/gdg/ - Game Design General

It looks fund and very engaging, this would be a bunch of steps ahead of FATE as a general, light and fun system. I do enjoy "dice assignment" as a game mechanic and your "organic" encounters seems pretty good too. I just skimmed over it, so I'm not sure how solid it stands as a game, but it looks good.

Progression is troublesome to deal with in 3d6 system, the range is far too short and the results are "too stable", I would rather use 3d8 increasing the range from 18-3 (15) to 24-3 (21) and increase variability a little. Compare the graphs:
anydice.com/program/a121

What do you guys think of this spell list?
An end-game spellcaster/spellweaver is able to learn 30 spells from this list, do you think that is too much or too little?
Would you change/add any spells to this list?
(feel free to suggest names and other changes)

forgot the link...
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Vpg3XrHtniU5jWsfGCInwXZJ-iI-tOGaGPlSXjzPm_w/edit#gid=0

>Progression is troublesome to deal with in 3d6 system, the range is far too short and the results are "too stable", I would rather use 3d8 increasing the range from 18-3 (15) to 24-3 (21) and increase variability a little. Compare the graphs:

Interesting. Thanks for the graph.

The only issue I see thus far is the fact that part of the reason I wanted to use a 3d6 system in the first place was to have it possible for die to land on the same number more often, resulting in nice combat moves or tricks for every double or even triple hit. However if you used d8s that would be less likely.

Chance of rolling a match is 44% for 3d6 vs 34% for 3d8...unless your game is focused in said moves and tricks I would recommend using 3d8

So you'd probably recommend using any match instead of using match skill levels?

The original idea was a match skill level system going with the traditional OSR roll X in 6 or in this case X in 8 chances, so you'd need 2 ones to get a 1 point skill in whatever. I like the idea of using any matches though.

I'm not sure if this would be totally the right spot but I've been working on making a scale map of Dark Souls 3. Does anyone have any references that would be good for figuring out the scale? So far I've just been using maps from the game guide and estimates.

The thumbnail makes this thread look very phallic

>had the same gooby little idea knocking around my head for ages
>the concept has been received well most places I've posted it
>settling on a core mechanic has been one step forward two steps back since conception
>it's been months now

AAAAAAAGGHGGHGGHGHGGHGH

Post it user, just post your idea, it's why we're here.

Thanks! I've ran a couple of test-sessions and even a full campaign in the WoD setting. Combat has always been that thorn in my side, so numbers, as usual, will get tweaked as I throw it against players.

Alright I'll post it again, some people might recognize it.

>The world of Under is inhabited by a myriad of creatures left behind by the enigmatic Humen. Though the Under is dark and dangerous, pinpoints of light and hope exist wherever Friendly Folks gather.
>Skeletons: These bony fellows may appear spooky to our eyes, what with their spindly arms and generally gravelike countenance. However, Skeletons are perhaps the most courageous and openhearted of all the Friendly Folk.
>Autos: Sturdy and metallic, these Folks can take a hit and keep on ticking: literally! Of all the Folk, they most similarly resemble machines, and are as a result more in tune with them.
>Goblins: Goblins are squishier than Skeletons or Autos, given that they have real fleshy bodies. They disguise this by wrapping themselves head to toe in all manner of clothing. Goblins are a deft and crafty folk to say the least!
>All the creatures of Under are powered by the mysterious essence known as Heart. Heart naturally appears whenever folk spend time together, enough so that even two friends wandering the dark will never go without sustenance: towns of folks produce enough Heart to power all sorts of fun machines!
>For heroic Folks, one's Heart can be manipulated to use powerful and mystical abilities! Be careful though, when one's body is damaged enough, one can become Heartbroken! This means that your Heart is all leaking out and you might fall Asleep if no one is around to help!
>Even the nasty creatures of the dark have a form of Heart that Friendly Folks can absorb: but taking Heart from Friendly Folks is just about the worst crime there is!

The mood is sort of like a cartoony Dark Souls with more hope: The world is dark and full of evil, but as long as we stick together, things can be alright.

Well, it was originally conceived as a one-sheeter and one-shotter, but to be entirely honest, after I've added all the bells and whistles I want and worked around some good experience system, I think it's campaign-viable, overall. I don't detest complex games, I just don't see the appeal anymore. Ascetisism kind of speaks to me, and while this is a game where your character sheet is literally an index card (it's very condensed), I see possibilities for campaign material, when I get some accompanying games ready. This is just the engine, after all.

Playtesting will happen tomorrow, so I'll see whether Despair is a fair system or an absolute homewrecker. Becoming a meatgrind is my biggest worry with it currently.

The other worry would be that Despair doesn't rack up at all. But we'll see. It also depends on the player, as different players might have wholly different levels of despair.

Essentially: Heart is a combination of mana, XP, and health. When you run out of Heart you don't die, you just go Asleep until you can get more Heart. (Being Asleep is unpleasant and definitely something you want to avoid).

I wanted combat to be pretty light mechanically, with maybe two or three categories of weapons and three tiers of armour. Statwise, I'd prefer maybe four core attributes, a health stat, and each player gets two or three skills, as well as a special Heart-related ability or two.

I'm not really sure, that's the problem.

I like it

Sounds like Dark Souls + Undertale, to be honest, and that's pretty neato.

Hmm... Maybe I could give you some pointers, I have some experience with systems. Do note that I can become overbearing at some points. If I go too far or off rails, I have no qualm about discarding any train of thought.

So, so so... Best way to implement a system like that...

Let's start with something fun(?), naming attributes. This can be a fun process if done right, but a heartwrenching and annoying if stuck.

Start with an acronym. Even though the number you specified was four, HEART would make a pretty nifty acronym for skills, would it not?

For example:

Heart (Why not use the same word twice)
Endurance (For your physical capability)
Affinity (For your social aptitude)
Reflexes (For quickness)
Thought (For intelligence)

Something something, think about how Heart would come into play:

-It seems to be the most important resource in the world, so in what kind of increments do you plan people having it? Single digits? Tens? Hundreds?

-If it works as health, mana and experience, how will you balance the risk and reward? How do you gain more Heart in the long run? Is faffing about with your friends enough or is a grand adventure a prerequisite for a grand heart?

Some other things you mentioned:

-Few weapon types and armor types: You can make them into a rock-paper-scissors type of deal, to keep the game fair, or make some progression in armor to make grand adventurers different from the rest.

There's some pointers to start with. Games that employ light and hope are welcome, because the dark and the gritty are getting pretty stale.

Hope any of this helps. Your game oozes potential for fun, so seeing it die wouldn't be fun.

Bamp

I was trying to do my own Dark Souls inspired system, but now it seems everyone is doing them. I wasn't really trying to go for a super "let's replicate Souls combat in pen and paper form!" style system, because I think that's stupid, but I wanted to focus on Stamina, and having all actions in combat cost some sort of Action Point, with action points used for both attacking and defending, as well as movement and anything else. The idea is more to focus on every action being taxing and costly as opposed to trying to deal with timing and proper hit locations and all of that.

It's a d% system, but I'm honestly unsure how to handle damage, since I want as few rolls as possible. I don't want bloated health numbers, but the 10s place of a d% roll plus a weapon die plus the 10s place of the Strength mod has the potential for a *lot* of damage at the high end. I also wanted to do hit locations, though those might be a little too complicated.

------------------------------------------

But I'd actually come to the /gdg/ to ask if anyone knew of any card based systems for me to look at. I've been musing over that and wanted to try something. I was looking to ORE, but in general you'll never get a Width of more than 4, barring squishing the dice (removing two height to add one width... or is that squashing?). I'm also not sure what to do with face cards.
CthulhuTech V2 has the fucking dumbest solution available: Take out all the face cards and shuffle two decks together and have everyone draw from an 80 card deck. I'd much rather each player have their own deck.

I may use cards for said Soulsborne game, but I feel like cards are something that really only fits with a cowboy/Weird West style game or a Magical Girl game.

I usually like condensing things to a singular roll, but yours would probably work best if after the to-hit -roll, you roll for damage as usual, but the dice do different things. Tens dice would tell the hit location, ones dice would tell the damage bonus. Then, if you have the additional weapon damage AND static bonus from strength, I would say...

Ascending die type for additional damage rolls, maybe?

See, combine the strength bonus and weapon bonus to a single number (say, 34 str + 3 wpn damage = 6), and if the number is large enough, you get a bigger additional damage die. I call them damage tiers. For example:

1-2: 1d4
3-4: 1d6
5-6: 1d8
7: 1d10
8: 2d6
9: 2d8

And so forth.

Some effects can turn a damage tier up, so it's just the next in the list.

This 1) Reduces the mathematics
2) and in turn, makes combat faster
3) Doesn't have that ridiculous damage and health bloat

>Action points
Basically Shots from Feng Shui, make a single sheet of paper that has numbers from 0 to 20 or whatever the maximum there is for AP. Then everyone places their tokens on the paper, and the one with highest goes first.

Different actions take different amounts of AP, naturally.

Essentially you roll d%+XdY. If the d% is under your to-hit chance (so Dexterity+Melee, for instance) you succeed, then add your Strength Bonus and then the result of the XdY to the Bonus of the roll.

So let's say you roll 34, your Dex+Melee is 65, your Strength is 46, and your weapon die is a 2d6 that rolls 4. You do a total of 11 damage.
Your opponent would also get a chance to avoid this with their own Dodge or Parry roll, and then there's armour, though since I'm going for something more Bloodbornesque, that's likely to be low.

The problem here is that the damage could get as high as 20 before weapon dice. But then again, maybe I'll keep the maximum for traits below 60% before modifiers and skills.

>This 1) Reduces the mathematics
>2) and in turn, makes combat faster
I feel that comparing numbers to a chart makes things slower and increases the math. This is actually one of the reasons I'm against hit locations: Comparing your die roll to a chart is the only reasonable way to do them.

Essentially you roll d%+XdY. If the d% is under your to-hit chance (so Dexterity+Melee, for instance) you succeed, then add your Strength Bonus and then the result of the XdY to the Bonus of the roll.

So let's say you roll 34, your Dex+Melee is 65, your Strength is 46, and your weapon die is a 2d6 that rolls 4. You do a total of 11 damage.
Your opponent would also get a chance to avoid this with their own Dodge or Parry roll, and then there's armour, though since I'm going for something more Bloodbornesque, that's likely to be low.

The problem here is that the damage could get as high as 20 before weapon dice. But then again, maybe I'll keep the maximum for traits below 60% before modifiers and skills.

>This 1) Reduces the mathematics
>2) and in turn, makes combat faster
I feel that comparing numbers to a chart makes things slower and increases the math. This is actually one of the reasons I'm against hit locations: Comparing your die roll to a chart is the only reasonable way to do them.

As for AP, that's not quite what I mean.
It's more that you'd have X AP and each action has a different AP cost. So if you want to do a regular attack that would be [W] where W is the weapon's base AP cost, but if you want an attack with a higher chance of hitting or an attack that deals additional damage, it might cost 2[W], and if you want to make a flurry of attacks, it might be 1.5[W]+.5[W] per additional attack. Things like Dodging would be [A], based on the base AP cost of your armour, and Dodging might be [A] while a combat roll to put yourself in a better position might be 1.5[A] and flat out breaking off an encounter and fleeing might be 2[A].

As opposed to breaking things up into Full Action, Half-Action, Swift Action, Standard Action, Reaction, etcetera, like so many games do.

Bomp?
Also, Misfortune thanks for being OP and keeping the thread alive, do you need any feedback/help on anything?

Some time ago I came up with this Wounds system that would have a limited number of slots (in this case, 12) where characters would track their wounds. The basic gist of it is that attacks on a slot mark that slot once (/) representing a Wound, and hitting it again would give you another mark (X) that would represent a Severe Wound, your Severe Wound threshold being your primary health stat (Vigor) before you started being in risk of death.

You'd also have the little colored or empty dots beneath each slot representing your Armor, which would deflect damage but put your armor at risk instead.

However, I found some issues with it, which I tried to compile into the image. I really want to make this work, but I haven't been able to move past this issue as of yet.

Any suggestions?

General weapons have low dice ratings (1d4~1d8) and a "size" bonus (0~+4).
Ranged and precision weapons have larger dices (1d8~1d12), but you can take Aim before shooting taking penalties on your attack roll to add a modifier to you damage dice (-4~+4) (any result 12 is a miss)
Armor can be light, medium or heavy (1~4, 4~8 or 8~12)

I have no idea what I'm looking at. I'd suggest looking at the way that Chronicles of Darkness handles things, since you seem to be cribbing from them anyway. Or from Fate, I can't really tell.

You have a number of boxes equal to your Size (usually 5 for humans) plus your Stamina (so between 1 and 5, human average being 2).

There are three types of damage. / Bashing, X Lethal, and ※ Aggravated (not sure that symbol will show up on Veeky Forums)

Fists and stun guns and so on do bashing, while weapons deal lethal. It takes severe trauma or magic to do Aggravated.

A melee attack would be rolling a dice pool equal to Strength+Weaponry minus the target's Defense, in d10s. Each of them that come up an 8, 9, or 10 are a success, and 10s are rerolled. You then add the success to the weapon's damage modifier and then subtract the opponent's armour from that number. Then you mark that many boxes of damage (which will likely be lethal). No matter how many health boxes you have, marking off the right three will give you a -1, -2, and -3 penalty, and having bashing damage in the rightmost box means having to roll Stamina to stay conscious. Any further damage will upgrade bashing boxes to lethal. If your rightmost health box is filled with lethal, you pass out automatically, any further damage upgrades to aggravated, and you start bleeding out at a rate of 1A per minute.

If I'm understanding your system right, you ONLY mark off the box equal to the roll's result? So if I roll d6 and get 6, my target would ONLY mark off 6? Wouldn't that kind of be shit, though? What happens if I just can't roll 1 but that's the last box they have unchecked? What if someone's Vigor is 5? Then no matter how many times they get stabbed with a dirk (1d4), they can't die. What if I stab someone and roll a 6 four times? Does that just not count? You actually have at least one ※ asterisk there, but how do you get that?

I was actually talking about the latter part of the damage system, not the hit location on 1) + 2). Hit locations are always tricky because they increase fiddling, but not the math necessarily. The only problem would be the increasing number of dice that could confuse the fuck out of players.

Alternatively to a randomized hit location system would be simple challenge upgrade: This would especially work on Dark Souls-scale boss enemies.

>Hitting its legs = +0
>Hitting its arm = +3
>Hitting its tail = +1
>Hitting its head = +5

For example, and the player simply decides whether they sacrifice missing to get that sweet critical headshot.

On AP-system, you still gonna want a token board. I have tried micromanagering six different players' AP, and that was beyond a handful (I used an abacus, absolutely awful). If the numbers, for example, would get to over 30-50 per round, some wizardry is needed to keep the numbers in check. Such as a tokenboard that has numbers 1-10 (the first digit) and then the player's sheet would have the last digit, or something.

That AP system seems like a handful, unless the individual crunched on the sheet beforehand AND this is done for all individual weapons the character carries.

I'll probably get myriads of feedback tomorrow when I playtest Misfortune. On the other hand, I have several other games on hiatus currently, because of various reasons, so maybe I'll ask about them at some point.

But not now, I'm too tired and I need to clean up my house for the game tomorrow *sigh*.

This is some prime feedback, I appreciate it.

>If I'm understanding your system right, you ONLY mark off the box equal to the roll's result? So if I roll d6 and get 6, my target would ONLY mark off 6? Wouldn't that kind of be shit, though? What happens if I just can't roll 1 but that's the last box they have unchecked? What if someone's Vigor is 5? Then no matter how many times they get stabbed with a dirk (1d4), they can't die. What if I stab someone and roll a 6 four times? Does that just not count? You actually have at least one ※ asterisk there, but how do you get that?

Most of those are also issues I'm trying to work on, I considered having some weapons instead of / deal / / / or / X / or similar patterns that affect more than one tile, the asterisk is a broken armored slot with a severe wound
What you pointed out with vigor is still an issue that I haven't been able to fix as of yet, but hopefully I'll be able to do something about it
Maybe I'm standing on an approach that simply doesn't work and I'll probably come up with something that allows me to have my way with the wounds while taking in account your feedback and concerns

One thing I did consider was that damage caused in the same slot would spill to the one(s) next to it, so for example your dirk that causes 1d4 damage would eventually spill to the 5th slot if you have 4 severe wounds, and rolling 6 four times would mean that you either cause severe wounds to 6 and 7, or that you cause light wounds to 5 and 7 instead of aggravating the 6th severe wound

>That feeling when you find the /gdg/ at work and don't have the time to type long questions and explanations on your phone.

Feels bad man. I need feedback on stuff.

Well, I can keep this thread alive for a while at least. I'm cleaning my up my house currently for the game tomorrow, so I can keep on bamping every so hours.

>I was actually talking about the latter part of the damage system, not the hit location
I know. But comparing things to a chart is why I'm so on the fence about hit locations.

Also, hit locations in Dark Heresy are based on your d% roll. 00 to 10 is one location, and so on.

AP is unlikely to be over 20, and characters can probably use counters or a die.

I think you should look to either Chronicles of Darkness or Fate. Although I have no idea how Fate's damage works. I'm not really sure WHY you'd want your system the way it is, where damage only affects one box. I mean, what does it accomplish?

Sure, if you feel you can manage it without token board. Token board just makes it easier to keep track whose turn it is, expecting that the turn order is by highest AP.

If it's not, what happens when a character runs out of AP?

Same. Worst part is, after I get home and finish making dinner, doing any dishes or laundry that needs done, and finally get to sit down at my computer, I forget what I needed to post.

That seems misfortunate. Well, it'll come to you eventually. I could try reviving these threads for shits and giggles, Veeky Forums has been bit of a bore lately without them.

>39 replies
That's not a lot to go by, still.

But maybe people who came here exclusively for /gdg/ have dispersed for the time, so probably just keeping making these threads is probably the cure for the infrequent population.

Probably the best idea
I'm honestly surprised it's lasted this long
Wished I could have put some more in, but last night I had a Final and had Work this morning. Maybe we could do a Saturday Game Design General or something, schedules help people I've noticed, mostly with small Generals.

Not a bad idea. We could try something like that out when this thread dies out.

It just depends on the time zones, really.

What is a good amount of special abilities over a PC's career?

I'm working on a system with various specializations that grant combat abilities, but the abilities are piling up, and too much of a good thing is bad.

Right now, I'm setting my sights on the equivalent of one special combat ability per level in DnD.

Depends on the breadth of a single ability. Elaborate on that.

Like, if the special abilities are equivalent of Quirks in Boku no Hero Academia (Very applicable in multiple different situations with a lot of leeway how to use them) or whether they are like singular charms in Exalted (Does one specific thing REALLY WELL), the answer is going to vary wildly.

Safe estimates:

Widely applicable --> Maximum of three to four
Situationally applicable --> Maximum ten maybe
Really specific --> About twenty

First of all, thank you for your elaborate and helpful reply. Each ability will be pretty specific - think singular, active action (there are no passive abilities in this particular list at all), things like Whirlwind Attack or singular spells from DnD.

Characters can gain passive and active abilities from character options that are available to everyone but these "special attack" type deals are class-specific and should define the character in combat.

Twenty sounds about right. The abilities are fairly similar to your average DnD spell (not Wish or anything like that) in terms of applicability.

So in another thread, I was throwing around my idea for dice pools with "popping" dice for resolution, when someone misread it and how he understood it actually came up with an idea.

The basis is each player rolls a pool of D12's. How many is determined by stats, and each die that rolls a certain score, also stats, is a success. Rolls of unmodified '12' count as 2. The original idea is that a weapon's power modifies the roll needed for a 'pop', i.e. a power of 1 means any unmodified rolls of 11+ for the attacker counts as 2. The attacker rolls their dice and counts successes, while defender rolls and any successes cancels an attacker's. If there's any left, they become damage on the defender, and armor absorbs some before its applied, example: the defender has 1 armor and takes 2 damage, you only apply 1 because of the armor.

What was the misunderstanding was the guy was thinking of it as armor working like power; it causes an increase in "pops" on the defense roll. This adds a symetrical take on the rolls, but at the cost of a more steady result of armor. Its goes from a guaranteed 1 armor stops 1 damage to a variable of how much it stops, but also allows higher values. The current system means the more armor, a dramatic decrease in potential damage taken. What do people think, stick with the old system, or go with the more dynamic, but less reliable system?

It is important to have consistency within a system, so having something modify the defend roll the same way as the attack roll would make sense.

However, that might not be armor. Perhaps a shield could manipulate defence pops while armor absorbs damage.

Well, terms can be juggled around. Right now, its 3 offensive stats and 3 defensive stats.

Offense has:
>Attack Skill - What's needed to score a success
>Strikes - How many dice you roll
>Power - Modifies "popping"

And defense has:
>Defense Skill - What's needed to score a success to counter the attack's roll
>Protection(?) - Number of dice rolled
>Armor - The currently debated stat, either a flat absorb, or a counter-power that modifies "pops"

I'm not even happy with "protection", need a better name there.

A character with no AP can't do anything. It'll probably be an option to trade life for AP, or even to reduce your maximum AP for the rest of the encounter. Just like running out of Stamina in Dark Souls, there's not much you can do other than move around.

The system I'm working on allows stamina (AP) to be burnt to keep acting. If maximum stamina hits 0 the character passes out.

I find its a good way to simulate a person pushing themselves to the point of collapse and think it's a good idea for most AP systems.

Burning life for more AP is a risky prospect that I like, but I don't think that option should be available to everyone. Burning HP for more actions could be an option to certain classes/species.

Remember to look at them not as a GM but as a player. I've designed enough abilities that looked balanced only for my players to find some insane use for it I didn't think of.
Good start though.

Bumping.

Instead of protection, you could use reaction or reflex to represent the number of dice rolled.

Yeah, like that better.

Do you guys think it's even remotely possible to somehow combine medieval fantasy and science fantasy into one setting? Future weapons, magic, knights, and spaceships? or is that too autistic?

People have done it before.

Check out ASE (Anomalous Subspace Environment) and Endless Legend.

Yes, but it has to be delicately handled. This might be more /wbg/'s thing.

Thanks for the information
Thanks for the info, I asked here because I may make a homebrew of it one day for my group, after a lot amount of planning and research. I just wanted to test the waters, make sure it's not too far fetched

I went and did a high sci-fi/Stone Age fantasy mix one time and I thought it came out okay.

Yor, Hunter from the Future?

So /gdg/, now that school's out for christmas break I've got some time to work on my projects. Tell me what to spend my time on:

1) Rewrite a partial system from memory and actually put it into google docs this time so the same thing doesn't happen againsince the original was lost to computer failure. Its my main project and has the most done, but also the most still to do. Its anachronistic fantasy that has elements from anywhere between ~400BC to 1800AD where you can build anything from the parts provided. Its like a Build-a-Char Workshop.

2) Actually do something with an pseudo-minimalist Ace Combat homebrew that I've just stopped working on. I haven't really been able to playtest it in any sense and it still needs some basic rules like plane and weapon statistics, but at least I have a google doc. It's also the closest to playtesting and release of the three, but that's only if the core mechanics don't need to get trashed..

3) delve deeper into a conceptual game where even the rules want you to fail. Everything, from the mechanics to the aesthetic is negative. This one has some more difficult problems like "How do I remove the idea of bonuses from the game?". The only thing I have is notes and a decent idea of the game's feeling. I just need to figure out how to translate that into mechanics.

Tell me what to spend my free time on.

I have a moba-esque game i asked for opinion on last thread

I am thinking whether to use dice for randomization or cards with numbers and/or additional effects

What would be a smooth way to emulate "level up powers" like in Pokémon and other JRPGs? For example, you've got a pool of powers which can be learned at certain levels, one or two powers at once. It would be easy to emulate in Fate, except that you cannot learn the better powers unless you have tried to learn the weaker first. Moreover, the powers are not unique to each character, so everyone could learn different things before.

I'm trying to do away with levels and XP, and looking for ways where this could be justified by narrative instead. The simpler the better.

I think some of the ease would depend on some other factors of the game existing. How do you plan on getting rid of levels and xp without creating pseudo-levels? and for that matter, how do you have characters learn level up moves when they don't level up?

Fuck I forgot to specify that this is for Fate. Fate specifically doesn't have levels or XP, and everything is narrative driven. In fact I'm trying to hack in such level up moves without resorting to levels and XP.

I'm not familiar with Fate (though I should probably start with all the questions I haven't been able to answer)

Perhaps you could go the FF6 route and have "Magicite" that people attune to. Whenever is narratively appropriate, have them learn the first move and just go down the list. Magicite doesn't have to be unique and might be swapped out at any time. There's a metagame in FF6 of giving characters different magicite at different times so that they can get optimal spells and stats, so mimicing that aspect might be a good solution.

Working on something similar right now

>I'm not familiar with Fate (though I should probably start with all the questions I haven't been able to answer)
You should check it out at least. Being super hackable is one of its features.

>Perhaps you could go the FF6 route and have "Magicite" that people attune to.
Wait, so characters get Magicite and this lets them learn powers and such, right? When do they get this Magicite?

For settings with this feature, check out Phantasy Star, a videogame. It's exactly what you're asking for.

In lore its the husk of a dead Esper, but in game they're just items like FF7's Materia. Its like a variation of FF's job system. Equip Ramah and get experience to learn lightning spells, Odin for Fire(?) and Shiva for Ice. In fact, just check it out finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Magicite_(Final_Fantasy_VI). I think it serves the purpose you want without needing the numbery bits.

I want to make a quick system, so I reduced the attack + damage to one roll only. But added damage is the roll minus target AC. And additional effects happen at each 3 points over the AC. I'm afraid this might make the resolution slower than rolling for damage and such.

I was thinking something like that. But, there is a problem.

Let us assume that we can actually change the Magicite. And we do, right at the middle of learning the next spell. And, narratively speaking, we're at a point where learning the basic spell of the new Magicite is pointless and we should be learning something better instead.

One thing that just came to my mind is to allow the character to learn all powers with learning requirement less than X, X being the amount of magic points (in terms of FF) that is needed to learn the next power, and up to the first power with that requirement.

For example let's assume that we're learning a power that takes 5x to learn, and we change our level up movepool. The character now automatically is able to learn all powers with requirement of 10x and all the MP earned is now transferred to the first power with 5x requirement.

Y/N?

Responding to my post.

This has a weakness. If the player gets a way to learn a move with high requirements, and changes the movepool, the player can abuse this system by learning a lot of stuff at once. This can easily become broken.

Jesus this is difficult.

Maybe. Those numbers are basically just the order that they should be organized with higher numbers learned first. In some cases you'd want to learn the basic spell anyway, so for that I don't think you'd really need to change anything. In the event that you've already learned a lower tier skill, then maybe go ahead and convert the effort.

The only odd part is when you have two equivalent skills that aren't related, like two x5 skills with the same X10 skill. Maybe you learn Fire 2 95% of the way, and then swap it out for another that grants Cure 2 instead. The next battle grants you that last 5%, but you've only been wearing the second for a single fight. They both teach you Fire 1, so you don't need to learn that again, but would that make narrative sense to learn Cure 2 so quickly? You could always design your own Magicite to avoid those problems, but in some senses you would get the benefit out of the effort you put into it. On the other hand, having to track all those partial skills would be a pain. Again, you could design it so that you only ever get one skill of each level (x10, x5, x2 etc) and you can get partial conversion when equipping another magicite, and that might alleviate some problems.

It's ultimately for you to decide.

Btw I'm talking about a metaphorical Magicite. I'm not going to add items because it doesn't make sense - my idea is to replace this with a Fate equivalent, a stress track that indicates training.

The reason why it cannot be changed when a power with different requirements is being learned is because this could cause another system abuse. If a move with low reqs fills the track too fast and the player decides to change the movepool (it can happen in a limited fashion), then they could easily abuse it by filling a too powerful power with too little effort.

speaking on the partial conversion, it could make narrative sense. You could justify something like 50% conversion as being the aptitude required to use higher level skills. The other 50% might be specific to the individual skill you're learning, so in that 95%vs5% stiuation, you could retain up to 50% of your total effort (or cut your current investment in half, whichever you prefer). The other 50% would be specific to learning Cure 2 over Fire 2 for example.

I figured.

To fix that problem you'd just need to make separate tracks and invert the numbers to match (which I would do from the beginning anyway). A basic spell might finish in 5, while a higher spell might finish in 10, 20, or 50. Or depending on how the track works, it might be 1, 5 or 10 times that it's completely filled. Those numbers will just be changed to whatever makes sense. Matching the concept is more important than matching the numbers.

Hm, maybe the solution is simpler: force the character to learn weaker skills if they haven't learned, or tried to learn, them yet. What's the worse that could happen? They're trading one thing for another so that's their calculated risk, isn't it?

>worse
Worst*

So players roll attack+damage with the enemies AC as the target, and every point over that is damage?

I'm not seeing how that is any more complex than rolling to hit then rolling for damage.

It is common to assume pluses are easier to math than minuses. So damage being (roll - AC) + weapon (fixed number) could be slower than two rolls.

And that (easy and quick math) was what kept me with a d20 and its linearity (and 5% steps) instead of a 3d6 bell curve (or a d%).

Its what I would do. The lower tier skills might even be desirable on their own so that shouldn't cause an issue.

I'm making a game where players roll for successes. More dice rolled mean more chances of success, more successes result in greater outcomes.

As it stands I plan on the chance of any die being a success to be 50%. However, rolling the maximum value on a die results in a critical effect. These effects are specific to the action taken.

What might /gdg/s opinion be on the size of die I should use? Thus far I've been assuming d10s, but I could potentially use any die type. The only difference being the odds of getting crits.

Would you, as players, prefer to see crits more or less often?

As an example; the basic attack action allows you to launch your target one space per crit in a direction of your choice. An average player would probably be rolling 4-5 dice for this action.

Maybe look into WoD or Exalted to see how they do success-based rolling.

Personally I think d6 is still best for dice pools due to the divisibility of the number 6 in comparison to 10.

Although a d12 dice pool would be dreamy because all them divisors. Especially if something to the effect of coloring different sections of the dice with different colors.

Continuing to the actual question you talked about, a possible solution would be crit confirmation, meaning two maximums would trigger a single crit.

/gdg/, I was working on a card game with card zones similar to the Neopets card game, but I've been trying to figure out how to make it more tactical without adding a lot of mental load to players. Basically, I want the order and arrangement of the cards in the zone to matter when it comes to targeting effects and dealing damage.

Is that too limiting though? Would it be too easy for players to forget it?

Game Design is probably a seasonal interest. Personally, I haven't been able to work on anything until now because I just recently had finals to finish up.

Also, maybe you guys can help me out. I'm trying to engineer a system that can be used for basic tactical style combat (think like Xcom) but I also want some of that 'action movie' thing going on.

I think I can do both, but I'm looking for suggestions on the actual firearm mechanic and core rolling system. I want to give guns mechanical differences, but I can't make anything too in-depth as my players are all ADHD. I was thinking of maybe giving guns a Rate of Fire and when rolling degrees of success determine how many shots hit, followed by rolling damage for each hit.

Can you anons think of any well-executed shooting mechanics for pen and paper games?

There us a game called Zombiecide (or something like that) that had an attack system that, in my opinion, was pretty solid.

A weapons stats were:
Range. How far away a target could be.
Dice. How many d6s were rolled when you fired it.
Hit. The value you have to roll or roll over to hit. (3+ would be 3, 4, 5 and 6, for example)
Damage. How much damage the weapon deals on hit.

The game had good diversity in its weapons. Some rolled a ton of dice but only hit on 5+, others had few but accurate dice. There were differences in range and damage, all sorts of possible combinations.

You could go further and add qualities to the weapons in your game. For example, maybe a scope let's you reroll misses.

Thanks brother, I may tweak that or borrow ideas. I hadn't considered not using skills to determine hit. Making it a weapon choice makes your equipment matter a lot more.

Weapon skill could instead work backwards. Being unskilled brings penalties, while being skilled results in the stat block as presented.

That's not a bad idea, I may use that.

I've got a 3-hr drive ahead of me, and sleep if I'm lucky, but at the rate Veeky Forums moves the thread ought to be fine. I may bounce some more ideas off of you in the coming days if /gdg/ is still around. Thanks for your help

I've got a 26 hours drive myself, so here's hoping /gdg/ is still alive by Friday. Maybe my questions will have been answered by then too.

I do my best to help where I can and ask what questions I can find non confusing wording for.

So long as other anons bring their issues to the thread, I will be trying to answer them. (I may or may not also be withholding answers until the thread hits page 9)

RATE MY SIDE-QUEST(middle to high fantasy, low character level game)
party enters a town on their way someplace

rumors abound regarding the road being extra bad this year just one stretch of road on the far side of the village and the surrounding forest, and its been getting progressively worse

villager1;;;"the merchants have to have someone watch the horses at night"

villager2;;;"I swear I saw a pair of wolves and a bear working together to break open my hen-house, ate them all!"
////
///
//
/
several small packs of wolves attack the party on the road prioritizing smaller targets(children, gnomes, etc.) or the weak and wounded, going after already downed opponents rending chunks of flesh where possible.

mauled and mostly eaten bodies are found on the roadway, pilgrims of a god to wanderers. tracks and dribbles of blood, can be followed to the ruined crumbled remains of a small tower.

fights and beasts and heavily gnawed bones getting thicker all the way to the old ruin.

a pair of dire-wolves reside in the basement of the tower sleeping around a half-buried sphere of polished onyx inlaid with brass and copper wires.

it cannot be dstroyed by any process available to the party. magical detection has it individually highly strong and neutrally alligned, with gentle emanations or slight magical radiation.
////
///
//
/
there is no immediate effect for holding this sphere, but over a month of close-ish proximity a simple continuous Willpower Test causes entities to begin consuming more food. supplies are consumed faster and faster a weeks food is eaten in 5 days more water is drunk.

once the will check is failed a harder check starts, and when it is failed an impossible amounts of food begin being consumed. characters get aggressive if food is withheld.

a week outside of contact with the sphere removes these effects.

>what might the sphere do/be?
>I thought of one thing but it may not pan out

THIS

is there a good term for a gunslinger specialization that focuses on two small weapons in close quarter combat? like pistols or sub machine guns?

Yeah, gunslinger could work, but I like the idea of that being the name of the class itself and having X amount of specializations for the class to choose from.

Well, the range of the weapon is the main factor, so the smaller range weapons are more dangerous as you note. High and low really doesn't have any actual tie-in to the effect of the weapon, do drop high=good, low=bad entirely.

Armor gives so many dots that players can put anywhere they want. So say a player gets 5 dots of armor, they cover 1,2,5,6 and 7 with armor.

Weapons are a dice of damage, but bonuses/penalties allow players to shift the number rolled around, but up to the weapon's dice. So a sword at d6+3 is actually the range of 1-9.

This means that the first few attacks just kind of fall where ever, and give the players some idea of where armor is/isn't on the target, or other wounds to aim for.

After a couple hits, they start start looking to pull the same number, so say they've hit 2,3 and 4 on previous 5 armor target. The players know that 2 is armored, but 3 and 4 are not, so when the long sword comes up and rolls a 5, the player uses his +3 bonus to modify the roll down to 3 or 4. (Maybe allow a hit with extra mods left over to do an extra damage).

You could armor up better against the smaller weapons (more armor on the lower ranges) but big range weapons could get nasty since they'll pass such armor up more often than not.

pistolier?
doublefire?
deuces wild?
wild-card?

Perfect thank you. For some reason I just had a mental block on this subject. Earlier, I couldn't even remember what the hell a clipboard was called.

sure thing.

whats your opinion on this miniquest module?I figure a sphere of gluttony might have some neat uses to a mage or alchemist or some other creature...