Who makes their own games?

LibrarianThorne

Hey there CFers, I've been working on my own system recently and I was wondering if anyone here does the same. I'd love to ask questions, give answers, and generally find out if anyone else digs making their own rulesets.

Games I've Made (non-published):
Escape miniatures game (based on the Escape From NY/LA movies)
Warhammer d20 (first game I made in college)
Drawing Superheroes (superhero system where combat and rounds must be physically illustrated)

Games I'm Working On:
HALO RPG (keeping everything kinda hush-hush on this one, though I post about it on my blog. Most in-depth rules system I've made)
Anime d20 (because I enjoy ramming my head into a brick wall)

Questions:
1. What do you think of social combat/rules? In my opinion, social interaction has only really been handled well by White Wolf. D&D, Talislanta, Shadowrun, et al. make social interaction as binary as combat, when it really isn't. I tend to eschew social stuff because it's only been done well through RP, at least in my experience.

2. Initiatives, what works and what doesn't? I love the simplicity of D&D and other static initiative systems, but at the same time it makes longer combats very predictable and kind of easy. I love Exalted's system because it makes initiative and action resolution a much more fluid thing, at the cost of simplicity.

3. Should characters have lots of hit points/damage levels/random other indicators of not dead-ness or very little?

If anyone's interested, I'd love it if we could share games in this thread, though I'd understand if mods get a little sketchy around that.

Hahnsoo1

In some settings (but not all), social rules are necessary. Why? Because you typically aren't dealing with ordinary humans talking with other ordinary humans. You are typically dealing with supernatural or science-fiction entities that express extraordinary abilities over the human psyche. These rules aren't meant to tell you about "normal interaction." They are meant to describe abnormal and super interactions. I wouldn't toss in social tests into a game about Pirates, for example, unless these are supernatural uber-Pirates with magical powers. I might toss in a couple rules about bidding or etiquette, but these wouldn't be the focus of the game as a whole.

There's also a concept of "chain of command" or "bureaucracy" and the PC's ability to wade through it. Social rules are useful for this sort of design precisely because it is a rigid structure of rules that can be manipulated through skill and knowledge.

As far as initiative goes, One Roll Engine (Godlike, Wild Talents, Reign, Nemesis, mostly all RPGs by Arc Dream) does away with Initiative rolls entirely. Or rolls versus target numbers, for that matter. We've recently discovered and switched to One Roll Engine as our main RPG, and we're loving it... combat is far more fluid, brutal, random, and awesome than it ever was in any other RPG (which, by comparison, makes other RPGs the banal equivalent of "I hit you, then you hit me, then I hit you, then you hit me" ad nauseum). The downside is that it makes any custom system that I've ever dreamed up look homely and clumsy by comparison.

Fortunately, for all of the great revitalization to our Roleplaying Games that ORE has done for us, their character generation systems are standard (even mundane) point based systems or template based systems that we've all come to know and love from GURPS, Shadowrun, etc. They don't re-invent the wheel here.

I'd say that you can't make a damage system that appeals to everyone. I tend to play games where one shot from any weapon can be enough to kill even the PCs at higher tiers of power. Mortality is a big thing for me. I know that it's not for a lot of gamers out there (Who wants to play a guy who always has 10 HP??). Pick a damage system that matches the flavor of the game you are making. One Roll Engine is a "gritty" system (which in this industry means "more one shot kills", sadly)... the original setting of Godlike is set in World War II, and taking inspiration from "Saving Private Ryan", every person has a potential of being killed right out of action. Shadowrun is fairly gritty as well, as it depicts a bleak world with high powered firearms, and introduces injury modifiers based on how critical your damage is. Dungeons and Dragons is only gritty in the first 2 levels (in pretty much every edition), and then it devolves into a slugfest between two slow moving groups of tokens. RIFTS and most Supers games are probably the least gritty and tend toward JRPG-levels of ridiculousness in terms of damage. All of these systems are "correct" for their own setting. A Shadowrun game with DnD hitpoints would be just as ridiculous as a RIFTS game that allowed one-shot kills from a .38 special.

SkyCaptain

I'm working on a 4th edition derivative that combines some useful elements from other rpg's and a couple mmo's to allow for a greater flexibility in character role and concept. It's nowhere near playable though.

SUPERSUGA

Follow the link on my sig image and you'll find my blog, which covers my games, all of which are free at the moment. Just look in the bar on the right and check them out.

At the moment I'm working on The Adventurer's Tale, which is a very simple fantasy system I've become quite fond of. It's inspired by Fighting Fantasy, HeroQuest and Ultima more than D&D directly.

SUPERSUGA

LibrarianThorne wrote: »

Questions:
1. What do you think of social combat/rules? In my opinion, social interaction has only really been handled well by White Wolf. D&D, Talislanta, Shadowrun, et al. make social interaction as binary as combat, when it really isn't. I tend to eschew social stuff because it's only been done well through RP, at least in my experience.

2. Initiatives, what works and what doesn't? I love the simplicity of D&D and other static initiative systems, but at the same time it makes longer combats very predictable and kind of easy. I love Exalted's system because it makes initiative and action resolution a much more fluid thing, at the cost of simplicity.

3. Should characters have lots of hit points/damage levels/random other indicators of not dead-ness or very little?

If anyone's interested, I'd love it if we could share games in this thread, though I'd understand if mods get a little sketchy around that.

1. For conversational interaction I prefer straight up RPing, with the GM taking factors into account. For example, a character with the appropriate Knowledge skill could roll to recall the correct ettiquete for speaking to a Noble, which might get them some extra points in his book. Likewise, a cowardly NPC might be more easily intimidated by the 6'7 Fighter than the Cleric.
I do, however, think some elements that might fall into social mechanics have a place in combat. Things like taunting opponents, giving your allies a morale boost etc.

2. I like very simple Initiative methods. In my games realism tends to take a back seat to keeping the game moving. In The Adventurer's Tale the GM decides if the adventurers or monsters will act first, taking surprise into account. Turns then alternate betweeen all the monsters acting and all the adventurers acting, or vice versa. Whether Orc 1 goes before Orc 3 is irrelevant.
In A Wanderer's Romance nearly everything is one-on-one, so whoever has the highest Balance score acts first, which can often be decisive. After that it's alternate turns.

3. I like characters to be survivable, for the most part, but not necessarily through soaking up a load of hits. I don't much like "0hp = dead" systems. In The Adventurer's Tale when your Damage equals your Body score you have to roll on the Death Table, which is nasty and will always result in permanent stat loss at the very least, and death at worst.
In A Wanderer's Romance you don't track damage. Instead every time you're hit you're either Staggered, allowing the opponent to attack again, Weakened, which damages your combat ability a fair bit, or Defeated. This could mean "sword to your throat" or "cut in half" depending on what your opponent wishes. This lowers the bookkeeping and makes every hit potentially deadly, which is how a duel should be!

SUPERSUGA

Let's give this thread one last chance. Nobody at all working on a game or got one tucked away somewhere?

I've got this in the works as of a couple of days ago, think there's some potential in the idea at least. Working on a scenario for it that would involve some pretty interesting use of an in-character wiki.

elraver

I've created a Game From Scratch involving powerful people who long ago gave up godhood to save the world from their own powers destroying it and such, yadda yadda.

It's kind of a mix of Mage and Tales from the Floating Vagabond in that you have foci and such, but you have the ability to (within the system's limitations) create your own 'powers' based on your character's foci, banes, and again... yadda yadda.

As for system, when I'm not busy working, I'll get into it all...

jabrams007

Not an rpg, but just for fun, I started designing a board game where the players portray presidential hopefuls trying to win their party's primary race. I'm still working out what I want in the game exactly and what kind of mechanics it would use, but I'm having a blast so far.

SkyCaptain

jabrams007 wrote: »

Not an rpg, but just for fun, I started designing a board game where the players portray presidential hopefuls trying to win their party's primary race. I'm still working out what I want in the game exactly and what kind of mechanics it would use, but I'm having a blast so far.

http://www.politicalmachine.com/

INeedNoSalt

LibrarianThorne wrote: »

Questions:
1. What do you think of social combat/rules? In my opinion, social interaction has only really been handled well by White Wolf. D&D, Talislanta, Shadowrun, et al. make social interaction as binary as combat, when it really isn't. I tend to eschew social stuff because it's only been done well through RP, at least in my experience.

2. Initiatives, what works and what doesn't? I love the simplicity of D&D and other static initiative systems, but at the same time it makes longer combats very predictable and kind of easy. I love Exalted's system because it makes initiative and action resolution a much more fluid thing, at the cost of simplicity.

3. Should characters have lots of hit points/damage levels/random other indicators of not dead-ness or very little?

Allow me to be a fanboy for a moment here.

1. I think social combat can be cool. I want my social PCs to be mechanically adept and I want for it to mean as much as being adept in combat or any other realm. It's really hard to pull off, especially between players; most players are comfortable with the fact that their PC might die, and less comfortable with the fact that their PC might not be under their control, which is usually what you shoot for with social combat rules. (So social combat vs other PCs would usually fall under 'no pvp' in this kind of situation, too, i guess.)

I like how White Wolf's Exalted handles social combat, but I wish it had as much depth as normal combat.

2. Likewise, I'm a fan of how Exalted handles initiative, although like other systems, it can often turn into "who acts firsts wins" - but that's not initiative's fault. I like the idea of characters who are faster or use lighter weapons acting more often - didn't AD&D do something like this?

3. I like lots of HP, and I tend to use HP as 'narrative protection' - doesn't actually represent anything in particular until you've got none yet. I think an HP system where attacks that deal HP damage also have a small chance to inflict some kind of wound penalty (to represent actual 'hits' over just forcing exertion or a decay in narrative protection) would be cool.

I've also toyed around with the idea of using a system where variables can directly or indirectly increase HP pools, where it's actually straight up called 'Narrative Protection' - something like, in a firefight, you're hiding behind a solid iron wall, your NP cranks up, and maybe you lose a few when you lean around the corner to take a shot.

The guy who runs past the wall to shoot the other guys in the face watches his NPs drop to nil, because he's being reckless and the narrative can't protect him as well.

... ramble.

Hexmage-PA

I'm actually thinking of creating a game that sorts of like a hybrid of Dungeons and Dragons 3E and 4E. I'm not a fan of 4E's Power System, but I'd like some way to link both magical and mundane abilities.

So far, I'm thinking of a pool of points that refreshes each turn and can be used to perform either several quick actions outside of a character's turn (interrupting a monster or another PC's turn) or a few stronger abilities on their own turn.

I'm basically taking advantage of the abstraction of time during combat and offering extra slivers of time that a player can use in certain ways. For example, a scoundrel-type character could spend these points to slip away when an attack misses them, or a soldier could use these points to immediately counterattack enemies that damage him.

I've never really designed a game before, and I'm not expecting to come up with anything very good. This is really more of a summer hobby than anything else.