OOC THREAD

Okay, so so far I've grabbed a bunch of "Lifepath" tables and stuff and chucked it into the Workshop thread. Now to start organizing it, straightening everything out, and removing what I don't want and adding what I do want...
This message was last edited by the GM at 16:59, Wed 10 Mar 2021.

WOW, you weren't kidding about the dump of tables :)

I did a brief scan and I like the romantic encounters table :)  That was actually well written.  I was genuinely surprised.

There is a lot of good stuff and some that we can probably ditch.
One thing before we get too deep, which system are we going to be using for Attributes?  I like the idea of a standard array.
What are going to be the standard Attributes?

When I get home from work, I will throw some attribute ideas into workshop thread.  And it won't simply be the D&D attributes.  I have several ideas on that for a bit more.  But not too many :)

None of it is mine (yet), it's from different systems. Traveller turned out to be too sci-fi for what I wanted. Most of the tables you see are from Harnmaster or Artesia.




Yeah



Mmmmm. I hadn't thought about that until this second, but my favorite is as follows:


--Forceful = tough and strong
--Agile = agile and/or sneaky
--Insightful = noticing things, remembering things, and figuring things out
--Charming = fast talkers and/or leaders
--Confident = doing things confidently and/or with focused concentration (extra-important for Sorcerers, Clerics, Druids)


In terms of the Amber game that Jon is in:

--Forceful = STR and CON
--Agile = DEX
--Insightful = INT and Perception
--Charming = CHR
--Confident = Willpower

Well if we are going to get detailed backgrounds, we should have some Attributes to match.
Here is a merging of what you put and some of the ones I like together:

Strength (STR) = This is your muscular capability to lift, climb, push, pull, carry, swing melee weapons / shields and melee damage.
Physique (PHY) = This is your constitution and endurance.  So resistances to fatigue, poisons, exertions, etc.
Agility  (AGL) = This is your dexterity, hand/eye coordination, ability to hit with range weapons and damage, light melee weapon alternative use.
Intelligence (INT) = This is your raw intellect, knowledge, logic and general problem solving.  Also affects how many and how well you can learn / train.
Wisdom  (WIS) = This is your comprehension, insight, intuition, know how to apply and extrapolate knowledge.
Damage Capacity (DC) = This is you ability to take damage before you pass out, then die.
Charm   (CHR) = This is your charisma, ability to speak, debate, negotiate, bluff, lie,  Charm
Appearance (APP) = This is your looks, how handsome / pretty
Anima (ANI) = This your base connection to Magic (Arcane, Divine, Psychic, Primal); depending on how we implement magic, this is either a bonus to the roll or could be a trackable resource.
Perception (PER) = This your awareness of things through the physical senses, esp, sight, sounds, to detect things not immediately obvious and your base investigative ability.
Willpower (WILL) = This is your mental fortitude to both resist mental assaults, but also to bounce back from physical and emotional trauma, ability to push yourself beyond your limits.

Luck (LCK) = This is how lucky you are; either neutral, good or bad and is GM applied bonus to rolls as seems appropriate.
Note: This is an optional Attribute; but it can be very fun; even at character creation. Alternatively, we can take this mechanic completely behind the scenes and we roll to determine how lucky a character is or isn't and then give them bonuses or penalties for various things.  But hiding it could detrimental.  Though setting luck to a 1d6 so it is 1 = -1, 2 = -2, 3-4 = 0, 5 = +1, 6 = +2.  Now the luck bonus of +2 doesn't necessarily mean a +2 to one thing.  But it could be a +1 on the Roll itself and -1 on her opponents check; the net result is still that +2.

Now some of these can be "calculated" if you like by average 2 or more of the others and rounding down.

I am assuming we are staying with the 2d6 system for Rolls.  I would suggest we use that to generate numeric values of our attributes as well.
Assuming a Max of +/-3:
2 = -3
3 - 4 = -2
5 - 6 = -1
7 - 9 = 0
10 - 11 = +1
12 - 13 = +2
14+ = +3

I just don't see the need to make it this complicated.

It seems to me:

Strength (STR) = Forceful
Physique (PHY) = Forceful
Agility  (AGL) = Agile
Intelligence (INT) = Insightful
Wisdom  (WIS) = Insightful/Confident
Damage Capacity (DC) = Forceful
Charm   (CHR) = Charming
Appearance (APP) = Charming
Anima (ANI) = Confident
Perception (PER) = Insightful
Willpower (WILL) = Confident

Luck (LCK) = not needed-- you're rolling dice... (Although I might do something with star sign...)




Yeah, I think so, for stat rolls...



Uh... No... I like:

Ability Modifiers
Score Modifier
1-3 -3
4-5 -2
6-8 -1
9-12 0
13-15 +1
16-17 +2
18 +3

Yes, but this gives you a bit more variety in building your character.
After all you can be Charming and Ugly.
You can be Strong and have poor constitution
As with most of them, you can be one and not the other.
You can be very intelligent, but not wise enough to know how to apply it or see how it can utilized differently than what you were taught.
You can also be very wise, see connections, but not be smart enough to know what it means.

Personally, Anima, Damage Capacity, Perception and Willpower  are attributes that should be calculated based on the other abilities, because even more so they are really aggregates.  I like the Anima, because you could be a Swordsman with great magic connection / potential, so while you don't cast spells, it manifests in magic item accumulation or magic item empowerment.

I agree 100% that there needs to be a balance between too complex and too simple.




Yeah, I think so, for stat rolls...
</quote>

That is fine, I think I am starting to get the hang of it.


Well the above was based on 2d6 not 3d6, so getting a 13+ is difficult, but not impossible depending on how we do Races, Star Signs, Background, etc.


So you want to use 3d6 for Stats? That is fine, it is traditional.

But see, I think of stats that way anyway. You can have a +3 in CHR (like Lance) and still fail a roll. What's up with THAT? Well, must've been your personality.




Mm, no, I wouldn't say that. Rather, I think simple on "range of types of stats" is fine considering the complexity that will be going into everything else. THAT's where the balance will come from, from my perspective.





Yeah. Why be complex "Y" when people are already used to traditional "X"...

This falls into the Charisma issue in D&D, when the single stats becomes both how pretty you are and how good at talking you are as if they are one and the same.  I liked the break out of how pretty you look (Comeliness, Appearance, etc.) vs. how eloquent and articulate you are and how well you can bluff (Charm).  Because it better represents a real person.

Using Lance as the example, he is very handsome and pretty (especially now).  But he doesn't seem to have the ability to speak well.  He is very good at saying the wrong things. :) He is like Wes Bentley, as my wife calls him the "Pretty" he is great to look at, but when he starts to try and act, it isn't convincing.

I don't know Lance's stats, but I can see Jon's.  Yes, his Appearance is a 10, so he is pretty and handsome, but he also is eloquent and articulate.
I like in the Amber Game that you broke Appearance Out from Charm/Personality)

They advantage we have, is that we are effectively building our own system and not bound by what is in the rules of the game.

Hmmm, how's this?
Physicality = Represents how hardy you are, how much damage you can put out in melee combat, how much you can lift and carry, etc.
Agility = Represents how dexterous you are, how much damage you can put out with ranged weapons and light melee weapons, you ability to avoid damage and slight of hand skills.
Resourcefulness  = This is your intelligence and wisdom, ability to learn, understand and apply knowledge, perceptiveness, insight and intuition,.
Confidence = This is your mental fortitude and inherent aptitude for Magic (Arcane, Divine, Psychic or Primal), represents how well you can recover from mental and physical trauma.  This is the image that you portray.
Charm = this is your ability to talk, act, bluff, negotiate.  But also how you carry yourself.
Appearance = this is your physical beauty and can affect how people react and treat you even before you say or do anything

Mm, no, I think I'll do it my way.

If this causes you to feel that you don't want to keep offering input, I'd completely understand. If you wish, I'll remove you from this game (workshop).

I mean, look at this goofiness:

https://rpggenerator.com/centralcasting/

I mean, you can see my point. That has the potential to be super cool, but when the WHOLE process is ENTIRELY randomized, it slides too close to the absurd. And yet...

I just got home and could look at that.
It is great fun.  And for a one-shot campaign or a mini-campaign, my group would have a blast with it. And I may just set that up and GM it personally :)

But for post game, having everything random is good as one option for creation.
I know we are focusing more on creation, but then we want our players to live with them and care about them, correct?
Sorta like the SIMS?

Yeah, I can see that



It SHOULDN'T all be random, BUT yeah, I do want to make it so that the player CAN just roll randomly on any given part if they feel indecisive or just want to be goofy that way...

I am with you there.  I'd prefer to pick and choose.  But also have the option for random is fun.  D&D 5th did that, they have these Ideals, Bonds and Flaws, which are a basic set that are all marked as a 1d10.  You can either pick and choose, make up you own that fits the framework or roll for it.

I like your idea of keeping the random as an option.

...How should xp work?

--like in the Amber game, failing rolls

--you should just get xp when you finish a goal

--like in Pantheon, based on how many posts you post

Which of these do you like best?

I like a little bit of a mix, to be honest.
I do like the XP for failing important/relevant rolls.  But I also think you should get XP for completing missions.

So a particularly easy mission, you might get 1 XP, because you didn't fail any rolls.  Or you failed everything, so you gained XP but since you failed the mission you don't get completion XP.

If you mix failing and succeeding rolls and ultimately succeed, you should get both.  Because you learned something on mission (failure XP) and you still accomplished the mission (Completion XP).

This to me gives a balance and kind of reflects real life.

The Fighter entry, is that supposed to be that you get ONE of those Three at level 1 and then you can add for free one of the others at level 2 and level 3?

No. That was VERY much a quick and clumsy start to a work in progress by me. I've updated it-- you should find that it makes a lot more sense now.

Indeed, it make more sense now :)

Just edited that post to include my take on Paladin; see what you think

Just edited and made big changes to the rules in the MOVES AND CLASSES thread

OK, I will take a look :)

Work has had med frazzled, so I apologize for not giving more feedback.
I hope to work though some of it tomorrow.

Here is some feedback / suggestions so far:

Defend - Call it a reediness pool vs. Hold.
Or Defense Pool.

Aid - in the line "...only keep the best 1 die..."  change that to "...only keep the highest roll from amongst..."


Take Watch - this is one of the few where I think we need more than 3 outcomes.
--On a 10+, you notice in time to alert everyone and prepare; everyone in the camp takes +1 forward.
--On a 9, you notice in time to alert everyone and is prepared.
--On a 7-8, you’re a few moments too late; you manage to alert everyone, but nobody has time to prepare. They have weapons and armor but little else.
--On a miss, whatever lurks outside the campfire’s light has the drop on you.


Stress and Health & Rest.
In Rest, you have two rolls to regain stress and health.
But in Stress and Health, there is only 1 pull, Stress which represents your heath.

I think it would be unique to have a Separate Stress Pool & Health, as indicated by the Rest Move.  And have the Stress represent psychological trauma vs. physical trauma.
The psychological effects can affect the physical, like providing negatives to rolls.
And if you lose all of your stress pool, then it does start eating into you physical health pool.

I love the chart for the Freak out.


Level up:
I recommend removing XP Generation from the Level description.
And just define level up as:
When you have an amount of xp equaling 4 plus your current level, and you Rest, you can also Level Up, which means you may either add a point to a stat, or else you can add a new special ability (with GM approval) (or possibly improve one you already have-- talk to the GM about it).

The question becomes what all do you get for leveling?  There are some freebies based on class from what I've read so far.  Then you get to pick one thing (a Stat Bump, a new non-class move, anything else?).  Does the health and stress increase with level?
If not, then do away with levels altogher and use XP to buy abilities and moves.
There is no level, you advance because you've picked up new skills and abilities.


For all of the classes:
Recommend rewording "AFTER LEVEL 2, YOU CAN ALSO ADD THESE MOVES, ONE BY ONE:" to be more like either:
"Starting after reaching Level 2 and each level there AFTER, YOU CAN ADD one of THESE MOVES:"
Or "Starting with/at/upon reaching level 3 and each level there after, you can add one of these Moves:"
It makes it more clear and I have two options because it is not 100% clear to me which it is.

Some General Thoughts
Why would the Fighter, a melee genius, get a bonus 2 stree on ranged combat?
It would make sense that they get it on the Melee.  Leave Range as normal.

You are making the Ranger an Archer class, so give them the bonus 2 stress on ranged attacks, but not on melee.  After all if they are good, especially elven archers moving through the trees unseen and un heard, launching volley's of arrows.  That is is a good psychological stressor.

And for the paladin, perhaps grant a +1 stress to melee and a +1 stress to Range (vs. a +2 to either) to represent not only their prowess but their faith.

And for the Barbarian, grant the +2 Stress to both Melee and Range, but (if we go with the Stress Pool separate from health) permanently reduce Stress by 2.  Or apply a -1 to the hit rolls, because they are reckless.

Hope you find this useful.

The term "Hold" is from Dungeon World, and since I seem (like many other people have tried) to be attempting to make DW 2.0, I'm gonna keep it.




It did sound just a little odd the way I had it, you're right. I've now changed that part slightly.




...Huh! ...Makes sense to me... I have now changed it to match what you just said.





No, because my whole point is to combine them. But you're right that the REST move was written before I decided to combine, so now I've changed the REST move, too.




Good. I just added to it just now, too.




As GONNA CHANGE THIS NEXT STUFF is supposed to show, the Level Up move is a work in progress... that I've hardly even started working on yet.

Buuuut maybe it's time now to work on it...

Okay, worked on it...




Yeah, I just clarified that just now with:

If you choose a new move from another class that says you deal stress differently from the class you started with, you may use whichever one works better for you in a given situation.




Both, actually. Except it can also be an advanced move from your current class, if you want.




HP DOES slowly increase with level, thanks for reminding me... Okay, added.






Oh, I see what you mean, there is something a little awkward about the way it is now...


...Changed.



I suppose it should be that the Fighter is a genius of PHYSICAL combat. But... you have a point. I had doubts about the way I had it...

...I guess I might change my mind (back) later, but for now, I think you've talked me into it...

...Okay, I've changed it. All fighters (so far) now do 2 stress in melee combat, and only 1 in ranged, UNLESS the roll result was 12 or higher, and then it's 2.

Rangers are the exception-- they're the opposite. 2 ranged, 1 melee, unless the result was really good.





...? I don't quite understand what you're suggesting.





I am not going with stress separate from health.