As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The Inevitably Doomed Project X Thread

piLpiL Registered User regular
edited September 2007 in Critical Failures
Hello, I am piL, and I kind of fell out of RPGs and ODaM for a while. Sorry for that. Anyway, I am back, and I've been in a sort of creative mood. I do not think that I have the endurance or the ability to reach my lofty goals. I haven't seen a thread to this extent, though for along time I've been secretively waiting for something of this sort to pop up—one were someone tries to make something, though most likely failing and having interest drift off. I suppose the first Myth game was approaching this, but is neither here nor there, and not what I was looking for, and there is the generic tabletop simulator thread, which is neat but not my alley.


There is a bit of a problem, however, and that I'm not keen on organizing and maintaining this sort of thing. I suppose I could, but I'd honestly rather not as I'm kind of busy. But I've waited and waited, and nothing has come up yet, and so I'm really pondering stepping forward. That is not what this thread is for yet, however. Right now I'd just like to do the following in this thread:

  • Gauge interest in the idea of putting heads together to create something ODaM related (I lean towards RPGs myself, but do not limit myself), be it a setting, a system, a supplement, a board game, a card game, etc.
  • Discuss what kind of things must be done in that event. For example, I personally believe that certain strict things must be decided beforehand, even though it risks alienating the members, that way the project doesn't stall out as everyone tries to throw in their conflicting ideas, nobody agrees, and everyone just quits. Am I right? Am I wrong? What kind of system should be in place to prevent this? Would anyone really want to be in the position of man-in-charge? Would anyone really want to have to follow orders? Can democracy work?
  • What do you think a community project should try to do? I know I have a number of ideas that I would like to see the light of day. Setting projects seem like what most people would be interested in, would people like to work together to fill a particular void in settings, fine-tuned to work with a pre-existing system? Would a small project to test the ability of the forum be a good idea, such as a short box game (a ZOMBIES!!!/Bang! style game), or an RPG supplement (d20 boat rules that don't suck?). Perhaps large aspirations so that everyone has something to do is the right sweet spot—making a system lets people make maps, art, settings, and rules depending on which they do. Or are small games tiny and boring, whole systems far too much to try, and settings lame and overdone?
  • Finally, what kind of project would you like to see? I personally wish there was an Arcanum-style setting and I have yet to find one that isn't too much on one spectrum or another, and I've been toying with the concept of trying to put together a rule-system for d20 that basically involves settlement growth and maintenance to better facilitate a colonization or goblin warren/dwarf fortress building style game. Does someone elses ideas intrigue you? What are your ideas?

So this is basically to open up discussion in these fields, and hopefully this will become a project of some sort. I'd like to work on something, but I don't want to jump in head first and unorganized in a way that will obviously result in failure, and to reiterate, I think it's important to gauge interest, decide on organization, and consider the size of tasks.




piL wrote: »
Second thing:


Does anyone have any desire in pursuing ideas listed elsewhere in this thread?
There was quite a bit of interest in the dungeon keeper game, for example. Perhaps I should prepare a list of the ideas in this thread, and people can look at that to see if they're interested.


Here goes, (let me know if I left anything out).
  • Arcanum-style setting (Me :P )
  • Dungeon Keeper-style game. (INeedNoSalt)
  • Megacorp wargame, heavy emphasis on money control and wargame-style strategy (monopoly meets wargame)
  • Starship game (delroland)
  • Our old trainwreck (Mojo_Jojo)
  • Something designed from the ground up for forum/irc-play (SUPERSUGA)
  • 1-D strategy game or a forum-style strategy game (delroland)
  • strategy game with turns that only require the player's-whose-turn-it-is input.
  • Multiple character/player strategy-rpg game (me)
  • Halloween cliche RPG with "witches, like honest-to-god, let's ride around on broomsticks and cook up potions with eye of newt witches" (INeedNoSalt)

Or we could just keep throwing around ideas for the time being. (I have no problems with this)

(end of this post copied to OP)

piL on
«1

Posts

  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I would like to see a board game that is similar to Dungeon Keeper, in that you make dungeons.

    And kill each other.

    INeedNoSalt on
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I would like to see a board game that is similar to Dungeon Keeper, in that you make dungeons.

    And kill each other.

    I like this idea. Something where you have to focus primarily on defenses and traps and what not, fend off attackers, and deal with the other dungeon keepers. Sounds like good material to me.

    piL on
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    piL wrote: »
    I would like to see a board game that is similar to Dungeon Keeper, in that you make dungeons.

    And kill each other.

    I like this idea. Something where you have to focus primarily on defenses and traps and what not, fend off attackers, and deal with the other dungeon keepers. Sounds like good material to me.

    I dunno how you'd make it work, but that would be it, primarily. Each player plays a Dungeon, and I dunno how you'd handle different rooms/minions/etc, but that would be something.

    Then you'd have Heroes, like Good Guys, which would maybe be something like the zombies in ZOMBIES!!! or Victims in HorrorClix -- a group of figures that everyone gets an opportunity to use each turn, but that aren't specific to any given player.

    INeedNoSalt on
  • ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I've had the foundations of an idea bouncing around in my head for a day or two. It's nothing major, no mechanics or even storyline has been established. The basic idea, though, is Monopoly meets wargame. Each player owns a mega corporation in the far future, locked in a competition to dominate the market and the planet itself. Players will use their military forces and attempt to destroy rival companies and claim territory to build more factories. The ultimate goal is to earn more money than anyone else, but to do that will require force.

    Zombiemambo on
    JKKaAGp.png
  • UncleKingyUncleKingy Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    RE: Dungeon Keeper idea

    You could use a system like the solo rules from "Advanced heroquest" to generate rooms/corridors etc. and pace them where you like. I would suggest a card-based events system to spawn heros, random monsters etc.

    Personally, I'd like to do a board-game along these lines, combined with the kind of magic system used in the 80s spectrum game "Chaos- Battle of the Wizards" to end up with a game that's a bit like Heroquest crossed with Magic The Gathering.

    Unlike Dungeon Keeper, you would be physically present on the table (as a wizard model) who can cast spells either summoning creatures or chucking lightning bolts etc. around against opposing wizards / creations.

    UncleKingy on
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I like seeing the ideas being tossed around.

    For something like this, spacial considerations is important. I would include a player defined map, ala ZOMBIES!!! and Twilight Imperium. Just something to consider.

    piL on
  • Der Waffle MousDer Waffle Mous Blame this on the misfortune of your birth. New Yark, New Yark.Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I do rather like the ZOMBIES! style map idea myself.

    Der Waffle Mous on
    Steam PSN: DerWaffleMous Origin: DerWaffleMous Bnet: DerWaffle#1682
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Although the way ZOMBIES!!! handled the map didn't give you a whole lot of options. "Here's the piece, put it where it fits." >>

    INeedNoSalt on
  • Zetetic ElenchZetetic Elench Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Thank god someone else feels the same way - I've been waiting for more games in the vein of Myth to pop up, and they haven't, really. So I've been quietly planning what I'd like to do, and I think sometime soon I'll give it a crack.

    But in the meantime I would absolutely love to see something similar to Mordheim or Gorkamorka. Something arena-esque; you know, where it's kind of a free-for-all, where a ton of different people with completely different ideas and playstyles can smash each other up and roleplay or whatever. An Arcanum-style setting like you were interested in would suit that brilliantly, too.

    I think the biggest problem is really by virtue of the forum being a forum. Forums are slow, and people can accidentally end up going out of sequence, and most importantly, the game mechanics have to be really simple and easy to enforce, else you end up with ten people with completely different ideas of how many production points a certain player has. So yeah, I think someone - maybe two people, that could work - certainly need to be around to say what can fly and what can't. Graphical maps help a ton, too.

    Zetetic Elench on
    nemosig.png
  • SUPERSUGASUPERSUGA Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I'm keeping an eye on this, but have no specific ideas myself. If it takes my fancy I'll be happy to poke my nose in.

    SUPERSUGA on
  • HorseshoeHorseshoe Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    piL wrote: »
    be it a setting,

    Campaign setting / supplement...

    Epic Legends of the Heirarchs: The Elemenstor Saga

    Horseshoe on
    dmsigsmallek3.jpg
  • delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I always had an idea for a d20 starship combat game, whereas you roll stats for your character, who is a starship pilot, but his "class" (and levels) is actually the starship class that he flies in. All of your feats, hit points, saving throws, and equipment would represent the ship itself, and when you level up, the ship itself gains better BAB (targeting computers) and saving throws/defenses (armor, PDS, ECM). I think the SAGA rules would be a good port.

    Stats could represent different aspects of a ship: str = cargo capacity, dex = maneuverability/direct fire attacks, con = armor, int = targeting, wis = ECM/sensors, cha = communications

    Example:
    Lvl 1 Spacefighter
    STR 8, DEX 15, CON 12, INT 14, WIS 13, CHA 10

    Armor 13 (109 + 1 con + 2 light shields)
    Evasion 14 (10 + 2 dex + 2 class)
    ECM 13 (10 + 2 wis + 1 class)

    Structure (hp) 27 (24 + 3x con mod, d8 hit die)

    Atk +3 laser array (1d8), inf ammo
    Atk +3 kinetic kill missle (3d6), 1 shot

    Skills (1+int):
    Sensors +6 (perception)
    Maneuver +7 (acrobatics)
    Initiative +7

    Feats:
    Evasive Maneuvers (combat expertise)

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo We are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourse Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    We could try and bring back that trainwreck of an RPG we tried to design a couple of years ago. It was based around percentile dice, had items that became magical as they were used by great heroes, cowboys, and a weird class system based on a dream I once had. It fell apart due to fairly poor management (as in the guy whose idea it was and wanted to be the project leader assigned people to different sections of development, some of these people weren't actually told they were in charge of anything).

    Suffice to say that it didn't get very far and I'm sure that all the resources have been scattered to the five corners of the earth by now, but we had lots of good ideas. Essentially, if you want a job doing then you'll need a very small team of people doing things and everybody else is a proof reader/ playtester.

    Mojo_Jojo on
    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
  • HorseshoeHorseshoe Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    I always had an idea for a d20 starship combat game, whereas you roll stats for your character, who is a starship pilot, but his "class" (and levels) is actually the starship class that he flies in. All of your feats, hit points, saving throws, and equipment would represent the ship itself, and when you level up, the ship itself gains better BAB (targeting computers) and saving throws/defenses (armor, PDS, ECM). I think the SAGA rules would be a good port.

    Yeah, Saga could work for that.

    In vehicle encounters, basically the players are fighting the vehicle itself, which is somewhat modified by the skill of the pilot.

    The vehicle has its own STR, DEX and INT scores. As you "level up" the ship you could periodically get increases to ability scores just as you do with a PC. Vehicle enemies also have skills and make skill checks, such as a mechanics check to repair shields during combat.

    You could also use the concept of "build points" from the Starships of the Galaxy in the RCR version to build the ship in terms of its armaments, engines, shields, computers, hit points, etc. Perhaps instead of talents every odd level the ship could earn build points and either save them for later or use them for an upgrade.

    Also, because all ranged attack feats can be used when in a vehicle if the pilot is proficient in heavy weapons or has the vehicular combat feat... existing feats could still be used every even level.

    With this ship for example, you'd basically be playing a pen an paper version of the Jedi Starfighter video game.

    Horseshoe on
    dmsigsmallek3.jpg
  • SUPERSUGASUPERSUGA Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I think the project should edge towards unusual rather than another d% RPG system or fantasy setting. Perhaps it should be something with a focus on actually being usable here on oDaM or in #bombfell.

    I'll have a think throughout the night.

    SUPERSUGA on
  • HorseshoeHorseshoe Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Hey Suga, you ever going to run that supers game?
    A.T.L.A.S.

    Horseshoe on
    dmsigsmallek3.jpg
  • SUPERSUGASUPERSUGA Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Haha. I really did want to but the ship's sailed, I fear. I start my teaching course on Monday so all hell's going to break loose then.

    I'll do my best to run it next Summer, but really, if anyone wants to take it from me I've got no beef with it at all.

    I'm looking at you, Horseshoe.

    SUPERSUGA on
  • RankenphileRankenphile Passersby were amazed by the unusually large amounts of blood.Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited September 2007
    I like the idea of a dungeon keeper competitive game, myself

    just brainstorming here

    each player starts off with a board for their dungeon, with a set amount of useable space. They each get three imps. They draw a set of cards - six would be my guess. Imp Cards would perform actions, such as:

    Dig
    Mine
    Claim

    They can use one card per imp per turn, and refresh their imp cards at the beginning of each turn. They move their imp to the tile, then either dig it up, mine gold or claim an already-dug space. They can then discard the rest of their cards and refresh the full six, or hold on to whatever remaining cards they have before refreshing. These cards are all kept face down in front of the player's board.

    When you dig, you get to draw a Play Card that could be a resource (gems, worth X gold), earthquake (rare, collapses a tile of your choice on another player's tile so that it must be dug back up and reclaimed before it can be used), wandering monster (that the player or the imp/monsters in the dungeon have to fight) or an action to be used against another player, such as RAID! or spy, etc.

    Players must dig gold to purchase different rooms, such as Lair, Chicken Room, Training, Library, etc. in order to attract different monsters. Each generates a certain number of points of its own resource, which can be kept track of using chits, tokens or just a gauge on the side of the board. Creatures must be "purchased" at the beginning of each turn, before the imps get to move.

    The point of the game is to build a big enough army to take over the other players' dungeons using RAID!s or other action cards and your own monsters until they are the last one left.

    PROBLEMS: Off the bat, there's a shitload of resources and cards to manage. Player elimination means that some players will be left out of the game while others keep going, which is never fun - perhaps they get conscripted into service, which costs an upkeep?

    Rankenphile on
    8406wWN.png
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I think the simple quick way to deal with the ousted players issue is to have the goal not be player elimination but something else--acquiring gold or some such. People that like to play deadly can do that (as an alternative way to win), and people that like to not slay eachother and make someone wait get to work towards that win-goal, like the winning of Civilization.

    I was thinking about how this could be the best CCG ever...


    But that's not something we could really design and make available, and so beyond the scope of this thread :)

    piL on
  • delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    K, here's a brain storm on PbP Strategy Games. One of the hardest aspects to add to a PbP game is graphical representation. Obviously, the easiest method for a strategy game is to display it with ASCII characters, but a 2d representation would be too difficult for Average Joe Poster. The solution: simplify. Linear graphical representation is very easy to implement, and I see two possiblilties for a linear graphic game. The first is the "bridge scenario" where you have two lines facing each other point-to-point, whereas only the "front" character can engage directly. Example:

    X>X>X>X>X vs O<O<O<O<O

    The other example would be the battle line scenario, similar to the old GW card game Chaos Marauders. Each character would have a line, and each line would face each other laterally. Think two single-rank warhammer fantasy units squaring off. Example:

    X-X-X-X-X-X-X
    vs.
    O-O-O-O-O-O

    g2g, more soon

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    This seems more like a simpler way to do spatial representation via telnet than it does for a forum. Forums can show images and image editors are free. At the worst, you just need a photobucket account and a moderate understanding of layers to use tools someone else has provided.

    In fact, I'm surprised I haven't seen someone run a game of Warhammer or Warmachine online, handing out some appropriately scaled icons, a picture of the map, and a PSD file. That might not be a bad thing to try and organize.

    piL on
  • delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    See, that's an example supporting my thesis. If it was so easy to do graphical representation on boards, MORE PEOPLE WOULD DO IT. Since they don't, my point is more strongly supported (though admittedly not proven).

    In fact, I challenge you to run just the type of game you are suggesting as research into the feasibility of graphical PbP games. (Not as in, "hey jerkface, why don't ya put up or shut up!", but as in, let's see it done, and if it works, hooray! we have a format for the theoretical Project X Game.)

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    See, that's an example supporting my thesis. If it was so easy to do graphical representation on boards, MORE PEOPLE WOULD DO IT. Since they don't, my point is more strongly supported (though admittedly not proven).

    In fact, I challenge you to run just the type of game you are suggesting as research into the feasibility of graphical PbP games. (Not as in, "hey jerkface, why don't ya put up or shut up!", but as in, let's see it done, and if it works, hooray! we have a format for the theoretical Project X Game.)

    encounter1round1jq4.jpg
    encounter1round2fz3.jpg
    encounter1round3at5.jpg
    encounter1round4qq2.jpg

    ?

    INeedNoSalt on
  • delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Okay, granted, that is a decent example of a two-player, one GM RPG. However, piL specifically made the comment in regards to miniatures warfare, which is on a much grander scale, and doesn't have the advantage of using a grid battlemap.

    Also, while the graphical representation is cool, it is a rarity, which means that Horseshoe is one of the few people with the time, desire, and know-how to put that much effort into creating a good graphical representation. The goal, as I believe it to be, is to create a viable, easy-to-use system whereas a majority of people would be inclined to use it.

    Horseshoe's campaign is the exception and not the rule. I am sure many of the other posters here that have played in more than one PbP will attest to that (**not saying you are somehow less experienced**). Most PbP games disintegrate in a matter of days due to lack of posts and combats taking WAY TOO LONG, especially when you have a "full table" of 4-5 players.

    Really, for a dedicated, ODaM/PbP-exclusive game, one must use a simple interface with diceless conflict resolution and tools that are readily available on the board itself.

    Here's a thought: make a stratego game that utilizes the smileys. Each smiley represents a unit of certain magnitude. Speech bubbles could represent buffs and debuffs. Example:

    8-) = troubador, CV1, can sing :whistle: to grant +1 CV to adjacent units
    O_o = Zerker, CV2, can rage, :!!: +1 CV one turn then :...: -1 CV one turn
    :x = knight, CV2, wins ties

    so:

    O_o:!!: v :x -> Zerker rages, killing knight
    O_o:!!: v :x:whistle: - 8-) -> Zerker rages, troubador inspires, knight wins ties, killing Zerker
    O_o v 8-) - :x:whistle: -> Zerker kills troubador -> O_o:!!: v :x -> Zerker rages, killing knight
    O_o:!!: v 8-):whistle: - 8-) - 8-) -> Zerker rages, killing troubador -> O_o:...: v 8-):whistle: - 8-) -> Zerker fatigued, troubador inspired, killing Zerker

    Of course, like stratego, you would have a set force. The only variable is how you arrange your forces. I would also suggest different army sets, similar to the four forces of D&D Minis.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • HorseshoeHorseshoe Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    Okay, granted, that is a decent example of a two-player, one GM RPG. However, piL specifically made the comment in regards to miniatures warfare, which is on a much grander scale, and doesn't have the advantage of using a grid battlemap.

    A battlemap with grids, though they would not be used for the "placing of units", might still be able to be used to lay down virtual templates and guage distances and movement rates, etc.
    Also, while the graphical representation is cool, it is a rarity, which means that Horseshoe is one of the few people with the time, desire, and know-how to put that much effort into creating a good graphical representation.

    It is done with free software, is easy enough for a guy like me who has only rudimentary skills, and doesn't really take that much time if you can find a map that works and not have to generate it, or just go with a real plain board with a grid in case of a larger scale battlemap.

    In a Warhammer-esque game, the two players could actually email the layered file to each other, alter it with the free software that both of them would have, and do it. It's not elegant and for sure it adds in some more time, but it could actually work.
    The goal, as I believe it to be, is to create a viable, easy-to-use system whereas a majority of people would be inclined to use it.

    I think they're called "phalla"... apparently it's easy and a crapload of people use them. But I really can't get into those so I may be completely and totally wrong about that.
    Horseshoe's campaign is the exception and not the rule. I am sure many of the other posters here that have played in more than one PbP will attest to that (**not saying you are somehow less experienced**). Most PbP games disintegrate in a matter of days due to lack of posts and combats taking WAY TOO LONG, especially when you have a "full table" of 4-5 players.

    Absolutely right. I had every intention of making the game the exception to the rule, as every other play by post game I have been in is just as you described. And really, I don't think that I could possibly run that game anywhere but here, where I have some idea of the commitment the players are willing to make.
    Really, for a dedicated, ODaM/PbP-exclusive game, one must use a simple interface with diceless conflict resolution and tools that are readily available on the board itself.

    It seems like phallas and freeform-type games are both diceless and readily available.
    Here's a thought: make a stratego game that utilizes the smileys. Each smiley represents a unit of certain magnitude. Speech bubbles could represent buffs and debuffs. Example:

    8-) = troubador, CV1, can sing :whistle: to grant +1 CV to adjacent units
    O_o = Zerker, CV2, can rage, :!!: +1 CV one turn then :...: -1 CV one turn
    :x = knight, CV2, wins ties

    The last time I played Stratego there was a map there... so how would you handle the spatial element of this?
    so:

    O_o:!!: v :x -> Zerker rages, killing knight
    O_o:!!: v :x:whistle: - 8-) -> Zerker rages, troubador inspires, knight wins ties, killing Zerker
    O_o v 8-) - :x:whistle: -> Zerker kills troubador -> O_o:!!: v :x -> Zerker rages, killing knight
    O_o:!!: v 8-):whistle: - 8-) - 8-) -> Zerker rages, killing troubador -> O_o:...: v 8-):whistle: - 8-) -> Zerker fatigued, troubador inspired, killing Zerker

    Of course, like stratego, you would have a set force. The only variable is how you arrange your forces. I would also suggest different army sets, similar to the four forces of D&D Minis.

    The emoticon rebus is something that I really can't comprehend with my eyes, but I may be in the minority.

    Don't get me wrong, I like where you're going with it, I'm just throwing my take out on it since I was specifically mentioned.

    Horseshoe on
    dmsigsmallek3.jpg
  • delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Yeah, the graphics are a little hard on the eyes. The map though is the "bridge scenario" I described earlier, two lines facing each other end to end and meeting in the middle. Without the smileys, X's vs. O's:

    X - X - X - X v O - O - O - O

    The rightmost X fights the leftmost O. If the X wins, all O's advance a rank, so it would become:

    X - X - X - X v O - O - O

    Now the second-leftmost O, now advanced to the leftmost position, faces the rightmost X.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Firstly, thank you INNS, you are win and awesome, because quite frankly, I've never been much for miniature war games, except for maybe Battletech, and even MW rests in a cool-idea-but-an-execution-that-doesn't-stand-on-its-own-for-me kind of gray area.

    Second, converting pixels to inches is easy, and with a high school understanding of the Pythagorean Theorem, you too can measure distances on a pixel grid. Though the pixels wont grant you that atomically discrete (read: gridless) effect, making a pixel length a sixteenth of an inch or even a thirty-second of one should allow precision enough for even the cruelest of players (and if they're really bitchy, there is a point where they can't tell the difference any more; reduce it to that and chalk the rest up to significant digits.

    Third, yay for the stratego idea. Even though I haven't played it, I like it

    ---

    As for another issue entirely:
    The goal, as I believe it to be, is to create a viable, easy-to-use system whereas a majority of people would be inclined to use it.

    Do not believe it to be when you are setting your own goal. This is your goal (though a noble and lofty one!), and the goal you created, not the goal of this thread. This thread's primary objective is the discussion creation of anything in general by the forum, not specifically for[ the forum, and certainly I don't believe I stated any Perhaps I should revise the OP--I get a sense of projection.

    But please do continue the discussion of your idea, I just don't want you to have the wrong impression of my intentions :)


    Horseshoe, agreed on all points. Also, I missed the Elemenstor Saga comment. I caught it, and subsequently chuckled. Mission accomplished!

    piL on
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I do not know why piL is thanking me, or if he is perhaps being sarcastic.

    I liked how the reply to my post was like, "Well, yeah, that works, but not exactly the way you've got it, so that is a terrible idea and plus, some people are lazy."

    INeedNoSalt on
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I do not know why piL is thanking me, or if he is perhaps being sarcastic.

    I liked how the reply to my post was like, "Well, yeah, that works, but not exactly the way you've got it, so that is a terrible idea and plus, some people are lazy."

    He basically said, "proove to me it's doable by doing it" and then you showed it was doable by showing someone else doing it :P

    piL on
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    piL wrote: »
    I do not know why piL is thanking me, or if he is perhaps being sarcastic.

    I liked how the reply to my post was like, "Well, yeah, that works, but not exactly the way you've got it, so that is a terrible idea and plus, some people are lazy."

    He basically said, "proove to me it's doable by doing it" and then you showed it was doable by showing someone else doing it :P

    well, yeah. if someone says 'prove to me a machine can fly by building a flying machine,' I'd probably just point him in the direction of the airport.

    INeedNoSalt on
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo We are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourse Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    piL wrote: »
    He basically said, "proove to me it's doable by doing it" and then you showed it was doable by showing someone else doing it :P

    well, yeah. if someone says 'prove to me a machine can fly by building a flying machine,' I'd probably just point him in the direction of the airport.
    That isn't you building a flying machine though.

    Mapping is a real ball ache in PBPs, its a rare talent to be able to produce something pretty and for everybody else it takes hours to produce something passable. What's needed is some kind of specialised map editor which doesn't suck donkey balls so you end up just ignoring it and using a normal image editor instead(Campaign Cartographer, I'm looking at you. Although I've heard that Dundjinni is a bit better).

    Mojo_Jojo on
    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
  • delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    piL wrote: »
    He basically said, "prove to me it's doable by doing it" and then you showed it was doable by showing someone else doing it :P

    well, yeah. if someone says 'prove to me a machine can fly by building a flying machine,' I'd probably just point him in the direction of the airport.

    Your analogy is not entirely appropriate. A better one, one more in line with my reasoning, would be me saying, "Prove to me it's easy to build an airplane by building an airplane." Pointing me to an airport or showing me a plane someone elsehad already built does nothing to show me how easy it is to build an airplane.
    I liked how the reply to my post was like, "Well, yeah, that works, but not exactly the way you've got it, so that is a terrible idea and plus, some people are lazy."

    I never said what Horseshoe does is a terrible idea or that people are lazy. What I said was that what Horseshoe does is not easy for everyone to duplicate. I'm not trying to be smug or condescending. I'm just offering up ideas, as this is a discussion forum.
    piL wrote: »
    Do not believe it to be when you are setting your own goal. This is your goal (though a noble and lofty one!), and the goal you created, not the goal of this thread. This thread's primary objective is the discussion creation of anything in general by the forum, not specifically for[ the forum, and certainly I don't believe I stated any Perhaps I should revise the OP--I get a sense of projection.

    Sorry, I misunderstood the OP. When you said "anything ODaM-related" I thought you meant related to the ODaM board itself and not the topic that ODaM covers.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    piL wrote: »
    He basically said, "prove to me it's doable by doing it" and then you showed it was doable by showing someone else doing it :P

    well, yeah. if someone says 'prove to me a machine can fly by building a flying machine,' I'd probably just point him in the direction of the airport.

    Your analogy is not entirely appropriate. A better one, one more in line with my reasoning, would be me saying, "Prove to me it's easy to build an airplane by building an airplane." Pointing me to an airport or showing me a plane someone elsehad already built does nothing to show me how easy it is to build an airplane.

    You didn't say 'prove it's easy,' you said 'prove it's doable.'

    I showed that it's doable, and Horseshoe said it's easy (if you're not entirely unwilling to put a bit of effort into it.)

    (Well, Horsehose proved it's doable, too, I just showed his work. >>)

    INeedNoSalt on
  • delrolanddelroland Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Fine. Then what I meant was, prove to me it's doable AND PRACTICAL. Horseshoe already knows how to do it. Do you? If so, show me, and show me how you did it. Or don't. I'm starting to not care anymore.

    delroland on
    EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
    "Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    delroland wrote: »
    Fine. Then what I meant was, prove to me it's doable AND PRACTICAL. Horseshoe already knows how to do it. Do you? If so, show me, and show me how you did it. Or don't. I'm starting to not care anymore.

    Yes, because Horseshoe just explained how it's done. o_O

    INeedNoSalt on
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Here is my model strategy game, although much more simplified. A background with terrain info could be placed instead of the hexes, but I wanted to make this short and sweet. Some liberties may have been taken with the actual gameplay of Battletech :)

    Arbitrator's post:
    Two Cicada's sneak up on an Atlas. What the hell are they thinking? Oh well, go ahead and play it out, I think I know how this one ends.

    sigh%20start.jpg
    edit this

    Player 1 goes first.

    Turn 1
    Player 1:
    I move both cicadas three hexes in an attempt to gain more of a flanking position.

    sigh%2001-01.jpg
    edit this

    Player 2:
    I move the Atlus one hex closer, taunting madly.

    sigh%2001-02.jpg
    edit this

    Turn 2

    Player 1:
    The left Cicada stays to cover the right one which moves into melee.

    sigh%2002-01.jpg
    edit this

    Player 2:
    The Atlus blasts the Cicada into oblivion.

    **some dice are rolled**

    Success, the Cicada is squashed like a bug.

    sigh%2002-02.jpg
    edit this


    Player 1:
    I am like... so pissed off right now, you have no idea how pissed off I am right now. Cicada fires.

    **dice are rolled, dots are marked, noone notices**

    sigh%2003-01.jpg
    edit this


    Player 2:
    I move into melee and destory the bitch.

    **dice are rolled, Cicada is destroyed. Somewhere someone cries**

    sigh%2003-02.jpg
    edit this

    Arbitrator:
    Good game all.

    All the actual players had to do was select the right layer for their guy, hit ctrl-a to select all, and then drag it to the appropriate hex. Save as JPG, save as XCF, upload both, make post. Something I think easily done in ten minutes, much less PBP time. More things would make it more busy, but these kind of games are usually built for two players where one player makes all his moves and then the other makes all of his moves, and so each person can take his time, move is 1, 2, 10, 20 units, make the post, and then let the other person take his turn at his convenience.

    The real issue is when you have to wait for one person, then the next, and have 6 people go in order. That's where I believe PBP fouls up the most.

    As long as everything is prepared beforehand, it's really a matter of selecting the layer, dragging the thing where you want it, repeating for all your units, and then saving the files. The majority of users here can probably handle it, and even if you didn't know how to do that, I do not believe it would take long to learn. Once learned, it should be a quick matter to complete your turn--I imagine most players would spend more time thinking of where things should be.

    I do grant that the above picture is an example of another discreet mapping system, but it shouldn't be too much more difficult to do it another way. You could convert all the ranges into pixel measurements using some arbitrary conversion, and then measure your distance by taking the square root of the sum of the squares of the x and y distance components. If you're in or past high school, can't do that, and live in an industrialized nation, either you've failed your education system or it has failed you. EDIT: Or you forgot, but should be able to quickly relearn.

    piL on
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I never responded to a lot of stuff in this thread, so I'm going to go at that now:

    delroland wrote: »
    I always had an idea for a d20 starship combat game,


    I remember one week I spent on trying to make a grid based tabletop game that kept track of momentum in a Newtonian sort of way. It took me that long before realized that my friends would, in no way, go for a game involving cosine and sine. Still, your idea seems sound and interesting enough.

    Mojo_Jojo wrote: »
    We could try and bring back that trainwreck of an RPG we tried to design a couple of years ago. It was based around percentile dice, had items that became magical as they were used by great heroes, cowboys, and a weird class system based on a dream I once had. It fell apart due to fairly poor management (as in the guy whose idea it was and wanted to be the project leader assigned people to different sections of development, some of these people weren't actually told they were in charge of anything).

    Suffice to say that it didn't get very far and I'm sure that all the resources have been scattered to the five corners of the earth by now, but we had lots of good ideas. Essentially, if you want a job doing then you'll need a very small team of people doing things and everybody else is a proof reader/ playtester.


    I didn't even realize you posted in this thread, heh, I remember that. That was totally management problems. No one could decide on anything, there was no way to ratify decisions, and so everyone was just including what they thought was cool and nothing really meshed with any over all goal. I liked some of the ideas there, but if that were to be done again, lots more decision-making would need to be done.


    Also, I feel that there is little reason for percentile dice (other than they're fun), but the beauty of a percentile system is that it is the most easier to supplant later in the development for some other cool system with a curve and still preserve the parts you want to preserve. I like curved dice systems, because a geometric probability means you can describe all the elements in easier to understand linear styles without running into the problems of linear progression. But I am digressing horribly.





    Mojo_Jojo wrote: »
    piL wrote: »
    He basically said, "proove to me it's doable by doing it" and then you showed it was doable by showing someone else doing it :P

    well, yeah. if someone says 'prove to me a machine can fly by building a flying machine,' I'd probably just point him in the direction of the airport.
    That isn't you building a flying machine though.

    Mapping is a real ball ache in PBPs, its a rare talent to be able to produce something pretty and for everybody else it takes hours to produce something passable. What's needed is some kind of specialised map editor which doesn't suck donkey balls so you end up just ignoring it and using a normal image editor instead(Campaign Cartographer, I'm looking at you. Although I've heard that Dundjinni is a bit better).




    That quote got backwardized! Any way, yes, while it's a ball ache to make a map from scratch, it is my believe that just editing pieces on top of a map that already exists should be quick and easy enough in a 1v1 turn based strategy game. Unfortunately, since each combat action in most games requires input from multiple players for a combat (one side rolls, then the other, or someone has to roll a save or someone might want to play a card), you have to break up the mapping and do it over and over again in small sub-turns, quickly making it unfun and make a turn take forever


    Perhaps a strategy game can be designed around one player being able to arbitrate all the actions on his own turn without intervention from another player is in order (or already exists and I'm a fool).




    Two more things:


    First thing:


    For another thing to add to the list of pursuable ideas:


    The discussion in the DnD4e thread has made me consider an alternative mana system for d20 along the lines of Shadowrun's drain system.


    As a spell caster, you receive a "Mana" stat that works kind of like attack rating. You get a point to it for every wizard/cleric level, maybe a couple of extra points spread about the sorcerer level, and the 4-cap casters (rangers and paladins) get it much rarer. Maybe a hybrid casting class could get one every other level.


    When the caster casts the spell, she can determine at what level she casts it, and then rolls this mana stat against some target number determined by spell level or whatever (this can be calculated based on how many spells per day a caster should get, and is not important). Failure or success on this role determines whether or by how much a "pool" stat is reduced.




    Perhaps this pool stat has 10 points. Or 8. Or 11. Or any number really, it doesn't matter. Casting easy spells might mean the pool doesn't get reduced at all, casting something medium might drop it 1 or 2 points. Casting something huge might drop it 8 points depending on your check and what not. The penalty to this is applied to your mana stat, (this pool could even be the bonus OF your mana stat), meaning the more big spells you use, the more exhausted your powers become and the less powerful you can afford to make all of your spells. Running out means you're dry or unconscious, or malignant effect of some sort, so as a spell caster, you have to balance this sort of thing. Meanwhile, the caster would be able to cast low level spells with impunity (allowing them to conserve supplies) without having to rely on what I believe is a disgusting tally system.




    Second thing:


    Does anyone have any desire in pursuing ideas listed elsewhere in this thread?
    There was quite a bit of interest in the dungeon keeper game, for example. Perhaps I should prepare a list of the ideas in this thread, and people can look at that to see if they're interested.


    Here goes, (let me know if I left anything out).
    • Arcanum-style setting (Me :P )
    • Dungeon Keeper-style game. (INeedNoSalt)
    • Megacorp wargame, heavy emphasis on money control and wargame-style strategy (monopoly meets wargame)
    • Starship game (delroland)
    • Our old trainwreck (Mojo_Jojo)
    • Something designed from the ground up for forum/irc-play (SUPERSUGA)
    • 1-D strategy game or a forum-style strategy game (delroland)
    • strategy game with turns that only require the player's-whose-turn-it-is input.
    • Multiple character/player strategy-rpg game (me)
    • Halloween cliche RPG with "witches, like honest-to-god, let's ride around on broomsticks and cook up potions with eye of newt witches" (INeedNoSalt)

    Or we could just keep throwing around ideas for the time being. (I have no problems with this)

    (end of this post copied to OP)

    piL on
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I have never really loved war games, but I do like the idea of an Arcanum-esque setting.

    I also like settings that don't have any other races besides human, which is kind of a pointless thing to add, but whatever.

    INeedNoSalt on
  • piLpiL Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I'm not really a war gamer either. If I had to pick my personal picks they would be the Arcanum-esque setting (not really fair since I suggested it), the Dungeon Keeper style game, and maybe the Monopoly Wargame (especially if it played closer to A&A than Warhammer). I wouldn't mind a wargame with persistence though--that brings to mind another idea I once had:

    Each player controls multiple characters, and brings them to a number of engagements, with a story that follows the groups as a whole as they work together towards some goal. It would work good when people weren't there because their "squad" would be elsewhere, and some element of the game could be character trading. Plus when I make characters for RPGs, it tends to be a very long affair because I really want to play like three different ideas but I can't decide. Multiple characters would heal that.

    Also, I'm not entirely partial to the presence of multiple races either way. I find them useful in some sort of archetypical manner, but not absolutely necessary. They could be useful in stressing the magic half of the steampunk/magic setting, but if you changed the magicness from, lets say high fantasy to a gothic sort of fantasy, with witches etc, I think it could also result in something interesting and cool.

    In fact, I've always found that while races exemplify certain national lines in a way, (so you can have an elf nation, a dwarf nation, a human nation or two, a gnome nation etc.), I find that they actually get in the way of the nations themselves (the two human nations sort of blur together, why don't the gnomes have six nations etc.)

    Pros and cons really. I compliment World of Darkness in the fact that it castes its players in such a way that race/class isn't the focus and yet your caste/bloodline/dickbend determines the sort of stuff that's available to you, helping to guide like clan and race. Another super-digression :)

    piL on
  • INeedNoSaltINeedNoSalt with blood on my teeth Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I actually sort of favored Wraith for being the one WoD game to not base your character entirely around some arbitrary thing that they've got no control over.

    I've always wanted to see a setting with witches, like honest-to-god, let's ride around on broomsticks and cook up potions with eye of newt witches. But no, never.

    I want a game that would be awesome to play on Halloween.

    INeedNoSalt on
Sign In or Register to comment.