Tiers and Levels

[Ganbare Gincun]

If we're working with three resistances, and this game is going to dominated by people running around trying to become false gods, why not use the three qualities that Machiavelli attributed to the Founders: Cunning, Passion, Might? Those are qualities that anyone from any race or class might have.

[Kaelik]

It's so good to see you two fighting again. I was a little confused for a bit there, and I thought mommy and daddy actually loved each other again.

So glad to know I was wrong.

[K]

We can keep an eye on this issue and just make sure there are combat enders in every category. Seems really simple.

Sure we can. Whatever ability categories we create, we can assign the stuff we write into it in any amounts we choose to write. But once we let that bird free, it won't stay that way unless it has some sort of system in place to keep it upright.

Guile vs. Physical is inherently unstable, because you cannot clearly articulate where one ends and the other begins or why. Magic is even more unstable, because in addition to being specifically out of the hands of many player characters, it is completely open ended and can manifest doing absolutely anything. And as abilities continue to be written, it will. Characters who have access to Magic will eventually be able to do "anything" while everyone else has to fight over the scraps and convince their GM that they should be allowed to Guilely throw a brick or some shit.

If you're going to divide attacks into three categories, you need to choose three categories that they will fucking stay divided evenly into once people start writing their own shit. Magic/Not Magic are categories that have been shown time and time again to not do that when additional material gets written.

-Username17

No matter what system you use, nailing down effects is always going to be hard. The only way that works is to say "fire is always magic, and status down effects are always Guile" so that when someone wants to make a spell like Parboil that does fire and gives you some damaging status down, you tell them to shut the hell up and to pick status down or fire damage.

You can do that with all effects so that when someone makes a new poison attack effect, you can sit them down and say "I don't care if it's called Terrible Wasp Strike, it's a poison attack so it's Guile."

Now doing that does exclude some kinds of effects, I don't actually have a problem with that. I'm personally kinda tired of people trying to pass off their attempt to go outside their protected role to go steal someone else's thunder or combine several turns of effects into one turn.

The exact problem comes up no matter how many attacks or resistances you have, and someone is always going to want to let their pet class do everything. Between that and people wanting Ultima damage you basically need Negative Rules telling people what they can't do.

[A Man In Black]

If you're going to divide attacks into three categories, you need to choose three categories that they will fucking stay divided evenly into once people start writing their own shit. Magic/Not Magic are categories that have been shown time and time again to not do that when additional material gets written.

No matter what system you use, nailing down effects is always going to be hard. The only way that works is to say "fire is always magic, and status down effects are always Guile" so that when someone wants to make a spell like Parboil that does fire and gives you some damaging status down, you tell them to shut the hell up and to pick status down or fire damage.

You guys have identified two separate problems. If you're going to make three separate, even categories, you need to make sure that they're separate and that they're even. I wouldn't know how to start tackling either problem, but I guess that's why you don't see me doing a lot of original writing on the Den.

[CatharzGodfoot]

We can keep an eye on this issue and just make sure there are combat enders in every category. Seems really simple.

Sure we can. Whatever ability categories we create, we can assign the stuff we write into it in any amounts we choose to write. But once we let that bird free, it won't stay that way unless it has some sort of system in place to keep it upright.

Guile vs. Physical is inherently unstable, because you cannot clearly articulate where one ends and the other begins or why. Magic is even more unstable, because in addition to being specifically out of the hands of many player characters, it is completely open ended and can manifest doing absolutely anything. And as abilities continue to be written, it will. Characters who have access to Magic will eventually be able to do "anything" while everyone else has to fight over the scraps and convince their GM that they should be allowed to Guilely throw a brick or some shit.

If you're going to divide attacks into three categories, you need to choose three categories that they will fucking stay divided evenly into once people start writing their own shit. Magic/Not Magic are categories that have been shown time and time again to not do that when additional material gets written.

-Username17

No matter what system you use, nailing down effects is always going to be hard. The only way that works is to say "fire is always magic, and status down effects are always Guile" so that when someone wants to make a spell like Parboil that does fire and gives you some damaging status down, you tell them to shut the hell up and to pick status down or fire damage.

You can do that with all effects so that when someone makes a new poison attack effect, you can sit them down and say "I don't care if it's called Terrible Wasp Strike, it's a poison attack so it's Guile."

Now doing that does exclude some kinds of effects, I don't actually have a problem with that. I'm personally kinda tired of people trying to pass off their attempt to go outside their protected role to go steal someone else's thunder or combine several turns of effects into one turn.

The exact problem comes up no matter how many attacks or resistances you have, and someone is always going to want to let their pet class do everything. Between that and people wanting Ultima damage you basically need Negative Rules telling people what they can't do.

K, please tell me if I'm constructing a straw effigy, but it sounds like you're saying that some classes shouldn't be able to deal damage or shouldn't be able to deal "status downs" (or something else that its't damage or affliction), and that furthermore a character's resistance types are 'resistance to damage', 'resistance to afflictions', and 'resistance to something else'.

I understand your desire to avoid 'do everything' characters, but this sounds much worse.

[PoliteNewb]

K, please tell me if I'm constructing a straw effigy, but it sounds like you're saying that some classes shouldn't be able to deal damage or shouldn't be able to deal "status downs" (or something else that its't damage or affliction), and that furthermore a character's resistance types are 'resistance to damage', 'resistance to afflictions', and 'resistance to something else'.

I understand your desire to avoid 'do everything' characters, but this sounds much worse.

I can't speak for K, but I didn't get that feel from him at all...in fact, I think he specifically stated (though I'd have to go back and look) that he thinks all classes should have all 3 attacks. It's just that when a wizard casts Blinding Flash, it's not a magic attack, it's a guile attack. When a wizard cast's Maxmillian's Venom Darts, that's a guile attack. And when a thief uses Napalm Grenade, that's a magic attack.

People think that "magic can do anything" because they figure "if a wizard does it, it's a magic attack". I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that K is rejecting that view.

[K]

K, please tell me if I'm constructing a straw effigy, but it sounds like you're saying that some classes shouldn't be able to deal damage or shouldn't be able to deal "status downs" (or something else that its't damage or affliction), and that furthermore a character's resistance types are 'resistance to damage', 'resistance to afflictions', and 'resistance to something else'.

I understand your desire to avoid 'do everything' characters, but this sounds much worse.

I can't speak for K, but I didn't get that feel from him at all...in fact, I think he specifically stated (though I'd have to go back and look) that he thinks all classes should have all 3 attacks. It's just that when a wizard casts Blinding Flash, it's not a magic attack, it's a guile attack. When a wizard cast's Maxmillian's Venom Darts, that's a guile attack. And when a thief uses Napalm Grenade, that's a magic attack.

People think that "magic can do anything" because they figure "if a wizard does it, it's a magic attack". I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that K is rejecting that view.

Yeh, that's what I'm saying. The idea is that everyone uses the various attack forms in their own theme, so a Thief may have Poison Strike that involves a non-magic poisoned dagger, but a Wizard has Cloudkill and they are both Guile Attacks.

Of course, the essential design problem is balancing out what goes where, but you'd have to do that with any resistance scheme you'd have.

Right now I'm learning towards something like this:

Physical: basic attacks, special weapon attacks like vorpal and cripples, elemental attacks, transformations
Guile:[/i] poison attacks, feints, called shots, illusions, mind control, denial
Mystic: anything not in the above two, like saves vs Plane Shift or curses

The idea is that there are "magic" and "non-magic" abilities really doesn't mean anything because nonmagic concepts will have access to effects traditionally thought of as magic (like status downs).

And for those keeping score at home, I did in fact move elemental out of Magicish thing and into Physical.

[Username17]

Yeh, that's what I'm saying. The idea is that everyone uses the various attack forms in their own theme, so a Thief may have Poison Strike that involves a non-magic poisoned dagger, but a Wizard has Cloudkill and they are both Guile Attacks.

I'm totally sold on this idea. Although I am not sold on the name "Guile" because it's a shitty name and you can't coherently explain what it does or why.

Of course, the essential design problem is balancing out what goes where, but you'd have to do that with any resistance scheme you'd have.

Yes. And that is why making it so that the different resistance types are differently respondent to justifications is a bad plan. Whatever the categories, they should all fit into the same hierarchy of language. Mystic and Physical are some sort of Yin/Yang that encompasses everything (even though of course one of them represents the "possible" and the other represents the "impossible" which is a much bigger and better list), and Guile is um... completely unclear.

You could split things into "Barsoomian", "Phyrexian", and "Lemurian". You could split it into "Wind", "Water", and "Fire". You could split it into "Red", "Yellow", and "Blue". I honestly don't care that much, save that every category has to exist on the same hierarchy of language and have equal linguistic claim to a share of the ability set.

Right now I'm learning towards something like this:

Physical: basic attacks, special weapon attacks like vorpal and cripples, elemental attacks, transformations
Guile:[/i] poison attacks, feints, called shots, illusions, mind control, denial
Mystic: anything not in the above two, like saves vs Plane Shift or curses

No.

That would be an example of a split in which the different categories had very obvious massive imbalances in their claim on ability lists.

-Username17

[Mask_De_H]

If we're working with three resistances, and this game is going to dominated by people running around trying to become false gods, why not use the three qualities that Machiavelli attributed to the Founders: Cunning, Passion, Might? Those are qualities that anyone from any race or class might have.

This seems to be a good idea.

Cunning fits lies, stratagems, forms and kata, and illusions.
Passion fits inspirations, hot-blooded force of will, enchantments, and Indy Ploys.
Might fits blowing shit up, hitting things really fucking hard, hard/soft martial arts mentalities (using the opponent's strengths against them), and feats of "raw athletic skill"/Charles Atlas Superpowers.

[Ganbare Gincun]

If we're working with three resistances, and this game is going to dominated by people running around trying to become false gods, why not use the three qualities that Machiavelli attributed to the Founders: Cunning, Passion, Might? Those are qualities that anyone from any race or class might have.

This seems to be a good idea.

Cunning fits lies, stratagems, forms and kata, and illusions.
Passion fits inspirations, hot-blooded force of will, enchantments, and Indy Ploys.
Might fits blowing shit up, hitting things really fucking hard, hard/soft martial arts mentalities (using the opponent's strengths against them), and feats of "raw athletic skill"/Charles Atlas Superpowers.

That's kind of the idea, but I don't want classes to be pidgeonholed into "owning" certain resistance types. Everyone should have access to all of these "power sources". Also: I'm not 100% sold on the term "Cunning". It really should be "Wisdom", but I feel that word choice would end up encouraging players and designers to consign all of those powers into the Spellcaster Ghetto instead of allocating them across a wide variety of classes. Perhaps "Wits" would be a better choice?

[Koumei]

I was thinking you could totally use F/R/W and call them Power attacks, Speed attacks and Cunning attacks. Then you could, for instance, have:

Archer McShootsalot:
-Rain of Arrows [Power] (and any "fire heaps of shots" attacks)
-Shot on the Run [Speed] (most single-arrow quick attacks)
-Police Sniper! [Cunning] (along with trick shots, fire arrows etc.)

Swordstab McHackenslash:
-Minotaur Charge [Power] (large numbers of Power Attack type things)
-Wall of Blades [Speed] (defensive attacks, light weapons etc.)
-Hamstring [Cunning] (along with eye-stab, ground-crushing mace etc.)

McIllusion:
-The Fireball That Wasn't [Power] (along with whole map-changing illusions that are as jarring as the Old Spice "Now I'm on a horse" ads)
-Illusory Pit [Speed] (Along with illusions of fast attacks)
-GREETINGS, MIND SLAVE [Cunning] (and "fake entangling vines" or whatever)

Wizard McSplosion:
-Meteor Storm [Power] (most big area effect "hit for damage" things)
-Lightning Bolt [Speed] (small area/single target effects)
-Cloudkill [Cunning] (battlefield control spells and status effects)

Now, you're flat-out telling people "I don't care, your barbarian berserker charger does not just have Power attacks" (which involves either making enough Speed and Cunning attacks that suit that image or saying "No one-dimensional characters that only work with one type") and "I know you're an Illusionist. No, you are not Will Negates." ans basically telling people "Shut up, it isn't D&D as you know it" for the first few sessions.

So as long as you remember to do that, it could work. That said, I could get behind the Wits/Passion/Might thing.

[K]

Yeh, that's what I'm saying. The idea is that everyone uses the various attack forms in their own theme, so a Thief may have Poison Strike that involves a non-magic poisoned dagger, but a Wizard has Cloudkill and they are both Guile Attacks.

I'm totally sold on this idea. Although I am not sold on the name "Guile" because it's a shitty name and you can't coherently explain what it does or why.

Hate to break it to you, but it doesn't have to be explainable. That's not even a coherent goal because at the end of the day it's always going to be arbitrary where some things fit into categories.

Regardless of your system, you are going to be balancing effects between your different things.

So I don't have to explain Guile. I just have to tell players "these are the ten effects that are in Guile, these are the ten in Physical, and these are the ten in Mystic" and then you make sure each is balanced with each other. There is nothing stopping you from doing that and having it work.

For example, if you think Physical is too common and thus too good because the Attack basic action is too common, you give Guile a Called Shot basic action that is equally common and Mystic a Chakra Strike common action and suddenly the problem is solved.

You have the exact same issue if you divided it into Red/Blue/Black/Green/White. The only difference is that it's a lot harder to balance five or seven things with each other than three, and the flavor of three is going to want to be more reductionist than five or seven.

And if people start focusing all their characters on Physical and not Guile and Mystic, then you look at it and figure out if they are making a flavor choice or a balance choice. You correct the balance choices and leave the flavor choices. I mean, I'm perfectly happy if the iconic party that people play is made entirely of warrior guys and only some guys choose Wizards as long as it's because of flavor and not because of balance.

[MfA]

Of course it matters, why else use an existing English word rather than making up a new one? There needs to be some recognition of existing fantasy tropes in the rules. There needs to be some explanation for the way the world works other than "cause it's necessary for balance" even if that's the real reason.

For instance the way area is controlled even after you leave it which Frank mentioned early in the thread ... that will be very hard to fluff, yet it needs to be.

[mean_liar]

Eh. It's just a label. K's arguing for a comprehensive effects-based framework. Once that framework's set, it doesn't matter if the category is called Guile or KUFSGbhjafd998. It is what it is and as long as you can hang enough bullshit on it to maintain some verisimilitude and it's mechanically balanced, the label is nearly meaningless.

[Kaelik]

Eh. It's just a label. K's arguing for a comprehensive effects-based framework. Once that framework's set, it doesn't matter if the category is called Guile or KUFSGbhjafd998. It is what it is and as long as you can hang enough bullshit on it to maintain some verisimilitude and it's mechanically balanced, the label is nearly meaningless.

Yeah, it doesn't matter if it's called Guile, except for some reason, Every time anyone says "let's call it something besides Guile" K vigorously defends Guile and continues to call it Guile and demands we call it Guile.

Which is stupid, because I'd rather it be called KUFSGbhjafd998 than Guile, because it would confuse fewer people.

[Username17]

Of course it matters, why else use an existing English word rather than making up a new one? There needs to be some recognition of existing fantasy tropes in the rules. There needs to be some explanation for the way the world works other than "cause it's necessary for balance" even if that's the real reason.

For instance the way area is controlled even after you leave it which Frank mentioned early in the thread ... that will be very hard to fluff, yet it needs to be.

That's an example of something easy to write fluff for. You assault and take a location, you leave it and leave "Fog of War" behind. Done.

I was thinking you could totally use F/R/W and call them Power attacks, Speed attacks and Cunning attacks.

I'd be fine with that.

Cunning, Passion, Might?

I'm fine with that too.

I'm totally OK with any arrangement that lays down some number of adjectives between 3 and 7 where each adjective is at roughly the same level of power in speech. Think of this like biological phylogeny. We can talk about 3 kingdoms, or 3 classes, or 3 orders, or 3 species. All of that is fine. But if one of the categories is a kingdom and another is a species that is fucking bullshit.

So if you throw in Cunning, Passion, and Might that would work because all three adjectives are similar in descriptive power. If you throw in Red, Yellow, and Blue that would also work because each is similar in abstractedness. If you throw in Phyrexian, Barsoomian, and Lemurian that would also work, because all three of those adjectives are total bullshit that doesn't mean anything until you say it does in the context of the game.

But Physical and Guile does not work. Firstly because Guile isn't even a fucking adjective, it's an abstract noun. But secondly, because the things that have Guile (nothing actually "is" Guile, which is the first problem) are all just a subset of things that are Physical. That's bullshit.

-Username17

[Ganbare Gincun]

Cunning, Passion, Might?

I'm fine with that too.

K, would this - or something along these lines - be an acceptable compromise?

[(nothing actually "is" Guile, which is the first problem)

*ahem*

[Koumei]

I was thinking it, but didn't want to say it. But clearly it means the three categories should be Guile, Chun Li and Lord Vega.

[MfA]

That's an example of something easy to write fluff for. You assault and take a location, you leave it and leave "Fog of War" behind. Done.

So the barbarian has a severe case of gas?

[K]

Cunning, Passion, Might?

I'm fine with that too.

I'm totally OK with any arrangement that lays down some number of adjectives between 3 and 7 where each adjective is at roughly the same level of power in speech. Think of this like biological phylogeny. We can talk about 3 kingdoms, or 3 classes, or 3 orders, or 3 species. All of that is fine. But if one of the categories is a kingdom and another is a species that is fucking bullshit.

So if you throw in Cunning, Passion, and Might that would work because all three adjectives are similar in descriptive power. If you throw in Red, Yellow, and Blue that would also work because each is similar in abstractedness. If you throw in Phyrexian, Barsoomian, and Lemurian that would also work, because all three of those adjectives are total bullshit that doesn't mean anything until you say it does in the context of the game.

But Physical and Guile does not work. Firstly because Guile isn't even a fucking adjective, it's an abstract noun. But secondly, because the things that have Guile (nothing actually "is" Guile, which is the first problem) are all just a subset of things that are Physical. That's bullshit.

Ok, now you are just fucking with me. You'd accept Cunning, Might, and Passion even though your bullshit semantic objection can applied equally to them as well (ie. all Cunning things have some Might, making them a subset...)?

Seriously, if we are going to get caught up on petty semantic crap like this, we'll never finish.

Semantics have not, and never will be, a recognizable flaw in any game ever played. The players are not going to throw down their dice in frustration because something is not as well named as it could be. I mean, 4e DnD is a proof of concept that you can just pick nouns and verbs and adjective out of a hat and people will happily play it.

This is a kitchen-sink fantasy. That's our design goal, and things need to designed generically so that people playing fruity JRPGs clones can play the same ruleset as gritty Howardesque sword and sandels or Tolkienesque epic racism or Call of Cthulhu fantasy.

So while it is a perfectly reasonable goal to flavor up your implied setting by hardcoding it into the ruleset, that doesn't work for a system designed for wide appeal like a kitchen-sink fantasy. Earthdawn didn't fail because it was a bad system, but because they hardcoded setting elements into it and people didn't want the hassle of adapting it to their preferred setting when DnD did all settings equally well (or equally badly, as the case may be).

[Kaelik]

So just to be clear K, any subset of names is okay, except they have to be Guile, Physical, Magic, and they can't be Cunning, Might, Passion, or you'll throw a hissy fit about how Guile is just as good and we should have guile?

If it really doesn't matter that much to you just accept that Guile is a noun, and Frank won't accept objectives and nouns, so make them all fucking adjectives like Cunning, Might, Passion, and then this can actually go somewhere instead of being about how Guile is/is not a shitty power category.

[For Valor]

Adjectives would be: Cunning, Mighty, and Passionate. Not Cunning, Might, and Passion. Those are nouns. /nitpick

But I'm lost. What's the discussion at right now?

[Ganbare Gincun]

Ok, now you are just fucking with me. You'd accept Cunning, Might, and Passion even though your bullshit semantic objection can applied equally to them as well (ie. all Cunning things have some Might, making them a subset...)?

If I'm reading Frank correctly, the main reason why he objects to the Physical/Magical/Guile terms is because players are going to leverage these terms to force classes to fit into their existing preconceptions of fantasy gaming archetypes. That's the only reason why these terms aren't suitable for usage.

But you really hit the nail on the head whenever you said that the game should have no more then three power types/resistances in play. It would allow everyone to get away from the Golfbag Of Weapons and power lists bloated to bursting out of necessity.

[Draco_Argentum]

+1 Cunning/Mighty/Passionate.

[Ganbare Gincun]

I've been kicking around the word "Passionate" in my mind, and I think "Spirited" would be a better choice of term. It's pithier, and doesn't have the kind of romantic connotations that "Passionate" would have in the minds of some readers. Anyways, here's how I would suggest dividing up regular weapon attacks under this framework:

Cunning - Bows, Chains, Daggers, Rapiers, Sickles

Mighty - Clubs/Staves, Flails, Hammers/Maces, Picks, Polearms

Spirited - Axes, Claws/Gauntlets/Unarmed Attacks, Falchions/Scimitars, Javelins/Spears, Swords

What do you think, sirs?