PDA

View Full Version : Someone Fight my Logic Please



Soft Serve
01-15-2013, 04:11 PM
I'm in the process of creating a fantasy RPG and while I was going through races (of which there will be 25) and it runs similar enough to D&D (Race gets +attribute, -attribute, and something nifty and specific to that race to make them fun.)

So I had a thought. If I total up the amount of +/- for each individual attribute and get them all to land around 0, that would mean that players who play for combat or stealth or magic would have the same amount of combat, stealth, or magically inclined races to pick from as the other two options. Right?

Because if it all rounds out to around 0. Then there has been just as many +2 STR races as there are -2STR races. And just as many +2 Essence or Purity (The magic based stats) as there would be -2ESS or PUR.

The entire goal was for people to be able to look at the list of races and see that there's just as many options for increasing Purity, or Endurance, as there was for increasing Strength or Agility, and I feel like I've done it right with this system, but I also feel like I'm doing something wrong, but I can't put my finger on it, so I brought the problem here.

Malruhn
01-15-2013, 09:55 PM
About the only negative I can see is for power gamers or die-hard min-maxers. If there are no options that are CLEARLY better than others, they may be put off and not want to play.

And I really tried to say that like a negative! HAH!

Now, for the crunchy stuff...

Why? Why have that many races? Why do they still exist? Why hasn't one (or more that gang up) tried to wipe out others to get their stuff? You know - the superstitious folk trying to wipe out a magically strong race... Sometimes, too many options can spoil making a choice.

Soft Serve
01-15-2013, 11:06 PM
Why? Why have that many races? Why do they still exist? Why hasn't one (or more that gang up) tried to wipe out others to get their stuff? You know - the superstitious folk trying to wipe out a magically strong race... Sometimes, too many options can spoil making a choice.

Because the entire realm is an amalgamation of a bunch of dead realms brought back to life.* And there's actually a lot of smaller coalitions within so that exact thing doesn't happen. For example I've got an insectoid race called the Galti which have a caste system. Warriors who are born with chitin plates that assist their defense, worker drones with wings (for limited flight) and a leader caste with limited psionics allowing them to link with other intelligent creatures and establish a temporary hive mind. So there's three different "Race" options to choose from, but they're all the same race. This happens again with a reptilian race I have. Not to mention Human relations with Dwarves and Elves.

But you called it right with extermination too. Orks and Goblins (another coalition) are born with the short straw living in a wasteland. So they banded together a bunch of tribes and dominated most of their surrounding area. They were stopped when the undead began to rise and a massive truce was called to push back the undead. The Orks who agreed to the pact were given a fair amount of land, and peace right now is strained but holding.

There are a lot more details, but I don't want to drone on about it all at once.


* There was a god capable of devouring realms, and he did it a lot, until the power he had absorbed from each one started to cause him an incredible pain, though his hunger was never sated. The god created a massive tower to hold the realms he had devoured. People on the realm believe the story branches here to things like "we're all living inside the tower" to "The tower was built too small to contain all the power inside and has begun to leak fragments of the devoured realms. We live on those fragments." to "the tower didn't have a limit on the power it was intended to drain, and swallowed the god inside."

So the entire world is kind of broken and patched together. Plants can range from average trees to being purple and highly intelligent. Oceans of living quicksilver, flash frozen jungles, obsidian towers dotting a wasteland with massive crags and ravines, and so on. The creatures and races are all just as varied, but have had a lot of time to evolve and adapt. It's kind of like the Real World of RPGs.

nijineko
01-16-2013, 11:56 AM
reminds me of a few different settings i've read. result is interesting, not so sure about lead up, but then i'm fanatical about cosmology, chiliocosmologies, myth, and pre-history.

generally speaking, i disagree with ZPD. (zero point design) the idea that everything has to be balanced (or has a zero point around which all positive and negative qualities are equally bracketed...) kinda makes it all feel like a video game and very limiting. real life isn't balanced. and shouldn't be, in my opinion. while i'm perfectly willing to pass over certain types of suspension of belief in order to enjoy fantasy and sci-fi in and out of games, ZPD is just not ever going to be one of them for me. i don't mind an injection of everyone has at least one or two ways to success, but not at the expense of draconican "balancing for the greater so-called equality" ZPD.

some people decry powerful characters in rpgs, especially when their own character doesn't match up. but they idolize them in books and movies, and then turn around and try to build them in rpg.


show me your 'balanced'-i-can-roleplay-better-because-i'm-not-"overpowered" character, and i'll show you my fantastic roleplaying of a character who struggles with the burden of great power.



(sorry if i got a bit rant-ish there.)

jpatterson
01-16-2013, 12:04 PM
The only possible problem I see offhand is if your actual implementation lives up to your theory restated below:


that would mean that players who play for combat or stealth or magic would have the same amount of combat, stealth, or magically inclined races to pick from as the other two options. Right?


While your black and white, on-paper result may bear this out, the real test of feasability is if your SYSTEM represents and gives roughly the same TYPES of opportunities to races in their use of each of these.

Normal physical combat generally requires only skills and stats, which are generally integral to every single character - native if you will, and not things that usually require much, if any, additional consideration or prep. Anyone can grab a tree branch and defend themselves, if it came down to it - may not be any good if they're not experienced fighters, but it would do in a pinch to hold someone off for at least a few seconds or make an unarmed attacker think twice.

This will not be the case for any other combat related set, unless your setting makes all other stats and skills as intuitive and native to ALL characters, where an unarmed and untrained goblin can just as easily pick up discarded tree bark and at least TRY to cast Vine Entangle, with no requirements of "being a wizard" or having particular skill in it. If your system does not allow this, then no, the races will never be balanced out just by having the same number of +1 Essence mods as +1 Strength, because the machanics that USE +1 Essence occur less or require more effort to engage in, initially and regularly.

For example, look at melee combat and a sword. Say you have minimal sword skill but no outstanding stat, so your damage will be d6 (just using a meta system for example). Danger approaches, you grab your sword. It is something that might be out of your hands and you have to retrieve, but once that is done, you've got it and can apply your combat skills.

You don't run out of sword swings.

You don't have to spend 8 hours recharging them.

You don't have to do resource management on "sword swing points" or make sure you use only your "lesser sword swings" unless something more powerful is needed, when you pull out "awesome sword swing", of whch you may only have one, or which may deplete your "sword swing pool".

You don't technically have to abide by any particular daily devotions or college of sword wizardry, pay dues, find scrolls or to a large extent, learn advanced and forgotten, rare techniques from others, on how to put the pointy end in the squishy part.

There is no chance of "sword failure" (except for possibly a critical fumble), only missing, which generally has little or no consequence.

There's no potentially deadly backlash in most cases, to swinging a sword.

Your armor or weapon choice is not limited due to wielding a sword as your attack style.

You can go between different swords at will, the only real restricting factor being how much money you have to buy new ones, and possibly if your skill definitions are so specific as to require different skills for Shortsword and Longsword.

If you can bring your non-physical combat skills into line with this same level of simplicity and openness and availability to all races, then having an equally distributed set of stat bonuses among all the races will make things essentially "even". If not...

This same idea will go for implentations of these things that do not all involve combat. If Magic and Stealth are two non combat pursuits and you represent them "equally" in your race list, you can't assume that makes everything "even" unless your system somehow legislates there being equal parts of these overall, in each session, or that you can somehow otherwise guarantee the same number of choices and opportunities for each of these to be used.

And even then, by what criteria are you juding "same opportunity" and "same amount" when comparing physical combat, to say, scaling a gate and infiltrating a throne room at night? Are those equal? Does healing someone or freezing five people in place equate to hit rolls, parry and evasion, damage, wounding, knockouts, critical hits and simply dominating other adversaries? By whose reckoning? How often does combat occur? How often does "stealth occur", or magic?

Soft Serve
01-16-2013, 09:33 PM
reminds me of a few different settings i've read. result is interesting, not so sure about lead up, but then i'm fanatical about cosmology, chiliocosmologies, myth, and pre-history.


I've got archives of notes for this story on a USB somewhere from at least 3 years ago (I want to say 4 years but I don't think we're far enough into 2013 yet.) So if the background and the story isn't the most interesting part of it, I'm going to be really disappointed in myself. And this is also why I want to be %100 comfortable with the mechanics when I'm finished with it, because if I screw this up and end up looking back at it like "oh this race shouldn't have had +3 here" then I'm going to kick myself for letting everything fall apart in my head over one regret. I am the worst perfectionist for my projects because I am my own biggest critic.



generally speaking, i disagree with ZPD. (zero point design) the idea that everything has to be balanced (or has a zero point around which all positive and negative qualities are equally bracketed...) kinda makes it all feel like a video game and very limiting. real life isn't balanced. and shouldn't be, in my opinion. while i'm perfectly willing to pass over certain types of suspension of belief in order to enjoy fantasy and sci-fi in and out of games, ZPD is just not ever going to be one of them for me.


I feel like I've made it sound like Race #1 gets +2str, +2agility, -2purity, which is kind of the case, but there's a lot more to it than that. The attributes I've listed reflect their physical build. No race was designed in mind to fit a Zero Point Design, it was an idea I came up with afterwards to see if Combat, Stealth, and Magic minded players had the same opportunities for races.


A few examples, Humans have +2 to whatever stat the player chooses. They can also take a trait at character creation to be of mixed blood with another race which gives them the opportunity to use items or join factions exclusive to that race. Dragonborn are huge creatures with +4 Strength, +2 Endurance, a slight drop in their magic at -1 Essence and Purity. So overall, they're positive by 4 points. They also get a breath weapon exclusive to their race that the player picks at creation for either fire, ice, electric, or kinetic damage, or they can take a commanding shout and dominate lesser creatures.


On the other spectrum are the Droma who are weak physically with a slight negative (I think -1 or -2) in Strength, Endurance, Agility, and Perception but have the ability to completely shift themselves into other creature (kind of like warewolves, but with bats, serpents, bears, and a few other creatures). So they're this frail looking kind of withered human-ish race with a power hidden inside them.


And there's a lot of that, as well as a few which are kind of stereotypical +2, -2. I didn't let the zero point design dominate the game, I just made sense to me to fit into it as much as possible for the sake of balancing.



i don't mind an injection of everyone has at least one or two ways to success, but not at the expense of draconican "balancing for the greater so-called equality" ZPD.


some people decry powerful characters in rpgs, especially when their own character doesn't match up. but they idolize them in books and movies, and then turn around and try to build them in rpg.




show me your 'balanced'-i-can-roleplay-better-because-i'm-not-"overpowered" character, and i'll show you my fantastic roleplaying of a character who struggles with the burden of great power.


I completely agree with you. 2/3rds of RPG is Roleplaying. Without people playing a role, it's just a game. It's not a story, or an interactive story (which is always my goal) it's just a board game, and that's not the same thing. But balancing is still really important, and it's the thing I feel like I struggle with the most when creating. But that's what playtests are for.







(sorry if i got a bit rant-ish there.)


No harm done. ♥


While your black and white, on-paper result may bear this out, the real test of feasability is if your SYSTEM represents and gives roughly the same TYPES of opportunities to races in their use of each of these.

Before going further, I'm pointing out that I'm aware simply adding the numbers was really black & white, it just felt right, and is also the whole reason I brought it to attention. It's obviously not perfect or I'd have just keep going with the data I had. If that makes sense. Not trying to be snarky or whatever, just saying that I understand.


Normal physical combat generally requires only skills and stats, which are generally integral to every single character - native if you will, and not things that usually require much, if any, additional consideration or prep. Anyone can grab a tree branch and defend themselves, if it came down to it - may not be any good if they're not experienced fighters, but it would do in a pinch to hold someone off for at least a few seconds or make an unarmed attacker think twice.

This will not be the case for any other combat related set, unless your setting makes all other stats and skills as intuitive and native to ALL characters, where an unarmed and untrained goblin can just as easily pick up discarded tree bark and at least TRY to cast Vine Entangle, with no requirements of "being a wizard" or having particular skill in it. If your system does not allow this, then no, the races will never be balanced out just by having the same number of +1 Essence mods as +1 Strength, because the machanics that USE +1 Essence occur less or require more effort to engage in, initially and regularly.

Well that's all up to the player actually. How often they'd use one attribute over the other is just a matter of... well how often they use one attribute over the other. I've spread things out among them to make sure anyone playing would have a hard time selecting a "dump stat".
If you have a low strength, you're low in physical attacks with heavy weapons and can't carry as much.

Low agility, low attacks with finesse weapons and you can't dodge traps as easily, and if you're wearing no armor or light armor, your defense suffers.

Low endurance, low health, low disease / poison resistance, low defense in medium or heavy armors.

Low perception, low general awareness, lower applicable intelligence (Perception in this case also reflecting mental awareness. It's kind of a stretch, I know.) low ranged attacks.

Low essence, less benefit from enchanted weapons and armor, less proficiency with essence based magic items like staves, wands, etc.

Low purity, less resistance to magical attacks, and less benefit from purity based items like necklaces or other trinkets that boost your character.


For example, look at melee combat and a sword. Say you have minimal sword skill but no outstanding stat, so your damage will be d6 (just using a meta system for example). Danger approaches, you grab your sword. It is something that might be out of your hands and you have to retrieve, but once that is done, you've got it and can apply your combat skills.

This is true, and it works similarly for MOST of my magic classes. Some magic classes will require a staff as a focus for their spells. Some will require an Omen (like a symbol of their church) to cast. So in that way, it is similar to Sword = Combat Skills in that Staff = Magic Skills.


You don't run out of sword swings.

You don't have to spend 8 hours recharging them.

You don't have to do resource management on "sword swing points" or make sure you use only your "lesser sword swings" unless something more powerful is needed, when you pull out "awesome sword swing", of whch you may only have one, or which may deplete your "sword swing pool".

In essence the question you're asking is "since Strength applies to sword swings, Strength will be more valuable than Essence or Purity, because the talents governed by those attributes requires resources."

So the first point I want to make is, does the fact that Ranged weapons like Bows, and Rifles require ammunition devalue the Dexterity (in this case, Agility) Attribute? I've never felt that was the case. But an interesting question I think.

But to answer yours (in regards to STR vs. ESS / PUR) the characters will select their classes and will have talent trees within those classes to select from. One of the combat classes talents is along the lines of "deal triple damage for a %50 chance to shatter the weapon you're holding." which DOES turn swords into a resource. They could carry several daggers or shortswords to use specifically with this talent.

So in the mage talent trees they unlock new spell listings. A generic mage might have a talent tree called Illusions and the only talents listed are Illusions I, Illusions II, Illusions III etc. that each unlocks new, or improved versions of earlier spells. One of the other trees (each class will have 3) would be something like "Mastery or Permanency (haven't got a name yet)" that would allow the mage to cast a weaker version of a spell they know without a staff or any components. After 5 Mastery levels, the mage has got a decent selection of spells they can use without worrying about resource management.


You don't technically have to abide by any particular daily devotions or college of sword wizardry, pay dues, find scrolls or to a large extent, learn advanced and forgotten, rare techniques from others, on how to put the pointy end in the squishy part.

There is no chance of "sword failure" (except for possibly a critical fumble), only missing, which generally has little or no consequence.

There's no potentially deadly backlash in most cases, to swinging a sword.

Your armor or weapon choice is not limited due to wielding a sword as your attack style.

You can go between different swords at will, the only real restricting factor being how much money you have to buy new ones, and possibly if your skill definitions are so specific as to require different skills for Shortsword and Longsword.

I think I've missed the point here. There are simple weapons that anyone could use, Military Weapons which are unlocked through generic training, and Advanced weapons which are unlocked by training specifically for that weapon. So a mage class could easily go and train to earn this proficiency, but they wouldn't learn the talents associated with being a combat class. A combat class could also use a magic item like a rod or a wand that requires a decent Essence stat to be effective, but they can't learn magical talents like a mage class could.


If you can bring your non-physical combat skills into line with this same level of simplicity and openness and availability to all races, then having an equally distributed set of stat bonuses among all the races will make things essentially "even". If not...

This same idea will go for implentations of these things that do not all involve combat. If Magic and Stealth are two non combat pursuits and you represent them "equally" in your race list, you can't assume that makes everything "even" unless your system somehow legislates there being equal parts of these overall, in each session, or that you can somehow otherwise guarantee the same number of choices and opportunities for each of these to be used.

I feel like I've answered this a bit in this post, tell me if I'm wrong and I missed the point completely, I literally spent all day on this typing it out, breaking for a bit, then coming back and typing some more, so if this seems scattered, that's why. But I think I've covered everything? If you still think this is the case let me know why.

Again though, I didn't design anything in the game to fit the zero point build. That idea came later. I haven't even changed anything to fit it yet and as it sits Essence is at -9, Purity at -4, Strengthand Agility at -2, Perception at +1, and Endurance at +2. So without really thinking about it or meaning to, I got things pretty close to 0 as it is.


And even then, by what criteria are you juding "same opportunity" and "same amount" when comparing physical combat, to say, scaling a gate and infiltrating a throne room at night? Are those equal? Does healing someone or freezing five people in place equate to hit rolls, parry and evasion, damage, wounding, knockouts, critical hits and simply dominating other adversaries? By whose reckoning? How often does combat occur? How often does "stealth occur", or magic?

How often it occurs is really up to whoever is running and playing the game. If you take your players to a lot of areas where stealth is required, then obviously stealth talents and abilities are more valuable to them than combat or magic. So it's hard to say really. All I can do is give fair talents applicable to Stealth, Magic, and Combat minded players and let them have at it. I can't control it any more than that.

This is a monster of a post, I think this is the longest thing I've ever put on a forum. If you guys read through all of this and not just the parts where I reply specifically to you than, Bravo. XD

nijineko
01-22-2013, 11:26 PM
nice reply. this reminds me of one of the things that irk me about d&d, the lack of endurance. i've hefted real swords and practiced with them. made me feel like a wimp, and i'm someone who can outlast most people holding my arms steady horizontal in front of me. swing it a few times and you feel it. swing it with intent and you feel it more. swing it for three or four rounds and you start feeling tired. fighters should absolutely "run out of swings". not that the melee types really need yet another way to feel inferior to the powerful casting types, but still. nixing that particular bit makes it tougher for me to enjoy the game somehow, if easier to play it, which is probably why they did so.

Malruhn
01-27-2013, 02:37 PM
nij, but you are untrained and unskilled with that sword. I felt the same way when I joined the Army and had to lug around 13 pounds worth of M-16 everywhere - after a few minutes I was tired and couldn't imagine being able to do it for an hour.

After a month, I was carrying it all day and I never felt the weight after that.

Yes, there comes a time when fatigue hits, but for those trained with a physical weapon, that point is WAY after a novice encounters it.
______________________________

Soft Serve, it your "small coalitions" sound like the ancient Mongolian tribes. What happens when a person (or whatever race) with a 20 Charisma shows up and unites the clans?
I was also thinking of it from a GM point of view - keeping track of that many variations and story arcs would be EXHAUSTING!!!

DMMike
01-29-2013, 09:12 AM
Shameless plug: I've posted an open invitation for game design in the Fantasy/D&D section. Use any idea you like, and suggest any idea you like.

Shameless admission: you guys have done a lot of typing in this thread, and I haven't digested all of it.

Soft Serve: If power gamers are your concern, you can probably toss out Stealth as one of the areas needing balance. I suspect they'll gravitate toward whatever race offers the most magical or physical power at whatever starting level the player will use. Since it looks like the point is to provide no clear "most powerful" race, those power gamers will have to go by the race's appearance after that.

For the role-players, well, they won't care about a balanced blend of races unless the really interesting races have really bad bonuses.

My concern is using Combat Stealth and Magic as your metric. It leaves out Discourse, Entertainment, Accumulation, Hunting/Adventuring, Politics, etc. Sure, there are established rule systems for Combat Stealth and Magic, but this is your RPG, right? Other areas can have rules too.

Also keep in mind D&D's reasoning behind ability bonuses: not all stats are created equal. At the end of the day, a character needs to breathe, and not have holes in his lungs, so physical stats are the most important. Always. Unless you're running a Celestial campaign. :)

Niji: +1. Swinging a two-handed stick is no joke. And fighters don't need a reason to get pushed any further behind spellcasters. If the average fight lasts 5 rounds (game rounds), we can assume the fighters have time to recover. But look at Skyrim: you get a Stamina bar (and a Magic bar), which recharges, and allows you to do cooler strength-stuff.

Simetradon
02-01-2013, 10:11 AM
nice reply. this reminds me of one of the things that irk me about d&d, the lack of endurance. i've hefted real swords and practiced with them. made me feel like a wimp, and i'm someone who can outlast most people holding my arms steady horizontal in front of me. swing it a few times and you feel it. swing it with intent and you feel it more. swing it for three or four rounds and you start feeling tired. fighters should absolutely "run out of swings". not that the melee types really need yet another way to feel inferior to the powerful casting types, but still. nixing that particular bit makes it tougher for me to enjoy the game somehow, if easier to play it, which is probably why they did so.

Untrained fighters and soldiers will get tired quickly, which will likely end with their death at the hands of trained individuals. This explains 0th level mooks vs. PC's.

Soft Serve
02-04-2013, 05:02 AM
nice reply. this reminds me of one of the things that irk me about d&d, the lack of endurance. i've hefted real swords and practiced with them. made me feel like a wimp, and i'm someone who can outlast most people holding my arms steady horizontal in front of me. swing it a few times and you feel it. swing it with intent and you feel it more. swing it for three or four rounds and you start feeling tired. fighters should absolutely "run out of swings". not that the melee types really need yet another way to feel inferior to the powerful casting types, but still. nixing that particular bit makes it tougher for me to enjoy the game somehow, if easier to play it, which is probably why they did so.

I agree that Stamina / Endurance could easily be justified in a game. But while it doesn't necessarily throw a wrench in the gears, it does add a whole new set of gears to fine tune and maintain.. by which I mean all mechanics need balanced, and somehow the D/GM would need to keep track of it on top of all the other numbers already presented. So it is easy to understand why it is absent.


nij, but you are untrained and unskilled with that sword. I felt the same way when I joined the Army and had to lug around 13 pounds worth of M-16 everywhere - after a few minutes I was tired and couldn't imagine being able to do it for an hour.

After a month, I was carrying it all day and I never felt the weight after that.

Yes, there comes a time when fatigue hits, but for those trained with a physical weapon, that point is WAY after a novice encounters it.

This is another good point. Take into effect people who are trained for years with their weapons (designated by weapon proficiency in game) and it makes more sense to not include a Stamina / Endurance mechanic or stat.


Soft Serve, it your "small coalitions" sound like the ancient Mongolian tribes. What happens when a person (or whatever race) with a 20 Charisma shows up and unites the clans?
I was also thinking of it from a GM point of view - keeping track of that many variations and story arcs would be EXHAUSTING!!!

I meant "Small" as in "Made up of two or three groups of people." Not necessarily in reference to number of literal people included. Though the Orks are actually based exactly on the Mongolian tribes. A bunch of wasteland roamers united by a single person in an effort to conquer more inhabitable areas that belonged to the other races.

Not a direct comparison to the Mongolians, but that's where the idea came from.


Shameless plug: I've posted an open invitation for game design in the Fantasy/D&D section. Use any idea you like, and suggest any idea you like.

I actually saw it and considered posting this question there, but I wanted it to get a lot of specific attention without stealing your thread.


Shameless admission: you guys have done a lot of typing in this thread, and I haven't digested all of it.

It happens. XD

After I post something I always go back and read it, and the replies, like 7-8 times just to make sure that I did everything right and don't sound like an idiot. Because I'm a freak.


Soft Serve: If power gamers are your concern, you can probably toss out Stealth as one of the areas needing balance. I suspect they'll gravitate toward whatever race offers the most magical or physical power at whatever starting level the player will use.

I know that Stealth can be an easily overpowered ability when groomed to be. A stealth oriented player in my 3.5 group has taken Rogue / Shadow Dancer and can apply his abilities to drop significantly difficult encounters without ever including a Fighter or Mage. Arcane Tricksters Impromptu Sneak Attack is another example.


Since it looks like the point is to provide no clear "most powerful" race, those power gamers will have to go by the race's appearance after that.

Yes and no. If I wanted it to be all about appearances I'd not give any race any bonus and just let them pick who they thought was the cutest before going on to select a class. But if you're building for a marksman type character and you've only got Human and one other race to make a decent marksman character with, compared to the guy building for a Magic user who has 8 races to pick from, you're going to feel kind of shafted if you don't like either of your options right?

The harder point of this, is that included with each race will be three "Traits" which give them small perks and changes. So with 25 races each having three traits you've got 75 options for the very first aspect of creating your character, and I've got to balance each of them. XD


For the role-players, well, they won't care about a balanced blend of races unless the really interesting races have really bad bonuses.

My concern is using Combat Stealth and Magic as your metric. It leaves out Discourse, Entertainment, Accumulation, Hunting/Adventuring, Politics, etc. Sure, there are established rule systems for Combat Stealth and Magic, but this is your RPG, right? Other areas can have rules too.

I'm using Combat, Magic, & Stealth as my focus because those are the three most easily applied character paths and part of the goal in my creation is to make a game that's easy to pick up and play. To put it in the least elegant way possible, my goal is to make it hard to describe the game as "Simple" or "Difficult" and land somewhere in-between.

Things like Discourse, Entertainment, and Politics I feel are best left without rules. Role playing games shouldn't need rules for how to role-play. Trying to entertain an NPC, or talk a representative into throwing his faction into a war are words that should come from your players, and not their dice. In my opinion. For whatever that's worth.


Also keep in mind D&D's reasoning behind ability bonuses: not all stats are created equal. At the end of the day, a character needs to breathe, and not have holes in his lungs, so physical stats are the most important. Always. Unless you're running a Celestial campaign. :)

In a normal world, I agree with you. But I like "Fantasy" to mean "Fantasy" not "Medieval + Dragons". So while breathing is still important (to most races.) you should still find a few people who would rather give an arm or a leg than their ability to manipulate magical energies or their knowledge thereof. Not that you wouldn't also find the hairy chested axe wielders with a notch on their belt for each rival mage they've cleaved in half, and their lot, but that's the point. To make everything rounded and a matter of opinion.

I don't want "Strength is better because it works better."

I want "Strength is better because it works better for me."


But look at Skyrim: you get a Stamina bar (and a Magic bar), which recharges, and allows you to do cooler strength-stuff.

Morrowind (the third in the elder scrolls series) had a stamina bar that would drop if you ran. Which at the time (before sprint) meant anything other than walking. And Stamina affected how well your skills worked. Every single one of them. So if you ran down the road out of town and a Nix Hound came up on you, your 45 skill in shortswords meant little to nothing because your stamina is drained.

Also, Morrowind was the last elder scrolls to include Spears, and takes place in an area larger than Cyrodil of Oblivion and Skyrim of...Skyrim. Which is why I still play it. I swear gaming is going backwards....


Untrained fighters and soldiers will get tired quickly, which will likely end with their death at the hands of trained individuals. This explains 0th level mooks vs. PC's.

Truth. Most of the minions in 4e never even know what hit them. XD

Soft Serve
02-04-2013, 05:19 AM
Also, every time I read my own words I always feel like the lack of tone in text makes me sound like a jerk. So if I come off snarky, I'm not trying to be and totally respect your opinions and the fact that you guys have invested the time to go over this with me.

In short, no offense is intended, and thank you for the attention you've given this so far.

nijineko
02-05-2013, 09:06 AM
never thought that you were being snarky, soft serve.

you know, if anything, magical endurance should be added to the game. channeling all that power can't be easy, and should probably cause non-lethal and/or endurance lost and/or temp con damage at differing points of effort. i never liked the vancian slant to d&d magic, and would much prefer to see a different method of measuring power and expenditure and so forth.

Soft Serve
02-05-2013, 11:12 AM
never thought that you were being snarky, soft serve.

you know, if anything, magical endurance should be added to the game. channeling all that power can't be easy, and should probably cause non-lethal and/or endurance lost and/or temp con damage at differing points of effort. i never liked the vancian slant to d&d magic, and would much prefer to see a different method of measuring power and expenditure and so forth.

I had to search for Jack Vance to be %100 sure I knew what you were talking about, and found a TVTropes article on Vancian Magic.

TVTropes in my opinion is the fastest way to learn anything about any kind of media, so I read up on it there and saw something similar to what you were describing.


[Vancian Magic] tends to create the problem that the mage must somehow know (or at least predict) which spells will be most useful in the near future. If you are expecting combat, then you (probably) aren't going to prepare a "talk with animals" spell that day, which may leave you up a creek if that's precisely what you need to do later. (And if you use up all your spells too quickly, you may really be up a creek later.) To work around this problem, some writers use a Mana (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Mana) or "spell points" system, where the mage can cast any spells they know at any time as long as they have a large enough reserve of energy at the time, which they can replenish later (either with time or with a Mana Potion (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ManaPotion)).

The TVTropes page can be found here. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VancianMagic)

But I agree with you in the fundamentals. Magic is a powerful force, it only makes sense that it would be incredibly taxing for an individual. Same with psionics.

nijineko
02-10-2013, 11:37 AM
no... i... will... not... be... sucked... into... hours... of... troping... argh!


^^

Soft Serve
02-13-2013, 02:50 AM
no... i... will... not... be... sucked... into... hours... of... troping... argh!


^^

Sorry Niji. But you know you love it.