Power 19: The Big Three

In an effort to really help me clarify my ideas, I'm going to answer the Power 19, starting with The Big Three.

1.) What is your game about?

Creating a group of characters with both group and individual goals then having the characters attempt to complete those goals.

2.) What do the characters do?

Attempt to complete their goals through whatever means they deem acceptable.

3.) What do the players (including the GM if there is one) do?

The group (including the GM):
Pick a setting, create a group concept and goals for the group.

The players:
Create characters, with their own individual goals, that fit within the group concept. The players then direct their characters through the game world while they attempt to complete their goals. Each player can have multiple characters in a group but can only have one active character at a time during play.

The GM:
Create the game world with assistance from the players and game materials. Determine the difficulties of attempted skill checks with assistance from the game guidelines. Portray entities encountered during play.

Refining my Vision

Besides the RL issues, part of my absence has been due to block. Not exactly writer's block, more like I'm-sick-of-looking-at-this block. I had gotten so frustrated with my game that my brain would shut down every time I looked at the files. In an effort to keep from returning to that state, I've decided to more or less scrap that design and start over. I've been taking it easy. It has mostly all been mental work so far. I spend time really thinking about what I want to accomplish and how to go about doing it. I have a document that I type my ideas into but that's it so far. I have a pretty strong picture of what I want but I really want to clarify it.

This whole thing stemmed out of my frustration with the D20 system. Whenever I came up with a character concept, I couldn't get a good fit with any of the classes. I learned to settle on close enough or, more often, just picked a combination of class, feats and skills that I liked or felt would be most useful and didn't worry about anything else.

In general, I'm trying to design the system that I want to play.

More specifically:

• I want completely customizable characters and fluid game play.
• The system will be universal and character oriented. 
• Advancement will be based on completing goals related to character concepts, not killing things.
• Resolution will have more emphasis on skill than luck.
• Anybody can attempt anything, training will determine success.
• I want to make combat more engaging and natural feeling, not just attack/apply damage/next player.

Design Journal: Combining Signature Moves

While working on adding combat styles and signature moves to my combat system, I was trying to figure out how to allow players to combine moves in ways that make sense. An idea I landed on was to divide attacks into four categories: basic, speed, precision and power. Signature moves would tie to a category and moves that share a category can be combined or you can combine a basic move with a move from another category

Basic attacks would be based on modifying your base attack. Two weapon fighting would fall under basic attacks as would the tumbling archer signature move from the combat styles and signature moves design journal post.

Speed attacks would be about fitting in as much as possible into 1 action. Having multiple attacks would fall under this category.

Precision attacks would be about hitting the mark. Sharp shooter and improved aim would be precision attacks

Power attacks would be all about the damage. Power attack would be in this category.

I would have a base modifier that could be built on. For example, cleave would fall under basic. The base modifier would be a -2 mod for the first cleave and an additional -2 for every additional cleave attempt. Anybody can cleave using this modifier as long as they drop their first opponent. If someone wanted to specialize in cleave, they can have improved cleave as a signature move. Improved cleave gives them a bonus on their cleave attempt. Depending on character build, a player could use a precision move like flashing blade to reduce their damage to improve their attack or use power attack to improve their damage while reducing their attack.

I feel this setup opens up avenues while keeping things realistic.

Design Journal: Wound

I started with the usual system for damage with some minor tweaking due to lack of levels; subtract damage from your hit points, unconscious at x and dead at y. I later added a fatigue system to deal with spell failure and special abilities (kinda like mana but not restricted to magic).  I then added on a wound system. Hits that did a certain amount of damage caused a wound point, when you received a certain  number of wound points you got penalties to your rolls. I decided that this was way too much number crunching and slimmed things down.

I got rid of hit points because they were too abstract for my taste and didn't do anything that couldn't be done better/easier elsewhere. Any hit that does damage gives one point of fatigue, as does using special abilities and not sleeping properly. Fatigue represents physical and mental wear, when you receive a certain number of fatigue points you get penalties on your rolls. I took the penalties off of wound and made it so that you died when you accumulated a certain number of wound points. This is still a little too abstract and clunky for my taste.

I am changing fatigue so that every point of damage gives a point of fatigue instead of every successful hit, however I have not settled on a satisfying method for wound. There are some things I am considering. One is including hit locations. There would be 5 hit locations(head, torso, right and left arm, right and left leg) and each location can only take a certain number of wound before being irreparably damaged. Another idea is having escalating wounds. When you receive a wound, you have a certain number of rounds to tend to it or it becomes a serious wound and then a mortal one.

Design Journal: Skills

I am very fond of the signature moves idea that I came up with for my combat skills. I feel that it allows for more diversification and will encourage players to think outside of predefined abilities. The bugbear in my soup is that I have a different method of application and advancement for each of the three skill sets. It makes things more complicated, which goes against my goals for the game.



To streamline everything, I will be switching my skills and special abilities over to the signature move style. In order to do this, I need to refine(read: actually make up my mind) how I want to handle selection and advancement of moves.



Here is the best idea I have had so far. When players spend their advacement points in a skill group or special ability, they have the choice of buying a new move or improving his or her current moves by 1. If the player wants to focus on improving one move instead of all the moves, s/he may place the new points from the other moves into the one move. No move may have a bonus that is higher than the total points in the skill.  When the player places enough advancement points into a skill or ability to move it into the next level of skill(apprentice to journeyman, etc) all the moves that make the transition improve by one.

Chase Tables: Basics

During a game, I set up an ambush for my characters. They were meeting up with a caravan to head off to the frontier. As they walked down the street, they saw a man leaning on a building just before an alley. As they got close to the man, three others emerged from the alley. The ringleader confronted the party and combat was initiated. Two of the thugs went down in the first round (I underestimated things just a bit). The third was knocked unconscious and the fourth took a hit and bolted. One of my players gave chase. A potentially thrilling roleplaying opportunity fell flat because I did not know how to handle it. I may be a noob GM but I learn from my mistakes. The experience gave me an idea for a mechanic for my game.

Chase Tables!

Here's the basic idea:

First determine the distance between the chasee and the chaser. The chasee can use obstacles to try to gain distance or impede the chaser. Obstacles are determined by the location. Distance is gained or lost in 10ft lengths. The chase ends when the chasee is caught, gains x number of lengths, or the chaser gives up.

An example:

#1 chases #2 into an alley. #2 has a 30ft lead on #1.

Obstacles: Crates and a fence

Option 1 - #2 can pull the crates over to cause #1 to have to successfully dodge the crates or loose a length while #2 climbs over the fence.

Option 2 - #2 can just try to climb the fence faster than normal. If he succeeds he can gains a length, if he fails he looses a length.


I plan to develop the idea and post the tables for specific locations. Look for Small Villages, Medieval Style.

Design Journal: Knowledge

It is my experience that knowledge skills are unimportant(for lack of a better term). Players spend their points and, if they have a few left over, will put them in a knowledge. They are rarely important to the game and generally a waste of a skill point.

 I currently use the standard method for knowledge skills; buy ranks in a specific knowledge skill and that determines your level of knowledge on the subject.

I am considering changing to a more abstract method. Players would not have to buy ranks in a subject. If it makes sense for their character to know something, then they can know it. To determine level of knowledge on a subject players use one of three methods; they use a related skill such as foraging for information about plants, gather information for information gained from people, and research for information gained from documents and other non-people sources.

I like this method because it frees up points for more directly useful skills and is less limiting. You never have to worry about your ranger not knowing poisonous plants from healing because he did not have points to spare for knowledges.

I do realize that this method could easily be taken advantage of. The GM would have to take care to make sure players are being true to their character concepts.

Design Journal: Combat Styles and Signature Moves

I have been working on my system for a very long time. Whenever I made a change I just wrote over what I had already written. I'm pretty sure I have lost some decent ideas this way. In the Design Journal posts, I will document the changes I am considering and any additions I make. This way I will have a log of my ideas and also gain input on the directions I take. First up, combat.
My current combat model looks a bit like this

4	Archery
3	Extended Range
	Imp. Ranged Flank
	Imp. Point-Blank Shot
	Ranged Sneak Attack
	Rapid Shot
1	Sharp Shooting

   


You buy ranks in a combat skill, such as archery, and that gets you a specialization point to spend on the sub-skills like rapid shot. The ranks you buy in a skill determines your BAB and the specializations are modifiers for your attacks.

I want to change over to a slightly different model. You still purchase ranks in the combat style and that determines your BAB. Instead of specializations, I want to use signature moves. It would look something like this



Archery
4


SM1: Sharp Shooter - negate 1 point of cover penalty
SM2: Additional Attack - make an additional primary attack with an AB of 2
SM3: Improved Aim - can shoot 15 feet beyond the range of the weapon without penalty
SM4: Tumbling Archer - can make attacks while tumbling up to 20 feet  at normal movement penalty

I like this model because it increases the character's overall effectiveness in combat and encourages customization. There is no set list to choose from, just a list of possible choices and guidelines for creating your own moves.

Moves would be bound by degree of effect, such as 1 point of penalty and 5ft for distance and movement. Moves should be about effects, not about increasing your attack bonus or damage. Negating specific types of penalties to attacks is acceptable, simply adding to your attack bonus is not. Of course, all moves are subject to GM approval.

There are multiple problems that I see with this. The first is that I will have to switch everything over to a penalty system such as:
Increased Range  -1/5ft
Rapid shot  -2/additional arrow

I do like this because I feel it is more realistic. Anybody can try anything but it is harder without training.  Unfortunately, I think it will complicate combat, which is something I do not want.

Also, in the skill system I am using, skills can get up to over 50. Having 50+ moves would be a pain to keep track of. I could say that instead of gaining a new move, you can improve the moves you already have or reduce the rate you can gain new moves to every other rank.

Feed

When I started play testing my game, I used a zombie apocalypse setting. I love the survivalism aspect of apocalypse stories and I thought zombies would make for a fun game. I started looking for stories and movies for inspiration (which was tricky because I am a total wuss. I once got nightmares from a friend describing a scary movie to me). After I got my first zombie nightmare, I decided it was time to take a break from that setting. However, I still like the setting idea and want to flesh it out. To that end, I still look for good zombie stories.

In honor of zombies and blogging, I introduce Feed by Mira Grant.

This story follows Georgia Mason, Newsie blogger in a world where the cure for cancer and the cure for the common cold equals zombies. What I liked most about this story is that society didn't fall. In most zombie stories I have come across, humanity exists in isolated pockets. In Feed, society survived and continued, just more paranoid (Georgia is part of the press detail for a candidate in the presidential election). Everything felt very plausible from the technologies and procedures used to deal with the plague to the cultural changes that result from living in constant fear; I especially liked the differences between the pre and post rising generations.

One thing I knew I wanted to do with my setting was offer play options for different points in the timeline. That way a GM could start during the rising and play through or simply focus on what happened after. This story made me think about offering alternate versions of the timeline. GMs could play through the normal fall of society or play in a world that survives and adapts (possibly due to the actions of the characters?).

To conclude: Feed is an excellent read for those who like more than gore in their zombie fiction and I can't wait to read the rest of the trilogy.