/gdg/ - Game Design General

An entire game based on downtime activities for heroes?

Bookkeeping becomes intolerable when it's
1) not named in a way that's easy to remember
2) not kept track of with simple methods
3) the layout and logic of the paperwork sucks
4) math every turn

Sounds like your characters have ONE stat that is a resource and max HP. In my system the stats are always below 10, so there's very little math to do. If you have stats that go up to 40 and fluctuate every turn, it will suck

I was working on one for a while. Get into it, prototype with basic office supply shit, then play test for a bit and walk away and let it digest in your mind. Come back to it when you figure out better methods and realize which parts really pop out as unique to your game

Will prolly do that, thanks. I already got clay so im going to do some modelling but if im going to make a proper game i would play test before making a bunch of models for it. I got the clay not for this as a main thing, i got it for the sculpturing aspect etc, thanks again.

Models should be one of the last things to worry about. Use paper chits to playtest and play around with concepts, drawing, sculpt parts, pushing in opposite directions to see what's good.

I've changed things so many times during my testing, any designs I started with wouldn't fit anymore. Hell, I keep bouncing genres with each system tweak. I go "This would fit a sci-fi game more" and change things around, only to tweak a mechanic the next week and go "Now it feels more like fantasy".

Initiative systems and action economy:

What are good ways to bring character speed into the game without making it the god stat?

Movement distance is reasonable, but I would like to use it more than that.

Today I took the first step to making my projects manageable again.

I started with one system, but realized I wanted to explore multiple genres depending on my mood. I began copying large amounts of the system between multiple InDesign documents and reformatting it each time. Then I would add or change mechanics, and this would inspire me to make changes to the basic aspects again. Over time, a constant churn of updating the basic rules accumulated, which discouraged me from working on multiple projects.

Today I registered a GitLab account and converted part of my rules to markdown format. Then I'll be able to store the base rules in a git repo and branch the other projects off of that; as I make changes, I can merge them back in. When the rules are acceptable, I can import them into InDesign easily.

I hope this new workflow will allow me to cultivate congruent, flexible rules without sacrificing the genres I wish to explore.

Defense, depending on how it is implemented, is a good indicater of speed. Action economy should have a limit, either hard or a high soft cap. It should be difficult to get extra actions, especially after +1. Initiative also can fall into a mix of stats, wisdom and awareness also play into, as well as speed.

What would a normal round of combat ideally look to you?

Repost from the last thread my current ruleset, because stuck on my phone at work and bored. No idea the quality, because phone posting.

Still not sure about restricting modifiers to the number of dice rolled. It makes it simplier, but I'm still worried about dice bloat.

do you think warmachine esque damage systems could be implemented in a fantasy skirmish game to represent injuries?

Are you talking the jack/beast damage grids? Yeah, no reason it wouldn't.

Something similar to that, so after striking an enemy you roll a dice to determine hit zone and fill in the grid as you inflict damage, with them rolling after the battle for long term injuries based on what happened in the battle.

I'm making a system where you make guns and combine parts. Right now I need to figure how to determine capacity of the weapons. The capacity right now is based on the ammo type and the 'reciever' base gun.

The trouble is I need a way to create vast gulf between ammo types, shotguns cannot have as much capacity as pistol bullets for example due to damage modifiers

So which one should I use?
>bullet type is a multipler, reciever gives base amount
>bullet type is flat amount, add or subtract reciever modifier
>something else?

-Discounts on actions in the action economy. Draw a weapon as a free action, or take 2 swift actions a turn or something.
-Give them more of a limited resource (say, Adrenaline Points) that can be spent to take an extra action, or some other bonus that would be OP if they had it constantly.
-Bonus to initiative.
-If it's crazy reflexes: I've noticed you can simulate bullet time pretty effectively by having Thug declare his action (shoot at Max Payne), Max Payne declare and *takes* his next action (move out of view,), and then Thug's declared actions resolve (he shoots but now has no chance of hitting Max Payne)
-I have a system where you can basically declare a reflex save-ish roll against any attack. You roll your speed stat against their relevant attack stat, and if you win... well simple version is that you basically time an evasive roll correctly and can shift your position a bit, but you've given up a secondary action from your next round.

Oh, have abilities/maneuvers themed around you using superior speed to run circles around your opponent, have them only work on targets whose initiative is at least X less than yours. Then throw in ways to reduce target's initiative count and boost your own.

>How much bookkeeping is too much?
As a rule of thumb, more than D&D 3.5 combat. It's gonna vary alot from player to player, but in my experience the common-denominator threshold for where things begin to get cumbersome is when your combat has more variables to keep track of than in D&D 3.5.

I can't tell you how many that is or anything, because you can't numerically quantify it all. Though I guess taking inventory...
-HP
-Initiative count
-Position (yours and relevant allies/enemies/environmental bits)
-Abilities with limited uses, and which remain available
-Temporary status effects
-Circumstantial modifiers (flanking, my character has a disease, concealment due to darkness, etc.)
-Relevant aspects of in-game situation (hostage's emotional state, how fast the fire is spreading, some enemies have petrifying gaze attacks, etc.)

Basically, when you compare your own system to the above (assuming they're similar in at least some respects), you want your system to NOT have elements whose complexity-to-keep-track-of is at least on par with all the extra stuff your system ADDS to the pile.

Yeah, it'd work. Just keep in mind, the nice thing with Warmahordes system is that its simple; you just keep filling in boxes til you hit the end, then start the next column. No fuss, only one roll for the initial location.

>2:57 AM where I am
It's on topic now, at least.
Have different levels of resources you need to keep up- when resources reach a certain level, the city's abilities and range of influence increase, but so do its needs. You'll need to use the city's resources efficiently to keep up with demand.
Plus, small villages will only acquire tiny raids by packs of roving ne'er do-wells. Large cities will be up to be conquered by dark lords.

Here's a fun little ditty I put together. It's a 2 dice random star generator for Sci-Fi games, easily compatible with Stars Without Number or any other space exploration game. The goal is to add a dash of accessible, real world astronomy without being needlessly detailed.

Same as above

Incidentally, does anyone have a good 10x10 hex grid? I downloaded one from drivethrurpg but the author put numbers in each of the hexes that I'd like to avoid.

When reading a setting supplement, what do you guys want to read and in what order?

What are the most important elements you look for when looking through a new setting book?

In what order does it make the most sense to present information?

On the topic of action budget, how shit a system sound where each successive attack after the first reduces your chance to hit by 15%? I.e.

Atk 1 = 100%
Atk 2 = 85%
Atk 3 = 70%

this would be linear as many characters in my system will find themselves with 125%-140% hit--chance to hit in this system is calculated by the base hit chance minus the enemy's chosen defense stat (basically dodge).

therefore, with a character with 125% hit, an enemy with 40% dodge, the attacks would look like this:

Atk 1: 85%
Atk 2: 70%
ATk 3: 55%

also, movement beyond a short distance would consume these points, causing a character who's moved to attack like this:
Atk 1: 70%
Atk 2: 55%
Atk 3: 40%

at which point they should probably settle for 1, MAYBE 2 attacks during their movement-heavy turn

That seems like a ton of accounting that needs to be done for relatively simple actions, especially when you're not dealing with easy numbers ending in 5 or 0.

all numbers would end in 5 or 0, forgot to mention

it's more or less a 1-20 rating system such that the final product of the roll can be done with a d20

So why disguise the range you actually have by multiplying everything with five?

What's your one tip to add some flavour to a game?

I've realised I've made a system not a game.

simply a design choice

the math is the same--anyone can do 135 - 55 just as they can do 27 - 11, so it comes down to how the chances are represented and i personally prefer percentages

regardless (as I might in fact swap to a 'hit chance x/20' system) i was curious about the hit chance penalty system as an action budget

in my mind
advantages: allows players less rigidity, giving them the ability to trade efficiency for emergency actions or a rapid series of actions (and the ability to build for those by stacking hit)

disadvantages: extra bookkeeping and math, though reducing the system to x/20 would make it much easier as one could simply calculate their base chance then subtract 3 each time

So it'd be what, d20 to hit and -3 penalty for each successive attack?

Could simplify it some by making it one attack roll. My opponent's defense is 20, I rolled 24, therefore I hit him twice but my third attack missed. (If you beat his defense, you hit 1 time +1 for every 3 by which you beat his defense.)

To clarify:
-Do I decide how many attacks I make before rolling to hit?
-How many attacks can I make?
-Is there any reason NOT to make the maximum number of possible attacks every round? (stamina cost to make the attacks? Penalty for missing?)

I definitely have been too hasty in posting here for what I'm asking of everyone, so I'll clarify as asked (sorry about that, all)

-Yes, you decide all of your attacks before making the roll with knowledge of penalty. some attacks* may ignore the penalty or not contribute to it, and certain attacks may be used after the rolls (for example, if a certain condition has been met e.x. if an attack crits, you may use an attack that is instantaneous and only usable after a critical strike)

-you can make infinite, but after a while it may become pointless to make attacks that have a -200% hit chance

-this is the key detail I feel i've neglected to mention--every attack and spell has a different resource cost associated with it. because these resources regenerate at the start of each turn at a rate determined by stats (that can be modified by certain passive effects or spells) but CAN BE POOLED, you want to balance your consumption between:
a. spending your resource without capping
b. spending your resource with maximum efficiency (i.e. highest hit chance)
c. saving your resource for certain conditions, i.e. vulnerabilities or temporary bonuses

i hope that clarifies some of my incomprehensible bullshit

* (think video game-style melee 'spells'--some melee attacks have different attributes, i.e. bonus to crit chance, only to be used after x condition, etc)

I'm trying to sort some things with a homebrew Bloodborne RPG system.

Specifically, it'll involve the equivalent of, like... a Sanity system/Morality system. A way to track how consumed by your Inner Beast vs. how much you've gone deranged in your lust for cosmic secrets vs. how much your sane side (your conscious goals and purpose) can stay in control.

But it's not just about erosion of will either. Bloodborne clearly implies that not everyone who learns cosmic secrets goes mad and that the strength one draws from beast blood (while potentially dictating strength of your beast if you DO fully snap) doesn't inherently dictate how close you are to losing control.

So I know I want characters to have at least one score associated with each of three aspects that can drive them- Bestial, Mundane, and Cosmic. Question is whether to have separate scores for how much control you do/don't have. One alternative might be to potentially start losing control if the growth of one of your 3 scores outpaces the other two.

What about this:

Your character's stability is a single track. On one end is Beasthood, on the other end is Insight. So it looks like this:

Beasthood-o o o o o o o X o o o o o o o-Insight

You start on each end, and when you get a point either of Beasthood or Insight you fill it in.

Once you reach the center on one side or the other you begin to lose your grip on humanity, but you can still push it further, eventually overwriting dots of Insight or Beasthood with their opposite.

If you fill the meter entirely one way or the other, your are forever and irrevocably transformed.

Bump.

Oh! Took me a minute to correctly follow what you were saying, but I think I like it. It's certainly got potential. You could just say that your unfilled dots are your humanity score.

Here's a 1.0 of my rules for a skirmish that I'll be running on /qst sometime within the next two weeks. I think it still needs to get cut down some more, but any feedback at all would be welcome.

Artwork may be found here: drive.google.com/open?id=1p7mbThFXqLKjoI8m1R2fEpwyj_ckPjfzYusUSFlP03g

Two of us are currently in the chat section of that google doc, if you aren't aware.

Annnd your latest change made it so I now need permission to view the doc. =P

I was going to ask about ramming, both as a case study for some general design practices and as its own mechanic. That's 1.25 times (base speed plus base hull), right? Or is it current speed/current hull? Is damage only dealt to the target of the ram? Are there piloting rolls to ram/avoid being rammed?

Let's try this again:
drive.google.com/open?id=1p7mbThFXqLKjoI8m1R2fEpwyj_ckPjfzYusUSFlP03g

Ramming is 1.25 (current speed + current hull). A navigations officer may make a special evasion action, placing a -2(current speed) modifier against the ship making the attack.

Ramming is twofold: physically moving into contact with a vessel, and then succeeding a navigation check.

docs.google.com/document/d/1p7mbThFXqLKjoI8m1R2fEpwyj_ckPjfzYusUSFlP03g/edit?usp=sharing

Try number three.

what are better game names? Made up words (Mordheim, Malifaux), real words (Infinity, Warhammer), or hybrids (Shadowrun, Bloodbowl)

Part of what I'm thinking is that PCs can have moments where their character is faced with a Lure.

Bestial Lure: Bloodlust. Intoxicating scent of blood, unwary prey that you could easily fall upon and rend.
Mundane Lure: Emotional comfort, things which would tempt you on a regular night as well, possibly a chance to advance your personal morals/goals. A chance for pleasant conversation with sane company. A bunch of gold coins, enough to make you rich if you can survive this Night of the Hunt.
Cosmic Lure: Curiousity, the hunger to know more. A chance to learn secrets about the founding of the Healing Church, some clearly paranormal phenomenon which you could investigate further.

What I'm thinking is that when faced with a Lure, there'd be about 3 possible outcomes.
-PC willingly indulges lure, probably boost the stat.
-PC rolls to resist lure using one of the OTHER two scores- so for example, if I try to resist Cosmic lure with my Bestial aspect, that means I add my Bestial score to the roll and my Cosmic score to the difficulty.
--Success means you resist lure, possibly boost the stat used to resist.
--Failure means your character is unable to resist and MUST indulge lure. Uncertain how mechanical consequences should differ from when char makes to effort to resist... maybe willing indulgence also gives some extra little bonus (+1 morale bonus to starting die pool next scene?), or maybe failed resistance only has a CHANCE to increase the relevant score whereas wholehearted indulgence guarantees it.

...Eh, I should KISS and just make it two outcomes, with the option to forfeit your roll to resist.

I'm also thinking that 1: a character could PRESENT a lure to another character in a kind of persuasion attempt, rolling their own relevant score to increase the DC of the target's roll to resist.

And 2: It might be up to the PLAYER to designate when something is a Lure to their PC. You'd have to make it so there was a metagame incentive to both the success and failure outcomes, and the player wouldn't have the option to forfeit- they gave up metagame choice when they declared that something was a Lure, now they're gonna roll the dice and see which side of their character wins out.

Eh, your name can be great or suck regardless of category. Try all 3 approaches and see what fits.

The "Humanity" meter from VtM might be useful here.

Basically in that you have points in a stat called "humanity", and when you're for instance attacked with lots of fire, or severely wounded or low on blood and see a juicy kine with a neck full of blood you roll as many dice as you have dots in humanity to avoid going into a frenzy and losing control of your character briefly.

In a blood bourne game I'd probably make it two sided, so when it comes to avoiding going into a bestial frenzied (in the "turn bestial and violent" sense not the sense of the frenzied status effect from bloodbourne) state in response to too much damage or too much blood healings you want the meter towards the insight side of things, but when you use a beast pellet you want it to be nearer the beasthood end of the scale.

Similarly, when using Kin weapons and items, you want it hard on the insight end of the scale, but when you face something that rocks your Sanity you want it on the beast end of things to avoid madness.

What are the absolute must-haves before you start playtesting? I've got a pretty good intro chapter (which covers 90% of the mechanics), character creation and most of the GM chapter.

What should be in the player chapter? How many items/monsters should I make? Is the setting creation chapter necessary? Are there any other chapters I'm missing?

something you could try is te passion system found in runequest 6, but make it a abigger part of the game, instead of the players nominating something that they love/hate/are loyal to they could create specific lures to each one, and try keeping them in the dark with this. Say on players more bestial lure is the thrill of combat, and the more he indulges in it the more it starts to erode him. and let's say the same player has a "knowledge" lure in mastering magic. you secretly keep track of how much each lure is being indulged, and give them at least one stimulus for each one per session (say you have 4 players, that's about 12 hooks per game, it will keep you on your feet and your players curious) also, allow their "passions" to overlap in some aspects and allow them to use theese lures as bounesses for their rolls (say, they are doing something to further a certain lure they can call upon it to help them) . I mean it's a system that asks alot of consistent roleplayeing and preparation but it can be hella fun

i'd love an answer to this too

Anyone ever make their own models before, or commissioned them? What was the process like?

Start play testing literally before you even start writing anything down but the barest of notes.
90% of your first drafts are going to be dogshit and playtesting will help you realize this and stop wasting time writing it down

>Start play testing literally before you even start writing anything down but the barest of notes.
I just moved to a new city so I don't have a stable of testers. I would feel bad if I brought in a bunch of strangers and didn't have an actual thing.

So tell them in advance how much there is to what they'll be testing. In my experience "Hey want to help test the combat system for my tabletop RPG" is plenty, plus a good elevator pitch in so they have a decent grasp on the intended genre.

I'm familiar with the system and know I'm not interested in doing something as simple as the setup you describe (where Beasthood and Insight are opposite ends of a spectrum your character has a specific position on, and being a normal human is in the middle). Nothing in Bloodborne really sets up Beasthood and Insight as being opposing forces like that. If anything, there's probably a stronger argument for the opposite.

was more acceptable because it has Beasthood and Insight eating away at your Humanity from both ends, and only coming into direct conflict if one of the two consumes your thoughts so wholly that there's little room left for anything else.

For the people who do playtesting, how alone are testers when playing? Are you a player, a DM, an out of game advisor, or just an observer?

This whole setup really depends on how closely you want to follow the lore of the game. If you don't want to follow it that closely, consider designing it with a basis of how you want the mechanics to work, then rebuild the lore around it.

But in Bloodborne, I don't think beasthood has much of a relationship to any part of a person's personality or thoughts. It seems that being a beast, or a vampire if you're in Cainhurst, is just a physical result of using blood, and being exposed to situations of extreme bloodshed. The only reason I can see insight and beasthood to be opposed is that it's going to become harder to pursue knowledge when you're spending your time as an animal. Though I think it's for that reason that only church hunters seem to become beasts, since they use blood to survive combat. People such as the choir don't use blood because they know of its side-effects and want to maintain the ability to think. The far end of the insight scale would be willing to learn so much that you're no longer able to function normally in society.

Same user as who posted Going further with this idea, obviously increasing your Beasthood or Insight should have mechanical benefits that makes them attractive, at the cost of making your character more and more unhinged and detached from the rest of mankind. With that in mind, what if your Humanity score (your total open dots) is your primary way of resisting Lures?

This sets up a dynamic where at the start of an adventure, it's easy to resist lures, but new players may not want to resist them because they're curious, they don't know any better, and they get good stuff from them. This mirrors the start of Yarnham's descent: at first it was voluntary because nobody knew that there were negative effects to blood ministration or arcane research, but by the time anyone realized there was a problem it was too late.

Once your humanity reaches 0, the only way you can resist a lure is to use its opposing characteristic (use Beasthood to resist Cosmic Lures, Insight to resist Bestial ones), which itself, which should have its own consequences. This represents hitting the tipping point where you've been transformed psychologically, and are now merely awaiting your physical evolution into Beast or Kin.