[Glossolalia 4.2] So Apparently I'm Making an SE++ RPG...
DE?AD
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Well, after Robcham started a fantasy comic thread over in SE++, I posted a bunch of jokey D&D-esque statistics for the in-setting species, things sorta got out of hand, and I now find myself in the process of creating a system for a proposed Social EntroRPG.
Now, the reason I'm posting this over here is I'd actually like to know what Critical Failure's more System-minded folk will have to say about it.
All of the rules can be found on the wiki. I'd post them here, but I've built up quite a few pages now, and it's actually a lot easier to read in wiki format.
I'm the first to admit that I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing, so I'd be interested in seeing how close to a workable system I've manage to fall in my random failings.
Opinions?
Now, the reason I'm posting this over here is I'd actually like to know what Critical Failure's more System-minded folk will have to say about it.
All of the rules can be found on the wiki. I'd post them here, but I've built up quite a few pages now, and it's actually a lot easier to read in wiki format.
I'm the first to admit that I have absolutely no clue what I'm doing, so I'd be interested in seeing how close to a workable system I've manage to fall in my random failings.
Opinions?
DE?AD on
0
Posts
The spread for that seems off.
A lot of the system is equal parts trying to make things work, and trying to make things humorous.
The fact that you can more than double your Wounded Dots each level seems a bit ridiculous, if for no other reason than combat with any level disparities is gonna get wicked-messy real quick. Just on the whole, the fact that almost every mechanic appears to use d20s seems like it makes balancing very difficult. I know that this is probably a one-off, or in any case only going to be used for this very limited purpose, but balance ought to still be a concern. I mean, if you dueled eachother at level 1, you could kill eachother in one melee hit (if i'm reading this right). Hilarious, and sure to keep the game moving, but not necessarily a good game mechanic. If you want to roll tons of dice for attacks and keep the thing rolling, 3d6s might be more appropriate for combat, but even then the leveling thing seems crazy-good. maybe just 1d20 each level, or like 3d20, drop the lowest 2 rolls?
I mean, the only way to make this ludicrous and working would be to triple the value of virtually everything, but then you run into issues with base stats - the reason they are where they are is because of the use of d20s some places, d6s others, and so on and how that scales. I mean, these systems have essentially been playtested for 30 years, you have to figure they've worked out a lot of the kinks by now.
Honestly, if you're already building your own classes, monsters, etc, taking a look at the 4E core resources wouldnt be bad advice simply because they're made to be adaptable, scalable, a very solid skeleton on which to lay whatever skin you desire. Then you can just tilt the scales and alter the rules in favor of humor without having to build an entire gaming system.
Good luck, however you end up working it out
Hmm. How so? Admittedly, I just looked up a Roll Probability generator and based the descriptors off of the percentiles it gave me.
Well, it's d20 only in so much as it uses a d20 die. So your opinion is actually entirely valuable.
Good point about the one hit kills, while funny the first time, they'd lose their appeal rather quickly. The question is how to fix that. The most intuitive answer would be to add more hit points, but that just increases the leveling problem.
One of the things I'm trying for here is the appearance of ridiculously high granularity without any actual granularity - ludicrously high numbers that actually tend to work like very small numbers.
{17, 17, 17} (51) | {19, 14, 18} (51) | {1, 20, 11} (32)
Fair dice would on average touch the 30s. The entire game skews towards failure. But even before I add 'nesses or 'ocities to my score, I've already won half the challenges, unless it skews up really high. Like your 'mancy example, which would only be possible taking it to some extreme. After a while, it'd kind of get well, boring.
You have gone completely and totally insane, DE?AD.
So, how would you suggest fixing that rather large bug? If I scaled it down to 1 or 2d20, I'd obviously have to reign in the points at character creation, but what I'm kinda more interested in is how it would effect higher-level play - where the bonuses begin to vastly overpower the dice-input.
EDIT: Thanks, Horseshoe.
Actually, I can think of two possible solutions off the top of my sleep-deprived head.
1. Attributes start at -50. Meaning that the highest possible roll a commoner could make is a 10, with the vast majority their rolls being in the negatives, with DQs to match (catch the water-pail DQ -20). Funny, but probably a little more awkward than even the current system.
2. Turn the system into a dice pool, with d20's serving as the main die, and anything above a twelve counting as a success, and all Abilities and Learnings being rated in dice. Leveling up continually adds new dice, creating the possibility for "roll 28d20" situations. As this will be an online game, that's actually not a problem. However, my issues with this are twofold - first, I'd have to rebuild the whole thing, and secondly, and more importantly, it's straying a little too far from a D&D parody, and getting a little too close to an Exalted parody.
Assuming the following: All 8 ability stats start at zero, you have 8 points you can start with, and all stats have a max of 10. What is the maximum level for this game if you get plus one ability point, 5 occupation and 1 endowment? AT what point does leveling become pointless?
What are the skills that one can use that doesn't involve fighting? IE: What can I do aside from swing a weapon or cast a spell. Is there a need to do more?
How many endowments should I have, and what do they cost to get?
The bit about the +10 being the peak of human potential wasn't actually meant as a limitation to the players, just a guideline as to when the truly superhuman stuff started, but looking at it again now, it definitely twinges of awkwardness - due entirely to the wide variance of the 3d20. As for maximum level, well, one of the things I was sort of attempting to do was create a steady build, with no actual maximum level.
The skills are pretty much D&D standard fair, with the added complication that combat abilities count as skills themselves - there's a superfluous crafting skill, a social skill, a survival/tracking skill, athletic skills, and so on.
Other options I can think of to tweak the primary roll mechanic:
1d20/5 Levels - more powerful characters have a wider variance to match their higher modifiers.
Weird d20 Dice Pool - turn the d20 into an awkward d4 with Cataclysmic/Bad/Good/Magnificent setup.
Weirder d20 Dice Pool - As above, but break the d20 into sections of 4 or 2 instead of 5. Throw in some strange consequences on the die, instead of just gradated levels of success. (I.E. 1-2 "Abyssmal"; 3 "Fortuitous Coincidence"; 4-5 "Poor"; 6 "Exceed Abilities"; 7-8 "Decent"; 9 "Downgrade Last Die"; 10-11 "Good"; etc.)
Any opinions?