• Welcome to The Campaign Builder's Guild.
 

The ∞ Infinity Gaming System

Started by Daddy Warpig, January 01, 2014, 10:28:13 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Daddy Warpig

Almost a year ago, I started posting details of my own little action-movie RPG system, called the ∞ Infinity Gaming System. (This is the system I'll be using to run Guns in The Outlaw, seen here.) Real life intervened, and I was forced to abandon the posting.

Since then, the rules have gone through two different revisions, and with the New Year I decided to start posting again, in hopes of getting some feedback.

A Smidge of Theory

I want to begin these posts with a tiny smidgen of game design theory.

My belief is that most people play RPG's to have an enjoyable time controlling imaginary characters in an imaginary world. Most people play for immersion: they want the world to "come alive" for them.

Immersion happens in the minds of the players and GM, when they use their imaginations to see the world. And that is facilitated by GM descriptions of the world and player descriptions of what their character is doing and thinking.

The central mechanic of the game is the Skill Challenge: characters using skills to do things in the world. Nearly everything in the game is built around this mechanic. And this mechanic is built around immersion, in three different ways:


  • The mechanics encourage GM's to describe the world vividly, by making it easy for them to describe both the difficulty of a Challenge and the outcome of a Challenge. (Without going overboard.) The mechanics encourage, but don't mandate this.


  • The mechanics also make it easy for players to understand the difficulty of a Challenge and the Skill/Attribute Rating of their characters in relatable, real world terms. This makes the game world more tangible — their own experiences allow them to better understand the world of the game, which makes the game world seem more real.


  • The mechanics encourage players to describe their character's actions in vivid terms. By depicting what their characters do, it helps the GM and other players imagine the world.

I'm not claiming that I've suddenly fixed roleplaying, because everyone else got it wrong for 40 years. I'm not claiming this is this one, perfect approach. But it seems like a great approach for an action-movie game.

Action movies are about heroes doing great things: jumping off a rooftop as it explodes behind them, defusing a bomb on a crowded airplane, shooting at hordes of bad guys in a burning refinery. Action movies revolve around action, and action is more exciting when it is described in colorful terms. The mechanics of the game encourage this, in players and GM's.

The goal of the game is to encourage vivid descriptions, and get out of the way. As I post the mechanics, I'll try and show how I've worked towards these goals.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

sparkletwist

A few thoughts!

Quote from: Daddy Warpigin hopes of getting some feedback.
In general, the best way to get more good feedback around here is to give more of it. :grin:

Quote from: Daddy WarpigMost people play for immersion: they want the world to "come alive" for them.
I agree!
In theory.
I mean, try to nail down what exactly that "immersion" is or the best way to get it and you'll probably end up with a dozen different ideas...  :huh:

Quote from: Daddy WarpigThe goal of the game is to encourage vivid descriptions, and get out of the way. As I post the mechanics, I'll try and show how I've worked towards these goals.
I like your goals.
My own system focuses on what I call "awesomeness" and is based around the similar ideal of allowing for simple mechanics that encourage vivid and fun descriptions.
So I will be intrigued to see what you've done... :)

Daddy Warpig

Players interact with the world through their characters. Most play "in-character", making those choices their character would make.

The better they understand their character, in real world, relatable terms, the more real the character will seem to them and the better they can gauge what he's capable of.

I'll start with Skill Ratings. Skill Ratings measure how good a character is at something. The higher, the better.

Skill Ratings

2-4 is a Novice, a raw recruit or an inexperienced beginner. Part-time employees, like the teen who flips burgers at a fast food joint, are Novices, as are interns.

5-9 is Skilled, someone employable in a field at an entry level. Telemarketers and Tech Support employees are typically Skilled, as are people just graduating college with a Bachelor's degree.

10-14 is a Professional, possessing a post-graduate degree or equivalent in on-the-job experience. Your general physician is a Professional, as are the vast majority of movie sergeants.

15-19 is Accomplished, a standout in the field, cited and respected by their peers, but typically unknown to the general public. Writers of specialized books (such as textbooks or reference works) are usually Accomplished.

20-24 is World Class, one of the best in the world. (As the name implies.) Olympic athletes, for example.

25-29 is a Grand Master, "The Best There is at What I Do". Grand Masters are luminaries in their field. Physicist Stephen Hawking, as a real-world example.

30+ is Legendary, one of the best who's ever lived. Legendary figures are those who dominate history. Their works live on long after they die and their names become synonymous with their field of expertise. Shakespeare, Robin Hood, Einstein: these are all Legendary figures.

Design

These are named and described in the most direct, most obvious language I could write. They are intended to be immediately understood by just about anyone. We all know novices, we all know professionals, we've all seen world-class athletes, we all know how accomplished Einstein and Robin Hood were in their fields.

We know what people like that are, and using the above chart, we know how our characters compare. This also makes it easier to translate fictional characters or real-world people into game mechanical terms.

Batman is the World's Greatest Detective. On the above scale, he'd be a 28, 29, or maybe 30 in the appropriate skills. Robin Hood is famed for being the best archer in history. 30, or higher.

Immediate. Direct. Obvious. (To the maximum extent practical.)

This is the design theory of the game.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

Quote from: sparkletwistA few thoughts!
Thanks! :)

Quote from: sparkletwistIn general, the best way to get more good feedback around here is to give more of it. :grin:
I'm not trying to criticize the site (or the members thereof). Apologies if that's how it seemed.

I was just wanted people to know I very much welcome feedback.

Quote from: sparkletwistSo I will be intrigued to see what you've done... :)
I hope you like it. :)
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

sparkletwist

Quote from: Daddy WarpigI was just wanted people to know I very much welcome feedback.
Right, and I was just (good-naturedly, I also mean no offense!) pointing out that the best way to get feedback around here is to hop into some other threads and start offering it to others as well, rather than simply posting your own material only and waiting for it. After all, if everyone did that, we'd all be waiting a long time.

Anyway, the math behind the skill system seems to be that a legend is as much better than a "mere" world-class person as that person is better than a rank and file professional, who is in turn that much better than a novice, 10 or so in each case. Since you're going "action movie" I would expect (or at least hope) that you're using somewhat "swingy" dice because crazy things happen in action movies. But that's about all I can say because I don't know how you are rolling dice yet.

Daddy Warpig

Quote from: sparkletwist(good-naturedly, I also mean no offense!)
np :)

Quote from: sparkletwistBut that's about all I can say because I don't know how you are rolling dice yet.
That will become clear in the next couple of posts, don't worry. It'll take a couple of days (I'm doing one post a day), but I'll get there.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

Challenges

Challenges are the bread-and-butter of the system. When a character attempts something significant, their Skill Rating (modified by a die roll) is compared to the Challenge Rating, a numerical representation of how difficult a task is. Gamemasters pick the appropriate Challenge Ratings (from 0 to 30 or higher), based on the following table:

CR 0 - Routine: "Didn't even think about it." A task so easy, you barely notice performing it. Teaching these takes a second or two. Even rank amateurs and raw recruits usually succeed at Routine tasks. Ex: Turning on a computer. Unlocking a car door. Using a fork.

CR 5 - Easy: "That seems pretty easy." A relatively simple task, something amateurs find too complex, and entry-level workers find challenging, but competent professionals almost always succeed at. Ex.: Taking off or landing an airplane in clear weather. Diagnosing a common disease. Swimming a mile.

CR 8 - Moderate: "That's complicated." This sort of task is the bread-and-butter of veterans (who usually succeed), but the untried and inexperienced find them daunting. Ex.: A reporter writing a newspaper column or story.

CR 10 - Difficult: "This isn't a job for greenies." Veterans often succeed at these sorts of tasks, and standout members of a profession nearly always succeed, but entry level employees usually fail.

CR 15 - Formidable: "We need a specialist." Something seasoned characters struggle to achieve, but luminaries usually succeed at.

CR 20 - Grueling: "Only 6 people in the world understand this theory." A task one of the best in the world fails at, more often than not.

CR 25 - Monumental: "There's only one man for the job." Tasks the foremost expert fails at most times.

CR 30 - Nearly Impossible: "No one could make that shot." Even a DaVinci or Napoleon finds these tasks difficult, failing more than half the time.

Application

Each skill will have a chart of appropriate CR's for that skill. Adverse or helpful conditions can modify those numbers. Utter darkness might impose a -10 penalty on attacks, for example.

Ideally, after a while the GM should be able to set CR's on the fly, without reference to the charts. The player describes what they want to do, the GM judges how difficult it is and sets the CR. The point is ease of use and speed of play, not exactly hewing to a chart. (The same applies to situational penalties. Pick a modifier and go.)

Some GM's are more comfortable with the charts, and find them faster than picking a number. "Go with that", is what I say. "Play the way you want to play." That's another of my design mottos.

Design/Development

I have two goals for my mechanics: that they be relatable or describable. As with Skill Ratings, Challenge ratings are intended to be immediate and visceral. People should be able to read the description and understand what it means, either because they've faced such a challenge in their life or they can imagine such a thing.

I want these descriptions to be as immediately understandable as the Skill Ratings chart, being described in relatable terms people can associate with things they've experienced in the real world. Right now they're okay, but not great.

As I finish skill descriptions, and in particular the Sample CR's with each skill, I'll be working those issues out. It'll get better.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

#7
Success Rating

Challenges are tests of a character's abilities, they represent the character attempting to do something. "I want to search for the Cardinal's letter." "I want to repair the car's engine." "I want to shoot at the griffin with my bow."

The third critical component of Challenges (after the Skill Rating and Challenge Rating) is Success Rating. To get this, you roll the dice, which gives you a number from -9 to +9. You add this roll to your Skill Rating.

Skill 10, roll 0 = 10
Skill 10, roll -3 = 7
Skill 13, roll -3 = 10

That's your total. Compare this to your Challenge Rating to get a result.

Total 10, CR 5 = result 5.
Total 5, CR 5 = result 0.
Total 4, CR 5 = result -1.

In other words, total - CR = result.

What does this mean? Well, the higher your result, the better you did. The lower, the worse you did. We measure this with a Success Rating (SR).

To get SR, we count by 3's. A result of 3 or better is a Success Rating of 1. A result of 6 or better is 2 SR. A 9 or better is 3 SR. And so forth, on indefinitely.

(This can also be represented by "result divided by 3, round down". Or it can be represented in a table. Up to you.)

What about a result of less than 3? Any negative result (-1 or lower) is a Failure. You didn't do whatever you attempted.

A 0-2 is a Partial Success (O SR). You didn't succeed, but you haven't failed yet.

This is the core of the system. All other mechanics, all other mechanics, are built around Success Ratings. Once you understand how to generate Success Ratings, you know how to play.

Tomorrow I'll talk about how Success Ratings (and Failure) work with Skill Challenges.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

#8
Skill Challenges and Success Ratings

About half of the game (or a little bit more) will probably consist of Skill Challenges, depending on how combat-happy your players are. These use Success Ratings, from the prior post, in an easy to understand manner.

The worst result is Failure. You screwed the pooch.

0 SR is a Partial Success. This means "not quite there" or "you need to do more work". (i.e. attempt another Skill Challenge.)

1 SR means "you barely made it". (Success.)

2 SR means "you did it". (Solid Success.)

3 SR means "That was great!", doing so well that people are impressed. (Spectacular Success.)

These are chosen to be simple, clear, and straightforward. They are also relatable: Everyone knows what it's like to fail. Everyone knows what it's like to just squeak past, or to succeed, or to succeed so well others are impressed.

Partial successes represent those times when you need to take some more time on a project, longer than you thought. (Hence the additional Skill Challenge.) Again, everyone should have experienced this at one time or another.

Because these are relatable, they are easily describable. A character jumps a ravine. If the Fail, they fall. If they get a Partial Success, they don't quite make it, but can pull themselves up. (Or someone else can.)

Success means they barely made it, and the GM can describe them tottering on the edge of the abyss. Solid Success means they leap across, and Spectacular Success means they easily made it, and land with a fancy roll.

Descriptive feedback makes the world come alive, and the Success Rating is built so GM's can easily do so. The mechanics get out of the way.

The odds of these things occurring are also relatable. When your Skill Rating is equal to the Challenge Rating, a Spectacular Success happens about one percent of the time. Well, that makes sense — when something is a Challenge, truly impressive outcomes are rare.

Success ("barely made it") happens about a third of the time, Solid Successes about 10% of the time. You fail just over half the time (it's literally a challenge), and you have to put in extra work to succeed about a quarter of the time.

I'm not claiming those are scientifically exact percentages, but they are perfectly understandable. They make sense.

The goal, with Skill Challenges, is to tie Skill Ratings, Challenge Ratings, and Success Ratings to the real world, in relatable ways. Players understand what each means in concrete terms. This means GM's know what it is they're supposed to describe, which makes it easier to do so. (Hopefully encouraging it.)

With these rules, the game world will feel more real, and be described a little better. That is my hope, at least.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

Don't Screw It Up!

The previous posts covered the core mechanic of the game, as well as the thinking behind its design — why I made the choices I did. I have some very specific goals, which exist for specific reasons, and I've been writing mechanics that (hopefully) achieve them. As much as is practical, the rules should achieve the following goals:

Goal 1: Simple, direct, obvious. The mechanics should be easily understood, easily learned, and easy to use.

Easily learned mechanics are transparent in play. You can use them without thinking about them too much.

Goal 2: Mechanics should be related to the real world in concrete and plausible ways.

Mechanics that violate reality, that give nonsensical results, jar us out of the game and destroy immersion.

Goal 3: Mechanics should be easily describable; they should also encourage descriptions of the game world by players and GM's.

Concise and effective descriptions make the world come alive. They invite immersion.

You'll notice that, even if done correctly, none of the resulting mechanics directly create immersion. That's because immersion is a result of the interplay between player and GM.

I can't create it. I can only make rules that don't undermine it. (And give some advice that might help the GM and players.) My job, as the writer, is simple:

Don't screw it up. People are already having fun at the table, just give them tools to do so, and get out of the way.

All three of these goals, if implemented well, aid immersion by getting the hell out of the way. (And by helping the GM and players make the game world feel vivid and true to life.) So, why do I think the core mechanic of the game meets these goals?

Goal 1: The mechanic is simple and clear.

Skill Total - Challenge Rating = Success Rating

That's easily understood, easily learned, and easy to use. (There's even three different methods for calculating Success Ratings — chart, math, count — for those who prefer different approaches.)

Goal 2: The mechanics model real phenomena in plausible ways that can be easily understood.

The Skill Ratings make sense. We all know of people (or characters) who match each of those descriptions. The mechanic matches reality.

The Challenge Ratings make sense. We can all understand how different tasks can fall into those categories. They match reality.

The Success Ratings make sense. We know what Failure is, what Success is, and what incredible Success is. They match reality.

The probabilities of each also match reality. Incredible success is rare. "No problem!" is uncommon. And failure is, unfortunately, all too common. (How many bad films has Spielberg made?)

Goal 3: They're easy to describe. The mechanics are linked to the real world, so GM's can use real world experience to describe them. And players can understand those descriptions, because they're grounded in the real world.

Skill Challenges are the core of the game. These are the mechanics people will encounter again and again, several times per session. And they're built to implement the three main design goals.

Now that you understand where I'm coming from, I want to back up and cover all the nuts and bolts I skipped over. I'll start with Attributes and go on from there.

Thanks for reading and commenting.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

Attributes

Characters have six Attributes: Dexterity, Strength, Endurance, Intellect, Influence, and Spirit. These represent the innate abilities of the character, whereas skills are learned abilities.

Attributes are rated numerically, with higher values representing more potent Attributes. Attribute Ratings for humans range from 5 (Deficient) to 15 (Legendary). Human average is 10.

Each Attribute has an inherent mechanical effect (see below) and provides a bonus to associated skills:

Rating — Bonus
5 — 1
6-8 — 2
9-11— 3
12-14 — 4
15 — 5

Each Attribute has a number of associated skills. Dexterity skills include Acrobatics and Dodge; Strength, Lifting and Melee weapons; Influence covers Charm and Persuade.

Dexterity
This represents flexibility, fine motor skills, reflexes, running speed, and other related areas. Characters with a high Dexterity are gymnasts and athletes of every sort, escape artists, stage magicians, parkour aficionados, and martial artists.
Mechanic: Dexterity is used in Initiative. The higher your Dexterity, the faster you react.

Strength
This represents a character's physical prowess: how much they can lift and carry, how hard they punch and swing a sword. Characters with a high Strength are weightlifters, circus strong-men, and so forth.
Mechanic: Strength determines the amount one can lift and carry and the base amount of damage with hand-to-hand weapons.

Endurance
Endurance describes a character's health: their ability to resist poisons and disease, to endure physical stress and exertion, and other related areas.
Mechanic: Endurance resists damage, poisons, etc.

Intellect
A high Intellect makes a person "smart". They learn faster, have a deeper understanding, retain more information, react quicker, and notice more. Scientists, college professors, inventors, engineers, and so on all have a high Intellect.
Mechanic: Intellect determines bonus skills during character creation.

Influence
Influence is the ability to successfully affect others socially. People with a high Influence are persuasive, charming, and adept at fitting in with others and building strong relationships. Salesmen, con men, politicians, rock stars, actors, the popular kids, and serial killers all have high Influence.
Mechanic: Influence determines the base attitude of strangers. (Characters who like you will treat you well, those who dislike you won't.)

Spirit
Spirit is the mental and spiritual strength of a character. A high Spirit implies self-reliance, confidence, a strong will, and stubbornness.
Mechanic: Spirit resists mental damage.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

#11
Attribute Design Notes

Why go with Attributes that are fairly close (if not identical) to the D&D "standard six"? Why go with something so conventional and uninspired?

Simple. Direct. Obvious.

Strength. Use that name, and people know what you mean. Instantly.

I could have called it Brawn, Power, Muscle, Burliness, or Might. But there's no point in giving it an Attribute an unusual name, just so I can pretend that it's not Strength.

Pretending to be different, while actually being the same, is kind of silly. It's pretend innovation. It's novelty simply for the sake of novelty.

I certainly could have made kind-of-new attributes. I considered it. I looked at ideas I'd had, going back decades, as well as stats from several other systems (FASERIP, Masterbook, Shadowrun, Interlok, Hero Games, and others).

Here's the problem: mechanics shouldn't take people out of the game. And an Attribute system that is weird, absolutely would.

Example: Back in 1997, I made the case that you could combine Endurance and Strength. And you could, quite easily, and it'd be realistic. Call it Fitness, and it'd work.

But any minute mechanical advantage Fitness would bring (balance DEX against STR and TOU), would be cancelled by the annoyance factor. Inevitably, it'd annoy some players.

Then there's the "I don't think that's realistic" factor. Some people would believe that, and argue about that, then I'd have to argue about muscle mass causing Strength and how maintaining muscle mass requires Fitness, so they're the same, and... "no, really, it's realistic!"

When a game designer is reduced to arguing with players in the text of the rulebook, they've already lost.

Mechanics, and labels for them, should have a reason to exist. And novelty, just for the sake of novelty, isn't a good enough reason.

I chose these Attributes because:

1) They are useable in any genre, and thus suited for an omni-genre RPG system.
2) They are universally understood. (The given definitions being almost redundant. Almost.)
3) They are realistic. (Or, at least, realistic enough to be acceptable to most people.)

Each Attribute is included for a reason, and each has a mechanical part to play. I chose names that reflect what the Attribute is, and where my names differ from the standard six, it's because they're actually different.

Why isn't Influence called "Charisma"? Because characters with a high Influence can be charismatic, but they can also be friendly, persuasive, likable, or physically attractive (any one of these or all of them at the same time).

Any number of qualities can underlie Influence. What matters for mechanics is the effect, not the source. Not all people with a high Influence are charismatic.

I'm not trying to make a game that is wholly novel. Novel is great, but novelty must be balanced by utility. And these Attributes offer a great deal of utility, even if they they don't greatly differ from the "standard six".
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

Skills

There are probably going to be 20 basic skills or so. These cover combat, technical abilities, social interactions, and miscellaneous uses. FX systems (magic, miracles, martial arts, etc.) have their own unique skills.

Skills are rated in Skill Points, which determine how trained a character is. Attribute bonuses are added to the Skill Points to get a Skill Rating.

Example 1: A character with an Influence of 11 has a bonus of +3 for all Influence skills. If they have 1 pt. in Charm, their Skill Rating is 1 +3 = 4.

Example 2: A character with a Dexterity of 5 has a bonus of +1. With a 5 in Firearms, their skill level is 5 +1 = 6.

Skill points indicate how well trained a character is (including book learning and experience).

0 = Unskilled. You haven't even the slightest hint of training in this area, and no experience either.

1 – 3 = Minimally trained. You have learned the very most basic concepts of the skill. There are large gaps in theory and application.

4 – 8 = Beginner. You have mastered the basic concepts of the subject, but struggle with intermediate techniques. You make mistakes that other beginners or amateurs won't catch, but anybody who know what they're doing will.

9 – 13 = Proficient. You have a solid grasp of the theory and practice of the skill. Advanced concepts can be challenging. (The oft-cited "10,000 hours of practice".)

14 – 18 = Expert. You are very skilled, thoroughly conversant with even the most obscure subjects in your field. If they know of it, your skill impresses people.

19 and higher = Master. There are few more knowledgeable than you.

The above categories are descriptive, not proscriptive. They allow players and GM's to roughly gauge how one character matches up with another. (Useful for creating foes or converting characters from other systems.)
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

#13
Skill Points, Design Notes

One of my design goals is to make mechanics that can easily be understood and described in relatable terms. The idea is to give labels and information which can easily be compared to people's real-life experiences.

This begins with the Attributes, which are described with labels people can easily grasp. (Not unique to this system, fairly common in fact, but critical to my approach.) We all know what Average is, we know Exceptional people, we know people who are Very Weak in something.

It's relatable.

This idea is carried into the skill system, in this case Skill Points (which represent training, practice, or experience). We've all been Unskilled in an area (right now in fact). We've studied and become Minimally Trained, when something is new and even the basics are a struggle. We know of people who are Proficient and even Expert at what they do.

We can relate the abstract numbers to real world experiences. This makes the game feel real.

The Skill Rating labels and descriptions serve the same purpose. But, as they are a combination of Attribute bonuses and Skill Points, there's some internal logic to how the two relate.

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

This is a common-sense, easily understood measurement. People with minimal training/experience are Novices. But let's look at the rest of the chart.

Average people (+3) with a Beginner's training (4) are Skilled (Skill Rating 7).

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

Average people (+3) with Expert training (14) are Accomplished (Skill Rating 17).

Average people (+3) with a Mastery of the subject (19) are World Class (Skill Rating 22).

Exceptional people (+5) with a Mastery of the subject (19) are also World Class (Skill Rating 24), but they are almost Grand Masters. It takes that extra bit of training to truly make them superior to nearly everyone.

Again, all of these are straightforward and make sense. You can easily understand why a Master of a subject would be World Class.

There is a distinct and clear internal logic to the Attribute scale (and bonuses), Skill Points, Skill Rating, and Challenge Ratings. They are designed to be easily understood and to make sense.

The idea is that not only can players and gamemasters relate to the mechanics, but gamemasters can translate mechanics into real-world equivalencies and vice versa. And all of this makes the game world feel real.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com

Daddy Warpig

#14
Omissions and Emendations

I missed one part of the Attribute section, and (thanks to some discussion on the Torg List), I'm replacing the Partial Success mechanic.

Attributes

Attribute Ratings have associated names, just like Skill Points and Skill Ratings, and for exactly the same reasons: making sure that the abstract numbers relate to real-world experiences.

For normal adult humans, attributes range from 5 to 15, with Average being 9-11.

5 = Deficient (+1) - The lowest normal Attribute level. (Crippling injuries can lower it further, and children or infants are often lower.) This is the Dexterity of a klutz, the Strength of a 98-pound-weakling, the Endurance of a sickly recluse. For normal people, it doesn't get worse than this.

6-8 = Weak (+2) - You're below average, and everyone probably knows it. You drop things a lot, need help lifting a backpack full of books, and catch every bug that's going around.

9-11= Average (+3) - Honestly, this isn't that bad. Sure, you're no superstar, but the majority of people are no better than you, and many are worse off. You may not be destined to win international competitions, but you can still do extraordinary things, if you're willing to work harder than those who are more gifted but less motivated.

12-14 = Exceptional (+4) - You stand out in the crowd. You run a little faster, are a little more popular, get a little better grades. You're not the best of the best of the best, but not many things are beyond your reach, if you're willing to work at it.

15 = Legendary (+5) - An attribute typical of the famous (or infamous). Napoleon had a legendary Influence, Einstein legendary Intellect, Winston Churchill legendary Spirit.

Mixed Success

The Success/Fail chart is all about consequences — what happens after the Skill Challenge.

Failure means something bad happens.

Success means something good happens. (Specifically, what you were trying to do.)

Mixed Success is a little different. This means you Succeed, and accomplish what it was you were trying to do, but something else happened as well. Something bad.

Maybe you fixed the engine, but it took twice as long. Maybe you gained admittance to the Suzerain's palace, but your attempt to bribe the Chancellor offended him (and he will have his revenge). Maybe you sabotaged the Grim Machine, but set fire to a pool of oil while doing so.

Maybe you bribed the cop, but it cost twice what it normally would. Maybe you convinced Judge Reinhardt to help get you out of jail, but he told you to never call him again. Maybe your bluff scared away a couple of gangers, but the remaining two pulled guns, turning a simple misunderstanding into a tense standoff.

In the process of Succeeding, you made a mistake and that mistake has consequences, consequences determined by the GM. In general, these consequences fall into four categories:

• Greater cost
• Complicate an existing situation
• Create a new problem
• Cause yourself trouble down the line

Example: A character is looking for a rare piece of gear (using the Streetwise skill). Failure can mean he doesn't find it. Period. Success means he found it.

A Mixed Success can also mean he finds it, but it's owned by an enemy or the Mob. Maybe obtaining it would obligate the party in detrimental ways. Maybe he has to buy it illegally or steal it. Maybe he has to do someone a favor to get it (now or later). Even better if the favor involves noticeable risk to himself or the party.


Dealing with the consequences of a Mixed Success can be easy, or difficult. It can even spawn a new scene or whole new adventure.

The important thing is that the consequences present a challenge and are interesting.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."
"Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Daddy Warpig's House of Geekery, my geek blog:
daddywarpig.wordpress.com

Storm Knights, my Torg site:
stormknights.arcanearcade.com