Discuss OOCly!
This message was last updated by the GM at 12:47, Wed 23 Apr 2014.

So...how about that Game Design forum huh?

If anyone wants to copy/paste their old posts from the forum to here, please do so!

We can't save the sinking ship but we can save as many of the passengers as possible in the lifeboats!

Hello!

*echo*

"Hello!"

"Hello!"

"ello!"

"lo."

<sub>"lo."

"o."</sub>

LOL looks like we're still just getting started. :P

If you gut an RPG and use just the rules but not the setting is it a homebrew? I like the rules for Battle bugs a wrestling RPG but hate the setting because you play bugs that wrestle.

In reply to shady joker (msg # 5):

I think thats just making house rules in a sense.

For everyone who transferred over from the old Game Design forum, did any of you want to save any of your posts from there?

You can copy/paste them here if you want to preserve them.
This message was last edited by the GM at 02:12, Fri 11 Apr 2014.

Does anyone else have any interest in the 'AEtherverse' miniatures game?

Howdy, I was *not* a member of the old forum. What is the protocol here? If one wants to discuss a particular system, does one begin by announcing ones intentions here in the OOC thread? Does one start a new thread? Are discussions of particular rules best suited for the system thread, or would it be prefered to put it in its own thread? How much of what we discuss here is setting versus rules?

I wasn't in the old forum either. But I believe you post in 'New Thread Request' What you want, then the GM makes the thread and deletes your post in 'New Thread Request'. That way only pending requests are in New Thread Request thread.

In reply to chupabob (msg # 9):

You can start your own threads by posting requests in the New Thread Requests thread.

Unlike forums, games here don't allow people to make their own threads without GM powers and if everyone is a GM then anyone can edit anyone else's post with no way for us to track down one irresponsible party.

So we just post it on your behalf and you can continue to comment on it there.

Having just read over the reasons for deletion in the original forum I would like to ask: If this game is approved for Forum status at a later time would it be possible for myself and others to be approved as moderators and what would be the process for doing that?

In reply to Alexei Yaruk-Mundhenk (msg # 12):

Heck yeah. If you read the game info i put a note to make sure this one doesnt die. Ill make anyone a gm here into a mod for the forum if we ever achieve the status.

In reply to Alexei Yaruk-Mundhenk (msg # 12):

On that note, did anyone want to get moderator status and does anyone know how long we have to be around before applying for forum status?

No clue, I think the time limit has something to do with the old forum having folded and them not wanting a new one to do the same: but I am going to hazard a guess that we have to wait at least till the old forum is deleted.

Oh, and BTW: Yes, I would like to volunteer as a GM/Mod, just in case. I wont be around and checking in every single day but I think I could definitely keep the forum from folding up and falling apart like the last version.  (In other words while I would take over if I had to I would rather be an assistant to the chief mod.)

Also I think we ought to establish some forum rules and post them prominently: Something a bit more delineated than what is in the RTJ and Also in their own thread so that players who have already applied can look at the top page and just say "OK, need to check the rules again: this thread says 'rules' that is probably a good place to start." (Among the rules that we don't have and I think we need is a ban on IRL politics and religion: if you really need advice about how to use those in a game there is GPIA for that, or alternately we could have a specific sub forum somewhere for discussing those topics, which I doubt would have much traffic: maybe hide it in a group like '7' or something.)

In reply to Alexei Yaruk-Mundhenk (msg # 15):

Good idea. Ill get cracking on that next time im at a real keyboard.

Yes I suggested something along those lines.  Although I think I suggested the current RTJ thread could have been renamed to Forum Rules and RTJ since the RTJ is primarily ya promise to follow the rules.

Your suggestions have been heeded!

**********************************************************
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT
**********************************************************

This is now a general content game.

No adult/mature material will be allowed.

No more cussing/swearing folks.

Keep it clean, keep it friendly and always remember to smile!

(or I'll fairly censor the ever-living shingles out of you cherries)

Note: Much thanks to Alexei Yaruk-Mundhenk and LoreGuard (and Malakhon, wherever he is) for their help and suggestions in making this possible!
This message was last edited by the GM at 01:31, Thu 17 Apr 2014.

I have a question about the rules presented.  I know most came from the old Forum, but I had a couple of thoughts I wanted to throw out.

#5 never post a game plug, ad or interest check:

The first rule makes perfect sense sense, as there are specific forums for this, and it shouldn't need to advertise hear.  The purpose of this forum not being having players, but instead having an improved (from some set of perspectives) game/game mechanics/rules, not human resources.  I fully support this above rule, but am posting the above rule, here to wondering if this rule is held properly in place if the following two rules are really necessary, so I suggest we consider if they are what we want to have in place?

#6 Never propose games that you won't run:
#7 Never ask for feedback for games that aren't on RPoL:

I will indicate that #6 is the better of the two, but I present, that I would not be opposed to a player of some other game, who was a participant of this forum, coming forward with an idea to simplify something about some game.  They may not be planning on running a game with the idea, but perhaps want some help fleshing out their idea to pitch to their GM to potentially implement in that game as a new house-rule, or provide as feedback to the GM who is doing play-testing.

Now I'm ok with saying that the person should be in a position to be creating a game, and have the intent to run a game, and implement the improvements being discussed, but I'm not sure it is absolutely necessary to exclude players.

The next rule (#7), I think would exclude some potentially very good conversations.  People whom are interested in developing some improvements, or a new game, which they will be using for their own F2F game every week.  As long as they are discussing the Rule/Mechanics and processes for the game, and not discussing how many seats they still have available at the table, and where it is located, I don't see a problem with the discussion having merit to the people here in RPOL.  The conversation might inspire someone to implement a similar game on RPOL, or even other F2F games, and I don't believe that would be a bad result.  (people wouldn't be allowed to use the forum to advertise their games on other sites... so it should not infringe on the Off-site forum.  Even in site, the extent of their advertisement would seem to be discussing the rules they are using, and changes they are implementing, and players whom decide they are interested can lookup the GM using the search functions of RPOL and find their games, and figure out which one it is.

I am perfectly willing to support all of the rules, but I want to make sure they are really what is wanted.  So I present the question about the #6 and #7.  [or is the prohibition of non-RPOL games specific only when discussing specific games, and general rules discussions, not talking about a specific instance of a game ok.  For instance, is it ok to discuss a card game design that won't be necessarily played on RPOL?

P.S. I do not believe that the limitation about being turned into a Discussion forum has to do with the old one folding, per-se, but rather limiting the frequency of the requests, since it requires the moderators to make the change, and they don't want to go through the trouble for forums that don't have significant user (and moderator) support.  So any forum would have to prove their interest level for a length of time before they open it up.

I thought I had remembered seeing somewhere how long it took before it was considered viable, but I'm not seeing it in the following conversation, and I haven't found another.  Following is a link to Malakhon's thread in RPoL Development that I believe led to the the original GDF.
link to a message in another game

In reply to LoreGuard (msg # 20):

All of the new ones are based on the rules from the previous forum.

Just covering bases so we qualify for forum status in the future.

Note that I've merged 7 and 5 and deleted 6 for being redundant.
This message was last edited by the GM at 04:49, Fri 18 Apr 2014.

Place got kinda quiet all of a sudden...

Right, attempt at Game CPR go!

PDQ# (PDQ Sharp) is new version of PDQ geared toward Swashbuckling games. It is used in Swashbucklers of the 7 Skies. Here is the companies link to the free demo pdf of the system.

http://www.rpgnow.com/product/58424/PDQ-Sharp

What other games do you think this engine could run? I was considering it for a Golem Combat league game. I'm trying to use something not too crunchy and either free or cheap.

Well I'm still around, just been working on my projects, but haven't advanced them far enough to brag about yet. :)

Hmm, I might have a look at that rule set. I like sharp stuff.

Instead of posting more posts for your rules, you can just edit your posts. Is that what you're worried about? Or is the project so big that it'll be full book sized and you really need a whole dedicated thread?

It's big.  12 races, 10 classes (each with 3 different specialty paths), fifteen levels, over 200 powers, plus advantages, disadvantages, feats, skills, pages of gear... that's not even getting into monsters yet.

Okay. I'll get to making a separate thread for you. Let me know if you need anything else.

Thanks!  Now I just need to enter a boatload of data and get some feedback.  Whew. So many pages upon pages of stuff to enter.  And doing tables is so much slower in RPOL than in Works.

There's a shortcut for RPOL tables.

/help/content.cgi?t=help&page=easytable

In reply to Arkrim (msg # 29):

Interesting.  Thanks!

No prob. Hope it helps.

In reply to Arkrim (msg # 29):

Okay stupid question...In the easy table help they used those vertical pipes..How the heck do I get one on my keyboard...yeah I know showed my ignernce here

On my keyboard it is above (shifted) the '\'

Most keyboards have it between the Backspace and Enter keys. It should have both a | and \ on it.

That's the key.

Hold shift while pressing the key and a | should appear.

Hi guys currently working on some stuff for the Mongoose Traveller game...anyone have a request...( star ships, tech, vehicles)I need some fresh ideas.

I wish I had time. I'm been pretty busy on my own project. It's why most of my posts here are on a temporary hiatus.

No requests... suggestions, maybe?  Psionics?  Cybernetics?

Yeah guys give me something to get my creative juices flowing....

What exactly are you planning to do? Designing equipment or making up rules? I'm a Classic Traveller fan, I've been designing equipment and rules for that universe for thirty years, but there is some crossover with Mongoose.

well I am working on ships for personal use, and a few sites I post to. But I am hoping that a few suggestions might give me ideas I can use.

Mostly ships, vehicles, and hard tech....but need to practice some on other things such as location planets and robots etc....

I'm still trying to figure out how I want to stat out ships. I've looked at d20 Modern, Pathfinder RPG and several other games and have yet to see a system that satisfies me so I'm starting from scratch.

If anyone has any "problems" with vehicles in other games and has thought up any of their own solutions or house rules, I'd like to hear it. Should we start a thread devoted to general vehicle conversations?

Yes lets start that thread.


My biggest complaint with any system is that they tend to either over simplify, or over complicate things or treat the entire vehicle construction as "Oh, yeah, here are some rules for it"

I tried several systems, including D20, and related systems, but effectively treating a ship as a critter is a bit of a pain.

Hmm, I don't recall any rules in d20 that treated vehicles as critters?

 It may be just my perception of the way they handled things. the entire system always struck me as ...odd.

I could've sworn we used to have a thread devoted to DICELESS games. Does anyone know much about how DICELESS games are played other than just freeforming it?

Some used cards instead of dice I believe.  Otherwise sometimes I believe that I have heard of something on the order of tokens can be used to 'win' a conflict by having the most of them.  I don't remember if you 'assert' that if you used one and what happened to the token if you used it?

Otherwise, it might simply having characters comparing values... so the strong guy always wins a contest of strength, etc.

You can implement things like in the game I believe it is called Diplomacy, where to take a country you have to have two armies to defeat/push back one army... which frequently required getting a third party to support an action with one of their pieces.

In reply to Arkrim (msg # 45):

Little Wars by H.G. Wells is a diceless system. His miniature war game was designed to replace the old sandbox rules used by military officers and were never much fun by anyones standard. The pieces include infantry soldiers and canons, both available at toy shops during Wells' own time. There were intricate rules about moving these units, but infantry combat is resolved much like how Loreguard described in the post above me. The numerically superior squad of soldiers kills or proportional fraction of the losing squad of soldiers. The randomness came in the form of the toy canons which had springs for firing charges at enemy infantry.

I've got some ideas for a system to run Fable based games where perhaps the Guild of Heroes remains funcitonal, and is considerably more cooperative. How would I go about posting those? Would there be a separate thread? Projects?

You post your idea in the New Thread Request and a GM will turn it into a thread for you.

Out of curiosity, I'm looking to get a BESM 3 game based on Persona/SMT off the ground. Does anyone here happen to know enough about either/both to offer advice on some of the abilities?
This message was last edited by the player at 01:58, Mon 20 Oct 2014.

BESM 3? I didn't even know there was a 3rd. Is there a book for it.

Yep, this is the cover.

Erhm, more surreptitiously: is there a free online PDF download or SRD somewhere? :P
This message was last edited by the GM at 03:31, Mon 20 Oct 2014.

There might be
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=https%3A%...2B3%2Bpdf%2Bdownload

hard to say for sure. Haven't actually looked on that page.
This message was last edited by the player at 03:42, Mon 20 Oct 2014.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 54):

So what you're saying is, you post broken links and don't have the slightest idea?

---

Nevermind. According to internet, it looks like that's just the same as the last edition. Apparently everyone's been playing the third book and calling it the second this whole time? Not sure how/why. And here I was thinking that something new had actually come out for BESM. You are a disappointment to me, once again.
This message was last edited by the GM at 03:54, Mon 20 Oct 2014.

Nah, actually if it's broken, it's RPoL's fault. They seem to have shortened the link by about 3 lines and I haven't tested it to see if it works on my end.


Can't say anything about whether or not people mean the one with the cover I posted, or the actual second ed which has a different cover.



That's rather harsh.
This message was last edited by the player at 04:28, Mon 20 Oct 2014.

Upon further inspection, it's an error of google indexing. Incidentally, the text posted into the search bar of the link I provided works in the address bar. Since I'm not sure why one would work and not the other, I'll just go ahead and call that my error.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 57):

LOL, no, you didn't disappointment me personally. I was talking to BESM. :P

And I wasn't referring to the cover at all.

And it may be because I'm using another computer today. I don't know. Oh well. I'll be back to normal later.
This message was last edited by the GM at 05:10, Mon 20 Oct 2014.

Ah-hah, Details. Definitely important.


I'm amazed how much that happens. I had my players tell me they couldn't see a demote I posted. It worked fine on my mozilla, but I switched over to chrome out of curiosity. Sure enough, it had a broken link icon. So I switched to a site that's more comfortable with hotlinking.

I'm considering two possibilities for future work

1) Valley Girls-A Percentile System game based on making a certain Gainax/Soft Egg series into a tabletop. It would be a Life Sim of a group of Valley Girls from the age of 18 to 30. Wouldn't be suprised if no one was interested in this one.

2) Saw an interesting article of weapon damage someone had on their Eclipse: The Codex Persona game. It got me thinking about making d20's modern firearm damage less arbitrary. The dice size would be based on half the bullet diameter, and the number of dice would be based on the length of the casing. So a 9x19 parabellum would be ~2d4, whereas a 7.62x39 would be ~5d8. The unfortunate drawback to doing it is that I need to know a good bit more about the case lengths of given rounds. Either that or I need to have all my rounds specified in mm and include case length.

For example I am not sure on the difference between 10mm and .40S&W but I think they're 10 mm with different casings, and the .40 was made because 10 was too powerful so one is probably d4s and the other d6s?

And what about .22 LR vs. .22 Magnum? Dice Size?

Right, so an idea that's been on the backburner for a bit is the possibility of a Shooter RPG based around the premise of a 'multiverse' that participates in tournaments instead of going to wars.

Shooter RPG? Don't first person shooters sort of require a video game instead of a tabletop RPG? Kind of pointless to have a "shooter only" style in tabletop.

Oh I wasn't necessarily intending on it being 'shooter only' Just using shooter mechanics to resolve tournaments, and having RP revolve around drama surrounding tournaments. Perhaps like a reality show (although that's not the only possibility).

A roleplaying game about a reality TV show about a shooter arena?

Well, that's certainly a unique concept.

Would this game be lighthearted? I imagine that would certainly do well as a "fun and games" type.

I don't really know whether it would or not. I plan on making it fairly generic, such that it allows any theme and tone the GM wants (with the primary similarities of each game being that they're all episodic and commonly alternate between tournaments and downtime). The tournaments would be resolved with a d% system, damage with gobs of dice (weapon dependent) and the social interaction would be more freeform.

Is anyone interested in discussing/developing a system for wealth/social climbing in a rules-lite game? Or maybe you know of a system that can be adapted?

I find that games tend to polarize this issue: either they require a billion dice rolls and a bean-counting spreadsheet for each player, or they go totally freeform and the GM makes an arbitrary decision on how much PCs earn and whether they're promoted.

I'm looking for something generic that could easily be used in a number of different games, but the game I have particularly in mind is a historical one where PCs are trying to make their fortunes and work their way up the English social scale, perhaps all the way from peasants with a few pennies in their purse to dukes with castles, palaces and vast tracts of income-generating land.

If anyone has played En Garde! or Flashing Blades, you'll know what I'm trying to achieve, but I want to do it much, much more simply.

If anyone is interested, maybe we can set up a discussion thread for it?

I'm aware of a system that works perfectly for it, but it's nowhere near what you'd call "rules-lite"


The system in question has supplements devoted to expanding the core rules of one roll while increasing vastly the number of ways in which you can make one roll, and that's where the "not rules-lite" comes in.


Check


Specific advantages can be extrapolated to reflect a specifically English tone.


I'm always interested in the particular non rules-lite system I'm talking about, and I even apply the Social Engineering rules to Dungeon Fantasy games. For example, a player recently wanted to know the difference between being an Ogre Emperor and say... a human emperor. My answer was 8 levels of Status in comparison to 5 of Rank and 4 of Reputation.

Make a thread for it and we can definitely brainstorm.

I know your favourite system, Steelsmiter, and that's definitely not rules-lite. :)

I've put in a thread request.

Thread has been created: go to and work on your rule's mod. :)

Started a GPIA thread because we don't try to advertise games here. If anyone's interested, it can be further discussed there.

Anyone here know enough about GURPS or BESM 3 to collaborate on making rules for running Platformer games with either system?

As in a platform video game adaptation?

Yep, that'd be it.

Well I know in BESM 3rd you will have to make a setting specific add on for character creation. Or people will just buy flight or teleport and make the platforming part of the game moot. I seen setting specific add on for BESM 3rd for  a Pet Monster game setting. But I do not have the foggiest idea how to make one.

Actually, if you want to make a thread for it, I have some ideas that can easily get around that. All you have to do is create platform-based limitations.

Sounds more like a setting specific subtraction, but I get what you mean. Incidentally, I think the Super Leaf and advanced suits derived from it are Flight with Maintain, unless there's a better rule somewhere


Well, the easiest way would be that everyone must have Companion. I don't know enough about Pet Monster games to add anything further.


Alright. On it. I'll be making additions for issues suggested here.

Well, I'm having to go in for a biopsy. I'll be focused on my health for a while.

High fantasy strategy? :P

Good luck Steelsmiter - fingers crossed for you.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 78):

Oh, just noticed that. Yes, good luck! Hope you get well soon and feel much better!

Yes, best of luck to you in your health.  Hopefully all will come back from test with good news.  (or at least as good news as such news is)

They think the results are benign (which doesn't really indicate anything definitive since I've already had thyroid cancer removed), but I also have some blood test results forthcoming, so that's kind of a worry as well. Thanks for all the well wishing.
This message was last edited by the player at 12:57, Sat 20 Dec 2014.

I'm actually at high risk for that myself, but I just haven't reached the age where it usually sets in yet. I try to keep healthy but genetics is ultimately a lottery based on the choices of our predecessors. I wish you the best of luck, man and hope you have only good news for the holidays.

I'm only 30 myself. I doubt I'll get any news until at least after Christmas though. I might get some this week.

Have been a bit busy, but I thought I'd say my last nodule was benign. I've been running my Fable playtest (which is going a bit slow, but it seems easy to pick up) and playing in an organized crime macromanagement game. The BESM Community Lounge has picked up, and my GURPS Dungeon Fantasy game is moving at a decent clip even if I did have a few quitters. Someone suggested rules lite Zombie Apocalypse, and I suggested The Window or Castle Falkenstein (modified to modern day, and with all the magic scraped off). I've been noodling with that but it hasn't caught much interest over in GPIA so I'm thinking I want to keep it on the backburner for now.

Glad to hear you're okay so far, man.

I've been pretty busy as well. Trying to get my projects off the ground.

I suggest Swashbucklers of the7 Skies. It uses the PDQ# system. The PDQ# system can be downloaded for free from drivethrurpg.com

If you guys were running a Zombie Apocalypse game, what "archetypes" would you include? So far I've got:

The Hometown Cop
The Quirky Expert
The Redneck
The Sexy Damsel
The (Ex-)Soldier

-The Idiot who literally does EVERYTHING wrong but somehow keeps surviving.
-The Random Civilian who just stepped on screen so that you could watch him get devoured by hordes of zombies.
-The Murderous Backstabber whom everyone else is too stupid to vote off the island until it is too late.
-The Smart Zombie who has somehow retained its intelligence and is coordinating other zombies to their doom to acquire more brains for itself.
-The Mysterious Stranger who appears just in the nick of time to save everyone but then disappears into the darkness.
-The Pompous City Slicker who used to be a big shot before the Apocalypse but is probably the first to die because of doing that EXACT thing the hero JUST told them not to do.
-The Lovable Loser who had a hard life even before the Apocalypse and despite being an AVERAGE JOE in every way, the show/comic/movie portrays them as a hero.
This message was last edited by the GM at 07:47, Sun 18 Jan 2015.

I realize I should have specified "for PCs" so I'm leaving the inapplicable ones out


That might be fun. I'm not sure how to work it though.


Haha :D I like that one!


Well, heroes... Does he actually have any skills relevant to an apocalyptic game?

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 91):

No, I'm just throwing random things out there.

It's cool, a good bit of them will be used for NPCs :D

I'm not familiar with ZA per se, but for general zombie game PCs:

The Single Parent with kids in tow
The Girl With Attitude
The Pensioner with essential knowledge
The Office Worker
The Manual Worker
The Ex-Criminal

Could add a bit of interest. :)

Maybe this might fall under ex-soldier but...

The Gun/Survival nut that has a stock pile of weapons and equipment. Make sure he says,"I told you all so" at least once.

The Doctor/Medical character that heals the other characters.

The Scientist tying to figure out WHY zombies are around.

Redneck actually. the main difference is whether we use the contraction of "you all".


Hadn't got that one down yet. Was thinking of non-doctor skills for it.


Hadn't considered a professional in that role either.

How about about the Entrepreneur who tries to figure out a way to control the Zombies to build a new workforce so they can start a new industrial revolution using zombie/slave labor.

Maybe he is a genius and may [almost] be successful.

Or maybe he only thinks he is, and is destined to be devoured by his exiting new workforce, when a regular feeding goes way wrong.

That's full of awesome!


Oh he can still be a genius and not account for certain failures :D

Glad I was able to come up with an entertaining idea for you.  :)

Do you want a thread for this?

I don't know. I will be using a modified form of Castle Falkenstein, but I've found that straight rules tweaks are viewed as somewhat counterproductive.

The following is an extract from the RPoL Development forum, thread called 'New Category: Gaming Aids'.

Basically, if we tag this 'game' as 'Discussion', we get a free ad in RPoL's 'Heaven' resource list, where maybe more people can find us.

---

Skald
 moderator, 616 posts
 Whatever it is,
 I'm against it
Mon 23 Mar 2015
at 12:05
rMail | Profile

moderator post | [quote] | [reply] | msg #58
Re: New Category: Gaming Aids.

...But we do have a thread in Heaven that points to specific gaming-related discussion games, if that's what you're after: link to a message in another game

I went through everything that had "discussion" as category or game system or in the title, plus found a few more here and there.  Ignored anything inactive or which hadn't had a post in five months.

Anyone else already has or starts gaming-related discussion threads (or if you're the owner of an inactive one that you're bringing back to life), I'd be happy, keen even, to add to the list.  :>

---

icosahedron152
 member, 450 posts
Tue 24 Mar 2015
at 06:00
 [edit] | [delete] | msg #60
Re: New Category: Gaming Aids.

In reply to Skald (msg # 58):

Ok, this is starting to look like a working compromise. I see at least one resource in there that others have been seeking. However, there are other resources that are missing because the GM has probably been confused about categorizing his/her game and picked a category other than Discussion (which was my original point).

So, if you are a GM, or know a GM, who has a useful resource with an element of discussion in it, get that resource tagged with 'Discussion' and let Skald know. And make yourself a shortcut to that list so you can find other resources as they are added.

Thanks, Skald - a positive result. :)
This message was last edited by the player at 04:09, Wed 25 Mar 2015.

I take it that means that 'System' needs to be switched from "Homebrew" to "Discussion" which is also a listed system.

Done and done. Thanks, Ico! I was wondering why discussion had never popped up as an option. I guess you just had to fill it in manually.

Last time Game Design lost it's discussion status because a troll had started harassing people there and when it was reported, it was discovered that the sole moderator had quit RPOL not responding to any inquiries whatsoever for months. Maybe this time around we have multiple moderators so that doesn't happen?
This message was last edited by the GM at 04:54, Wed 25 Mar 2015.

Just to be clear, I believe adding (or changing) to tag to Discussion will still leave us as a 'game', not a public discussion forum like the other one was.

To achieve that status would be a later upgrade requiring specific moderator alteration.

All this current change will do is give us a free ad in the 'Heaven' public forum. But at least we'll appear on a list that people can find.

If I'm still not clear, let me know.

I believe you are right if, if I remember correctly forum was a two step processes. First you opened a game for discussion.  Then you had to prove the idea would fly with a certain amount of activity and length of existence.  Then you can  petition to be made a public rather than private forum.
Below is a copy of the notice of closure from the other Forum.

Yes I believe we would also need to request it be listed in the list in heaven.  I think it would be best to have Arkrim request it.  So we don't flood them with requests.

We could examine if we want to continue to require RTJ to participate, or if we should ask to have it made an open discussion group.  Would the opening up bring more people to our discussions, or bring extra disruption?

Speaking for myself, I do believe that making it an open discussion forum was always the goal, and I have eagerly awaited the day that it came to pass.

However, weather or not it becomes open discussion I think it should be listed in the Heaven thread, because we need some fresh blood around here.

Okay, so step one: free heaven plug.

I'll happily submit the request. Is there a specific method I'm supposed to send the request or should I just Rmail the admins?

And do we need to eliminate the RTJ in order do so? I mean, all we do is ask someone to agree to the rules here anyway. There are no requirements beyond that. We only have 7 rules and they're mostly "be respectful, be sensible" repeated in 7 different ways.

I believe that getting listed in heaven would be accomplished by an RTJ stating we are a discussion group that has been around for getting close to a year now, and offers help and advice in building games and usable mechanics to into existing games.

If we want to dispense with the RTJ requirement I think that is an rmail to the moderators.  I think as you mentioned the rules we go by are simple and designed to be in line with public forums framework, and we have several internal moderators whom have stepped up.  Thread naming might get a little messy unless we moderate them, but we can discuss how important that is.

As I understand it, becoming a public forum would sidestep a plug in Heaven, because as a forum we would be just as prominent as Heaven itself.

I'm not sure that the moderators would consider us currently to have a sufficiently high profile or large enough membership/following to take that step, but a plug in Heaven would be a step in the right direction.

I think, as Lore Guard says, a request to Skald, care of the moderators, will get us the ad. Or we could simply ask in the thread where this offer was made, to see what format he prefers.

It is there in heaven now.

---Spelling edit
This message was last edited by the player at 03:01, Fri 27 Mar 2015.

Awesome! Thanks guys.

One thing we've noticed in WoD Forum, which is a public forum, is that when a game becomes a a forum, it no longer has "seeking players" flag and as such it doesn't turn up in default "Only active games requesting players" searches. In turn, this considerably reduced our ability to attract new folks. Personally, if this was my game, I wouldn't go that route.

I wonder if Jase has thought about that... I would presume that a Public forum should be treated as if it always had the players wanted flag turned on.  So it would show up in default searches, for instance.

Well, if you get him to fix that I certainly would appreciate it.

That's a good idea. Perhaps we should just wait it out. Stay a game until that gets adjusted, then apply for discussion status IF and WHEN that's fixed.

I put in a suggestion in the RPOL Development... I really think that is non-intuitive to be stuck off... by becoming open, that is effectively stuck open, the extreme of requesting participation.  You never know, Jase might notice it and simply take care of it.  I really think it was a non-intentional ramification of their decision that forums and discussion groups shouldn't advertise as games do.  I think to advertise in PW they have to have that flag on... If they can't turn it on, they can't advertise.

I'm pretty sure you can turn on the Discussion flag and tweak with Active/Inactive/Deleted/Only active games requesting players.

Edit: Nope, having the least restrictive search perameters set only turns up Portrait Posse and one other game.
This message was last edited by the player at 12:08, Fri 27 Mar 2015.

Hmm. That sounds bad. I thought that if you had a public forum it showed up in the default list in the Main Menu (homepage). ISTR the 'other' Game Design forum was there, but maybe it was something I found by accident and added myself.

But if there are other public forums that don't show up there and you can't advertize them either, that's a real problem.

Does anyone know if Shriek by deep7 has rules for playing vampires in 1PG?

Technically this is a 'game' not a forum. Anyone can make games but forums need to have staff permission.

LOL. Apparently, joker missed the last 10-20 posts. We've already been discussing exactly that.
This message was last edited by the GM at 12:52, Tue 31 Mar 2015.

In reply to shady joker (msg # 121):

I'm afraid I haven't bought or played Shriek, can't help you on that one, but ISTR it was more about recreating slasher flicks. Deep 7 has a Yahoo Group that is still monitored by the game designers, you could ask there. You'd need to join, but if you're a fan of their games that might be no hardship. There's also some good fan-made houserules there. I'll probably add mine when they're ready.

 Well the game seems to be about Slasher flicks and the reviews mention nothing on playing vampires.

 Would a 1PG game about playing vampires be fun? They already use 'Blood' as the health track. I was thinking something in the style of Forever Knight or some such.

I started designing a vampire game a while back, based on 1D8, simply because of the 8 pints of blood in a human body, but after I discovered 1PG I wondered if I could adapt it - or adapt 1PG to run on D8 just for that game.

Unfortunately I'm snowed under in RL just now so I have no time to develop it.

Still, I think it shows that it could work. I'm not familiar with Forever Knight, in fact I've never played a vampire game. It's on my to-do list but, alas, now is not the time for a new project. :(

Forever Knight was a cheesy TV show about a vampire that was a cop who used his powers to solve crimes and be a kind of dark hero. It was the only vampire based thing I could think of that has nothing to do with the WoD games.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forever_Knight

Anyways, the one problem I hit is 1PG characters are supposed to be disposable and the system is made for one shots. Vampires don't seem to go along with that idea.

1PG was originally designed for one shots, but it doesn't have to be that way. I'm play testing ordinary games right now using 1PG. There's absolutely nothing to stop you using characters for as long as you want. It's just as good as any other system.

What was the nature of your problem? I probably already have a fix for it. After a while I tend to forget which were the original rules and which are my house rules, so I can just be running a game and not realize that you can't do X with the original rules.

So I just finished the first season of a really interesting anime (Noragami) that gave me a lot inspiration to start designing a game based along similar concepts. I wanted to get some advice on where to start with this. So far I have no design or anything more just a general theme. The player is a unknown god seeking renown in the modern world. Along with dealing with mundane activities to help the people around them they also deal with the darker embodiments of human psyche. They enlist both human contacts as well as the souls of the deceased who are uncorrupted.  These individuals are treated in game mechanic terms as both NPC's and Equipment.

What are some baseline concepts/lore/rules that may be relevant to this endeavor? Any systems that would work well with this?

Should be noted I'm not very familiar with many systems as I've typically lacked the resources to look into them to any great extent and typically relied on my own designs.

Well, if you want to focus on the mind and psyche, I know a lot of different games focus on mental and social stuff more than straight up combat. D20 games are usually more combat oriented, so you might be looking into one of the d10 or d6 games to start with as an example.

Fundamentally, I think one of they key things you need to determine is what are the points of conflict/competition in your stories.  Does it highlight and depend on competition between players, or is it primarily player vs. neutral environment, how much can the players interact with one another and assist one another?

How much do you want to depend on a GM to run the story... and the world... or do you want it to have the rules somehow mediate conflicts between the players?

As I'm not familiar with the Anime that inspired it I don't know exactly what feel you want for the game.

@Arkrim I enjoy the Psychological elements of games. Also enjoy the idea of rolling large amounts of d6.

 @LoreGuard I wanted a lot of the drive of the game to be focused on the unknown god gaining renown from the people, but to also have a general conflict with the supernatural elements of the world to add spice to the game. During the day the gods would be answering the wishes of people, doing 'missionary work', and rather mundane tasks. At night though a god would deal with...

running from, hiding from, and fighting with Phantoms. The story for the players would rely on interactions with higher dieties, powerful entities, their associations.

I would like for players to be aware of eachother and to interact on a semi regular basis but not really united. As for conflicting with each other I'd prefer to avoid that.

I would like the gm to have a strong influence on the story. Sort of like the player decides the destination but the gm handles the route. For most activities...

I'd prefer just to be about flavor without much conflict content. Probably would like to handle most days by answering several wishes or possibly one intrigueing and challenging wish. As for actual conflict I'd want to allow for a lot of flair but still being determined by basic dice rolls. You'd have several elements going into each attack but still only one roll with conflicts lasting several several clashes.

Did this all make sense and help? Btw thanks for all the q's it helps me know what I want.

Been a while since I've been around here. I recently got a laptop, and the Pricedown font. What do you guys think the interest would be in creating a GTA RPG?

Well on rpol I would say pretty high. Users on here love sand boxes.

Well, I'm thinking I'll use GTA V's stats and do d%. Either that or divide the percentages by 10 and use dice pools (with Target Numbers instead of successes). But I might add Fat from San Andreas in there too, depends on whether anyone thinks its worth it to depict the consequences of overeating as they did in San Andreas.

It is not worth it. When it comes to table top games having stats that change constantly and involve tons of book keeping is a bad idea. It is okay in video games because the computer keeps track of it

and the other bit?

I never played GTA V so I don't know what the stats are. So what would the roll mechanic be in your game?

http://gta.wikia.com/Skills_(GTA_V)
(it appears RPoL isn't wanting to add the ending parenthesis in the link. Just add it back in manually I guess) Personally I'd probably scrap the bit about Special Abilities because those are specific to characters, but I might include some sample ones, or make one for each stat (and allow each player to choose which one they have at the start of the game).


that's what I meant by "and the other bit?". The other bit I was referring to was the use of either d% or d10 dice pools with TN (I don't particularly like number of successes). d10s or d% seem like the most obvious options to me anyway (and easier since they are often referred to as percentages in game literature, walkthroughs and the like). I could possibly be persuaded to do something else though.
This message was last edited by the player at 13:25, Wed 13 May 2015.

For dice rolling mechanic I'd say you need to consider what feel you want. Different mechanics have different curves. d% will be linear, but I haven't managed to figure out the shape on dice pool. My gut feeling is that they'll tend to make tasks that are easy for a person of your skill level, almost always succeed, while tasks at or above your skill level will have a greater spread. That is just a gut feeling, though.

Oh I decided on a Dice Pool with TN mechanic something like 44 pages ago. I just started doing the work once I started getting collaboration on various chat clients, Facebook, and other social media sites. (interesting story, I now have a model that wants to appear in the book :D. Found her on dA.)

The way I have it set up is that NPCs never actively roll, taking half the maximum result of their applicable "dice" as their default result. I may change that for Named Enemies though, because the added risk seems appropriate. But otherwise, players pretty much roll against a set difficulty level, and I have lots of ways to determine difficulty level, depending on circumstance.

NPCs such tend to scale, so a starting NPC may only have a 2 in a Skill so the player needs to roll a 10 (not too terrible if they have 3 dice), and even someone from the Metal Gear series won't typically force them to roll more than a 50 (because they can't have more than 10 Stealth and Shooting) without using tactics and other things that grant dice bonuses.

Also, each Skill has its own Special Ability under my system. Trevor's was Stamina, Michael's was Shooting, and Franklin's was Driving. The only one that doesn't have a special ability is Lung Capacity.

Anywho, it's a work in progress, and I don't plan on uploading it anywhere until I feel like it's gameable.

I somehow completely missed how long ago the last post was. Never mind me.

No worries. Slow group.

I have a shameless plug for a tabletop roleplaying game that I'm designing. I'm trying to build up the game's following before we kickstart it.

If any of you are interested in checking it out, please Rmail or PM me. It is against our rules to post links to off RPOL games here and I don't want to break our own rules.

I would appreciate any likes or other support you guys can offer, but it is absolutely not required. Just something interesting for you guys to know.

Also, if anyone wants to friend me on facebook or join the last wave of the betatesting, feel free to send me a request (but let me know who you are in the message).

Anyhoo, I encourage you guys to check it out. We've got a really talented team of artists. If nothing else, it's bound to provide some inspiration.

Perhaps you should change the rules. We checked with RPoL Staff and they said that it's perfectly OK to advertise off site games outside RPoL public forums, as long as the GM of the game where you advertise agrees and the game content does not fall outside of what can be run on RPoL.

Are all the other GMs here okay with that?
This message was last edited by the GM at 20:10, Sat 29 Aug 2015.

I'm not a GM here, but I bet they don't mind.
In other news, what's the interest in creation of a Horror RPG from the ground up that makes the characters look less like L4D than the existing games?

L4D?

I'm ok with the rules being adjusted.  Should probably change the rules first.

Perhaps require that games (in or off) Rpol must have had at least one of their mechanics discussed in a thread here prior to a link being posted.  Discussion requiring that at least one other person has provided feedback on the thread before such a link is posted.  (If we allow the link to be posted in the appropriate qualifying thread). Alternately, we could have a advertisements thread that a GM can past a simple link and description at the request of a member based on some criteria.

The discussion bit keeping someone from simply spamming.  They have to be willing to wait for interest before being able to post a link that might be seen as an advertisement.

If we do a GM managed thread, we could make a post with a description, a link to one or more in forum links of the relevant discussions, and a single link to their game content.

Just quick thoughts...

Being able to point people to beta/playtest games seems relevant to game design.  Might not even have to limit them to one resource link and one playtest game, as long as they can't generate lots of noise by bumps.  If a designer wishes to have a playtest resource post made, they point the GM to their relevant current threads, and and their current resource links they need.  If the GM makes the post as the user they can update it, but it won't produce bumps on the notice thread.

We can have guidelines on acceptable types of links, with complaints potentially causing the post contents to be emptied and locked.  But primarily I see guidelines being no links to any adult content without clearly being designated.
No gratuitous/unnecessary use of formatting.  (Lots of color changes, font increasing, etc.). And no bumping in threads just to get people to refer back to your advertisement.

Left 4 Dead. I haven't seen many horror games that don't devolve into shoot 'em ups.

Updated.

I have no personal problem with advertising outside projects here.

Regarding this particular project, I likely won't be participating in any crowdfunded projects for some time. I would like to help promote it, but I am flat broke right now.

Well, MY project isn't off the ground yet. I'm just trying to get followers on Facebook and Twitter. I don't get my project in the air until next summer.

I can say that it is a very new twist on the d20 dynamic and I'm not interested in hearing how people "liked it the way it was". I'm looking for NEW suggestions and brainstorming. Not comparison to existing games.
This message was last edited by the GM at 03:27, Wed 30 Sept 2015.

In the Community Chat board, I started a thread about Adventuring Kits for Shadowrunners. that would be my current project. Would anyone be interested in discussing that here?

Alas, I've never played Shadowrun, can't really help there.

In reply to chupabob (msg # 156):

Me!

Regarding the Shadowrunning kits, there has been a new development. I put a considerable amount of effort into designing and editing about six kits for characters with different styles and budgets. Then last week, another gamer found Runner Kits in the brand spanking new sourcebook. I basically wasted an entire week of my free time.

In reply to chupabob (msg # 159):

But before you found out there was already a sourcebook about it, on a scale of 1 to 10, how much fun did you have?

And would you be willing to work on a scifi game with tech similar to shadow run?

In reply to Arkrim (msg # 160):

Before I discovered that it was a waste of time: 8/10. The piecing together of lists is fun enough, but looking up the costs and ratings of each piece is a pain.

After: 5/10.

I would absolutely be interested in doing something with your sci-fi game. There would be a caveat. I have a concept for a sci-fi story that I might write in 2016 for NaNoWriMo. If I did come up with something for your game that I liked, I would want at least enough rights to use it in my own work.

Fair enough. I was thinking more of just pre-designing kits and helping me to stat/price those.

I wasn't looking to taking anyone's stories. Though, if the kickstarter is successful next year, I will definitely need to start hiring freelancers.

In reply to Arkrim (msg # 162):

That does seem like a fun project. Do you have any information about the project online somewhere that I could browse?

For farther down the road, I know several gamers who are artists and work cheap. I also know some authors. I am an editor myself. What sort of help are you wanting?

Well, the main thing I'm looking for is a web developer and an online social media rep.

However, I could always use another set of eyes and constructive suggestions from fellow designers and editors.

The website we have is incomplete and has only been used for the beta, but you're welcome to peruse it:

http://www.CosmosRPG.com (official site)


I'm interested in any feedback I can get. Just be aware the site is not finished and we're still updating things. Without an official web developer, this is the best I can get in the mean time.
This message was last edited by the GM at 05:35, Tue 22 Dec 2015.

So I'm finally not in terrible health. Anyone wanna try out a horror game I'm working on?

Glad to hear you're better steelsmiter! Oh? You alpha/betatesting it here on RPOL?

Probably better call it Alpha. Depends whether I get enough interest. You guys have early dibs. If I generate enough interest, either here or in GPIA, I'll throw something together. I have ideas for a multitiered story. I've slowly gathered ideas for about 75 pages worth of material (but players don't need the GM section so that cuts out about half). I'll link to the PDF (within the game) if others seem to want in on it.

I'm interested if we can do it casually here on RPOL. I don't have a large amount of free time but I think I have enough to at least help out a fellow game designer. Plus I haven't played in forever.

Ok. I have a GPIA thread up.

Where?

You didn't give a name or link.

GPIA is Game Proposals, Input, and Advice.

In other news: link to a message in another game

I hate acronyms. That's a personal pet peeve of mine. Looking at it now, I'm not sure I'm as up for it as I previously thought. But thanks for the link. Looks like others are showing interest already. Good luck.
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:43, Mon 09 May 2016.

So I'm working on a gurps campaign right now. I was wondering if anyone has any ideas on how I would make an initiative system that allows an extremely fast character multiple turns in the same sequence. Similar to Shadowrun. I was thinking I could multiply 3d by their basic speed and then each turn subtract 10 and do new turns.

Does that make sense?

Been a while since I posted here. Actually I've been stewing around with the idea of getting off RPoL for a while now, but hadn't really gotten around to it. I started up a discord when the UESRPG went that route and I signed on to their server. Pretty much all of my RP projects are on there (one is horror, a second is visual novels, a third is criminal sandboxes), and also talk about stuff that isn't mine. The only thing I don't really care to go into on my server (mainly because they're a dime a dozen, but also because I have nothing constructive to add) is d20. I recognize that this is a bit of a turn off for a number of you, but if you're interested, you can either PM or rMail me.

Yes ArgamenPhish, that does make sense.

Does anyone here have experience designing board games?

In reply to chupabob (msg # 177):

I have not had any of my designs published yet, but I have been designing board games for several years now.

What are you wondering? (you can PM me if necessary)

In reply to mofo99 (msg # 178):
I don't have a specific question, but I am interested in your general take on board game design. Yeah, I know this is a big topic with lots and lots and theory involved. I'm not asking for a college course. I'm just interested in your basic opinion or any advice for a rank amateur.

The story is this. I've been writing my Alien Fiction novella and posting a chapter at a time as I get a chance. I've been working on the RPG simultaneously. I might post a chapter of the narrative and then switch it up with a chapter of the RPG. I actually have more experience as a game designer than as a writer. Another writer and I have been trading comments on each others books. He planted the idea of a board game in my head. In one of his comments, he wrote that he would be more interested in seeing my story turned into a board game than a RPG. Now, I'm pondering various game mechanics and layouts in my head. I haven't gotten as far as even writing notes on a napkin yet.

In reply to chupabob (msg # 179):

Ah, I see. Well it definitely sounds like you've got a great theme and that you've got the work ethic to see a project like this through. Here is a (very) brief outline of how I would suggest you proceed:

1. Begin with the End in Mind - It sounds silly, but it's true. Understanding the purpose of your project will help guide your workflow. So I ask, why are you creating this game? What do you hope to achieve with it? Creating a game for personal use is one thing; creating with the intent to publish is another. Who is your target audience? Who will play your board game?
   
   
2. Play a lot of Board Games (especially newer ones) - Understanding what works and what doesn't work, where the industry has been and where it's going, conventions (perhaps so that you can buck them?), trends (so that you can follow/avoid them), etc. In other words, know the world you're getting into. This counts as research.
   
   
3. Do your Research - Similar to #2 above, here I'm talking about learning the craft itself. It's about this time that you should be marrying your awesome Theme with some solid Mechanics. There is a wealth of information on Board Game Design in books and on the internet. If you need some specific links or something, I can create a list. You can also find so much info from the general board game community.
   
   
4. Get Involved with the Board Game Community - Both IRL and online, there are lots of folks who love talking about Board Game Design and who are very willing to help. Seek out these like-minded people wherever you find them. Don't be afraid to ask questions and build relationships. This will be especially useful later when you start playtesting.
   
   
5. Don't Get Bogged Down - This advice is meant to temper #2, #3 and #4 above. It's easy to get lost in all that preparation and research that you burn yourself out and don't actually do anything. The research stuff mentioned above should be in moderation and consistently sprinkled in throughout the process. Which segways into perhaps the most important step...
   
   
6. Just Do It - Start writing things down right now; on whatever you have handy. Never stop writing things down. Ideas are worthless (and easily forgotten), but when you commit words to paper you're actually making a thing, you're finally designing. As soon as you can, get all those stray notes centralized into what will become your Rule Book. The most basic step here is just write down a list of components that your game will need and step-by-step instructions for how to play. Of course, it will be super rough at this point, but you'll continue to refine it throughout the process. The important part this early is that this is getting you organized for when you make your prototype.
   
   
7. Make a Prototype - Even if it's just hand-written on slips of paper or borrowed pieces from an old Risk box, get your idea in physical form as quickly as possible. Don't spend money on your first few prototypes, because things will change (a lot). Once you turn it from an idea into a physical entity that takes up space in your closet, then and only then can you begin to learn if your idea is actually even fun by actually playing it.
   
   
8. Play Your Game - Start with just yourself until the you can definitely find the element of fun in the game. Finding other people to playtest with you can be difficult (see #4 above) but it's absolutely necessary to playtest your game as much as humanly possible. There are some best practices to playtesting (of course), but in the early stages you just want to make sure it's fun in every iteration.
   
   
9. Iterate - Continue doing all of the steps above and don't stop. Keep improving your rulebook and your components, keep expanding your playtesting groups. Keep 'Just Doing It'. Always improve, but never lose focus of what makes your game fun. The amount of time and energy you put into it relates to #1 above, but in general you're less likely to see the project through to finish if you take breaks.
   
   
10. Take Breaks - Seemingly in contrast with #9 above, it is important to take care of yourself, your family, etc. Clearing your headspace to make room for new ideas is valuable to. Breaks are probably necessary - but again moderation. Breaks are fine as long as you never give up.
    
    
11. Give Up (if you have to) - With any project, when it stops serving its purpose it's time to cut your losses and call it quits. As long as you really want/need to finish the project you should keep on trucking. But if/when life circumstances change, know when to mercifully pull the plug. But never delete/throw out anything. There may be a day (even if it's years down the road) when you'll want to come back to your project. It can be fun, refreshing, and enlightening to pick up an old project and begin it again with fresh perspective.

So yeah, that's what I got off the top of my head right now. Of course, there's always more where that came from and I'm always happy to help.
This message was last edited by the player at 12:35, Mon 19 Feb 2018.

That's actually a lot more than I thought I would get as an answer. The acts of digesting and implementing all this advice will take some time, probably months. I might come back with specific questions then. This is more than enough information to keep me busy for a long time. Thanks!

In reply to chupabob (msg # 181):

No problem and best of luck.

Has anyone taken a look at Pathfinder 2E yet? http://paizo.com/pathfinderplaytest

I'm interested to see how this new ruleset plays out.

Not sure how I feel about the proficiency and gradual ancestry feats but I love the new equipment. Any other thoughts on this?

No, I knew nothing about it until your post.

In reply to chupabob (msg # 184):

It's still in beta. I'm intrigued by it.

I watched the video, but I still haven't seen much in the way reviews nor even reaction vids. Do you have a take on it?

In reply to chupabob (msg # 186):

I like the new items and races and the fact that combat feats are now fighter feats instead of anyone being able to take them. Not everyone can take wizard spells or druid spells willy nilly. Seems fair.

Not such a fan of the proficiency. +1 is expert but +3 is legendary? Doesn't seem very good to put "interpretation" of a roll so heavily on a GM when the whole point is that the roll is supposed to take that burden off the storyteller.

Huh, I guess the system is moving further away from its D&D 3rd roots thrn.

HELLOOOOO! Long time no see. To pick up where we left off...

So I've been playing the Pathfinder 2e official release for the past couple of months now.

I have to say, I think it's well-balanced but faces a lot of the same flavor issues that D&D4e had. Not as many, but still some. Like, why am I attacking a target's Fortitude DC to grapple them? Why was UMD, Spellcraft, and Knowledge (Arcana) rolled up into one skill but Nature and Survival are separate skills?

They improved the proficiency tiers to +2, which is a step in the right direction but still. Trained +2, Expert +4, Master +6, and Legendary +8 is almost meaningless when you still have to take skill feats in order to actually DO anything with that proficiency. I feel like some stuff should just "come with" you know?

Anyone else play it or run it?

Ok, I’ll bite.  Played through the first adventure of doomsday dawn with the family.  (I was the GM) and the kids liked it in general.  My daughter enjoyed making her character, and I think actually got her more interested in making characters in general.  (Not just 2nd ed)

I converted the doomsday dawn adventure to go with the new published 2nd edition rules and we ran through it again.  They had forgotten several parts, and had actually skipped a few rooms in the first run through that they explored this time through.  We used the APG playtest classes and everyone seemed to enjoy playing it.  The NPC was a hobgoblin witch, and my daughter played a leshy oracle of fire.

Not going to say there aren’t things that I’d have thought I’d have done different, but in general I also really enjoyed it.  I’ve mostly converted the Black Fang dungeon as well and the plan is to have them go through it as well since the have really fond memories of it and the Steel Talon Starfinder Beginner box adventures, as they were their first forays into the games.

One of the biggest things I sort of miss is masterwork weapons and armor, that level between magic and normal weapons.  That and to a degree, their changes to wands make them permanent magic items leaving a bit of a treasure gap between scrolls/talismans and permanent magic items that used to be filled by mostly spent wands.

At first the Ancestries seemed a bit shortchanged, but there is an optional rule in the GMG to have them get more ancestry feats.  I think that might almost be a necessity if you are trying to convert an existing story over, and some may simply prefer that play style, and use the optional rule as a standard.  But I think I eventually got to feel like even without it the game can be fulfilling as per core rules if you aren’t stuck thinking about what some ancestry used to get by baseline.

Some might find HP healing without magic kind of hmmm gamey if they are used to a more gritty setting, but you could houserule some limitations on healing, but it would impact play style. (But that would presumably be the intent if you did it). As it is it reminds me a bit of default play style of 5th edition, with respect to healing back up quickly without necessarily using magic.  Really it plays pretty good though in my opinion.

It seems easier to adjust things with less unintended consequences which should help people make their own house rules on their own to make the game play their way.  I think that is a big plus for it.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

With the formalities out the way, I been thinking, has anyone played EZD6? They replaced hp with strikes. Which looks simplier. But i haven't tried it. Any thoughts?

No I never tried it. Haven't even looked at it. Does it have a free srd somewhere?

No, I suppose the rules are so simple a SRD would destroy the book sales.