I'm mainly looking for feedback on the game information provided on the site. I am still working on the game, but the info on the site gives you a taste of the game I'm making.

Any feedback is welcome, preferrably constructive criticism. =)

Um, which game? Realms of Wonder? There are three on the page.

Also, check out the stickie at the top of the forum for notes on how to best post to get a response. I will ask one question, however: is this an new incarnation of some older game, or one that's been in design for a while? It seems familiar to me, though I can't place it.

Mike

Sorry, I'm new here. I'll read the sticky. Thanks for pointing it out.

It's been in design for a while. Unfortunately, life has gotten in the way of game development, but I'm finally on track for a release either late this year or early next.

Yes, Realms of Wonder is the game in question. The other products on the Action Studios site are from my partners, which are also still in development.

For the record, we are still deciding on the exact method of distribution. Right now we are doing a printed book format, but not sure if we will be going POD or normal distribution (which is what we'd like to do).

What about the game do you have concerns about most? What would you most like to see discussed? Anything you think needs improvement?

Mike

I've gotten no real feedback of any kind. I'm interested to know what people think of the game as presented. What areas draw you? What aspects make you groan? What do you think about the core task resolution mechanic (see the Book of Order page for details)?

I also would like to hear what people think of the setting as well as the presentation of the game. Basically, I'm presenting the game in 5 "Books" which are the various sections of the core rules book. There is a heavy religious strife bent to the world, having various peoples have real religions and histories based on said religions, as well as strife with others, is one of the main themes. The other main theme of the game is that just because you are right does not mean I am wrong and Heroes can come in all forms. There are no "evil" kingdoms, but there are evil people in all of them, as well as good ones.

The Book of Origin tells the back history of the world and how we get to where the players are going to begin the game. It establishes the setting.

The Book of Lore covers Hero Creation, further developing the setting as well as giving you a full understanding of how to make a Hero for the game. It also covers expanding said Hero.

The Book of Order covers Task Resolution and Combat. While weapons are listed in the Book of Lore, along with the rest of the gear lists, how to use them and the combat system are taught here.

The Book of Arcana covers magic. It also covers the Bestiary due to the way Witchcraft works in the game.

The Book of Prophets is the GM section and how to use techniques I call Cinematic Gamemastering, NPCs and how to make them, as well how to cover the basics like handing out EP, etc. I plan to include a ton of hooks for both adventures and campaigns using the setting. Some sample NPCs will be provided, but the emphasis will be on the GM carving his own new history for my world.

Just to let you all know, I wasn't meaning to say that no one from this forum was giving feedback, I was meaning in general.

Other than the people already associated with the game thru playtesting, I've gotten little feedback from the general public. What little I have gotten was all positive. I was just hoping that this group getting exposure to it would help me to do the best I can with the project I'm working on.

I'm in the middle of working on my regular job (for Sony) and squeeze in some writing time, plus coordinate the art side, as well as keep my wife from killing me. All this and trying to get the game done before our first child arrives. Hopefully I will get some time to breathe and hit the head once in a while there. =)

OK, now we're talking.

Hardpoint wrote: I'm interested to know what people think of the game as presented. What areas draw you? What aspects make you groan? What do you think about the core task resolution mechanic (see the Book of Order page for details)?

Mike Holmes wrote: You have a unique resolution system, but it has some serious problems. And the setting is absolutely bog standard (even the evil Elves idea was done in much the same way by Children of the Sun recently).

Edited my last post after truly delving into the article in question....Ron writes good stuff and I agree with him most of the time.... I hang my head in shame for being a bit reactionary.

And for the record, the Elves are not Evil...just a bit self-important and racist.

Also for the record, Realms of Wonder was influenced not so much by DnD, but more by Pendragon, James Bond, Stormbringer, Cyberpunk, Champions, Shadowrun, Call of Cthulhu, Vampire, Star Frontiers, and the PBM Duelmasters. Yes it was originally conceived and created as a game alternative to DnD, but I have deliberately tried to shy away from some of the DnDisms. The magic system is decidedly non-DnD, as is the combat system. The emphasis is on storytelling and person vs person conflict rather than treasure hunting and monster murder. My intention was to give players a setting and game system designed to foment more cinematic style gaming, rather than the more traditional "I attack him" mentality. I've found that less hardcore gamers have a hard time getting out of that mode of thinking. Getting them to try using the Combat Moves can take a bit of doing, but once they do, they really enjoy the fun of combat more interesting than that of a Final Fantasy/DnD fight.

Well, I'd also be interested in hearing Mike's analysis of the system, 'cause I thought it looked okay... but then I didn't delve into the details too deeply, and I don't have Mike's eye.

As for being "bog standard," well, there's nothing wrong with being bog standard - as long as you're not trying to publish, market, and sell it. For your own gaming, it's fine. But I must agree with Mike that at this point, your setting isn't very marketable.

One idea to add some clout would be to shake things up a bit. Maybe take what I call the Dragonlance approach - take your developed setting and drop a mountain on it. Shake things up, make something outrageous and weird happen, turn the world upside-down, and outline all the repurcussions. The game mechanics can be stable through all of that, but you will probably have a more interesting, and marketable, setting.

I for one would be interested to hear suggestions on how to make it more interesting to the masses? I'm not one of those indie producers who is a snob when it comes to innovation. I feel that if someone does something really well, and creates an interesting setting, who cares if it is derivative. The feel and the ideas presented therein are what matters. 7th Sea, while derivative, creates a nice atmosphere for fun roleplaying. Pendragon has the cool personality traits aspect thereby forcing the players to sometimes do things outside their normal comfort zone. It foments interesting roleplay. This was the desire and drive behind creating my game.

Plenty of interesting settings that were not "bog standard" have tanked hard, as well. Remember Talisanta? How bout Skyrealms of Jorune? Just because it is different does not necessarily make it better. I'm a big fan of smaller games, as they do tend to require less stuff to play

I have no delusions that I will unseat the world champs with this one. I know that. I'm happy to produce a product that I want to play and have a finished looking product with which some others might be interested in playing. That's all any indie RPG maker can hope for really. Unless you have good money for marketing, you're not likely to make a real dent in the industry as it stands anyway.

I created a world based in the familiar, but with the twists of the concept that roleplaying is important over "I'm getting powerful because I kill things". The core thrust of the world setting and game system is to simulate the style and character driven storytelling of novels and movies. Instead of making a game that is nothing more than a video game with dice (DnD3 seems even more aimed to this end), I wanted to make a game that was oriented to roleplaying, but allows for all kinds of adventuring. I am trying to emphasize the religion side of the game, as the main drive for creating the various faiths in the game was to introduce organized religions into a world where gods are real. I did this because, even as a non-practitioner I felt it odd that Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms, even the world of Dragonlance, had a very Greek Gods style set of cults instead of a fully formed Church style. Other than Stormbringer, no games seemed to deal with the very real strife of religious conflict. In today's world, religion plays as much a role in conflict as politics and the perception of evil does. Why not bring that into a fantasy world? The conflicts that can arise there seem more interesting in a roleplaying setting than the standard good vs evil. What happens when two peoples who both believe they are "good" clash? This is one of the key focuses of the game world as it stands now.

I came here to the Forge hoping for constructive criticism and instead feel like I got derision. Comments like this certainly do not endear me to this community, a place I was hoping to find some advice, assistance, and constructive criticism, perhaps even some new ideas and direction to go in before I finalize things too much. I also hope to find a new game to read and be inspired by, but comments like Mike's give me that Linux vs MS feel which frankly leaves a bad taste in my mouth. You may chalk this up as "yet another amateur getting his feelings hurt", but that's not the case. Yeah, I'm a little new to this side of the game, but I've been designing game systems for 20 years, albeit not professionally. I've learned a lot in the last several years about storytelling, character development, and the business of game development in my career in the computer game industry. I've also learned that I don't know everything, thus I came here.

Mike Holmes wrote: There are some neat ideas there, but they're goint to need a lot of help if the game is going to go anywhere, IMO.

First a factual correction: Talislanta has not "tanked." The fourth edition is selling very well (on its second printing, headed for third).

Second, I'm sorry you feel like the comments have been derisive. I would say they're honest. A few people have looked at what you have to offer and have said they think the setting is uninteresting. I agree. It's not to my taste. I'll explain why below. But I would suggest that you not write off The Forge as a helpful community simply because initial reactions to your work were negative. People here have taken the time to read and comment honestly on your product, something that you yourself admit that you have not gotten much of. Stick around. Ask more questions. Solicit specific feedback. The nice folks here will be happy to help out.

My reaction to the game is simply, "Meh." Elves, dwarves, goblins, trolls... various kingdoms and roughly Renaissance technology. This is pretty much the market niche of "vanilla" D&D, Forgotten Realms, Scarred Lands, Kalamar, Evernight, and many others. To me, it seems like a homebrew D&D campaign world, with new mechanics. Not my cup of tea at all. Notice that I don't say "it sucks." You actually have some cool stuff here, it's just not for everyone. The last thing I need as a gamer is another fantasy world featuring the core D&D races (plus a few new ones) and a new race/profession/stat/skill system (with 22 stats!). I don't mean to be rude, but: been there, done that.

Of course, there are plenty of gamers out there that want this very thing. It's an awfully crowded market, though, which is why some people are asking you about what makes your offering special and sets it apart from the pack. As someone that doesn't care for D&D-derived fantasy games, I can't see the appeal of Realms of Wonder versus, say, Forgotten Realms or Evernight. They're all the same to me.

I'm not trying to discourage you, though. I'm just here to say two things: 1) I for one am not the kind of gamer that is into a game like Realms of Wonder, but there are plenty of gamers that are. 2) That market is filled to bursting and you need to really stand out to attract customers and give them a reason to play your game instead of D&D and it's cousins.

OK, I've offended you. I'm sorry. How can I rectify the situation?

I will get to the actual system details, I promise; but I have to go run a game right now.

Later,
Mike

PS Needless to say, today is a bit emotional for me. Sorry.

Hey Marcus,

You asked about games to read for inspiration. Here are two:

The Riddle of Steel
This game got me excited about "standard fantasy" all over again. More than a campaign setting and game system, this game addresses the how and why of gameplay far beyond "go adventuring". This is the game to beat in this market, IMO.

Trollbabe
This game couldn't be more different from yours, but it could be considered swords-and-sorcery/fantasy. I recommend reading it just to see a totally different approach to gameplay and style and as an example of the state of the art in progressive RPG design.

Thank you for being honest, everyone. I do appreciate it. I know the setting is not terribly exotic (but then that is not necessarily bad, as you've said...it's just not for you...which is also ok), but there are ways to set oneself apart. I just need help finding those things out. Punching up the things that aren't so interesting would also help, but races are not going to change at this point.

Perhaps what I should be asking is what IS interesting? What are the "cool things?" Everyone has mentioned them, but no specifics were given. If I don't know what my strong points are, I will have a hard time focusing on them.

As for the stats issue, it used to be a lot worse, but that was back when all it was, was a homebrew system. It's gone through countless iterations, tossing all the borrowed mechanics and replaced by new ones. For the most part, the primary stats are the ones that matter most, as they directly figure into skill fomulae. The Secondary Stats are more provided to give players ready information so they don't have to look stuff up that often.

Hardpoint wrote: Perhaps what I should be asking is what IS interesting? What are the "cool things?" Everyone has mentioned them, but no specifics were given. If I don't know what my strong points are, I will have a hard time focusing on them.

Feng wrote: Hey Marcus,

You asked about games to read for inspiration. Here are two:

The Riddle of Steel
This game got me excited about "standard fantasy" all over again. More than a campaign setting and game system, this game addresses the how and why of gameplay far beyond "go adventuring". This is the game to beat in this market, IMO.

Feng wrote: Trollbabe
This game couldn't be more different from yours, but it could be considered swords-and-sorcery/fantasy. I recommend reading it just to see a totally different approach to gameplay and style and as an example of the state of the art in progressive RPG design.

Yeah, TROS has a cool combat system. And I also think it's a bit player-skill intensive, but that can be fun too sometimes. But that's not what makes TROS cool, IMO. The spiritual attributes are where it's at. You could toss out everything else from TROS and the spiritual attributes system alone would be worth the price of the book. TROS is not "just another fantasy game" because of the player-defined SAs and the way they shape gameplay.

I'm NOT saying, "You should have SAs in your game." Far from it. I'm just saying, "This is a game that distinguishes itself from the pack." You need to find your own way. What really excites you about your game? What is the one thing about it that you are most proud of?

Hardpoint, my suggestion is to try and sum up what you'd like to make your setting/system cool and different in one paragraph(no more than 100 words). Like a marketing blurb. Really go to town on the coolness. As if you are selling it to somebody (like me!).

Then look at that paragraph and ask yourself how true thsoe comments are. Be honest, and find textual examples in the game for each of them. If it's not true. Consider how you will make it so.

While this is a very abstract excercise, it will help you see what you consider to be the key features of your game compared to everything else on the market.


-Matt

And an additional note on TROS. It does distinguish itself from the pack in the way the SA's interact and with its combat system. However, from what I understand (though someone who knows better could correct me) The setting is fairly standard fantasy.

This is not a Criticism of TROS, but rather an illustration of the above point that a standard fantasy setting isn't a bad thing but TROS's combat and SA's more than help it stand out from the pack.

regards,

Trevis

Ok...here goes (this is off the top of my head so bear with me...)

Realms of Wonder is a game where its key elements are flexibility and cinematic style gaming. Heroes are either Wielders of Steel or Wielders of Magic, with Professions that dictate starting skill sets, but are free to branch out after play begins. In fact, even the ability to determine how one advances in Rank is up to the player. Each Hero chooses a Fighting Style, which gives him certain Moves in Combat, but those Moves can be added to, further fleshing out your Hero's repertoire. Similarly, Magic has four forms of High Magic and three Low Magic forms, all of which can be mixed and matched, all that limits your Hero is time and experience. Flexibility in how you use your magic is employed through a system wherein portions of your Power are spent, allowing for the maximum control over the magic you use. Hero Points give the players the flexibility to make things go their way when the dice fail them, but there is a limit, as even the most heroic individual's luck can run out.


Side note....

After looking at the G/N/S thread, I'd say the style of the game is a bit of all 3 with a lean towards the G and N sides.

On TROS

just from reading the freebie version, I'd say that TROS was heavily influenced by Conan the movie (hence the name) as well as some screenwriting character development works (though this is just what I gleaned from it). The notion of building a character based on "what does he want and how far is he willing to go to get it" is a good way of approaching any character be it PC or NPC.

Realms of Wonder Game Aspects

Character Creation

- Pick a Race and Nationality
- Generate Stats via Random or Point Based methods...GM Choice
- Professions are merely a starting point.
- You determine your career path by selecting 12 skills that you define as "Professional" skills. It is these skills you selected which you need to increase to rise in Rank.

Combat

- Players have a Fighting Style which has Moves
- Moves are used in combat for various strikes, blocks, and special Moves
- Unarmed Combat has list of Moves too (but these are the same for everyone with Unarmed Combat)
- Combat intended to be quick, yet cinematic

Magic

- Alchemy (players can make their own magical items, at any level with the right skills)
- Runes (take on different powers depending on what they are etched upon, which includes weapons, armor, items, structures, and even as tattoos)
- Rites (simple magical rituals that confer minor bonuses but last a long time)
- Sorcery (characters get to make their own spells, at any level, and have full control over how their Power is spent, thus giving maximum flexibility)
- Faith-based Miracles (currently a set list, but each miracle has a differing effect depending on what Rank you are...the more powerful you are the simple miracles become more grandiose)
- Ecomancy (like Sorcery, but is totally freeform within the Elements your Hero is skilled with. Heroes begin with 1 Element, but as they grow in Rank, eventually learn to use them all)
- Witchcraft (a summoning magic wherein the Hero can summon the spirit as a creature, or merely borrow the spirit's powers, even form, for a time by way of making offerings. A magic type that requires preparation, but has a lot of power to it)

World Setting

- Focuses on the religious and political struggles which are locked in a long history with one another. It is a world where evil is typically defined by bigotry.

Okay. based on what you have so far, it seems like your game system is more important to you than your setting. Whether that's true or not, I don't know, but you've presented us with all this system info, and only a couple of sentences about the setting. Could it be that you're more into the system, and your setting is an afterthought, something added on to pad, flesh out, and (maybe) justify the rules? Not saying that's bad, just food for thought. Many games take this approach - D&D obviously being the most successful example.

I'm impressed by the different options available for magic, in particular. There's potential for a great deal of flexibility in play.

ethan_greer wrote:

PS Needless to say, today is a bit emotional for me. Sorry.

No big deal Marcus. I realize that we can sometimes come across like a bucket of cold water in the face, especially when you so obviously care very much about your creation*. But here's a secret: we actually care about your creation, too. Not as much as you do, obviously - we've all got our own cauldrons to tend, after all. But we do care, and we'd like to help you make it better.

*The attractiveness of your website is testimony to that... Very well done.

The setting being told it was "vanilla" I was attempting to meet the request to show how my game is different. I've been pouring a lot into the history of the world, the religions, naming conventions, etc.

John Wick once reviewed the game a long time ago, back when I was playtesting the L5R RPG for him, and he told me that "people don't want systems, they want worlds" and I began the process of fully integrating the world into the rules. Originally Realms of Wonder was going to be setting lite system, designed to replace (if you so chose) your existing one and allowing you to use whatever setting you want. But his comments where the one that drove me to start really delving into the world.

Yes, this is the world I run my games in. The world, for me, is my home away from home. I can see the cities, the clothing, the people. I developed the counting system for the Elves, allowing numbers all the way into 11,000+ (as that is the year according to Elvish reckoning). When I began my path into Judaism (about 3 years ago) is when I began to devise the tale of the Elvish religion, their rise and fall, and the tale of Human oppression. Mind you, the Elves having been a fallen empire that once ruled most of the world has always been there, even back nearly 20 years ago when the first inklings of the nations presented were there. The names have remained the same, mostly, but the details have changed a little. For the most part, the world presented has been the one I've been using for the last 2 decades.

I'll be honest, a lot of the world's elements were inspired by either historical tales or by the books and films I grew up with. Stuff like Sinbad movies, Elric, Conan, Zorro, and of course, Errol Flynn pirate films (The Seahawk being my all time favorite). In later years I added Rosenberg's Guardians of the Flame series as an influence along with a heavy dose of Joseph Michael Straczynski, as well as a thousand other influences, some fantasy some not.

I want a game where the players are supposed to be heroes, but don't have to be. Where they can do evil things, but it will come back to haunt them (providing the GM is doing his job). I want people to indulge in the world where the Human's savior is also the destroyer of countless Elvish lives. To explore the turmoil between the Elves and Humans, who were forced to be allies in the last great war, crawling out of the ruins of that conflict, only to return right back to ancient hatreds and bigotry. The idea behind the world was to present a world where ideology is as strong as the need to do the right thing. The true heroes are the ones who can rise above those petty hatreds, but not all of the righteouos ones are able to so easily let go of such things. There are no blacks and whites in this world, only shades of gray; where good men sometimes to evil things but for what they feel is the right thing to do.

An example of this is the city of Cerena, a holy city erected by the Humans in order to celebrate the miracle of their army not only surviving an ambush of 8 times their number, but winning as well. They see it as a holy city, a momument to throwing off the chains of oppression; but the Elves see it as a momument to slaughter, a reminder of their greatest failure. To some it stands as a testament to the Blessed Mother and Father turning away from them. This makes some Elves embrace the Humans and do whatever they can to make amends for the sins of their people, while others use it as an excuse to make war; the idea being that obviously their ancestors were weak and now is the time to return to their former glory. Thus the stage is set for players to enter a world on the brink of Holy War. As this goes on, there are those who follow the darker path, a nihilistic Black Church who seeks to free their imprisoned god, the Lord of Oblivion, and thus return the world to its "natural state" nothingness.

The presentation of the back story and the game itself is layed out like the "Old Testament". This is why the website has the various Books. The rulebook is being done the same way. The Book of Origin tells the world history and setting. The Book of Lore covers character generation. The Book of Order governs Task Resolution and Combat. The Book of Arcana is about magic. The final book, The Book of Prophets, is the GM section.

I focused on the system since that was what it seemed set the game apart, but the world is something I'm devoting a great deal of time to lately. The problem is boiling it down to only 100 words...lol My guestimate is that the book is looking to be around 300 pages. I'm a little wordy, I know. I'm also not skimping on the art, going for fairly high standards here to avoid the stigma most games seem to have. Hell, even the WOD stuff sometimes has crappy art. This is why I've been getting the art contracts handed out now...while I'm still writing it. I am using the same sort of take that John Milius did with the first Conan movie. For those who don't know, John brought Basil Pouledouris in to write the music while they were still filming as he wanted the music to be a character in the film. I feel the art in my game has to have the same kind of impact. I wish I had limitless funds, as I'd hire some of the men I've had the pleasure to work with in my video game career, but alas, I'm doing the best I can. I'm liking what I see and have turned away some stuff that was free because it was not up to my standards.

This above standards is one of the reasons why I seek your advice and critiques, but I am looking for constructive stuff. I'd also like to have specific examples of what is cool and what is not. If there's a problem with the dice mechanic, tell me where you see the problem. If there's something in particular that you like, please let me know. A pat on the back is worth a lot, as many of you probably know.

FYI, I've successfully used this dice mechanic in regular campaigning for nearly 5 years. It takes a short learning curve for players to grasp the Rank system, but once it's learned, things move swiftly, especially in combat where damage total is a direct result of the die roll. Hit Location can be left aside for those interested in speedier play, but it only adds a 2nd roll if used.

As a side note, If you're interested in the game style I run, check out the campaign site for "Defenders of the Faith" the campaign set in the game's "modern day" period. You can reach it from the Realms of Wonder site, the Action Studios Services page, or here.... http://www.actionstudios.com/realms/campaigns/defenders/index.html
I'm also running the final book in the saga via the Action Studios "Re:Action" forum (an interesting experience indeed)

Hardpoint wrote: An example of this is the city of Cerena, a holy city erected by the Humans in order to celebrate the miracle of their army not only surviving an ambush of 8 times their number, but winning as well. They see it as a holy city, a momument to throwing off the chains of oppression; but the Elves see it as a momument to slaughter, a reminder of their greatest failure. To some it stands as a testament to the Blessed Mother and Father turning away from them. This makes some Elves embrace the Humans and do whatever they can to make amends for the sins of their people, while others use it as an excuse to make war; the idea being that obviously their ancestors were weak and now is the time to return to their former glory. Thus the stage is set for players to enter a world on the brink of Holy War. As this goes on, there are those who follow the darker path, a nihilistic Black Church who seeks to free their imprisoned god, the Lord of Oblivion, and thus return the world to its "natural state" nothingness.

Ethan's spot on.

I have not read your website at all, but I've read through your posts to this thread a number of times. The following points are fairly direct, but please take them in a constructive spirit.

Why haven't I visited your site? Because as of yet nothing you'd mentioned about your game seemed very compelling to me to make it worth checking any further. Please note that's NOT saying that your game isn't worth checking out...just that you haven't sold me on it. You haven't yet convinced me that what I'll find there is worth the investment of my time.

My advice. Find something about your game that you can sum up in a paragraph that isn't like anything else. Something I can do with your game that I can't do with d20. Something about your setting that I can't find already done in the forgotten realms. Then find away to convey that in an exciting and compelling manner. Clear, Concise, and Compelling are the 3 Cs to getting people to check out your game.

Let me tell you so far what has piqued my interest. To do that I'm going to examine your recent paragraph.

Realms of Wonder is a game where its key elements are flexibility and cinematic style gaming.

Heroes are either Wielders of Steel or Wielders of Magic

with Professions that dictate starting skill sets, but are free to branch out after play begins. In fact, even the ability to determine how one advances in Rank is up to the player. Each Hero chooses a Fighting Style, which gives him certain Moves in Combat, but those Moves can be added to, further fleshing out your Hero's repertoire. Similarly, Magic has four forms of High Magic and three Low Magic forms, all of which can be mixed and matched, all that limits your Hero is time and experience. Flexibility in how you use your magic is employed through a system wherein portions of your Power are spent, allowing for the maximum control over the magic you use. Hero Points give the players the flexibility to make things go their way when the dice fail them, but there is a limit, as even the most heroic individual's luck can run out.

Yeah, what Ethan said. Every time I go back to read the site I get the feeling that I'm missing something. That there's more detail than I'm seeing. Am I looking at just a preview or something? Like when I go to the part in the Book of Lore on Chargen, I see that there are supposed to be a bunch of stats with "Base Scores" to add to. Where are the stats? And where are the Base Scores? In the combat system it mentions moves for the styles, but I can't find anything but a brief description of the styles. No weapon list. Etc, etc.

On the DL page, there's a bunch of stuff, including the "Jumpstart Edition", but it's all "coming soon."

So have I missed something, or is this just still somewhat incomplete (I keep getting the sinking feeling that there's some link that has a complete version that I've not discovered yet)? It all reads like a very elaborate ad. In any case, my analysis below is made more difficult by the missing information, and may be innacurate because of it. But I'll try to work from the assumptions that I have.

Before I do, I would also like to agree with Ethan that the site looks great. There isn't a big market for it yet, but weirdo's like me would love to get a copy of the HTML with the game (or just the HTML). So if you publish consider including it in the purchase, or having some way to access it.


Anyhow, on to brass tacs. The only real objections I have to the system is the weight it seems to place on the random roll, and the limited scope. I'm assuming that the 15/16 combination for stats given in the example is fairly good (the character is a mage doing mage stuff). Given that, this character can only get an increase from about 50% at level 0 (or is there a "non-proficiency" penalty?), to 67% at level 5. If I read that right, that's only a 17% increase in ability going from non-skilled to grandmaster. Some games do preference stats quite a bit, but I've never seen quite this level of stat preference.

The chance for a given character to attain a certain rank of success other than 5 does not increase with stats or skills. That is, most characters will have a 13.33% chance of a Rank one success, and a 10% chance of each Rank 2 to 4. The only one that actually increases is the chance to get a Rank 5 success, or a Crit, those odds coming out of the failure odds.

Again, I'm not sure what the stat levels go up to, but what if the levels can get very high? Let's say we have some Dex based stat with a pixie that has a Dex of 32. Is there any point to skills for this creature? Does it still crit fail (being the only sort of failure it can achieve) on a 30? Or does it never occur that stats related to rolls ever get above a 28? What about the effects of other bonuses and penalties?

Despite Criticals scaling up with skill, fumbles do not scale down at all. That is, no matter how bad I am at something, I have only the same chance to fumble as a character who is a statistically talented grandmaster. Also, in a similar vein, no matter how good your opponent is, you have the same chance to hit him. There doesn't seem to be any rules for defense at all.


To make this more constructive, I'll offer some ideas (on the assumption that my obserations aren't faulty due to missing info). First, to make skill a more important part of rolls, you might reduce the stat scale but more effective would be to increase the skill range, as you already seem to have a top end problem on the scale which needs to be fixed (See below). Typically, most systems give about as much effect to skill as stats, but that varies widely. A 1 to 10 range might do just fine.

To fix the top end problems, I would do some sort of open-ended thing likely. Meaning that 30 isn't a fumble, but requires you to roll again and add the roll to 29. With further 30s being additional adds of 29 and another roll. That way you can scale your stats as high as you like. In any case, you can stop rolling as soon as you know it's a failure if you use the method below.

To make successes scale more naturalistically with skill, try something like the following. This method seems to turn people off at first, but is faster than it sounds, and very dramatic: the continuing roll method. That is, you roll against your target (chance as you call it), and if you get a success you roll again. This continues counting successes until you get a failure. Same thing with failures, BTW, you roll again and again until you get a success. A "crit" then becomes getting, say, 6 successes (at which point you can stop rolling), and a "fumble" becomes, say for symetry's sake, 6 failures.

Again, this seems like a lot of extra rolls, but it has some distinct advantages. For one, you don't have to remember multiple target numbers (chance/level), and stats do add to your overall chance for a crit. Each higher level of success has a geometrically lower chance of occuring, getting better and better however with each increase in stat or skill. There is a greater scale of failure as well (instead of the standard Fail/Fumble dichotomy). Further, you could just not have "crit" levels, and just keep adding multipliers on for each success (i.e. 6 = x3, 7=x4, 8=x5, etc).

Anyhow, I'm not actually suggesting that you use any of these things directly. They're just the ideas that I had off the top of my head. But hopefully they'll be thought inspiring. Assuming I found any problems at all, and this is not all just misinterperetation. :-)

Mike

First of all, the website is designed to be an ad, one I don't have to constantly update (save one page or so for new content and news)...but I do know that it needs work. Thanks for pointing the problem areas. At least now, when I tackle the website, I can fix them.

The stat issue is such that the average Hero will begin with a 50% chance to succeed out the gate, as a Novice. Most Skills can be performed at 0-Level, but some cannot, meaning those skills that require certain knowledge, such as Alchemy or Gunsmithing. The Base Numbers for each race run in the 8-10 range on average, with some stat bases as high as 15 (Troll strength for instance) and as low as 1. This, coupled with the max skill level of 5 provides a maximum of 30 ever (figuring in Heroic Gift bonuses) for a skill's Level/Chance setup. In actual play, 18-20 seemed a fairly standard starting Chance (figuring a Level 1 in a skill).
Stats are intended to be in line somewhat with DnD (admittedly not D20 necessarily).

Each Hero begins the game with a Heroic Gift (Humans get 2). This Gift can be anything to a bonus to skills, stat increases beyond the racial max, to some special abilities like Prophecy and even Heirloom Items (which can be magical if the GM decides so).

The Success Chart is static so that as you rise in your Chance (albeit a maximum amount of only +5 over the 0 Level Formula), you get an easier chance of getting the greater result. I left 30 as the lone chance for Fumbling as that seemed cinematically appropriate. Heroes in movies rarely Fumble just by happenstance. They tend to Fumble when it's dramatically approriate (or humor dictates he should). With Hero Points, players can also adjust the Rank Result as such that they can prevent Fumbling if it happens; even turning a Fumble into a great result, if they want to buy a success. The tradeoff on that is, while yes, you can buy a great hit, you have a limit of how many Hero Points you can have (12 for Humans 10 for everyone else), so the tactical use of Hero Points is desired. Earning Hero Points is accomplished by doing acts of a Heroic or particularly Dramatic nature. They are used as a reward for players to take chances, do cool stuff, really play up the swashbuckling, derring do atmosphere of the game. 7th Sea does something similar, but I think my system is a little simpler to understand.

I went with single die mechanics, as opposed to the Successes method you mentioned, because I found that method a little cumbersome for some players who were not as hardcore, plus I don't like the extremely mediocre results you frequently get (based on my experiences with Shadowrun, Vampire, and Werewolf). I also know that one die can be finnicky enough. Yes, multiple dice make for more consistent results, but also make for less cinematic ones in my experience. I've also found that straight math evaluations of dice are not the best method, as they do not take into account the superstitiousness of gamers and their "special" dice. While I don't put too much stock in that, I have seen enough wacky results in my time to know that straight odds is not enough. Dice, like computers, are not totally random sometimes (even without cheating).

Combat is a series of exchanges (actually have a fair amount in common with Riddle of Steel on that front). 2 Phases (Active and Reactive) dictate a Round. All those going first vie to attack those that React, but those that React get bonuses to their Defense Chances for things like Dodges, Parries, and Blocks. The combat was designed to be based around the movie fencing model, back and forth. The Combat Moves help facilitate this.

No, the game is still in development, so there is no full version to check out. I plan to make the freebie version available again (had to rework stuff a little for clarity). I'll let everyone here know when that freebie version is available, which will now be sooner than later, as that will give you all a chance to really get a look at what I'm doing.

As for the Wielders comment, yes your idea would be cool, but that is not this game per se, though I will be borrowing certain aspects of that if you don't mind, as I like some of that mentality. The Glory system is designed to do just that. As your Glory total rises, you become more well known and thus in time your name is known the world over. Stories of your deeds get more and more distorted as your Glory rises though, so those 10 guys you defeated can turn into 100 or more as your fame rises. Heroes do not start the game out as widely known individuals, but I am providing an avenue for starting the game out beyond the Novice Rank if the story you wish to tell is something along the lines of which you speak. You will probably have a slightly less powerful Hero that way, but that is the benefit for starting out at the beginning of your career. Of course, Hero Advancement totally depends on the amount of EP your GM hands out.

BTW, the GM is referred to as The Author in the game.

Things you can't do in D20 that I've seen so far (but to be honest, I don't play much D20), a Sorcerer casts a spell and divides his Power between 5 Aspects (Area, Range, Form, Intensity, and Duration). This means that at anytime, that fireball spell can be set to be area effect or just hit a single target; the Form allows the mage to dictate which targets are hit by the blast; Range is obvious (but done in broad terms, not exact measurements); Intensity is how hot the fire is (read Damage); and the spell can be set to burn for no time all the way to being effectively eternal. Of course, each time the spell is cast the Sorcerer has the ability to shift these points anywhere he wants, any way he wants. As an Ecomancer, the system is the same, but the Ecomancer can even change what the fire does (ie non-lethal damage, fire cage, wall of fire, etc) as well as how it does it. This sort of flexibility in spells is the thing I've not found in set spell lists like DnD provides. Yes, there will be ready made spells, but the player, at any time in game, can create all new ones (Ecomancers can do them IN COMBAT). Sorcerers are limited to what schools of magic they are skilled in (Combat, Conjuration, Information, Manipulation, and Travel), while the Ecomancer is limited to what Elements he knows (Air, Earth, Fire, Water, and Magic). Sorcery, in the game, is a pseudo-scientific approach to making the other 3 magic types occur. It can do similar things (even heal), but has to do so with formulas of spell components. The spell building system is connected to the Alchemy system through the ingredients list and what properties each ingredient governs.

Weird how I missed this earlier. Your sig: "actions have consequences!" Is this going to be a tagline for your brand? It occured to me that in quite a few fantasy games actions don't have consequences, you could certainly distinguish your game by adding a focus on this.

-Matt

Further setting data...

The Faithdom Nations (those Human nations what won their freedom from the Elves) war amongst themselves, though not openly yet. Small subtle things happen. Two of the strongest nations, Valron and Randisar, have effectively annexed the land in between them. With tensions like this Faithdom is ripe for a Schism.

The Elves are on the brink of Civil War, due to their Queen having taken a Human as a husband (who was later killed by an Elf during an uprising) and her general lack of political savvy. She's being pressured into things by powerhungry lords seeking to take her throne.

While this goes on the merchantile state of Xaxyia sits back and manipulates things to their own profit, having made strong alliances and insinuated their people so deep into other nations politics that they know everything that goes on in the world.

One change in the setting that is not on the site is that the Centaur Nations are not stuck in the Forest Realm, but rather are roving bands of tribal gypsies, making the whole world their home, but wanted by none. Their desire to find their true anscestral roots and remain among nature brings them into conflict with a world rapidly moving forward.

Hardpoint wrote: First of all, the website is designed to be an ad, one I don't have to constantly update (save one page or so for new content and news)...but I do know that it needs work. Thanks for pointing the problem areas. At least now, when I tackle the website, I can fix them.

The stat issue is such that the average Hero will begin with a 50% chance to succeed out the gate, as a Novice.

The Base Numbers for each race run in the 8-10 range on average, with some stat bases as high as 15 (Troll strength for instance) and as low as 1.

This, coupled with the max skill level of 5 provides a maximum of 30 ever (figuring in Heroic Gift bonuses) for a skill's Level/Chance setup.

In actual play, 18-20 seemed a fairly standard starting Chance (figuring a Level 1 in a skill).
Stats are intended to be in line somewhat with DnD (admittedly not D20 necessarily).

The Success Chart is static so that as you rise in your Chance (albeit a maximum amount of only +5 over the 0 Level Formula), you get an easier chance of getting the greater result.

I left 30 as the lone chance for Fumbling as that seemed cinematically appropriate. Heroes in movies rarely Fumble just by happenstance. They tend to Fumble when it's dramatically approriate (or humor dictates he should).

Earning Hero Points is accomplished by doing acts of a Heroic or particularly Dramatic nature. They are used as a reward for players to take chances, do cool stuff, really play up the swashbuckling, derring do atmosphere of the game. 7th Sea does something similar, but I think my system is a little simpler to understand.

I went with single die mechanics, as opposed to the Successes method you mentioned, because I found that method a little cumbersome for some players who were not as hardcore, plus I don't like the extremely mediocre results you frequently get (based on my experiences with Shadowrun, Vampire, and Werewolf).

I also know that one die can be finnicky enough. Yes, multiple dice make for more consistent results, but also make for less cinematic ones in my experience. I've also found that straight math evaluations of dice are not the best method, as they do not take into account the superstitiousness of gamers and their "special" dice. While I don't put too much stock in that, I have seen enough wacky results in my time to know that straight odds is not enough. Dice, like computers, are not totally random sometimes (even without cheating).

Combat is a series of exchanges

No, the game is still in development, so there is no full version to check out. I plan to make the freebie version available again (had to rework stuff a little for clarity). I'll let everyone here know when that freebie version is available, which will now be sooner than later, as that will give you all a chance to really get a look at what I'm doing.

Stories of your deeds get more and more distorted as your Glory rises though, so those 10 guys you defeated can turn into 100 or more as your fame rises.

BTW, the GM is referred to as The Author in the game.

Things you can't do in D20 that I've seen so far (but to be honest, I don't play much D20)

Matt wrote: Weird how I missed this earlier. Your sig: "actions have consequences!" Is this going to be a tagline for your brand? It occured to me that in quite a few fantasy games actions don't have consequences, you could certainly distinguish your game by adding a focus on this.

Matt wrote: Weird how I missed this earlier. Your sig: "actions have consequences!" Is this going to be a tagline for your brand? It occured to me that in quite a few fantasy games actions don't have consequences, you could certainly distinguish your game by adding a focus on this.

-Matt

So, your game has:

- A metagame resource for PC protagonism (Hero Points).
- Player-created abilities (the Gifts).
- The Glory system, which is something that has been done before, but not quite like this. This is a very cool element, IMO.
- A flexible on-the-fly spellcasting system.
- A system for tracking the fate of a character's immortal soul (BSMs), placing morality and metaphysics front and center.

Dude. These are all very cool things. I didn't see any of this on my quick tour of the website. Maybe I missed them, but to me, these should be screaming at me right up front. This kind of thing says to me, "I'm not someone's D&D/homebrew fantasy heartbreaker."

I agree with Mike's assessment of the system, though. The idea of starting out as a "level 0" putz who fails half the time is a D&D legacy that you should examine. What purpose does it serve in your game? Why not simply let players choose what Level their heroes should start at? Why not start out with actually heroic levels of ability?

Also, Mike's "tight circle" comment about the Hero Points is spot-on. They're a great addition to your game, but you might want to consider an alternate way for players to generate them during the game.

Dude, every tidbit you reveal about this game makes me want to know more. At this point it might be good to take the advice you've gotten so far into account and crank out a full document of the game that we can look at. Once that's done, you can start another thread and we can go through another round...But that's just my opinion, and only a suggestion.

Someone somewhere around here has said, "every word you write on the forums is a word that you're not writing to finish your game." Or something like that.

Edit: Cross-posted with John "Feng" Harper. I definitely agree with his entire post.

Mike Holmes wrote: I wish you'da said that before. I'm reviewing an ad. Sheesh. ;-)

The stat issue is such that the average Hero will begin with a 50% chance to succeed out the gate, as a Novice.

This, coupled with the max skill level of 5 provides a maximum of 30 ever (figuring in Heroic Gift bonuses) for a skill's Level/Chance setup.

So, starting characters are putzes like in D&D? Only able to hit a three-toed sloth 60% of the time? Wait, I know, heroism is a state of mind.

The point is that it's a D&Dism to have to start out with wimpy characters. Have you considered an alternate way to go?

But they don't get better. Only the Rank 5 success gets better. Seriously, I do this for a living. Yes, the expected value creeps up, but not the chances of any particular Rank other than 5. The others will occur at exactly the same rate.

If you really want fumbles to occur when it's dramatic, give the GM the authority to make them occur (maybe with some player reward or somesuch). Just an idea. In any case, as pointed out, these "heroes" are starting out with very novice chances to hit.

Actually sounds just like 7th Sea. Which is cool, IMO. The only problem there is that you have what I call a "tight circle" of reward. Where players who spend points tend to get them back in spades. The problem with this is when the player gets low for some reason. Then he has to play conservatively so as not to lose the character, meaning that he'll have trouble getting points back (they tend to get given as pity points at that point). Just noting a standard problem with the mechanic. You might want to think about alternate ways to get them back, or some other "non-tight circle".

Would you like another, or are you satisfied enough with your system that you really wouldn't change it?

Ah, OK, had no idea about that. All I saw was the chance to hit calculations.

Cool. That would make life easier.

Hmm, that's an intriguing mechanic. Does it have any other mechanical effects?

That actually says a lot about your design philosophy right there. In fact, that's the local equivalent of a Freudian Slip. :-)

Then why compare? This is the Heartbreaker attitude. Yes your game kicks the shit out of D&D. So do most other games that are not D&D. You aren't (and as you note, can't) competing with D&D. So why compare? Tell me how this is better than Exalted, or TROS? How is it better than Earthdawn or Donjon? How is it better than Talislanta or The Pool? Harn or FUDGE? Pendragon or GURPS or Hero System? LegendaryQuest or Burning Wheel? These are your competition, and the bar is set very high in many cases. Most of these games do all the things that you mention that D&D doesn't do, and much more. Are they perfect? No. Can your game be better? Sure.

But I don't think we've seen that special part yet.

Mike

Feng wrote: So, your game has:

- A metagame resource for PC protagonism (Hero Points).
- Player-created abilities (the Gifts).
- The Glory system, which is something that has been done before, but not quite like this. This is a very cool element, IMO.
- A flexible on-the-fly spellcasting system.
- A system for tracking the fate of a character's immortal soul (BSMs), placing morality and metaphysics front and center.

Dude. These are all very cool things. I didn't see any of this on my quick tour of the website. Maybe I missed them, but to me, these should be screaming at me right up front. This kind of thing says to me, "I'm not someone's D&D/homebrew fantasy heartbreaker."

Feng wrote: I agree with Mike's assessment of the system, though. The idea of starting out as a "level 0" putz who fails half the time is a D&D legacy that you should examine. What purpose does it serve in your game? Why not simply let players choose what Level their heroes should start at? Why not start out with actually heroic levels of ability?

Feng wrote: Also, Mike's "tight circle" comment about the Hero Points is spot-on. They're a great addition to your game, but you might want to consider an alternate way for players to generate them during the game.

ethan_greer wrote: Dude, every tidbit you reveal about this game makes me want to know more. At this point it might be good to take the advice you've gotten so far into account and crank out a full document of the game that we can look at. Once that's done, you can start another thread and we can go through another round...But that's just my opinion, and only a suggestion.

Someone somewhere around here has said, "every word you write on the forums is a word that you're not writing to finish your game." Or something like that.

Edit: Cross-posted with John "Feng" Harper. I definitely agree with his entire post.

I have been playing Realms of Wonder for several years now and I have to say you are missing a lot of World info. Marcus can go on for hours on his world. trick is getting it onto paper. But I will say this, I cannot go back to D&D after playing it. the spellcasting system is the best i have ever seen. as a mage goes up in level he has more control over his magic not less like in D&D.

And something Hardpoint left out is that Difficulties can vary so a character can easily perform simple actions but more difficult actions require better skill.

Edited my last post answering Mike as I'd forgotten to finish a sentence...whoops.

Hardpoint wrote:

Mike Holmes wrote: I wish you'da said that before. I'm reviewing an ad. Sheesh. ;-)

Sorry...you're right about that.

No worries. But as everyone here is saying, these are the things you need to put into your "ad". Basic mechanics aren't inspiring in terms of play. All a combat mechanic says is, "yep, this game, too, will be about killin' things and taking their stuff." Seems that your game has a lot more depth to it than that, and that's the stuff that you need people to see.

Some things players can just do. Skill are only required when a Quality Rank is needed. Meaning a player wants to climb a tree, he just gets to do it, but if he wants to climb a tree while someone is shooting at him, he needs to roll.

That's in the expanded rules, somewhere, right? I mean the general notion of when to roll and when not to do so. It's funny, because I often make fun of the many games out there who will tell GM's not to roll for things like crossing the street, and tying shoes. Does anyone actually do that? But lot's of people would roll for climbing a tree. What GM's need to know is what sort of things make sense to roll for in this partticular game. Seems that you only want rolls when there's significant pressure or somthing like that. Make that known with examples. Most designers miss this point in their text.

Larger creatures simply have a different scale for detemining things like Damage Rating, Hit Points, etc. The reason for this is to have a consistent mechanic.

But my point was to make only one scale, which would be simpler. Yes it would require a modification to rolling. But I guess my point is to ask if any of these "different scale" stats ever get rolled against. And if so, how do you accomodate that with the system. If only Str goes on this other scale, and is never rolled, well then I guess you have no problem. Still, it seems atrificial to cap ability ratings to me in order to keep them on a small scale, and there are fun and easy ways around this. Just saying. :-)

In actuality, starting characters are not that wimpy, since I don't do the DnDism of increasing Hit Points.

And, again, you kick the crap out of D&D there. But do a search here on the phenomenon called "Whiff Syndrome". Your game isn't as bad as some, but it's going to have significant amounts of this problem.

I didn't want to maintain the percieved adversarial GM/Player relationship that games like DnD have always had in my eyes. I thought that having a single, solitary, even handed chance to fumble was fair and equitable. It gave a failsafe for "supercharacters" at the same time didn''t penalize low statted or "wimpy" heroes.

That's an astute observation (about the adversarial relationship). But in general there are two ways to deal with this. One is, as you do, to limit the GM's powers to areas that can't be percieved as adversarial as much as possible. The other, however, is to create mechanics that speak to the neccessity of trust. Basically, it's an irony, but true, that the more you limit the GM, the more you inform them that they are working against the players in a limited framework. These limitations become something to work around to "get" the characters. There are lots of other ways to engender trust, IMO.

That said, I don't really like the GM having to make such subjective decisions (there are lots of potential problems in that). Again, you're taking my suggestions too literally. OTOH, equitable is just fine if that's truely your goal.

Actually the Hero Point system as used by myself and the one in 7th Sea are both derived from James Bond which did it a long time ago. James Bond is also what inspired my cinematic style gaming. A truly underratted game. Also to show it's influence, check out Spycraft's Chase rules, which are very much influenced by VGs Bond Game.

You're misdirecting. I might point out that when I bought James Bond (about the day it came out as I am a slavering fan of the franchise), I noted that it was itself influenced by Fame and Fortune points in Top Secret, which might be considered the first metagame resource mechanic.

But that's neither here nor there. You're dodging the question of whether or not the rewards are too tightly bound to what you are rewarded for. At GenCon playing with Wick, I saw this in action. In the game he was running for us, several times, he took a chip from a player only to hand it right back to him. John, I think, sees this as a good thing, but I don't personally. It doesn't encourage stretching out, it doesn't inform about anything other than playing dramatically. Which a lot of groups do anyhow.
(I firmly believe that the game John ran would have been exactly the same frolic that it was without the mechanics we used. Sorry to use you to make a point John :-( That said, he was making the mechanics up as he want, pretty much, so that's not really a surprise. The real surprise whas how much fun the premise was. )

Just as another example, you could, for instance, link the rewards to increasing Glory or something (which seems to make intuitive sense), which could then, in turn be used to help the character in other ways. The point is that in extending the cycle to include other activities, you create links in your mechanics that can be useful in promoting the style you want to see. Do you see what I'm getting at?

I've found that the dice mechanic I use works just nicely. Instead of tearing it apart and suggesting new ones perhaps testing it out and seeing how it works (see the end of this for a taste of the game...)

Well, you did ask for feedback. And perhaps I flatter myself, but I've played so many different RPGs, that I think that I get a pretty good sense of how they're going to play even without doing so. OTOH, that may just be arrogance, and you can dismis it if you want. But I'd like to think that I've helped people with my commentary, and generally get feedback that I do.

OTOH, if you want to play, then bring it on over to Indie Netgaming. We're all about the Actual Play here. There's certainly something to be learned by playing the game. My point is not that it wouldn't be educational to do so. Just that I'm pretty good at eyeballing games, if I do say so.

Here's a link to a version that was released to the public for a short time, but was pulled to fix and re-work the format.

Cool. Do you want more feedback, or do you now think I'm an arrogant bastard who has nothing useful to say? ;-) Further, if you do want feedback, could you make it a bit more clear what subjects you'd like to discuss. The more you tell us what you want, the more cogent help you'll get.

It contains editable areas of the PDF (for the characters) and the art by Larry Elmore is there with consent, as the release is free.

I thought I'd recognized that art. Very nice. You apparently haven't spared any expense to make this a good looking game (or do you have an "in" with Mr. Elmore?).

Glad you like it. It does affect NPC reactions and can be used as a method for intimidating foes (though that is still being worked out exactly)

Cool. Now that's worth waiting for. Want to work it out here at all?

I wanted to use Storyteller or something similar, but Author seemed the most style oriented, yet not proprietary.

Heh, like I said, Freudian. That's exactly what I predicted. Given your design, what you're doing here is, IMO, displaying an intuitive knowledge of GNS issues. That is, Storyteller is actually a bad name in some ways for what the GM is mandated to do in WW products, but much more closely fits your vision. I wish you had it instead. Still, Author works well. Good choice.

Someone here asked what ROW could do that D20 couldn't, which is the only reason I went there. Normally I wouldn't.

My mistake, sorry. That said, you do it in your text, and have several times here, already, the above example notwithstanding. It's been suggested here that comparisons to other games in your text is not a good idea. Because it gives an unconfident feel, as if the game is self-conscious and feels a need to measure up to the big guy. If the game is good, let it speak for itself. People will naturally make comparisons on their own anyhow, and see the advantages for themselves.

HERO on the other hand I might.

In HERO you have to build everything in detail, with little or no flexibility after that "spell" is created. You can't improvise. Being able to adapt to varying situations is at the heart of ROW. It was the one thing that turned me off to Hero, the lack of adaptability and free form gaming. HERO still seems locked in its wargaming roots.

I just got the new 415 page Fantasy Hero with it's 67 pages just on magic. :-) But I'll not disagree that Hero is more complex; there's no denying that. So (given that you acceed that you can do all this with a VPP) that seems to be your game's advantage. I'll buy that. In any case, I'm not actually asking for comparisons to individual systems; I was being rhetorical. What we need to know is simply what's special about your game overall, such that it's something that ought to be considered for play.

All that said, as others are now agreeing, we're starting to see where your game might shine. We're just wondering why you didn't make these things you major selling points.

I agree abou the "wargaming roots" for HERO, BTW. Yet, your game seems to bend to tradition quite a lot as well, IMO. I especially liked your note that says something like, "RPGs are about combat, and this one's no exception." For how I feel about that see Mike's Standard Rant #3: Combat Systems. I think almost all RPGs are still beholden to their wargaming roots, you see. Not that your game ought not to be about combat. Just to realize that these are all decisions on a spectrum, with none being better than another.

If you really want to get away from wargaming, there's lots of directions that you can go from what you have.

I share some stylistic elements to TROS, but my system is less based on how good the player is at the tactics of combat, allowing for the character's skill to fill in where the player is less so. I like TROS, but only discovered it a few months ago. Have not had a chance to actually play it yet.

Yeah, the choice to go with player skill or without is an interesting one. The point is that TROS has it, which makes it attractive to a certain group of players. It's out of the norm there. Do play it some if you get a chance - it's very good.

Mike

Following up on the previous post to Marcus's pal Daeglan here:

Daeglan wrote: I have been playing Realms of Wonder for several years now and I have to say you are missing a lot of World info. Marcus can go on for hours on his world. trick is getting it onto paper.

And something Hardpoint left out is that Difficulties can vary so a character can easily perform simple actions but more difficult actions require better skill.

Daeglan wrote: the spellcasting system is the best i have ever seen. as a mage goes up in level he has more control over his magic not less like in D&D.

Mike Holmes wrote:

No worries. But as everyone here is saying, these are the things you need to put into your "ad". Basic mechanics aren't inspiring in terms of play. All a combat mechanic says is, "yep, this game, too, will be about killin' things and taking their stuff." Seems that your game has a lot more depth to it than that, and that's the stuff that you need people to see.

I plan to tackle that, but will wait to do it when I'm more done with the game, like when I finish the reworking of the JumpStart Edition. I like what others have said are focus items, and that feedback will certainly be listened to.

That's in the expanded rules, somewhere, right? I mean the general notion of when to roll and when not to do so. It's funny, because I often make fun of the many games out there who will tell GM's not to roll for things like crossing the street, and tying shoes. Does anyone actually do that? But lot's of people would roll for climbing a tree. What GM's need to know is what sort of things make sense to roll for in this partticular game. Seems that you only want rolls when there's significant pressure or somthing like that. Make that known with examples. Most designers miss this point in their text.

I do in fact specifically mention not to make people roll for things that have no need to be rolled unnecessarily. Sometimes Heroes can just do things, like climb a tree. There are some things that DO need to be rolled each time, but that is for making things, as Rank Result indicates Quality Rating.

But my point was to make only one scale, which would be simpler. Yes it would require a modification to rolling. But I guess my point is to ask if any of these "different scale" stats ever get rolled against. And if so, how do you accomodate that with the system. If only Str goes on this other scale, and is never rolled, well then I guess you have no problem. Still, it seems atrificial to cap ability ratings to me in order to keep them on a small scale, and there are fun and easy ways around this. Just saying. :-)

And, again, you kick the crap out of D&D there. But do a search here on the phenomenon called "Whiff Syndrome". Your game isn't as bad as some, but it's going to have significant amounts of this problem.

Well, in playtest it so far hasn't been that much of a problem. Those that have had issues with die rolling was because they couldn't roll below the high 20s and few would succeed then. Players have had extremely good die rolling (Daeglan in fact consistently rolls well and his Elf has stats around 20 and is Rank 3 in a lot of his skills), while others have trouble, but that has to do with the die more than anything.

There are opposed rolls, like in Combat, but there are also unopposed checks (like Sneak Attacks, making something, etc)

That's an astute observation (about the adversarial relationship). But in general there are two ways to deal with this. One is, as you do, to limit the GM's powers to areas that can't be percieved as adversarial as much as possible. The other, however, is to create mechanics that speak to the neccessity of trust. Basically, it's an irony, but true, that the more you limit the GM, the more you inform them that they are working against the players in a limited framework. These limitations become something to work around to "get" the characters. There are lots of other ways to engender trust, IMO.

That said, I don't really like the GM having to make such subjective decisions (there are lots of potential problems in that). Again, you're taking my suggestions too literally. OTOH, equitable is just fine if that's truely your goal.

The idea is to tell a fun story and one where the players all get killed is not terribly fun (CoC, some DnD...). The goal is not the point, it's the road getting there where the fun lies. GMs gunning for players is discouraged in the rules, instead they are encouraged to foment fun roleplaying and introduce cool story elements where the players can shine. I also talk about GMs making sure that the spotlight gets moved from player to player now and again to make sure everyone has their "time in the sun". This is an area where a lot of RPGs simply fail to recognize that there are different styles of player and some are more timid than others, but at heart, everyone wants to have their moment of glory. I just encourage GMs to consider that angle. Make sure that your players get a chance to be the center of attention.

You're misdirecting. I might point out that when I bought James Bond (about the day it came out as I am a slavering fan of the franchise), I noted that it was itself influenced by Fame and Fortune points in Top Secret, which might be considered the first metagame resource mechanic.

I wasn't meaning to. I had forgotten Top Secret. I actually first saw Glory in a pocket TSR game called Saga. But that was how you won the game.

But that's neither here nor there. You're dodging the question of whether or not the rewards are too tightly bound to what you are rewarded for. At GenCon playing with Wick, I saw this in action. In the game he was running for us, several times, he took a chip from a player only to hand it right back to him. John, I think, sees this as a good thing, but I don't personally. It doesn't encourage stretching out, it doesn't inform about anything other than playing dramatically. Which a lot of groups do anyhow.

Just as another example, you could, for instance, link the rewards to increasing Glory or something (which seems to make intuitive sense), which could then, in turn be used to help the character in other ways. The point is that in extending the cycle to include other activities, you create links in your mechanics that can be useful in promoting the style you want to see. Do you see what I'm getting at?

Did you see my post on Hero Point awards and how they are handed out? I hand them out for doing things in a heroic manner. Not just for drama, and combat, but also for acting like a Hero. Also, they are there as a means of "cheating" within the rules. They are designed to cover that cinematic aspect of why a hero wins a fight he shouldn't. The real reason is "it's in the script", but here since there is no script, sometimes the Hero has to nudge things his way. I call it Good Guy luck. This is how that works. I see your point about the tight circle, but because the awarding of Hero Points is based on play, it encourages players to participate, not just go thru the game. Players who add to the fun factor of play for everyone else are to be rewarded. I do that with Hero Points, Glory Awards (as playtesters will remember my "take 2 Glory out of petty cash" award wherein I reward players for cool dialogue ), and at the end of a Chapter (read play session) EP. EP is handed out on the concept of roleplaying vs rollplaying. I created this "tight circle" to ensure that players would want to get involved, in order to get the goodies. Those who just show up, play like it was DnD and just loot and scoot, will not ever get as many of the benefits of my game as those who grab hold of the concept of the dramatic style and run with it. I award things based on players acting and doing rather than just existing. Yes, the system is meant for Hams, but that is the point of cinematic style gaming.

OTOH, that may just be arrogance, and you can dismis it if you want. But I'd like to think that I've helped people with my commentary, and generally get feedback that I do.

Perhaps this is something you should evaluate of yourself. Arrogance is not something to be proud of. I don't wish to engage in a flame war as that is destructive and pointless. I'm just giving you feedback on what I read here. As Ron Edwards said in the moderation issue of the other day "I can't read intent, only what is here in print" and what is here in print is sometimes unncessarily inflammatory.

OTOH, if you want to play, then bring it on over to Indie Netgaming. We're all about the Actual Play here. There's certainly something to be learned by playing the game. My point is not that it wouldn't be educational to do so. Just that I'm pretty good at eyeballing games, if I do say so.

I may do just that.

Cool. Do you want more feedback, or do you now think I'm an arrogant bastard who has nothing useful to say? ;-)

See above. =) Sometimes arrogant bastards can be useful. You made me fight for what I've done, for which I do thank you. You have made me see things from a different light, but at the same time, I am sticking to my design.

Further, if you do want feedback, could you make it a bit more clear what subjects you'd like to discuss. The more you tell us what you want, the more cogent help you'll get.

Point taken. Will do in another thread.

It contains editable areas of the PDF (for the characters) and the art by Larry Elmore is there with consent, as the release is free.

I thought I'd recognized that art. Very nice. You apparently haven't spared any expense to make this a good looking game (or do you have an "in" with Mr. Elmore?).

I guess you could say I have an "in." He's a very nice guy with a very soft heart when it comes to small publishers. I've met him several times while working security for Cons in Los Angeles. I contacted him, asked for permission, and he agreed, as long as I linked back to his website and didn't alter the images (other than size).

Cool. Now that's worth waiting for. Want to work it out here at all?

Sounds like a decent idea. But certainly a new topic.

Heh, like I said, Freudian. That's exactly what I predicted. Given your design, what you're doing here is, IMO, displaying an intuitive knowledge of GNS issues. That is, Storyteller is actually a bad name in some ways for what the GM is mandated to do in WW products, but much more closely fits your vision. I wish you had it instead. Still, Author works well. Good choice.

Glad you like something...lol =)

Someone here asked what ROW could do that D20 couldn't, which is the only reason I went there. Normally I wouldn't.

My mistake, sorry. That said, you do it in your text, and have several times here, already, the above example notwithstanding. It's been suggested here that comparisons to other games in your text is not a good idea. Because it gives an unconfident feel, as if the game is self-conscious and feels a need to measure up to the big guy. If the game is good, let it speak for itself. People will naturally make comparisons on their own anyhow, and see the advantages for themselves.

I just got the new 415 page Fantasy Hero with it's 67 pages just on magic. :-)

I'm guessing at around the same page count for ROW, perhaps more, and that includes a bestiary (for Witchcraft). I read a little about Sorcerer last night and those who like that game will find that my Witchcraft rules are very similar (without ever having heard of it before).

All that said, as others are now agreeing, we're starting to see where your game might shine. We're just wondering why you didn't make these things you major selling points.

Cause I'm dumb...lol

I agree abou the "wargaming roots" for HERO, BTW. Yet, your game seems to bend to tradition quite a lot as well, IMO. I especially liked your note that says something like, "RPGs are about combat, and this one's no exception."

I'm an action move buff and that is what I'm going for, thus there will always be combat. I also have had complaints when I've run for not having enough combat in the campaign. This stems from my belief that there are no such things as Random Encounters, something I touch on in the Book of Prophets. All combat in the story has to have a purpose, even if that purpose is to inform the players what kind of environment their Heroes are entering. This is why I will never provide an "encounter table." An Author should have his combats lend movement to the story, not just be there so people can experience what my friend Sean Fannon calls "Kool-Aid". I do agree that there should be regular action, but not all Action Scenes have to have combat in them. Chase scenes, death traps, etc can all be used to create moments of Action without having to have blood spilt.

Realms of Wonder defines gameplay into 2 basic modes, Action Scenes (which use Combat Time) and Dramatic Scenes, which are much more free form. Authors are encouraged to plan out their stories using this format as a means of getting the story moved along.

Whoa, somehow some of the quote in that last post got seriously mangled. :-)

At this point I just want to say that you and I apparently have very different wavelengths for communication. You keep interpereting things I say in ways that I didn't intend. Probably my fault. Still, if you could make a bit of an effort to see what I'm saying, I'll try to be more careful in how I write. We may be able to shorten this some.

Did you see my post on Hero Point awards and how they are handed out?

"I can't read intent, only what is here in print" and what is here in print is sometimes unncessarily inflammatory.

You have made me see things from a different light, but at the same time, I am sticking to my design.

I guess you could say I have an "in." He's a very nice guy with a very soft heart when it comes to small publishers.

Glad you like something...lol =)

I read a little about Sorcerer last night and those who like that game will find that my Witchcraft rules are very similar (without ever having heard of it before).

I'm an action move buff and that is what I'm going for, thus there will always be combat.

I also have had complaints when I've run for not having enough combat in the campaign.

Realms of Wonder defines gameplay into 2 basic modes, Action Scenes (which use Combat Time) and Dramatic Scenes, which are much more free form. Authors are encouraged to plan out their stories using this format as a means of getting the story moved along.

As for the Sorcerer similarities, the summoning for borrowing powers or just for sending it off to do tasks is the similarity I speak of. Styles are VASTLY different. The Witchcraft system I have developed is one where you summon a Spirit from one of 3 Realms (Celestial, Natural, and Infernal) and then have the option to borrow its Aspects in order to gain special powers like flight, nightvision,

As for the communication issue, you're right. I'm being a little reactionary and will cool down and read over what it is you write, but try reading what you post from my perspective. Really read what it is you write and how you say what you say. I'm sure I'm not the only one who might feel this way, but perhaps the first to say something.

On the front of the Tight Circle, the handing out of HP is not instantaneous. I've handed them out at the end of a session and during gameplay. Both methods seem to work ok, doing it at the end of play makes the

Hero Points cannot be awarded and used in the same move, at least when I run. Other Authors might take their own approach to it. I give alternates on how things can be done, encouraging Authors to find what works for them. Like monsieur Wick, I encourage people to throw out rules where they get in the way of play. The only other campaign GM whose run ROW long term is my partner Jon King. His take is to do things the way I started out, which is to hand out EP, Glory, and HP at the end of the Chapter (which is typically a single session, but sometimes is just the story stopping point, which might take more than one session to reach).

As for not being a piker, I've been published through the Chrome Books (1-3) for CP2020 and have had a long relationship with the Pondsmiths. In fact when I worked at Microsoft on Crimson Skies (XBox) Mike was the man who brought me there. I'm now at Sony working on the next Syphon Filter game. I've worked in video game development since 1995, starting as a tester and now as a designer. In fact, it was me who brought Fannon into Action Studios in the first place. And now that life has quit kicking him, he'll be able to get back to making games.

Admission: I am also one of the playtesters for RoW. I will admit also, that there are elements of the mechanics that I'm not too hot about at all, but it's not so significantly flawed to remove the fun of the game for me...

What I enjoy in RoW: First and foremost, is the world as we have already touched on. But the key for me, even in the campaigns that don't immediately focus on it: the religious reformation that is taking place in the Human (Faithdom) nations. It pulls from elements of the Protestant reformation, and thats something that I believe has been lacking in so many other fantasy/renaissance era worlds & (frankly) historical reenactment also.

The drama of trying to decide which is better, to be part of the establishment or part of the reform. Either as the leader, or as just a casual layman of the church/faith. During the actual European Protestant reformation is was such a part of the political and emotional landscape that the remove the potential dramatic play is a severe crippling aspect to any other of this genre I've experienced.

Admittedly also, in the campaign that Marcus referenced I play a major part of the reform movement. It's that moral challenge that brings me back. The internal struggle with the PCs own moral code when in theory there is no real right or wrong to the debate of faith vs. reform. This can also be taken to the debate around Cerena's existence and Tal Ceren himself. Tal Ceren is a hero to the human lands but a murderer/slaughter to those elves across the river. Even PCs within the human lands upon researching start seeing the potential for the skew that history can take. It's not to say that the elves or the humans are more right than the other... it's that debate that drives the drama.

As long as the races aren't specifically "evil" you will have the potential for PCs playing the flip-side. The Drama, and drive isn't the "go crush kill" mentality prevelant in so many fantasy genre games that I've experienced, but rather when everyone, both PC and NPC are dancing that line of moral ambiguity. It makes them all seem more real... Makes it easier for the suspesion of disbelief.

Okay... enough rambling... and an attempt to not talk about my char. *eg* Just trying to help maybe put down some of the selling points of the world.

Shazear
AKA Alex Bender
...

Hardpoint wrote: As for the communication issue, you're right. I'm being a little reactionary and will cool down and read over what it is you write, but try reading what you post from my perspective. Really read what it is you write and how you say what you say. I'm sure I'm not the only one who might feel this way, but perhaps the first to say something.

Hey, what can I say, I gotta be me. And Jeff's right, you can't take it personally. Still, it would be hypocritical of me to expect people to accept criticism and then not to do so myself, no? Hard to break 5000+ posts of habit, however; so don't expect miracles! :-)

Anyhow, from what Alex says (and other previous comments), it sounds like a nifty setting. So... I guess I want to see it.

Good to hear the Mr. Fannon might be doing something soon. Any chance we can get him in here on some discussions? As a theorist (those who are unaware, SPF wrote the Gamer's Bible) I think he'd be able to mix it up well here. In fact, he's quoted here somewhere, I believe (though, honestly, I think mostly to be refuted).

Anyhow, I think this thread is dying off, and I await more on more specific topics. :-)

Mike