The Campaign Builder's Guild

problem I'm having: I want to have it so each EP equals an equivalent amount of power no matter what task you're doing, but the skills might not be comparable in that manner. Should I just let each skill go off and do it's own thing?

Big bump, with a question that, surprisingly, isn't quite as superficial as it seems: Just what should I name this thing?

"New Gaming System" isn't as descriptive nor as evocative as a proper name should be, and at this point, it's no longer all that accurate, either. So what should I call it?

I'm contemplating having an upper limit of 20 for skills levels, at least for developmental purposes. I can scale to taste later on, right?

Also, still looking for some sort of name...

Still having trouble with diceless.

Can you call it, " Grunt with Effort"?

That could be decent for a working name, anyway. Once I get some more development underway, hopefully the weirdness of the lack of dice will work itself out.

So, I've definitely settled on having the max skill level for humans be 20, with average humans ranging from 1-4, and average adventurers ranging from 5 to about 15. I might allow godlike beings to go up to 100, or maybe even more, but that's for future work. This way, I can use push-ups as an example use of strength, with 1 EP equal to five push-ups.

Of course, I'd probably have to change the EP level to two times-- maybe even three times-- DUR, just so that not everything is expended all in one go.

Thoughts?

Is the system really that bland?

Anyway, I've settled (for now) on calling this DUGS-- Diceless Universal Game System. I'm currently working on combat, and might have something up on that by the end of next week.

First new material posted to the CBG in over a year!

For those who are wondering, I am still working on this. Right now, my efforts are directed toward the main mechanics, but I thought I'd put in a couple of ideas for some optional mechanics:

A stress system. I'm not entirely sure what this could be used for, but it might be fun to eventually develop, nonetheless.

A sanity system. Lovecraft galore!

Anyway, I'll probably post some new material sometime soon. Please feel free to let me know what you think of what's up here!

Glad I saw this. I'm making my own diceless system (hidden among the posts on my wizard thread) and I'm currently playing around with an energy expenditure mechanic.

I don't know what advice I can offer at this point given how fast and loose we play, except to say to say that "how about [a variant that is not entirely diceless]" comments don't help at all. Every diceless system I've ever seen (especially my favourite of all systems, Nobilis) requires a great deal of interpretation. That, to me, is a feature. Not a bug.

EDIT: Two other things.

Awesome name. DUGS.

Is combat damage narrative like in Fudge/FATE, so that a single success/failure might represent a change in tactical position, distraction, disarmament etc.?

EDIT 2: Also, this.

Quote from: Salacious AngelGlad I saw this. I'm making my own diceless system (hidden among the posts on my wizard thread) and I'm currently playing around with an energy expenditure mechanic.

I'll have to try to remember to check that out sometime. Remind me, if I don't remember myself.

I like the energy expenditure approach, personally. The idea, I think, is that you have to put something in, in order to get something done.

Quote from: http://www.dyasdesigns.com/roleplay/decision_driven.htmlthis[/url].

That actually looks pretty cool! I can only give it so much attention at 12:41am, but it looks pretty decent.

New material. This is slowly closing in on a workable state!

Your system seems quite elegant so far.  I do have a question (really just a request for clarification) about action resolution.

So there are two Energy Pools, physical and mental, equal to Durability and Intelligence respectively, and then there are skills which determine how many points one can spend on a particular task.  I take it that skills (costing less than abilities) are always going to be higher numerically than attributes, unless they're at 0 (i.e. if you have the Climb skill it should always makes sense to use your skill instead of Strength to climb, so it only pays to have skills so long as they're higher than your abilities).

So let's say I'm climbing a cliff and I have an Energy score of 12 (physical) and a Climb skill of 7.  The difficulty of the cliff, if I'm reading the system correctly, is known only to the GM.  Let's say that difficulty is 5.

If I attempt to climb the cliff, do I decide how much Energy I want to spend?  Do I "bid" a certain number of EP in order to attempt to the cliff?  And I lose those EP but do not succeed at the task, do I have to spend the full amount to complete the task?  Let's say I bid 4 EP to climb the cliff and thus fail since the difficulty is 5.  Do I have to spend another 5 EP to complete the task?  Is there any way to ascertain a difficulty rating?

Quote from: SteerpikeYour system seems quite elegant so far.  I do have a question (really just a request for clarification) about action resolution.

So there are two Energy Pools, physical and mental, equal to Durability and Intelligence respectively, and then there are skills which determine how many points one can spend on a particular task.  I take it that skills (costing less than abilities) are always going to be higher numerically than attributes, unless they're at 0 (i.e. if you have the Climb skill it should always makes sense to use your skill instead of Strength to climb, so it only pays to have skills so long as they're higher than your abilities).

So let's say I'm climbing a cliff and I have an Energy score of 12 (physical) and a Climb skill of 7.  The difficulty of the cliff, if I'm reading the system correctly, is known only to the GM.  Let's say that difficulty is 5.

If I attempt to climb the cliff, do I decide how much Energy I want to spend?  Do I "bid" a certain number of EP in order to attempt to the cliff?  And I lose those EP but do not succeed at the task, do I have to spend the full amount to complete the task?  Let's say I bid 4 EP to climb the cliff and thus fail since the difficulty is 5.  Do I have to spend another 5 EP to complete the task?  Is there any way to ascertain a difficulty rating?

experience in a skill should enable an ability to ascertain the difficulty, or some amount of it...

Generally, the best way to figure out a difficulty is trial and error. In a situation like your climb example-- and I'm going to assume that it's a ground start-- you simply wouldn't be able to lift yourself up. You can then give it another try, knowing that you have to put in more effort. If you then put in 7, you succeed at climbing, and you know that the cliff has a climb difficulty somewhere from 5-7. Maybe next time you might try to put in 6, and hope that the difficulty wasn't 7. (with only 12 physical EP, you wouldn't be able to make a second attempt right away.)


As of right now, skills become increasingly harder to improve, while attributes do not. This will be changed, as soon as I figure out how I want to handle it. The problem with the current set-up is that it quickly becomes easier to just take another level in an attribute than in a skill.


Actually, writing this, I think I figured out how I want to handle advancing level costs. I think I'll let skills keep the Fibonacci curve, and give the attributes a +x curve, where x is equal to the current level. Up until levels 9-10, it'll be easier to add a new level in a skill than in an equal attribute. After ten levels, things switch around, though...

Edit--

Vreeg, that's a fair enough point. I might make it so that if the difficulty is less than half your skill level, you can know the difficulty. Of course, that also gives skills a bit of an edge-up on advantages, when it comes to action resolution. Hm...

Edit #2--

My apologies. I just double checked my math, and the two curves would actually converge at levels 7-9, not 9 and 10. In order to get them to converge at levels 9 and 10, I'd need a slightly steeper curve. Also, I probably should let the attributes have the early advantage, and let skills improve better in the higher levels. More to think about...