How's that fantasy heartbreaker coming along user?

Fantasy can be modern. Some would argue that's the best kind.

I'd assume burgerflippers are more in need of escapism than most.

okay enough, getting the rules thesmelves to a point where they can be spread around. But then again it's a setting for a general core rules I built.

Congratulates, all you need to be an influencal auther is a tragic death in your early thirties.

>Make a campaign about hipsters and McDonalds employees

>Shit tier. I'd rather make a modern heartbreaker.

Did Both. Didn't regret it. Only Torm can judge me.

Modern != Reality

It's coming along excellently! We even have a website!

www.opsandtactics.com

I'm currently working on the "offical" campaign setting for the books. It's still months out, so I'll release a updated rulest soon with the minor corrections.

Memes.

>All in all, my now extended ruleset is 5 pages long, but it's still got fair bit of breadth and possibilities for good gaming, without bogging shit down.

I'd like to read this, please.

Trolling

Really I'm just publishing my houseruled 3.5 and calling it a day, but I've got Monte Cook's endorsement in the prologue that it's the one true successor to D&D so I figure we can just ride off of player ego and resentment to get the sales going.

>How's that fantasy heartbreaker coming along user?

Working on class talent trees.

Sure. Might have oversold it a little, but whatever.

Keep in mind that many things in it will seem backwards if you start thinking it with preconceived notions of how RPG:s usually do things.

>The lower the stat, the better it is --> Because your stats are weaknesses rather than strengths.
>Despair is your "HP", more like your "wounds", but works with the tone the game is supposed to have - Ironic mockery.
>Calculating difficulty is as important as rolling.
>Every time you do a singular thing, you roll only once.

I like it.

>the one true successor to D&D
lol wut
how can you have a successor when the king has yet to be dethroned?

Seems tonally confused. What is it you're going for anyway?

It's about mockery. Your character has weaknesses, problems etc, and the only good things inherent to the character are their saving graces. It's supposed to invoke the feeling that your character, kind of sucks.

But this framework is is filled then with movie logic. Like, the rolling system is a prime example. The whole idea in the basic rolls is that you must ROLL OVER your stat, meaning you have to OVERCOME the WEAKNESS of the character. It's like the dice work as a direct conduit of the character instead of being just an abstraction of numbers that are thrown about.

Then, in combat, rather than trying to cause damage and knock enemies out, all you're trying to do is to achieve victory. Thus combat can be anything, and is actually just rolling dice, trying to beat the last rolled score and seeing how far the opponent is willing to go.

So it's this amalgamation of your character kind of sucking, all the logic turning into movie / anime logic, and being about how daring the character is. Because if you go too far in trying to succeed, your character will eventually succumb to Despair and start spiraling towards death.

Ehhem, I meant

In that case, why not make it a non-zero sum game? Trying to achieve one's own maxim ends up being inefficient when teamwork gets everyone ahead?

I wonder. I am not versed in non-zero sum games, am unsure how to make it work.

Does it simply mean to fail forward, as it has been said about Fate? I haven't read Fate games (Ironically, I have dozens of Fate and Fudge dice) at all, so I don't know how it is done there.

Originally, the point of the game is more about the characters trying to solve their current problems and gaining more problems in the process, which they try to solve later and so on.

My original draft of the game wasn't so serious, with people gaining Heart Damage EVERY TIME they fail in a roll, but Heart Damage being unable to kill the character in any measure, to emphasize a game where death isn't possible (mechanically), but you still get shit.

I just likened to the Despair system when I came up with it, and Heart Damage had its fair share of problems (It increased the amount of math in the game).

Any ideas how I could make it more Zero-sum? If you want to continue this deeper, do come tell your opinion in /gdg/.

Finding me from there is easy, because I namefag

Additionally, Despair works kind of as a fail forward mechanic, there is just a serious cost for it. Failure is kind of integrated to the game, not as a driver of events, but driver of character development.

It is a very character-driven game in that sense, but ironically it's not a zero-sum game, which it in vein almost SHOULD be in that sense.

youtube.com/watch?v=CemLiSI5ox8

This is basically what you need to understand to start playing with ideas of non-zero sum games.

Most games emphasize personal triumph and victory, but it sounds like your game is trying to subvert that idea and focus more on "not failing" (if I'm understanding it correctly that is). If one player's maxim, the ultimate expression of action, isn't enough to overcome their weaknesses then perhaps what is needed is a victory state that is achievable through collusion. Everybody can win as long as everyone acts towards that goal. This is different than, say, DnD and PF because there are tools within those systems for profound individual success. It sounds like you just need to identify where the reward stimulus is coming in for the player- because conquest and triumph are not the same things as the reward stimulus: they just happen to have been the core reward stimulus for many MANY trpgs in the history of the genre.

Also make sure you're understanding the difference between "Zero Sum" and "Non-Zero Sum"
"Zero Sum" is "A Maxim of Victory necessitates an equal measure of Failure"
"Non-Zero Sum" can thus be described as "A Maxim of Victory does not necessitate an equal measure of Failure"

I've been working on a system that tries to do something similar, but it looks like the goals of our systems are different enough to have conversation without implicit competition- so that'll be nice.

I'll pop over to /gdg/ tomorrow probably, super tired atm.

So you're saying that there basically should be some mechanic that emphasizes on solidarity and cooperation, on a mechanical level?

I am unsure how to implement what you said in . Personal gain would hinder the group's gain, aka the goal of the game.