New Edition of Rules

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

New Edition of Rules

Post by Username17 »

I was totally serious about this. I am heading to Winter Break (all ten days of it) at the end of next week, so I think that it can be finished to a playable state before D&D 4e hits the shelves.

The basics: First we design a system that generates character classes which are capable of outcome based combat, then we make the standard classes off of that system. Players will of course have access to the back end, so they will be able to make crappy non-synergistic characters. Ideally that shouldn't be a problem for most players because the sample character classes should be fairly decent.

Expected Outcomes

A monster list should be drawn up. Monsters should appear at levels 1-20. I figure that there should be basically four standard monsters of each level and that these monsters should fit into the standard roles of monsters:
  • Glass Hammer
  • Artillery
  • Tank
  • Skirmisher
Characters should fight a roughly even fight against level appropriate monsters. Higher level monsters should beat you down, low level monsters should get creamed. The most important thing is that characters should be able and expected to take out large numbers of monsters of lower level. Specifically, the exchange rate of dude to army of mooks should expand faster than exponentials. It's fine to fight 2 enemies who are two levels lower, but enemies of 4 levels lower should seriously come in big groups.

Combats should last 3 to 7 rounds, with an average of 5. Battles should involve characters building up to victory by damaging dangerous opponents, or by clearing off weaker enemies.

Gadgeteering

Some abilities actually should be variable on a daily basis. A Gadgeteer should make a different device every adventure, a Wizard might prepare a mighty ritual, and so on and so forth. The important portion of these is that characters should have very few abilities which work like this, because they become extremely difficult to manage. And a lot of players don't even want to deal. Indeed, many times characters will take their “gadget pools” (or prepared spells or whatever) and set them to a default setting that works for them and essentially never change it. People who are going to do that should be rewarded by having abilities which are individually slightly more versatile and less hassle.

Abilities: MAD and madder

OK, so there's Strength, Dex, Con, Cha, Int, Wis. Sure. They generate the DCs for people to hit you with various attacks. We're kind of stuck with them, but I think it can work. Every ability you ever get will be based on multiple attributes. At the very least, one ability to determine whether you hit and another to determine how big an effect you get. Abilities should be on the 3-18 scale and stay there. No 35 Strengths, not even any fucking 19s.

Ability penalties are annoying and counterintuitive so they shouldn't happen. Instead you should just get a variable bonus. A character with an Int of 5 doesn't have a -3 penalty, he only has a +3 bonus. The stat bonus should also round up to reduce the fetishization of 18s.

Large monsters still have Strengths on the 3-18 scale, they just happen to have abilities where they are hueg like an Xbox.

Schools of Abilities

Abilities will be divided into color based alignments. Characters can normally only select from their own alignment. In addition, abilities will be categorized into schools. You can get access to uncommon and rare abilities ( seriously ;) ) by the simple expedient of taking a requisite number of abilities out of a school. Abilities also have a level. You need to have an appropriate level to take such an ability. All the abilities in a school will have an attached attribute, but they'll vary in secondary attributes. With 3 alignments, that's 18+ schools. With 5 alignments that's 30+ schools. Actually that should do it for something quite playable.
-Username17
User avatar
Bigode
Duke
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Bigode »

I've to ask 2 questions before stuff goes north and down: first, any chance of you finishing the base classes less than 20 levels long (fire mage, marshal, pupetteer and possibly something else)? And, where could I find a SAME ability list?

EDIT: on the stuff here itself, what good is a 18 if it gives the same modifier as a 17 and you actually don't want people to have 19s, as in "it's halfway to nowhere, and doesn't even give a particularly better benefit". Also, what good does it do to actually have scores and modifiers? If you aren't going for general compatibility with D&D this time, why not make the modifier be all?
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
User avatar
the_taken
Knight-Baron
Posts: 830
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lost in the Sea of Awesome

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by the_taken »

If you're outsourcing for ideas

Building up to victory: I've just beaten Might and Magic 8 (retro month) and while it was a bit of chore, I had little else to do. Within the game was a card mini-game called Acromage. The concept was that you had three resources in pools that you used to play cards, HP and wall HP. Every turn you acquired a number of each resource based apon how big your factory was.
Note that although you lost a game by loosing HP, gaining it was easier. Most of the matches I played were won by having a high enough HP or resource count at the end of the turn.

Perhaps a model like that could be used. You have an HP pool, and Action Points. Based apon your level, you gain AP, which is then used to perform an action. Certain actions require a large number of AP, and those are generally the win moves, but to use them, you have to keep your AP expenditure lower than your AP gain.
Then maybe, to stop people from starting a battle with lots of AP there's a rule where you have to trade blows with someone, so a bag of rats doesn't generate AP, while a hungry troll. Or maybe AP accumulation can be based apon your opponant's ability (NPC aggro?), and not fighting for X rounds reduces your AP count to base.

Bigode at [unixtime wrote:1197422213[/unixtime]]... where could I find a SAME ability list?


Frank's 4 stat system
My 8-stat variant
I had a signature here once but I've since lost it.

My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
Catharz
Knight-Baron
Posts: 893
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Catharz »

Taken, a system like that is good for a computer game, but managing large pools of points with various thresholds and costs by hand is obnoxious.


And frank, I understand the tradition of 3-18, but if you're not going to generate attributes using 3d6 it seems more beneficial to go the True20 route. I'm also wondering how much, if at all, you plan to rebrand the attributes.

Lastly, in monster categorization, 'glass' is more of an additional descriptor than a specific type. You have glass artillery, glass tanks, and glass skirmishers as well as good old fashioned hammers. But yeah, this sounds good. I'm done with finals on the 17th, I think, so I'll have some expendable time as well.
User avatar
Bigode
Duke
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Bigode »

Thanks, taken, but I meant an ability list like Frank's examples such as "to spin webs, you need climb"; a list of skill-related effects, not the system itself, that I already know.
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
PhoneLobster
King
Posts: 6403
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by PhoneLobster »

On the whole attributes thing... why does a 5 give you +3?

Why can't a 3 give you +3?

Having an attribute AND a derived bonus then only ever using the derived bonus pisses me off.

Can't the attribute BE the bonus?
Phonelobster's Self Proclaimed Greatest Hits Collection : (no really, they are awesome)
User avatar
the_taken
Knight-Baron
Posts: 830
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lost in the Sea of Awesome

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by the_taken »

Bigode at [unixtime wrote:1197425670[/unixtime]]Thanks, taken, but I meant an ability list like Frank's examples such as "to spin webs, you need climb"; a list of skill-related effects, not the system itself, that I already know.


He didn't make any. But I started: The 8-stat system on TheCBG.org
I had a signature here once but I've since lost it.

My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Voss »

Alright, on the size thing (and keeping the stats sane). I toyed with this idea when I was thinking of converting 3rd over to an entirely skills based system (because it was... bad. And didn't work on a lot of different levels). But, the idea I had for creature sizes was as follows:

Basically, you use the size bonus as a modifer or multiplier for physical stats. It wasn't terribly consistent, (and wouldn't work with entirely positive modifiers) but basically large creatures would multiply their physical bonuses (or penalties) by whatever that size modifier is. So, a large creature would double their strength and con modifers to damage and hit points, but would deal with some sort of meaningful dex penalty.

It would also scale in a meaningful way. So a large critter would have a x2 modifier, huge x3, and etc.
So a critter with str 16 would have +3 damage at medium, +6 if it was large, +9 at huge and so on.

It seems useful, since it pretty much incorporates potential grapple modifiers into the existing bonus, rather than multiply it several times with huge creatures that have a high bab from high hit dice, high strength, AND a size bonus to grapple modifiers.


Catharz
Knight-Baron
Posts: 893
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Catharz »

the_taken at [unixtime wrote:1197427152[/unixtime]]
Bigode at [unixtime wrote:1197425670[/unixtime]]Thanks, taken, but I meant an ability list like Frank's examples such as "to spin webs, you need climb"; a list of skill-related effects, not the system itself, that I already know.


He didn't make any. But I started: The 8-stat system on TheCBG.org


BTW, that system isn't 'mathematically balanced'. It's always best to keep all your stats at x with the exception of two connected attack stats, which are at 8 and 6. You can't choose what kind of an attack is used on you, and you gain no offensive versatility from defensive stats, so a defensive point is worth about 1/2 an offensive point. Secondary offenses are worthless, but you have to buy them up anyway.
Jacob_Orlove
Knight
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Jacob_Orlove »

PhoneLobster at [unixtime wrote:1197425783[/unixtime]]
Can't the attribute BE the bonus?

The math gets very different when you use the attribute, instead of the derived bonus. You end up sacrificing a lot of the value that you get from a more moderated standard deviation, I think.

Of course, that's irrelevant if we're doing this by point buy instead of dice roll, so meh.
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Voss »

Hmm. Its 3 in the morning and I'm totally procrastinating on stuff I should be doing, but what the hell.

I think I agree with Bigode and PhoneLobster. Attributes are bonuses and they run from 0 to 10. Rounding up so that 17-18 really doesn't work, because you can just stop at 17 and never, ever care. Kick dice generation to the curb, since a couple statistical variations in either direction can blow a game to shit and make people cry.

If you're serious about the color stuff, why not just trickle in mana. 1 point on round 1, 2 points on round 2, 3 points on round 3, etc. You could save shit on each turn and make wussy normal attacks like you're an NPC, or you could spend a point a turn and do something effective while saving up for an 11 point uber-nuke on turn 5. Or you could spend your max each turn, wagering that you aren't going to make to the next round if you don't keep blowing your load.

Maybe use extra mana points for metamagic effects, lowering resistance and those sort of shenanigans.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Username17 »

Notes on the Random Number Generator:

So one of the most important things to do is to keep things from getting pushed off the Random Number Generator. That means among other things that bonuses shouldn't scale. It alsmo means that untyped bonuses have to go. All the bonuses should be defined at the beginning.

Things like:
  • Bonuses
  • Positional Advantage
  • Surprise
  • Magic Weapon
  • High Morale
    -----
    Penalties
  • Positional Weakness
  • Light Cover
  • Heavy Cover
  • Near Total Cover
  • Low Morale
  • Difficult Targetting
  • Very Difficult Targetting
  • Medium Range
  • Long Range
  • Extreme Range


Ability Scores

A variance of 0 - +10 in modifier is too much. That's like the whole RNG. Also, the prospect of getting things to randomly generate abilities still has value. I find it generates more interesting characters than Point Buy right through the inherent unfairness.

Essentially what this means is that on 3d6, one in 54 ability scores generates the maximum bonus. That would be one out of 9 characters having max bonus on something. On 4d6, pick 3 it's one ability score in 17, on 3d6 reroll 1s it's one ability score in 31.

As to whether you should generate your ability modifiers and then only write those down or not - that depends entirely upon whether you're going to have ability damage or not.

-Username17
Voss
Prince
Posts: 3912
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Voss »

Random scores are a lot harder to balance though. Partly because the one in 54 isn't actually true. Its how it should average out (over a shitload of rolls), but there is no guarantee that any given score isn't going to come out contrary to expectations. And its a new roll for each score.

Unless you force map everyone to the bell curve in some way, you're inevitably going to end up with situations where the shitty characters drag the party down and get everyone TPKed. And that sucks. Even more than the slightly more common situation where they guy who somehow got great scores dominates everything and everybody else is just trailing after Awesome Guy.


Your penalties also seem to overlap. I get cover and range, but the targeting ones seem to budge in on both.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Username17 »

It's the age-old Range/Cover/Concealment issue. Displacer Beasts are hard to hit with swords but not especially hard to hit with explosives. However, finding nomenclature that DMs will not confuse is difficult. How many times have you had to contend with a DM handing out a concealment miss chnce because you couldn't see every part of the target?

Random scores are a lot harder to balance though.


Yes and no. If you have a rule where everyone has to get at least a 15, then the difference in ability scores won't be beyond what is compensatable by magical gear. It's unfair, but for a Fantasy Game it actually seems to be better than having a fair system where everyone just min/maxes all their stuff.

-Username17
User avatar
angelfromanotherpin
Overlord
Posts: 9745
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by angelfromanotherpin »

FrankTrollman wrote:As to whether you should generate your ability modifiers and then only write those down or not - that depends entirely upon whether you're going to have ability damage or not.


For the record, I hate Ability Damage as it's handled in the current system, where it fails to scale with level and can cause cascading recalculation during battle. The lack of scaling is a mechanical issue, since having something that takes 4-5 hits to drop a character no matter what level they are runs counter to the level system (though it can make for an interesting tactical puzzle). The cascading recalculation is more of a pet peeve, but in my experience it's almost always more annoying than the cool factor of Ability Damage is worth; which is a shame, because it's moderately cool.

If those issues could be addressed somehow, it would be nice to keep Ability Damage.
Daiba
Journeyman
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Daiba »

I suppose you could roll stats for the whole party, and then distribute them amongst the characters. So for 4 characters you'd roll 24 times, and then split up the results by consensus or drafting. This way you'll have randomness, but still keep everyone about the same.

Of course, you then introduce the possibility of potentially nasty fights at the gaming table before play even starts, depending on your group.
Koumei
Serious Badass
Posts: 13872
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: South Ausfailia

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Koumei »

Or do what several DMs do (I know that's a dangerous starter, given some probably suggest consulting the runes, bribe-based stats or whatever), and roll the statline once, then let the players arrange the individual rolls however they like.

Heheh, I still recall the time the DM said "I want it to be high powered, so should it be 4 drop 1, 5 drop 1..."

One immediately declared "YES! Five drop 1!"

"Wait, shit, I meant 5 drop 2."

"Nuts, as a caster I could really do with a 24."

(Note: We would have had a 23 each, having to "make do" with an 18 each.)
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Username17 »

The basic mechanics I'm looking at is to have hit points which go up and down in big ways; and wound levels which are not healable in combat at all and take a finite number to drop a character. Characters pick up wound levels only on big hits or special ability strikes.

In that respect the idea is that ability damage wouldn't scale up, it would just happen instead of a wound level with certain attacks. So the fact that it will only take 4 or 5 applications of 3 points of Wisdom Damage to completely drop pretty much anyone isn't a huge problem - it's a feature even because people are supposed to take a finite number of wounds before they drop.

-Username17
Jacob_Orlove
Knight
Posts: 456
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Jacob_Orlove »

So if we're rounding up, and using only positive modifiers, we have:

3-4: +0
5-6: +1
7-8: +2
9-10: +3
11-12: +4
13-14: +5
15-16: +6
17-18: +7

That's still pretty big. Maybe we should go back to the Rules Cyclopedia model:

3-5: +0
6-8: +1
9-12: +2
13-15: +3
16-18: +4

I'm actually folding in the extreme values for 3 and 18 here, because Frank wanted those to not be "special".
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Maxus »

One DM I know has something he called the champion array.

In a lot of his games, you get these stats to assign as you wish:

18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8.

He does it because it lets people make a character that's really good at a couple of stats, thereby helping to mitigate the occasional MAD, but still makes them be only fair-to-poor in the others.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
shau
Knight-Baron
Posts: 599
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by shau »

I'd like to jump in to bitch about the random rolling thing. I actually wound up with my highest attribute being a 12 before. Let me tell you, it kills the damn game.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by Username17 »

I possibility is certainly to make a series of choosable arrays. The key is that people with just two primary attributes shouldn't be running around with the same overall stat line as people with 3 or 4 attributes on call.

Having a six attribute array isn't inherently balanced. And that's a problem. But one which can potentially be overcome. Especially if attributes don't go up during play.

And it's important that characters don't just have 2 good attributes, so that they always have something that they can expand into later in life.

-Username17
User avatar
the_taken
Knight-Baron
Posts: 830
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lost in the Sea of Awesome

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by the_taken »

Catharz at [unixtime wrote:1197434278[/unixtime]]
the_taken at [unixtime wrote:1197427152[/unixtime]]
Bigode at [unixtime wrote:1197425670[/unixtime]]Thanks, taken, but I meant an ability list like Frank's examples such as "to spin webs, you need climb"; a list of skill-related effects, not the system itself, that I already know.


He didn't make any. But I started: The 8-stat system on TheCBG.org


BTW, that system isn't 'mathematically balanced'. It's always best to keep all your stats at x with the exception of two connected attack stats, which are at 8 and 6. You can't choose what kind of an attack is used on you, and you gain no offensive versatility from defensive stats, so a defensive point is worth about 1/2 an offensive point. Secondary offenses are worthless, but you have to buy them up anyway.


I was fooling around with the concept of randomly forcing attacks to affect you.

BlockYou have a 1 in 6 chance of being the subject of a physical attack instead of your ally. If this ability works, the attack automatically hits you, though the accuracy roll still occurs for the purpose of determining bonus damage.
I had a signature here once but I've since lost it.

My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by K »

I've recently been thinking of dropping stats for the most part.

Give people stats for out-of-combat skills, but otherwise keep class features based off level. That way you don't have to really worry about stat arrays or good rolls or anything. You can have a well muscled mage and a smart fighter then.

I don't know about you, but I'm tired of stereotyped characters for the sake of "balance".
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: New Edition of Rules

Post by RandomCasualty »

K at [unixtime wrote:1197493190[/unixtime]]I've recently been thinking of dropping stats for the most part.


Yeah, this also helps multiclass characters a lot because they have less ability dependency.

I've considered just making them totally defensive. So it's hard to trap "Strong guy" in a web, and "wisdom guy" resists domination spells. "Intellect guy" is good at picking out illusions, and so forth.
Post Reply