Discovery Channel like "Top Ten Weirdest Animals of the World!" for some ideas for new powers. (I'm guessing this is how Jared found out the coolness of giant sloths.)
xiombarg wrote: Yeah, you're best off with a short list of "punkish" examples, that that players can use as a springboard.
Doing this too. Every animal writeup will have a short list of the abilities available to lycanthropes of that type. Out of those abilities, every character will only have enough creation points to get a few. So essentially it's "here's a big list of sample powers" then "here's some example animals and what powers they might have. Pick which ones you want. You can get more with experience, but none outside of that animal template."
For example, I want to play a were-hermit crab. They've got pincers and armor, but it's special armor that can be removed when necessary. So, when writing up the "Hermit Crab" template, I include "claw" (for the pincers) and "Armor" plus the enhancement "removable." I could do some more research on hermit crabs to find out what other interesting things they do that I could spin into possible powers.
This component-based creation was essential since there's really no way to make a universally satisfactory list. Also, part of the setting is second-generation "chimera" who share traits of both lycanthropic parents. That last bit alone just begs for component-based creation system.
Again, thanks for the cool ideas everyone, I'd love to hear more! :)
On 7/2/2003 at 12:06am, scobie wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Little_Rat wrote: Rats. I love rats and they are perfect for any *punk setting. But don't make them to "ebil"- rats might be mangy sewer dwellers but they also thrive in human enviroments, are very very intelligent and resourcefull.
Gotta admit, rat is the punk animal of choice (although ferret does seem to get a good run here in Melbourne).
I agree that rats tend to get badly slandered in rpgs, as do all animals=human stereotype options. Actually, I think the way that rpgs deal with this issue, and the question of 'race' generally says a lot about where many writers are coming from. Not limited to rpgs, look at fantasy sci/fi racial stereotyping - urgh!
The whole racial essentialism thing needs serious consideration in any game that has racialised elements. While the LOTR film tried to bring genetic engineering in as an excuse, the whole 'evil race' thing is inexcusable.
Yeah, animals - gotta go with the ratties.
On 7/2/2003 at 1:41am, gobi wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Right. I'll try to have a more three-dimensional representation of the rats then :) Actually, one thing I'm trying to avoid is factions exclusively composed of one or or several lycanthrope-types over another. Just a general effort to avoid ground well-treaded by Palladium and White Wolf.
On 7/2/2003 at 6:27am, cruciel wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
gobi wrote: The format I'm working with is something like this. I have a list of abstracted abilities like "claw," "striker," or "bite." As well as a variety of funky things like camoflage, speed and so forth. I'm trying to be as general as possible without missing fun little abilities like "high-impact spit," "venom," or "webs."
Seems pretty solid. Keeping with the it depends on the detail level you want disclaimer; claw, striker, and bite could all be the same abstract item - hand-to-hand weapon. If you level it based on damage (1, 2, 3), you could have horse bite(1)/scorpion tail(2)/shark bite(3). Plus you could only charge for the most powerful weapon. If you want claws(1) and teeth(3), you just take weapon(3) because the claws don't give you an extra action, right?
Anyway...I'm adding weregorilla to my list: the ultimate thug.
On 7/2/2003 at 6:49am, taalyn wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Me, I'd go for the insects - I have a thing for spiders.
As for complex parentage - I'd love to do a spider/fox, or a raven/fox - a variety of enfield. Would a unicorn be a horse/rhino mix? Chimera proper, manticore, all sorts of traditional combinations become options.
Aidan
On 7/2/2003 at 8:21am, Dr. Velocity wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Wow. Interesting. I also go with the create-a-were idea and I did enjoy the TMNT rules, though I never got to play (still thought they were a little overdone but good nonetheless).
I think you need a reason for this were stuff, and with that, you need to really think about the downside of cool things like 'armor, removable'.
Hermit Crabs, for example don't just have armor which they can take off if they want to - they begin in small shells they find, because their exoskeleton just isn't tough enough to help them survive normally, so they take cast-offs and have to keep changing as they grow, etc. What if you can't find a new shell?
There is a lot of personal dynamics and vital requirements here, and I am sure, with all animals and their unique traits and things they do so I think a good eye needs to be kept on the needs for the game and the applicability of weaknesses as well (dogs sensitive to high pitched noises, etc etc) so people will understand more of the animals themselves that they are considering, and will know what sets of traits are more interesting to them to play (the good and bad).
The thing I hate most about 'races' and things like that is they're just like 'costumes' you dress characters up in - this 'race' is short and has a beard, this race is pointy eared - occasionally you get a generic personality guideline (Taciturn, Haughty) but more or less, they're just 'race costumes' because there's no real 'melding' as far as the player considering the races - same potential hazard here (I'll take a were turtle cuz its got really tough armor - no thought about anything else really or if it would be a good or bad thing to be a were-turtle - would it be boring? Slow? Would you be 'ugly'?)
For my two cents, I like Armadillos (they can jump three feet, straight up, ya know, but on the downside, may carry leprosy), also Sloths and Crabs and Owls.
On 7/2/2003 at 11:36am, gobi wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Dr. Velocity wrote: I think you need a reason for this were stuff, and with that, you need to really think about the downside of cool things like 'armor, removable'.
In case folks are really interested in the origins of lycanthropy in this setting: A long time ago, when earth was still fluid and hot, a huge chunk was blasted off and sent into orbit to become the moon. Inside the moon was a vast reservoir of mystical energy. The earth cooled, began housing life, yada yada, until 2017 when an asteroid strikes the moon, shattering it to a quarter of its size. The falling debris releases the mojo into the atmosphere, returning a bit of that fluidic unity the earth had so long ago. This partial re-unification manifests itself in a variety of ways, most notably by merging human souls with the archetypal aspects of the animal kingdom, turning them all into lycanthropes.
Dr. Velocity wrote: Hermit Crabs, for example don't just have armor which they can take off if they want to - they begin in small shells they find, because their exoskeleton just isn't tough enough to help them survive normally, so they take cast-offs and have to keep changing as they grow, etc. What if you can't find a new shell?
Food for thought, thanks.
Dr. Velocity wrote: a good eye needs to be kept on the needs for the game and the applicability of weaknesses as well (dogs sensitive to high pitched noises, etc etc) so people will understand more of the animals themselves that they are considering, and will know what sets of traits are more interesting to them to play (the good and bad).
I'm definitely keeping the less advantageous traits in mind, though I'm not quite sure how to implement them without it encouraging min-maxing.
Dr. Velocity wrote: more or less, they're just 'race costumes'
I'm using a special category of traits called "behaviors" that represent the general disposition and instinctual activity of the animal. When role-playing those behaviors, the player gains instinct points (because they're acting according to their nature) to use in buying new traits or increasing existing traits.
On 7/3/2003 at 1:47am, Little_Rat wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
For chimera? I always thought a "ratbat" would be a pretty neat pet. Just an ordinary rat with wings on its back. Or a "ratdog", because, face it, walking a rat the size of a collie down the street would be really cool.
(needless to say, my baby did not grow wings or large enough to walk down the street... But if you need any rat info, I'll be happy to help)
On 7/4/2003 at 12:44am, gobi wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
After surveying a few other boards I frequent, the standings are as follows:
Bat
Cat (Big, Domestic)
Ferret
Rat
Elephant
Bear
Gator
Wolf
Eagle
Otter
Dolphin
Rhino
Snake
Shark
Fox
Monkey
Crab
Penguin
Snail
Amoeba
Gorilla
Platypus
Flamingos
Spiders
Sloth
Lemur
Porcupines
Elk
Toad
Still room for a few more :)
On 7/4/2003 at 5:24pm, Simon W wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Don't forget the Puffin. Thinks...he's confused it with a Penguin.Gotta be room for a were-mole too. All that super-tunelling expertise!
On 7/4/2003 at 8:57pm, gobi wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
Whoops, forgot about about the puffin. ::adds puffin and mole::
On 7/4/2003 at 9:14pm, RobMuadib wrote:
More animals
Gobi
Umm, I'd want to be able to make a Were-Wolverine, a Wereverine, and like a gorilla, and coolest as possible a Were Wolverine/Gorilla that is also a ninja:)
On 7/5/2003 at 5:13am, buddha wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
I'm definitely keeping the less advantageous traits in mind, though I'm not quite sure how to implement them without it encouraging min-maxing.
Just a thought, you could do it kinda like Nobilis, which, if I remember correctly, gives you a bennie (XP, Power points, or some such) each time a disadvantage you've taken actually hinders you.
Hmmm... I hope that was Nobilis, and that I'm not getting my rpgs mixed up....
Buddha
On 7/7/2003 at 12:00am, Jeph wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
I second Were-Lemur.
And monkey, for those who admire Bruce Lee.
On 7/24/2003 at 11:55pm, permacultureguerilla wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
I'd like a cat with wings, opposable thumbs, and gills. I can swim, fly, climb, chase . . . and I have the intelligence to sit at a computer and type. I would prefer not having to be a carnivore, but at least I could chomp humans I don't like. Of course, I'd want some powers like maybe telleportation.
Did I take this just a little off topic? Lol.
On 7/25/2003 at 12:49am, gobi wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
permacultureguerilla wrote: I'd like a cat with wings, opposable thumbs, and gills. I can swim, fly, climb, chase . . . and I have the intelligence to sit at a computer and type. I would prefer not having to be a carnivore, but at least I could chomp humans I don't like. Of course, I'd want some powers like maybe telleportation.
Did I take this just a little off topic? Lol.
Actually, not really. I planned on all the powers available for werecreatures to be things any animal on the planet can do, possibly to an exagerated degree. So basically everything you listed would be doable in the game. Except for teleportation. ;)
On 7/25/2003 at 1:12am, Ben Lehman wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
I must second the armadillo. If only because the main character in the longest running game I have ever run was a mutant armadillo. They're bad-ass.
yrs--
--Ben
On 7/25/2003 at 1:55am, Brian Leybourne wrote:
RE: Survey: What kind of were-creature would you play?
I have a thing for cats (insert cheap pussy joke here) so I would have to vote for werecats. Domestic, but also the larger cats.
And, to tip the hat to Storyteller for a second, I really loved their werespiders. Alternate forms were human, giant spider, half human/half spider (like a drider, I guess) and the last possible form was to melt into a swarm of spiders, good for getting away or stealthily spying on someone. The werespider survived as long as even a single spider survived, but to reform, they needed the same mass of spiders they originally had so if some died they needed to use their "summon spider" ability to draw more spiders to them to form their human body again with. Cool stuff.
Brian.