The Campaign Builder's Guild

This the the discussion thread for my new gaming system, which can be found  here. Please post any comments, questions, critiques, or suggestions in this thread.

So, finally I got to take a look at the ideas for your system.

First, what I like...
#1: Settingless. While some systems that are deeply tied into their settings (like Earthdawn, Shadowrun, Lot5R, etc) are really good, this connection makes it very hard to introduce houserules for certain aspects of the game. Therefore I'm a huge fan of systems that are not tied into a particular setting (like GURPS, d20, etc).

#2: Classless. In my opinion classes are too restrictive for advanced players ("I need 2 levels in class A plus 2 levels in class B plus 5 levels in class C plus prestige classes X and Y to make a character fitting my concept.") while not necessarily making things easier for new players ("Why can't I take a level in class F as an elf?" or "Why don't I get new class I spells if I take a level in class J"). A skillbased system, however, can easily emulate classes by providing a sort of template with a predefined selection of skills and advantages (or whatever those perks are called in a system).

Now, what I don't like so much...
#1: Attributes. While I myself are a fan of systems that don't swarm the player with an unnecessary amount of attributes (*cough*The Black Eye*cough*), simplifying things too much is in my opinion also contraproductiv. For example, I don't like that the only mental attribute is "Intelligence". This means that the character is either all of...
- smart
- observative
- strong willed
- mathematically apt

...or he is all of...
- dumb
- unobservative
- weak willed
- unable to calculate "2+2"

...but there is no middle ground. Concepts like the "confused professor" or "naive but highly observative teenager" or "strong willed simpleton" are unable to be made with your system.

Further, I don't like the emphasis and importance you place in the attribute "Durability". It has similar problems to "Intelligence". A character can either have a high stamina, be resitant to diseases or poisons, have many hitpoints, have a large energy reserve, etc, or he has none of that. Also, I just cannot see how the ability of being able to perform multiple demanding mental or coordinative tasks in a row should be related to one's physical condition. Just look at Stephen Hawking as an example of how the physical condition has no influence of one's mental capabilities.

#2: Diceless. This is more a personal thing, but is somewhat related to point #3 (see below). While I find your approach interesting, it takes away a lot of fun. In my opinion, rolling dice is part of a classical roleplaying game. Also, removing dicerolls from the system presents some interesting challenges regarding damage and combat. I'm really curious to see how you handle these situations.

#3: Skill mechanics. I just don't like them. There is no random chance with them. For example, a character has skill A at 4 ranks. However, the task he attempts has difficulty 5. No matter what, the character can NEVER succeed at that task. Also, what happens if you attempt easy tasks (with difficulty 1 or 2) after you exhausted all your energy? Like trying to drive a vehicle through the rush-hour traffic after you escaped some assassins?

~~~

Ok, that's all for now. I hope my comments are not too much of a mess. :D

Quote from: Ra-TielSo, finally I got to take a look at the ideas for your system.

First, what I like...
#1: Settingless. While some systems that are deeply tied into their settings (like Earthdawn, Shadowrun, Lot5R, etc) are really good, this connection makes it very hard to introduce houserules for certain aspects of the game. Therefore I'm a huge fan of systems that are not tied into a particular setting (like GURPS, d20, etc).

#2: Classless. In my opinion classes are too restrictive for advanced players ("I need 2 levels in class A plus 2 levels in class B plus 5 levels in class C plus prestige classes X and Y to make a character fitting my concept.") while not necessarily making things easier for new players ("Why can't I take a level in class F as an elf?" or "Why don't I get new class I spells if I take a level in class J"). A skillbased system, however, can easily emulate classes by providing a sort of template with a predefined selection of skills and advantages (or whatever those perks are called in a system).

Thank you, on both accounts. Those are actually the reasons I went with those choices.

QuoteNow, what I don't like so much...
#1: Attributes. While I myself are a fan of systems that don't swarm the player with an unnecessary amount of attributes (*cough*The Black Eye*cough*), simplifying things too much is in my opinion also contraproductiv. For example, I don't like that the only mental attribute is "Intelligence". This means that the character is either all of...
- smart
- observative
- strong willed
- mathematically apt

...or he is all of...
- dumb
- unobservative
- weak willed
- unable to calculate "2+2"

...but there is no middle ground. Concepts like the "confused professor" or "naive but highly observative teenager" or "strong willed simpleton" are unable to be made with your system.

Further, I don't like the emphasis and importance you place in the attribute "Durability". It has similar problems to "Intelligence". A character can either have a high stamina, be resitant to diseases or poisons, have many hitpoints, have a large energy reserve, etc, or he has none of that. Also, I just cannot see how the ability of being able to perform multiple demanding mental or coordinative tasks in a row should be related to one's physical condition. Just look at Stephen Hawking as an example of how the physical condition has no influence of one's mental capabilities.

For the most part, I intend to have these differences reflected by various skills and advantages/disadvantages. For example, the naive but observant teen might not have an exceptionally high INT score, but he has a pretty decent Investigation skill, possibly even with an automatic bonus granted from an Advantage. Another thing is that Advantages, Disadvantages, and even Skills will have various options specific to them (the Defense advantage will be a prime example, once I get it written out).

The issue you gave with mental tasks being assigned to a physical attribute is, indeed, a problem, and I think it's closely linked to the fact that there's a blanket reserve of Energy, for all tasks (you addressed that problem later on, too). While most scenarios are understandable (spending all your Energy on Swimming, then not being able to climb), there are some oddities that I'd like to work out of the system, such as the ones you've pointed out.

Quote#2: Diceless. This is more a personal thing, but is somewhat related to point #3 (see below). While I find your approach interesting, it takes away a lot of fun. In my opinion, rolling dice is part of a classical roleplaying game. Also, removing dicerolls from the system presents some interesting challenges regarding damage and combat. I'm really curious to see how you handle these situations.

I do have an idea about combat and damage, but it's being very slowly refined in my head. Once I feel the idea is good enough for posting, it will be.

Quote#3: Skill mechanics. I just don't like them. There is no random chance with them. For example, a character has skill A at 4 ranks. However, the task he attempts has difficulty 5. No matter what, the character can NEVER succeed at that task. Also, what happens if you attempt easy tasks (with difficulty 1 or 2) after you exhausted all your energy? Like trying to drive a vehicle through the rush-hour traffic after you escaped some assassins?

The lack of random chance is exactly why I decided to go diceless. In a traditional system (say, d20), you could have the party meathead roll a natural 1 STR check to try to tear down an iron door that he otherwise could have easily torn down. Next up to the door,  the mage rolls a natural 20, and off the hinges the door goes. This sort of randomness doesn't seem very realistic to me.

However, with my system, an average person with 5 ranks in Swimming (assuming 5 to be the average, which I haven't quite settled on), couldn't manage swimming across the Atlantic without some serious training. It's not that it's humanly impossible (it has been done before), just that it's a very difficult task that not many people are physically up to. On the other hand, if a character has advanced his Swimming skill to the point where he knows he can swim across the Atlantic (okay, maybe with quite a bit of effort, preparation, and rest afterwards, but still), then why give him the chance to "roll a natural 1" when doing a single lap in his backyard pool?

QuoteOk, that's all for now. I hope my comments are not too much of a mess. :D

No problem, I appreciate the feedback :)

Quote from: Sdragon1984Thank you, on both accounts. Those are actually the reasons I went with those choices.

I see.

Quote from: Sdragon1984For the most part, I intend to have these differences reflected by various skills and advantages/disadvantages. For example, the naive but observant teen might not have an exceptionally high INT score, but he has a pretty decent Investigation skill, possibly even with an automatic bonus granted from an Advantage. Another thing is that Advantages, Disadvantages, and even Skills will have various options specific to them (the Defense advantage will be a prime example, once I get it written out).

Ok, now I get what you mean. However, I wonder why you'd need attributes at all then. ;)

Quote from: Sdragon1984The issue you gave with mental tasks being assigned to a physical attribute is, indeed, a problem, and I think it's closely linked to the fact that there's a blanket reserve of Energy, for all tasks (you addressed that problem later on, too). While most scenarios are understandable (spending all your Energy on Swimming, then not being able to climb), there are some oddities that I'd like to work out of the system, such as the ones you've pointed out.

How about giving each attribute it's own energy reserve, and make skills use the energy reserve of the associated attribute? Eg, Swim would use Durability energy, Firearms would use Dexterity energy, Cryptanalysis (eg. breaking a cipher) would use Intelligence energy, etc. You could then include advantages that allowed a character to use one type of energy for unassociated skills, like allowing Dexterity energy to power Durability based skills and so on.

Quote from: Sdragon1984I do have an idea about combat and damage, but it's being very slowly refined in my head. Once I feel the idea is good enough for posting, it will be.

Ahhh, ok. I wasn't sure about that, so I thought better mention it. :)

Quote from: Sdragon1984The lack of random chance is exactly why I decided to go diceless. In a traditional system (say, d20), you could have the party meathead roll a natural 1 STR check to try to tear down an iron door that he otherwise could have easily torn down. Next up to the door,  the mage rolls a natural 20, and off the hinges the door goes. This sort of randomness doesn't seem very realistic to me.

I see somebody else has been watching "The Gamers". :D However, the situation you describe is exaggerated. First, natural 1 and natural 20 have no impact on things other than saves and attack rolls. This means, that even with a rolled natural 1 your Conan-style barbarian probably has a result of 7-10, while even with a rolled natural 20 your elderly mage has a result in the 18-21 range.

If you consider the typical break DCs for doors (last table at the bottom), even with the hightest possible result the mage would actually be unable to break down a "strong wooden door" or anything else, and by far would be unable to bend iron bars.

At most, the natural 1 result on the barbarians attempt should be treated as the "first try" to get his grip right before making the "real" attempt. ;) Another thing, why do most athletic competitions allow for two or three attempts and then take the best result? Because <gamespeek>the athlet can always roll below his abilities first and still get a really good result later</gamespeek>. :P

Quote from: Sdragon1984However, with my system, an average person with 5 ranks in Swimming (assuming 5 to be the average, which I haven't quite settled on), couldn't manage swimming across the Atlantic without some serious training. It's not that it's humanly impossible (it has been done before), just that it's a very difficult task that not many people are physically up to. On the other hand, if a character has advanced his Swimming skill to the point where he knows he can swim across the Atlantic (okay, maybe with quite a bit of effort, preparation, and rest afterwards, but still), then why give him the chance to "roll a natural 1" when doing a single lap in his backyard pool?

Well, in DnD movement related skills typically only cover about one move action worth of distance. It'd take an awful lot of swim checks to actually make it across the Atlantic ocean by the book. Add to that the option of circumstancial modifiers, weather influence, swim DC modifiers, weight modifiers, fatigue, and you quickly approach DCs that anyone with less than 15 ranks just can't handle.

But this still doesn't solve the problem of characters being faced with situations where they will never be able to actually succeed at the task because they have 1 rank too few in skill X. In a "normal" system you could always hope for a high roll and still make it (eg jumping over a collapsing bridge), but in your system a character with Jump 1 wouldn't even have to try, because he cannot spend more than 1 energy on that attempt and is automatically bound to fail the check.

QuoteThe lack of random chance is exactly why I decided to go diceless. In a traditional system (say, d20), you could have the party meathead roll a natural 1 STR check to try to tear down an iron door that he otherwise could have easily torn down. Next up to the door, the mage rolls a natural 20, and off the hinges the door goes. This sort of randomness doesn't seem very realistic to me.

I've encountered this problem before, but there are other solutions than total dicelessness. In my system, for example, characters trained (and especially specialized) in a given skill can autosucceed at one or two die tasks as of first level (circumventing the fighter with a +5 str modifier failing a DC10 str check to do fifty push ups... actually happened to me once).

If you do have your heart set on the diceless thing, though, you might consider checking out Amber. Might help you out a little.

In addition, are you going generic like GURPS did (where you try to account for almost everything in the core stuff) or like D20 did (specific games, bare minimum mechanics in the SRD, but OGL means that *somewhere* there's an awesome D20 variant of *exactly what you want to play)? Or maybe some combination of the two?

Quote from: beeblebroxI've encountered this problem before, but there are other solutions than total dicelessness. In my system, for example, characters trained (and especially specialized) in a given skill can autosucceed at one or two die tasks as of first level (circumventing the fighter with a +5 str modifier failing a DC10 str check to do fifty push ups... actually happened to me once). [...]

In my humble opinion... 50 push-ups are a tad difficult. No way an average untrained person is able to do it. Therefore, the DC should imho be more something in the 15-20 range. ;)

Quote from: Ra-Tiel

Quote from: beeblebroxI've encountered this problem before, but there are other solutions than total dicelessness. In my system, for example, characters trained (and especially specialized) in a given skill can autosucceed at one or two die tasks as of first level (circumventing the fighter with a +5 str modifier failing a DC10 str check to do fifty push ups... actually happened to me once). [...]

In my humble opinion... 50 push-ups are a tad difficult. No way an average untrained person is able to do it. Therefore, the DC should imho be more something in the 15-20 range. ;)

really? i can do it, and my arms are like toothpicks.

I guess my idea was just something along the lines of that if someone's got the maximum possible strength, rolling a 4 shouldn't screw them over on mundane tasks.

QuoteHow about giving each attribute it's own energy reserve, and make skills use the energy reserve of the associated attribute? Eg, Swim would use Durability energy, Firearms would use Dexterity energy, Cryptanalysis (eg. breaking a cipher) would use Intelligence energy, etc. You could then include advantages that allowed a character to use one type of energy for unassociated skills, like allowing Dexterity energy to power Durability based skills and so on.

Listen to your friend Ra-Tiel, for he is wise.

There are a number of ways you could go about this. For example, your attributes could represent your starting reserve points in an adventure, and your skill could represent the maximum you could spend on any one task.

*Or* you could have a single pool of points. Skill+stat would (firstly) determine what tasks you could succeed at automatically (you don't have to spend points on a task of skill+stat or less difficulty) and (secondly) be multiplied by 1+points if you did spend points. Needless to say, give them fewer points in this system. Or apply some maximum to the number of points you can spend on a check.

In either case, you may need some way of getting new points as well.

Quote from: beeblebroxreally? i can do it, and my arms are like toothpicks.

Well, my arms are quite strong and I cannot. *shrug*

Quote from: beeblebroxI guess my idea was just something along the lines of that if someone's got the maximum possible strength, rolling a 4 shouldn't screw them over on mundane tasks.

Then perhaps something similar to the Tri20 system of my design could help here:
* skills have ranks and modifiers
* a skill's modifier is calculate from three attributes the skill is based on
* a skill's modifier is further added to each check made on that skill
* a skill's ranks is the measurement of training and can be improved by the player
* the final result of a skill check is d20 + skill modifier and then capped based on a "look up" table dependent on the skill's ranks

The skill's modifier is usually much higher than the skill's ranks, assuring success on relatively easy tasks, while the capping based on the ranks assure that only those with intensive training (== high ranks) are capable of getting a degree of success high enough to perform the really difficult/impressive tasks.

Quote from: beeblebrox

Quote from: Ra-Tiel

Quote from: beeblebroxI've encountered this problem before, but there are other solutions than total dicelessness. In my system, for example, characters trained (and especially specialized) in a given skill can autosucceed at one or two die tasks as of first level (circumventing the fighter with a +5 str modifier failing a DC10 str check to do fifty push ups... actually happened to me once). [...]

In my humble opinion... 50 push-ups are a tad difficult. No way an average untrained person is able to do it. Therefore, the DC should imho be more something in the 15-20 range. ;)

really? i can do it, and my arms are like toothpicks.

I guess my idea was just something along the lines of that if someone's got the maximum possible strength, rolling a 4 shouldn't screw them over on mundane tasks.

Especially when rolling a 6 would allow a lesser skilled character to succeed. Which is exactly what I'm trying to avoid.

[blockquote]

QuoteHow about giving each attribute it's own energy reserve, and make skills use the energy reserve of the associated attribute? Eg, Swim would use Durability energy, Firearms would use Dexterity energy, Cryptanalysis (eg. breaking a cipher) would use Intelligence energy, etc. You could then include advantages that allowed a character to use one type of energy for unassociated skills, like allowing Dexterity energy to power Durability based skills and so on.

Actually, that first option seems like it might be the best. It would grant an overall total of twice the EP that the system currently allows, but the selection would be more limited, depending on your selection of skills... I think I like it :)

Quote from: Sdragon1984Actually, that first option seems like it might be the best. It would grant an overall total of twice the EP that the system currently allows, but the selection would be more limited, depending on your selection of skills... I think I like it :)

Awesome.

I added another skill to the list, and I wrote out the description of another advantage.

This is the first I've seen of this system (I guess I missed the post before), so I'm going to comment on it as whole, rather than just the new stuff.

First of all, I like the diceless approach. I've always been more of a "freeform" player myself, and the luck of the dice can do strange things. However, since you've opted to go diceless, I have to ask, why do you need attribute scores at all?

It seems to me like a character could start off as a pretty much "average person," and various advantages and disadvantages would tell the tale of their unique traits. You could place advantages and disadvantages into various categories, to make it easier on the players to know what's up, of course: it somewhat reminds me of the system of using lists of adjectives to note your abilities used by V:tM's LARP system.

Now, about your new advantage, which I assume is "Radar/Sonar." I would suggest keeping abilities like this simple and generic, and modifying them as needed to fit the specific way the character uses-- for example, the core of this ability is "Perception." This can come in different forms. As a simple example, normal human eyesight would be the ability "Perception - Light-based, passive." Something like Sonar where 'pings' are sent out would be "Sound-based, active." You can get very complex with these modifiers, and how complex you want to get depends on how many different factors you feel balancing (and how much of a headache you want to give the GM) but my basic suggestion is to keep the mechanics as open-ended as possible, since you are going for a "settingless" system.

If you have never read GURPS Powers, I'd recommend it; you'll probably find a lot of inspiration and useful information in there. It does a very good job of breaking down various esoteric powers into their root effects, which is really what makes them work as a game mechanic.

[blockquote=Ra][blockquote=beeblebrox]
really? i can do it, and my arms are like toothpicks.[/blockquote]

Well, my arms are quite strong and I cannot. *shrug*[/blockquote]
Ah, the very best example of muscular enduance versus muscular strength I have seen in a while.  Beeb here is pretty much describing muscular endurance (related to BUT DEFINITELY NOT the same thing as aerobic endurance).  Otherwise known as the ability to push /exert at a sub maximal level (often 50% single max)for a certain amouint of time
Muscular strength deals with the the ability to push/exert a large amount once, or once or twice.
I only bother to bring it up because they really are 2 very seperate things that we lump together.  

Quote from: sparkletwistThis is the first I've seen of this system (I guess I missed the post before), so I'm going to comment on it as whole, rather than just the new stuff.

That's perfectly fine by me. In fact, commenting on it as a whole is encouraged :)

QuoteFirst of all, I like the diceless approach. I've always been more of a "freeform" player myself, and the luck of the dice can do strange things. However, since you've opted to go diceless, I have to ask, why do you need attribute scores at all?

The primary reason I'm going diceless is to avoid the quirkiness of "the luck of the dice". Another reason, although to a lesser extent, is that actions require energy to do. In, say, d20 (and I continue to use that as an example simply because it's the system most people are familiar with), a 7th level Fighter could fight goblins for weeks straight, with no sleep, and incur very little penalties. In this system, it doesn't really matter if you're that powerful, you're eventually going to wear yourself out, even fighting goblins.

(please note that this was written before using another tab to read Vreeg's comment)

Why do I keep ability scores? Because everybody has some degree of physical strength, but not everybody is good at climbing. Just because you're not good at climbing doesn't mean you can't lift yourself up a bit and try for a foothold. Likewise, just because everybody has intelligence (despite seeming evidence to the contrary :p), not everybody has deductive skills.

By the way, after thinking about the whole Energy Pool per Attribute idea, I've decided against it for this very reason. Why bother buying levels in Climb when you can put Strength EP right back into Strength?

I do have a solution that I'm thinking of using, but I'm not quite sure exactly how I'm going to implement it yet.

QuoteIt seems to me like a character could start off as a pretty much "average person," and various advantages and disadvantages would tell the tale of their unique traits. You could place advantages and disadvantages into various categories, to make it easier on the players to know what's up, of course: it somewhat reminds me of the system of using lists of adjectives to note your abilities used by V:tM's LARP system.

In designing this system, I'm learning that class-based systems seem to start off with PC classes and their various unique talents, and then working backwards to the NPC classes, by taking away all of those talents and abilities. Skill-based systems seem to work more in the opposite direction, using the average human as a base, and then working to explain what makes a given character different.

I'm not very familiar with V:tM, and know nothing about the LARP system they use, but if I'm not mistaken, isn't the system skill-based? Or are the various clans more like classes?

QuoteNow, about your new advantage, which I assume is "Radar/Sonar." I would suggest keeping abilities like this simple and generic, and modifying them as needed to fit the specific way the character uses-- for example, the core of this ability is "Perception." This can come in different forms. As a simple example, normal human eyesight would be the ability "Perception - Light-based, passive." Something like Sonar where 'pings' are sent out would be "Sound-based, active." You can get very complex with these modifiers, and how complex you want to get depends on how many different factors you feel balancing (and how much of a headache you want to give the GM) but my basic suggestion is to keep the mechanics as open-ended as possible, since you are going for a "settingless" system.

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying, here. Are you suggesting that I should make plain Sight an advantage?

QuoteIf you have never read GURPS Powers, I'd recommend it; you'll probably find a lot of inspiration and useful information in there. It does a very good job of breaking down various esoteric powers into their root effects, which is really what makes them work as a game mechanic.

I don't think I've read that yet, but I know that, out of all genres, support for the superhero genre is one of the priorities at this point in creation, so I may give that a look.

Quote from: Sdragon1984Why do I keep ability scores? Because everybody has some degree of physical strength, but not everybody is good at climbing.

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying, here. Are you suggesting that I should make plain Sight an advantage?[/quote]
No, I was just using plain sight as an example. What I'm saying is that it might help a lot in terms of structuring things (as well as giving options to players) break down your advantages to their component parts (that is, rather than describing it in terms of "Radar," describe what it actually DOES) to keep them as generic and flexible as possible.