The Campaign Builder's Guild

Rolling the Dice

The game uses two 10-sided dice of different colors, typically numbered 0-9 (0 representing "10"). One color dice is the Hot dice, the other the Cold dice. (For Storm Knights, the Hot dice is red, the Cold dice blue.)

The player rolls the dice and discards the larger of the two. If the remaining dice is Hot, he adds the number to his Skill or Combat Rating. If it is Cold, he subtracts it. If the dice are tied, nothing is added or subtracted. This number is called the _bonus_.

Example: If you roll a Hot 5 and a Cold 1, you discard the 5. Your bonus is -1.

Example: If you roll a Hot 3 and a Cold 4, you discard the 4. Your bonus is +3.

Example: If you roll a Hot 9 and a Cold 9, you discard both. Your bonus is +0.

This generates a bonus from -9 to +9. You add (or subtract) it to your Rating.

Analysis

That's it. That's the entire rolling method. It's simple, clear, and direct.

No chart lookups, no funky odds, no massive numbers of dice.

As far as probabilities go, it's identical to 1d10-1d10 (and you can use that instead, if you wish), but far quicker.

People can instantly tell which number on the two dice is larger. (Remember rolling % dice in D&D? Same exact thing.) They can immediately tell which color a die is. Then they add or subtract the resulting single digit number.

It's quick. It's clear. It's easy.

During playtesting, the method felt odd for the first half-dozen rolls. After that, it became habitual and very, very quick.

This die method leads to some interesting effects, which I'll talk about next post.

Never Tell Me The Odds!

Die odds are something players and GM's never need to deal with directly. They can roll the dice all day long, and never have to plumb the black depths of probability. For those that are interested, here's the scoop:

Under 2d10 Dice, you will roll a bonus from -9 to 0 to +9. The odds of rolling a 0 are 10%. 1 out of 10 times, you will roll a bonus of 0.

Each number, higher or lower, is increasingly unlikely. The decrease is 1% each time. So, the odds of rolling a bonus of +1 is 9%. The odds of rolling a bonus of -1 is also 9%. +2? 8%. -2? 8%. The progression continues until +9 (1%) and -9 (also 1%). Or, in table form:

0 = 10%
1 = 9%
2 = 8%
3 = 7%
4 = 6%
5 = 5%
6 = 4%
7 = 3%
8 = 2%
9 = 1%

2d10 Dice is very, very quick. It is, however, slightly unusual. (Not a lot of games use a similar method.) There are a couple of alternate methods provided, for those interested.

Alternate Rolling Methods

There are two alternate rolling methods the Game Master or players can use, which produce identical results (both as to generated Bonuses and the probability of getting any given Bonus). One is d10-d10, the other is Opposed d10's.

d10-d10 also involves two 10-sided dice, including a Hot and Cold die. Roll both, and subtract the Cold die from the Hot die to get the Bonus.

With the third option, Opposed d10's, the Player rolls a d10 and adds it to the Skill Rating or Combat Rating. The GM rolls a d10, and adds it to the Challenge Rating.

Example: The Player has a skill of 10, and is facing a Challenge Rating of 8. The player rolls a d10, and rolls a 3 for a total of 13 (10 + 3). The GM rolls a d10, getting 1, for a total of 9 (8 + 1). The Result is 4 (13 - 9).

Again, this provides the exact same (effective) spread of Bonuses, with the exact same probabilities as 2d10 Dice.

The weakness of d10-d10 is that it involves subtraction, which is slower than a straight comparison. Most players can instantly tell which die of a set of two is higher, and discerning color is even faster.

While Opposed d10's provides the same probability as the other two, it requires both the player and the GM to roll every single Challenge, which also slows play (most noticeably in combat).

The default method for is 2d10 Dice. The other rolling methods are provided for those who prefer another dice method.

I read the two dice posts above.
The system sounds interesting.

Have you considered also using an "action roll" system or another way to get a quick point here and there to further skew points when say, facing an extremely powerful villain. I've always wondered if any system uses an an "action roll" rather than just a straight up point modifier.

eg. in DnD 3.5 Eberron- you DO have action points, but they're something extra- what I'm talking about is that instead of "add 1 difficulty" if terrain is bad, you would "add 1d6 difficulty" if terrain is bad...and add 2d6 if the terrain is EXTREMELY treacherous.

If no system does this, I wonder why. It would certainly mess with the probabilities, but it would also eliminate some debates and the need to look things up on tables (it appears to be a design goal of yours to avoid tables). (e.g. GMs will not need to consult the "fire damage" or "wind damage" tables).

Quote from: Light DragonI read the two dice posts above.
The system sounds interesting.

Thanks. :)

Quote from: Light DragonHave you considered also using an "action roll" system or another way to get a quick point here and there to further skew points when say, facing an extremely powerful villain.

The GM has total control to set Skills and Attributes of NPC's to any level he wishes. He can set Challenge Ratings to any level he wishes.

Indeed, that's a large part of the mid-game assumption: after the GM becomes adept with the system, he can just wing it with regards to CR's, instead of referring to a chart.

There's a fire, raging out of control. What damage does it do? Whatever you wish, based on how deadly it is supposed to be: 15, 20, 25, or more. Up to the GM.

After a while, he should be able to set all these off the top of his head. (Assuming I write it up correctly.)

Also, there is a "hero point" mechanic, which I call Resolve. I'll talk about that in a bit.

Simplicity Itself

Sometimes very simple things to do are quite complex to understand. Take running. One foot in front of the other, at speed. Simple to do. Two-year-olds can do it flawlessly. Yet there is a load of anatomical, muscular, and neural complexity behind it: muscles, skeleton, tendons, blood vessels, lungs, balance, eyesight, inner ear functions, digestive system, ATP, mitochondria, and on and on.

Simple to do. Complex to discuss.

2d10 Dice is the same way. Exceedingly quick and simple in practice. Complex to discuss.

Sometimes the discussion obscures the simplicity. And since I'm about to do another post discussing the intricacies, I thought I'd back up and underscore how simple the method is.

Quick recap: two 10-sided dice, one blue and one red. You roll them. You look at them, and see which die is lower value. If it's red, you add. If it's blue, you subtract.

Roll. Look. Math.

Simple. Direct. Obvious.

I just want to describe an experiment. A way to test 2d10 Dice for yourself, to see how complex it is.

Take two differently colored dice, one red, one blue. Roll them on a surface and look at them.

How long does it take you to notice which dice is which color?

Try and time it. I bet you can't physically move your thumb fast enough to start and stop a stopwatch to measure that length of time.

It's measured in fractions of a millisecond, because it's innate to the sense of sight. Unless you're blind or color-blind (and even then, you just need to pick the right dice), you can tell what colors two objects are.

Easily. Instantaneously.

Now roll two dice and look at the numbers. How long does it take you to know that the numbers are equal, or that one is larger?

Again, you cannot operate a stopwatch that quickly. You just know that 4 is smaller than 5, or that 6 is larger than 3. It's programmed into your brain, from the time you learned to count, and is essentially instantaneous.

Utterly simple. Unbelievably fast.

Doing both of these things at the same time takes a millisecond. Maybe less. And there's no decision involved, no cognition, no reference to internal knowledge or external charts.

No effort.

You look. You see. You know.

Your eyes and your brain provide the information instantly. You know which number is smaller. You know what the color is: red or blue?

Red. Hot. Blue. Cold.

Colors and labels chosen to correspond with each other, almost immediately, because we closely associate those two colors and concepts. You know the colors, and the colors tell you what to do with the smaller number: Hot, add. Cold, subtract.

That last step takes a little effort, because it's math, but it's really easy math, which can be carried out really quickly. Add 1, 2 ... 9 or subtract 1, 2 ... 9.

And that's it.

No, seriously. That's it. There is no other step. No further complexity.

Roll. Look. Math.

It's that simple.

It's new, unfamiliar, but in no way is it complicated.

Roll. Look. Math.

Simple. Obvious. Direct.

That's why I chose this method.

Automatic Success

The die rolling method lead to the following rule, regarding automatic successes.

The Rule: If a character's Skill Rating is 10 points above the Challenge Rating (as modified by circumstances, if applicable), the character automatically scores a Success (1 SL), without needing to roll.

CR 5, Skill 15? Automatic Success.

CR 10, Skill 20? Automatic Success.

This rule only applies to Skill Challenges. Also, the player can always choose to make a roll, if they want to do better (or just see how well they did). Other than those two caveats, +10 points means no roll is needed.

For the character, Automatic Success means the task has become so familiar, it's habitual. They don't have to think about it much, if at all. It's pretty much effortless.

"Makes it look easy" is the sign of true mastery, and something we've all seen. We know someone is a great writer, actor, or athlete, because they make their hideously difficult endeavors look effortless. That's an Automatic Success.

"Automatic Success" Analysis

Taking a look at the Skill Rating and Challenge Rating charts, under this rule:

• A Professional (Skill 10) always succeeds at Routine (CR 0) Challenges.

This pretty much makes sense. Professionals should always succeed at tasks that are Routine for their field. That's kinda one of the expectations of being a professional.

[Note: In the game, I recommend DM's never make anyone roll for Routine tasks, because that's boring. In real life, however, people fail at Routine tasks all the time. Just watch someone who's been using computers for over a decade double-click on everything, because they don't have an innate sense of what they need to double- or single-click on. That's Failure at a Routine bit of knowledge. Even so, this is an action movie game, and rolling for Routine tasks is boring, so don't do it.]

• Accomplished characters have skills of 15+, and always succeed at Easy (CR 5) tasks.

Same thing. If you're Accomplished, Easy tasks are effortless.

• World Class characters have skills of 20+, and always succeed at Difficult tasks (CR 10).

• A Grand Master has a Skill Rating of 25+, and they always succeed at Formidable Challenges (CR 15).

What makes someone a Grand Master? Tasks that Professionals usually fail at (85% failure rate v. Formidable), they do without even thinking about it.

• Legendary characters — people who are one of the best in all of history — have skills of 30+, and they always succeed at Grueling tasks (CR 20).

Grueling tasks are "only six people in the world could make this shot" deals. Legendary characters — Einstein, Da Vinci, Robin Hood — are so skilled, they don't even think twice about such challenges, they just do it. That's how good they are.

This is another example of how I've tried to build the Skill Rating and Challenge Rating charts to be easily understood, in real world terms. They make sense — we can all think of common tasks that have become habitual, we do them without thinking twice. Unless there's some adverse circumstances (little sleep, harsh weather, being drunk) we can just do the task, we never fail.

It takes a long time to climb the skill curve (by deliberate design choice). But once you do, there are significant benefits. Automatically succeeding at low-CR Skill Challenges is one of them.

Characters, By The Numbers

These are the game mechanics that define all characters (PC's and NPC's):

Attributes: Basic, innate capabilities. Physical strength, flexibility and reflexes, innate intelligence, and so forth.

Skills: Learned or trained abilities. How to operate a vehicle, how to compose a poem, how to shoot a gun, and so forth.

Characteristics: Setting-specific game values. Measured on the same scale as Attributes and Skills. Rules for these (how to gain or lose, what you can do with them, the effects each causes) will vary from setting to setting.

• In a cyberpunk setting, Dehumanization might represent the cumulative alienating effects of a nihilistic lifestyle and deliberate cybernetic augmentation. The more metal, the more cruel, the less human you are.

• In a cosmic horror setting, Forbidden Knowledge is a measure of how many things Man Was Not Meant To Know that you now know. As this number creeps higher, you might begin to suffer from schizophrenia, psychosis, mania, or other mental illnesses. Too high, and you go irretrievably insane.

• In Storm Knights (my revamp of the Torg setting), Cybervalue (Tharkoldan and Cyberpapal), Orrorshan Wickedness, Ayslish Honor and Corruption, and Reality itself are all Characteristics. (Along with other similar values.)

Traits: Free-form, character-specific tags that describe unique facets — good and bad — about the character. These can be talents, personality tics, physical oddities, or nearly anything else you can imagine. Each has a specific circumstance in which they help or hurt the character. Some examples:

• "Nietzsche Is My Co-pilot." (God is dead, so it's easier for you to resist miracles.)

• "Born With A Gun In My Hand." (You're expert with all kinds of pistols.)

• "The Bottle Is A Friend Of Mine." (One drink turns into two drinks turns into passing out and waking up... God knows where.)

• "I Dare You... Say That One More Time." (When people Taunt you, it usually turns out badly. For everybody.)

When a positive Trait applies, it doubles the bonus granted by an Action Deck card or a point of Resolve/Possibility (see next). And when a negative Trait comes into effect by causing a significant difficulty, you gain an extra Resolve/Possibility point.

The raw numbers of Attributes and Skills are shared by everyone: one character with a Firearms of 15 is pretty much like another with a Firearms of 15. Traits describe what is wholly unique about your specific character. Nobody else in the world has the same Traits you do.

Resolve/Possibilities: This is your pool of "hero points". They help you do better on Challenges. You gain them at the start of a module, at the end of an act, and every time a negative Trait causes significant difficulties.

(These are called Resolve in the base system, and everyone has a Rating of at least 1. In Storm Knights, they're called Possibilities, and Ords don't ever get any.)

Obviously, each of these areas has some more in-depth rules, which I intend to discuss next. I'll start with Skills.

Skills, Experience, and The Action Movie Hero

I want to talk about the details of the skill system. In order for the design of skills to make sense, you have to understand a couple of things.

This is an action movie system. Skills are designed to work within that framework.

Also, Experience and Advancement had a major influence on how skills were built. Let me explain.

Experience and Advancement

Your level of training is represented by Skill Points. To this, you add a bonus based on the appropriate Attribute. The total of these two is your Skill Rating (or "Skill").

Every module you receive a small number of Experience Points (XP). To raise your Skill Points (SP) by 1 costs a certain number of XP, based on the current SP level:

0-9 = 1 XP
10-19 = 2 XP
20-29 = 3 XP
+10 = +1 XP

Remember, this is the Skill Points. You add your Attribute Bonus to this to get your Skill Rating.

Example: If you have 9 Skill Points in Firearms, it costs 1 XP to raise it to 10. If you have 10 Skill Points in Firearms, it costs 2 XP to raise it to an 11.

Pretty easy.

Modules

This is an action movie system. Unless the GM decides otherwise, all PC's are assumed to be action movie heroes. They should act like it. This means risking their lives for innocents, protecting the helpless, persevering against overwhelming odds, and displaying cunning and tenaciousness in fighting villainy.

(Yes, I use words like "heroism" and "villainy". It's that kind of game. You're heroes. Act like it. (Also, I use the Oxford comma. Suffer.))

PC's who act in a heroic and inspiring fashion, who protect the innocent and fight the villainous, gain more XP. Those who do not... don't.

Each module, the GM assesses the party's performance:

1: Failure. The players failed to stop the villain or achieve their primary goal. They "lost" the module.

or

Ignoble Victory. They won a Victory, but didn't act heroically.

2: Victory. The party stopped the bad guy, or otherwise achieved their primary goal. They "won" the module.

or

Ignoble Significant Victory. They won a Significant Victory, but weren't especially heroic.

3: Significant Victory. The players did very well, not just winning the module, but achieving other side goals of significance (which vary from campaign to campaign). Additionally, the party risked their lives for innocents, protected the helpless, persevered against overwhelming odds, and were cunning and tenacious in fighting the villains. If recounted, the module would be an inspiring story.

(In Storm Knights, this level of accomplishment automatically qualifies as a Glory, and plants a Story Seed.)

If the party as a whole acted heroically, but one specific character didn't, rate them lower. Villains don't get to coast on the heroism of their companions.

These numbers — 1 to 3 — are the Outcome of the module. They are related to XP in a deep and intricate fashion: each point of Outcome equals 1 point of Experience. (Landmark Modules — major, globe-spanning events — add an extra XP for a Victory or Significant Victory.)

Spending XP

You spend XP to increase Skill Points, as above. If you don't have enough points, you can save them until you do.

One limitation: you can only increase a skill by one point after a module. If you want to increase it by another point, you have to wait until after the next module.

Nearly all Skills have Specializations, which I'll explain next message. Each Specialization costs 5 XP. If you learn a Specialization of a skill, you cannot also increase your Skill Points at the same time.

Taken together, the Experience and Advancement rules mean it takes a very long time for characters to become Legends. This is a deliberate decision, but it does have some consequences for skills. I'll talk about that next message.

A few small notes on the XP system.

Advancement Speed: I assume that the majority of modules will end with an Outcome of 2 and hence award 2 XP. This allows for the player to increase two basic skills (SP 0-10) by 1 point apiece after each module, or one advanced skill (SP 11-20) by 1 point after a module.

That's a speed of advancement that allows for satisfactory, but not too-rapid, progress. Which is my goal. (Of course, I'll know more after further playtesting.)

Specializations and Skills: Specializations cost 5 XP, so buying one means you have fewer SP's. This is a deliberate choice. A character can be very skilled in a skill, very versatile in that same skill, but not both. These distinctions are what makes each character unique.

Calculating Cumulative Cost: The XP cost is designed to make it easy to calculate how much total XP is needed for a specific SP.

Starting with a new skill (0 SP), it costs 10 XP to raise it to 10 SP, an additional 20 XP to raise it to 20 SP, and an additional 30 XP to raise it to 30 SP. The total, from new skill to 30 SP, is 60 XP.

These are nice round numbers, easy to calculate: How much does it cost for 14 SP? 10 XP for 0-10, 8 XP for 11-14. Total 18.

Other cost methods — such as the one where the price increased every 5 SP — made it harder to calculate costs. It was also more complex in play and character creation (see below).

Mnemonics: The costs are also designed to be easy to remember — basic skills (0-10) cost 1 XP each. If the first number is a 1 (10, 11, ...), it costs 1 point more. If the first number is a 2 (23, 24, ...) it costs 2 points more. And so on.

I'm not sure the mnemonic is needed, as the XP costs are pretty straightforward, but it's there anyway. (And, again, other cost methods were less easy to remember.)

Character Creation: Character creation should be as simple as possible, so people can get into the game quickly. The costs are intended to simplify character creation.

During creation, players get a number of "customization" points, which allow them to customize the character, buying more Skill Points than the default, or an extra Specialization, and so forth. How many points you get depends on how gritty or heroic the campaign world is intended to be.

These tweak points are spent exactly like XP. You can buy Skill Points, Specializations, and so forth at the same cost you would in play. In effect, they're free XP.

At 1 point per SP, it makes creating the character a pretty quick process. This simplicity was carried over into the XP prices, to make that equally as easy.

Avoiding Complications: When Character Creation and advancement use different costs, it causes some odd effects — different pricing between chargen and XP means some things are cheaper in chargen, which encourages people to build characters around those price breaks. It's also harder to devise a fair system to create more experienced characters.

This approach also eliminated those troubles.

Faster Advancement: If people play less often, or want characters to advance quicker, it's really easy to do so; just give out more XP. I prefer slower advancement (hence the "increase cost at 5" method), but this system was a good compromise between speed and simplicity.

As I've said before, the system isn't perfect. (No rules set is.) But I've done my best to think things through from several different angles, to make the mechanics as simple and easy as possible. Hopefully, both players and GM's will benefit.

All About Skills

Skills represent specific areas of expertise, such as firearms, athletics, or charm. The firearms skill represents the character's ability to shoot (e.g.) pistols and shotguns, lifting their ability to heft heavy objects, charm their ability to flatter others.  Nearly every action one wishes to attempt will have a pertinent skill.

Each Attribute grants a bonus to associated skills. Dexterity skills include acrobatics and dodge; Strength takes in lifting and hand-to-hand combat; Influence covers charm and persuade.

What Do Skills Allow?

Each individual skill is capable of doing a lot. Vehicles, for example, covers driving a car, a semi truck, a tank, a helicopter, a fighter jet, a sailboat, a canoe, a wagon or chariot, and even the Space Shuttle.

Of course, you have to be specifically trained on each of these. Which is where Specializations come in.

Like many skills, vehicles has a number of Specializations:

Vehicles
Default: Any
• Land Vehicles
• Water Vehicles
• Air Vehicles
• Beast Riding
• Wagoneer
• Space Vehicles

When you learn 1 Skill Point in vehicles, you can choose one Specialization from the list. (Which is what "Default: Any" means.) With that one Specialization, you use your full vehicles Skill Rating. With any other Specialization, you are considered Untrained (no Skill Points, maybe penalties, maybe you can't attempt Challenges at all).

After a module, and assuming you have enough XP, you can spend 5 Experience Points to learn another Specialization. With that new Specialization, you can use your full vehicles Skill Rating. Eventually, you could learn all the additional Specializations or just keep increasing your Skill Rating, while only using the default.

The computers skill works a little differently.

Computers
Default: Operate
• Operate
• Programming
• Hardware Repair
• Hardware Design
• Cracking
• Decking

When you learn the first Skill Point in computers, you gain the operate Specialization for free, because that's the default. Again, by spending Experience Points, you can learn additional Specializations.

Not all skills have Specializations, but most do. All combat skills — firearms, hand-to-hand combat, and so forth — have Specializations, and are usually Default: Any.

Modifying the Mechanics

This is the default setup for the game. GM's are free to add Specializations, divide existing Specializations, split a group of Specializations off into a new skill, or make a single Specialization into its own skill. GM's can even add Specializations to a skill which (in the default rules) has none. Some examples:

• Unarmed brawling and bladed weapons are both Specializations of hand-to-hand combat. Some GM's may prefer to have separate skills for unarmed combat and melee weapons.

• Some GM's might want to further subdivide the vehicles Specializations, for example turning air vehicles into propeller airplanes, jet airplanes, and rotor vehicles. (Possibly doing the same for the other vehicles Specializations.)

• Some GM's might wish to split beast riding and wagoneering into their own skills, and leave the others under vehicles. (Or even split each vehicles Specialization into its own skill.)

• Some GM's might want to ignore Specializations completely, and allow the base skill to apply to all potential Specializations. (This is the simplest option, though you lose a lot of flavor.)

GM's can decide which of these they prefer (if any) on a per-skill or per-Specialization basis. Or they can use the default rules.

The default will be a small number of skills (20 or so, not counting FX skills), some of which require Specializations. The Specializations themselves will be relatively broad, as in the vehicles example.

Simplifying Skill Specializations

Skills are pretty simple:

Skill Points + Attribute Bonus = Skill Rating. Roll a bonus, and you're done.

There is some added complexity, because reality is a cold-hearted bitch who refuses to be reduced to simple models.

Many skills have no Specializations. As an example, Intimidate, Overbear, and Dodge.

Other skills do: Investigation has the Evidence Analysis, Find, and Research Specializations. (The Default being "Any".)

When you learn your first point in Investigation, you can choose any one of those Specializations to learn, for free. (Find, we'll say.) Let's suppose your Int bonus were +5. That makes your Skill Rating a 6.

When Finding things, you roll a 6. When doing anything else you roll Unskilled: 0 Skill Points, Attribute +5 = Skill Rating 5.

Later, after you've gone on several modules, you've increased your Skill Points to 5 and learned Evidence Analysis. That makes your Skill Rating a 10 (5 +5).

When you roll for Find or Evidence Analysis, you use a 10. When you roll for Research, you use a 5 (as you're Unskilled).

The same holds for Vehicles, Hand-to-Hand, and any other skill with Specializations. Full Skill Rating for those Specializations you've learned, Unskilled for any others. (Some skills you can't roll Unskilled, and sometimes penalties apply. Reality strikes again.)

In the skill list, Investigation appears as:

Investigation (Int): Evidence Analysis, Find, Research. Any.

The name of the skill, the Attribute abbreviation, the names of Specializations, and the Default Specialization. Pretty straightforward.

Computers looks like this:

Computers (Int): Hacking, Hardware Design, Hardware Repair, Operate, Programming. Operate.

The Default Specialization is Operate instead of Any, because you gain Operate with the first Skill Point. Again, pretty straightforward.

Here's a more complicated one:

Hand-to-Hand (Str): Brawling, Melee Weapons, Hard Martial Arts, Unarmed Combat. Light Weapons (Dex), Soft Martial Arts (Dex). Any.

Hand-to-Hand is based on Strength. But there are two H-T-H Specializations that are based on Dexterity instead. Those are listed separately, and with the appropriate Attribute. How does this work in play?

Let's assume you have a Strength bonus of +2 and a Dexterity bonus of +5. You have 5 Skill Points in H-T-H. You've learned Brawling (Str) and Light Weapons (Dex).

When you attack with your fists, you use a Skill Rating of 5 +2, or 7. When you attack with a knife, rapier, or other Light Weapon, you use a 5 +5, or 10.

Most melee weapons and attacks should be based off Strength. (I know this doesn't match with most people's conceptions of swordfighting, but that's what my reading has indicated.) But some should be based off Dexterity. So that's what I did.

My goal is to simplify as much as practical. Sometimes, you can't be as simple as you'd like. This is one of those times.

Skills, Meet Attributes

Most RPG's have at least a little bit of simulation in them: we generally expect mechanics to reflect reality. Pistols shouldn't do more damage than the main cannon of the Death Star, a puppy shouldn't be harder to hurt than a battleship, and a butter-fingered incompetent shouldn't be a better basketball player than Michael Jordan. Even in an action movie game, these things matter.

The Attributes and Skills, and how they relate to each other, are designed to operate in accordance with reality. Not exactly duplicate it, but to reflect it as much as practical.

Attributes are innate abilities of a character, things they are born with. Strength is an abstraction covering muscle mass and tone, corresponding to how much physical force you can generate and control. You lift and pull heavy things with your muscles, swing a sword with them, and grip tighter to a ledge or ladder. All of these things are made possible by your Strength, and a higher Strength means you do them better.

Intellect is your capacity to engage in complex mental work. You can recall facts and memories, consider different elements of a problem, and comprehend new ideas. All of these capabilities are made possible by your Intellect, and a higher Intellect means you do them better.

The Attributes were chosen because they reflect — to a greater or lesser extent — actual capacities humans have. (Of course, they are also similar to the "standard six" Attributes common to many RPG's. This is also deliberate.) These innate capacities, which we have in the real world, are what makes it possible for us to learn from experiences, to improve via training and practice, and to innovate new techniques and approaches.

Innate capacities underlie our learned abilities. In this system, learned abilities are Skills. Attributes provide the raw capacity that Skills build upon.

Why not the full capacity, or Attribute Value? Because, no matter how strong or smart you are, an Average person (Att 10) doesn't become a Professional (SR 10) with just 1 point in a Skill. They become a Novice. A Legendary person (Att 15) doesn't become highly Accomplished (SR 15) with just 1 point, they become Skilled. Even the talented have to learn and practice before they become great.

This matches personal experience and scholarly research. Innate capabilities do give people a boost up, but not so much they they simply become one of the foremost figures in their fields with but a smidge of learning.

Our innate capacities affect us in another way: they set limits on what we can eventually accomplish. No matter how hard we work, no matter how much time we spend practicing some things, if we don't have a certain level of innate ability, there are some things we can never accomplish.

This is depressing, and against the ethos of the demos, but is is true. If you're not born with exceptional hand-eye coordination, you won't become an NBA center. If your eyesight is weak, you will never be an effective fighter pilot. And becoming a contortionist requires a great deal of flexibility, something that cannot be developed beyond a certain point.

This is reflected in the game with a straightforward rule: when Skill Points exceed an Attribute, XP costs double. If your Attribute is a 5, your 6th skill point in all associated Skills costs double (as does every Skill Point thereafter). If it is 10, your 11th costs double. If it's a 15, your 16th costs double.

Once you've exceeded your innate capacity, it simply becomes harder to learn. People with a high innate capability in a given area start off better, improve faster, and achieve more in that area. Again, this is backed up by real world experience and scholarly research.

(Rules Option: A hard cap on Skill Points, in addition to the increased cost, is even more accurate. Under this entirely optional rule you can never gain more Skill Points in a Skill than twice its Attribute. Att 5? You can only ever learn 10 SP in associated skills. However, this isn't very action-movie, and hence is an optional rule.)

While not perfectly duplicating reality, the interplay between Attributes and Skills does reflect it. As much as is practical, given other considerations.

(Such as playability, enjoyment, simplicity, and all those other annoying things that muddle up perfectly good unplayable mechanics.)

Analyzing the Attribute / XP Rule

In the spirit of my other plausibility analyses, let's run the "x2 XP" rule through the plausibility analyzer. We'll look at what Skill Rating (Skill Points + Att Bonus) the increased cost kicks in, and see if it makes sense.

Attribute: Skill Rating. Description.

Attribute 5: Skill Rating 6, Skilled. With the lowest possible human Attribute, you will struggle to become a Professional in the field.

8: SR 10, Professional. With an Attribute that's notably below Average, you can have a career in the field, but find it hard to stand out in the crowd.

10: SR 13, Professional. With an Average Attribute, after some hard work you've become a very good professor, doctor, lawyer, or whatever, but you face an uphill battle in becoming a truly remarkable member of your profession.

12: SR 16, Accomplished. With a notably above average Attribute, most in your field know you by reputation, but moving into the top tier of your profession is proving difficult.

15: SR 20, World Class. You're there. With the highest possible human Attribute Rating, you are literally one of the best in the world. But it's going to be a long, hard slog to become one of the truly great ones.

This is the central concept of the rule: If you're wholly unsuited for something, you should have to work hard to accomplish great things, harder than those with notable natural aptitude.

Let's suppose two characters, one with a 15 Attribute and one with a 5.

Alan, our 5, can't count (even on his fingers), has trouble walking and breathing at the same time, and finds a single sheet of Kleenex to be a heavy burden.

Bob, our 15, is the fittest of the fit, the smartest of the smart, a strongman to beat Hercules and a charmer to shame James Bond.

Those two characters differ greatly. And, although Alan can eventually scale the heights and become one of the greats, it simply takes more work. A lot more work.

That makes perfect sense. A person with absolutely no aptitude for a subject should have to work harder to develop it.

An argument can be made that Alan should be hard capped. Why should...

• A Barney Fife clone, twitches, fumble-fingers and all, ever be able to shoot the wings off a fly?

• A pasty-faced pushover, the sort of spindly geek that 98-pound weaklings laugh at and pick on, ever be able to become Mr. World?

• An socially inept introvert, the kind of dork who laughs at random, for no apparent reason, makes offensive comments incessantly, and becomes tongue tied when talking to anyone except his mom, ever become the kind of guy who can casually pick up supermodels in a bar?

That's a very good argument, which is why the optional Hard Cap rule exists. Yet this is an action movie game, and "head cheerleader becomes a veteran commando" is practically de rigueur.

Accordingly, the x2 XP rule increases the cost of skills, but doesn't cap them. It may not be perfectly realistic, but it is appropriately cinematic.

The x2 rule itself, however, holds up well under analysis. Attributes of 5 struggle to become Professionals, those of 10 can become standout Professionals, but struggle to become Accomplished, and those with a 15 can become World Class, but find it harder to progress beyond there.

That makes sense. We've all tried to learn something, only to hit a wall where progress is slowed to a crawl.

Again, the mechanic doesn't exactly model the real world, but it is easily understandable and very plausible. It makes the game more approachable, more like the real world.

And, as an added bonus it slows skill advancement at higher skill levels, something very necessary. It also provides a direct benefit for buying a larger Attribute during character creation (beyond the skill bonus) or increasing one during play. Both of these are good things, necessary things.

The rule makes different Attribute levels worthwhile (sometimes very worthwhile), slows down super-high skill progression, and just makes sense in real-world terms. Even if you disagree with the philosophy behind it (see last post), the rule itself works.

Revising Rules

Skills are the core of the system, which is why I've been banging on about them for so long. I want to move on to other topics, but before I do, I have some corrections and expansions to post. I'll start with the Skill Points chart, which has been thoroughly rewritten and slightly expanded.

Gauging Skill Points

Skill Points indicate the amount of instruction, study, practice, or experience a character has invested in a skill. You can judge how knowledgeable a character is using the following chart.

0 = Untrained. You know essentially nothing about the skill.

1 – 3 = Rudimentary. You've learned the basic concepts of the skill, but little else. There are large gaps in your understanding.

4 – 8 = Familiarity. You have mastered the basics, but struggle with intermediate concepts. You make mistakes that other beginners probably won't catch, but those who know what they're doing will.

9 – 13 = Proficiency. You have a solid grasp of the theory and practice of the skill. Advanced concepts can be challenging.

14 – 18 = Expertise. You have begun delving into the esoterica of the field, becoming knowledgeable in several advanced areas.

19 – 23 = Superiority. You are very skilled, thoroughly conversant with nearly all of the advanced subjects of the skill, though there are esoterica beyond even your grasp.

24 and higher = Mastery. There is very little you don't know about the subject matter.

Analysis

Let's see how the Skill Point descriptions above relate to Skill Ratings. We'll start with an Average person. (Reminder: Skill Rating is Skill Points plus Attribute bonus.)

The bonus for an Average attribute is +3. With Rudimentary training, 1 Skill Point, Average people have a Skill Rating of 4 (1 +3), which makes them Novices. An Average person with Rudimentary knowledge is a Novice.

This is a common-sense, easily understood measurement. People with virtually no training or experience are Novices, pretty much by definition. But let's look at the rest of the chart.

• Average people (+3) with Familiarity (4) are Skilled (Skill Rating 7).

• Average people (+3) with Proficiency (9) are Professionals (Skill Rating 12).

• Average people (+3) with Expertise (14) are Accomplished (Skill Rating 17).

• Average people (+3) with Superiority (19) are World Class (Skill Rating 22).

• Average people (+3) with a Mastery of the subject (24) are Grand Masters (Skill Rating 27).

And just to break free of all the Average people:

• A Legendary person (+5) with Mastery of a subject (24) is a Grand Master (Skill Rating 29), but he's almost a Legend. It takes that extra bit of knowledge to truly achieve immortality.

Again, all of these make sense. Proficiency pretty much defines the basic requirements to become a Professional. Superiority does indicate a World Class individual. And you can easily understand why Mastery of a subject would qualify you as a Grand Master.

In all areas of this game, my main goal has been to clarify and simplify the mechanics, then explain them as clearly as I am able. That means I've had to do a lot of revision, a lot of revision, but the final product is becoming ever better, which makes me happy. I hate crap, and the game (so far) isn't crap.

Revising Rules II: XP and Roleplaying Rewards

Next to last post before we start talking about shooting bad guys and blowing stuff up. Below is a clarified rule and some GM advice, both about XP.

Revised XP Guidelines

After some discussion about the XP per Module guidelines, it became clear that they could use some clarification. Here's the streamlined guidelines.

XP Rewards, per Module

Group Rewards
Survival — You lived. Yay! 1 XP.
Scope — If you beat a Landmark Module, +1 XP.
Significant Victory — If you did more than just win, +1 XP.

Individual Bonuses
Heroism — If you were a true hero, +1 XP.

Landmark Module: A Landmark Module is a major event, bigger in every way than the norm: heavier opposition, a more intricate villainous plot, and much higher stakes.

What qualifies differs from campaign to campaign: if a regular module is "solve this murder", a landmark module is "they're going to blow up City Hall"; if a regular module is "they're robbing Fort Knox", then a landmark module is "there's a nuke loose in New York City, and time is running out". (Very often, they're the climax of a series of adventures.)

Defeating a Landmark Module qualifies the PC's for an XP reward — obviously they learned a lot while figuring out ways to overcome such overwhelming opposition.

Significant Victory: The players out-thought and out-fought the module, not just winning, but achieving goals the module (or GM) hadn't even anticipated. If they won, and surprised you with what they managed to do at the same time, it's a Significant Victory. And they certainly gained some insights while devising ways to make the bad guys (and GM) look like fools, and that translates to extra XP.

Action Movie Heroism: The character risked his life for innocents, protected the helpless, and persevered in the face of overwhelming odds. Having to think his way out of such dire straits is worth some XP, don't cha think?

Roleplaying Rewards

Most games have individual XP rewards for inspired roleplaying, making a funny joke, or generally doing things that keep the game enjoyable and entertaining for everybody. I like such rules, and encourage GM's to follow them. But not by handing out XP.

XP is permanent. Each point is a major reward, representing a permanent increase in power that lasts for the rest of the campaign. As a reward for a single moment of play, it's kind of overkill.

Resolve, on the other hand, is ephemeral. (I'll talk more about that when I get to combat.) It's a great benefit in a specific situation, and once spent, it's gone.

GM's can be free with Resolve, because they know it won't unbalance a character. You can give it as a reward for nearly anything, and even if you give too much away, it will be spent sooner or later. No big.

But XP is permanent. And too much XP can and will have a big impact on the game.

It's better to be strict with the XP and loose with the Resolve. The game runs better that way.