In games like D&D, combats are structured around levels, a group is unlikely to face an outsize or too-powerful foe unless the GM is being a dick. In non level based games characters can summarily come up against very lethal situations, just like in real life, so I think its helpful to give them an out, in the form of some kind of luck stat. I wouldn't bother giving it to anyone except PCs though.

Quote from: The Traveller;571176In games like D&D, combats are structured around levels, a group is unlikely to face an outsize or too-powerful foe unless the GM is being a dick. In non level based games characters can summarily come up against very lethal situations, just like in real life, so I think its helpful to give them an out, in the form of some kind of luck stat. I wouldn't bother giving it to anyone except PCs though.

We can certainly do this, but IMO it detracta from the lethal and gritty feel we have been aiming for. I think it i a perfectly good mechanic if you want to make a game where pcs are above npcs a bit and things a bit more over the top. But keep in mind because of the whole premise with the microchip, allows for characters to survive past death

For me being able to draw on a small store of luck, experience or whatever you want to call it will be the difference between a grizzled veteran, a dozen times or more uploaded into a new body, and the latest greatest raw recruit who is coldly efficient and accomplished at everything. Sure, 9 times out of 10 that raw recruit who was top of every class going will succeed in every test, but that grizzled, scarred vet whose had a dozen lifetimes of being blown up, shot, stabbed, strangled, burnt and gassed will have been around the block. They may even be hundreds of years old. That sort of thing you can't teach in classrooms. The ageing gunfighter, veteran of fifty or more face offs, against the young hotshot, out to make a name. The younger man might be faster, have better eyes, be a pinpoint accurate shot through hours of practise.

The old man?

He makes his own luck.

Quote from: APN;571230For me being able to draw on a small store of luck, experience or whatever you want to call it will be the difference between a grizzled veteran, a dozen times or more uploaded into a new body, and the latest greatest raw recruit who is coldly efficient and accomplished at everything. Sure, 9 times out of 10 that raw recruit who was top of every class going will succeed in every test, but that grizzled, scarred vet whose had a dozen lifetimes of being blown up, shot, stabbed, strangled, burnt and gassed will have been around the block. They may even be hundreds of years old. That sort of thing you can't teach in classrooms. The ageing gunfighter, veteran of fifty or more face offs, against the young hotshot, out to make a name. The younger man might be faster, have better eyes, be a pinpoint accurate shot through hours of practise.

The old man?

He makes his own luck.

That is something quite different from a general karma or luck pool though, as it basically reflects wisdom from experience. I would say that should either just be a product of getting xp and spending it increase skills. If that isn't enough you could give characters who achieve veteran status some kind of bonus (which I would suggest be a flat bonus they can apply at all times (since you don't manage your veteran's wisdom as an intangible resource). Again, if we are shooting for high octane cinematic lie die hard (in the spirit of savage worlds) by all means, luck makes sense. But if we are telling people this is a gritty, naturalistic game, then I think you want to avoid the luck as resource approach. My sense was this wasn't intended to be a cinematic game, in which case luck seems out of place to me.

You can dial back the pulpiness by making luck harder to acquire, if even an experienced player only has a handful of luck points they won't be used trivially. Players willing to use only a couple per game aren't going to tarnish the grit too much, I feel. In some games they tend to be used much more as a deus ex machina, if that can be avoided, you're good.

Again this does depend on our design goals, but if gritty is the goal, my position is pulp should be an option you dial in, not a default mechanic you have to dial out of the game.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;571413Again this does depend on our design goals, but if gritty is the goal, my position is pulp should be an option you dial in, not a default mechanic you have to dial out of the game.

Let's just put it to a vote or have Bloody weigh in on it. I don't feel too strongly one way or the other but I thought that we were going gritty with it. Also my vote is on Kirk being able to die.

Quote from: APN;571167Another option...

Fate, Experience, Luck, Karma, call it what you will.

Characters start at 0 Luck, earning it through continued play. A luck point allows an extra die to be rolled (in addition to the usual d10) and the player chooses which of the dice to use. Once spent, a luck point is gone, and you can't spend more than a single luck point in one task attempt.

I'VE DONE THIS!!!:eek:

Except in my system Fate rolls were cumulative rather than re-rolls. You get one per level, they cannot be recharged unless the moderator says otherwise. Fate can even be used as a "get out of death free" mechanic. Basically allowing the player to insert narrative power into events.

EDIT: If i may chime in on a more constructive note, i was looking over the skill sets list MGuy had posted back on page 18.

Under the physical skills you might add "Lift" and "Push" or combine the two, additionally you might consider splitting Steal into two categories "Pickpocket" and "Lockpick" or possibly "Hacking" since this is a SF setting, though "Hacking" might go into the Knowledge category. For Knowledge, have you considered Cryptozoology or Xenobiology, or would those be combined with something else? A simple "Performance" skill could cover any kind of art/music/dance/poetry/singing/etc... Perhaps with modifiers in an area where the character has specifically had experience. For instance, i took 6 years of piano, but am self taught with guitar, so i know more technically about piano and can play easier, but i can perform on either one. I've also gone to college 6 years in addition to my previous gradeschool/highschool practice at Art, so i can draw or paint better than i can sing, but i do sing.

Would Engineering also include construction of simple tools, such as melee weapons or containers? I've recently run a futuristic SciFi spinoff using my own rules and my player ran into things such as being disarmed as a passenger aboard a cargo ship carrying top secret containers of zombifying acidic ooze. He used stealth to follow people around and hide, Hacking to open secured areas, and glass and cloth from the mirror and bed in his guest quarters to make a shank in the event that the crew turned against him.

As i have gone through about 4 different revisions of the character sheets for my game, i'd advise thinking about the space you have available to you on a typical 8.5x11 sheet of paper, and how you intend to fit all the skills you do have already on that in an organized fashion. I used microsoft word, but no doubt there are better programs, Adobe Photoshop even, or a hand drawn sheet scanned in and made into a 2 page pdf for double sided printing.

EDIT: I apologize if i've mentioned anything already discussed, i haven't read the entire 21 pages of this thread, and am not likely to... If anything i offer is not accepted for whatever reason, no hard feelings.

EDIT again...: what, if anything, has been decided about combat? I read the part about "suddenly Captain Kirk dies" and think that's awesome. That's pretty much how my last SF game ended, the player took a gunshot wound to the head... from his own gun... (the First Officer had it)

Has anyone played or read Wayfarer's Song by Mythopoetic Games? It has a combat system based on dice pools where you pick only the highest roll as your success/fail, the exception being in the case of really weak weapons, then you pick the lowest die. It was done completely with d10s, and with a predictable damage range one could easily plan your Health around that 1-10 range of damage so that you have a higher possible mortality rate. I think Level 1 characters had something like 20 health. Weapon damage was rated by "Menace". The higher the weapon's Menace, the more dice you rolled, but the result would always be between 1-10... or something like that.

Hi guys, and welcome Amalgam; I've been meaning to have a look at your new thread (I normally would) but sorry, has been a busy week at work.
 
On latest developments I'm fine with recent stuff so far. If going with point buy I think we need separate totals of points for mentals and physicals due to the body switching.
 
On Luck: My preference would be that Luck could be an advantage that characters have the option of buying, rather than being automatically built into the system. (YMMV, but I actually like it when a random die roll causes the play session to go off at 90 degrees to what you expected..). So a character might spend some XPs and buy a luck point (one use) or a Luck ability that works once a session. I don't know, it seems to me that could be a workable compromise between no luck and having built in luck points?
 
I do like the idea of experienced characters having something that gives them an edge even where the youngster has high raw skill, but its hard to define exactly what that is - and I don't quite know how to handle giving that out mechanically. I don't think its luck exactly, but an ability to make maximum use of the situation, make decisions quickly, exploit opponents' weaknesses. More actions/round? A set of extra skills that experienced characters only can buy up e.g. Appraise Enemy, Cool Under Fire, Diehard, Combat Improvisation ?
 
 
On skills a few thoughts:
-APN mentioned the idea of specialties back a bit, these could be useful in resolving the question of how broad to make skills?
 
-For Science maybe a few broad science skills (Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Geology, Psychology ??).
One biology skill would probably do for a military focussed game. As specialties you could have Xenobiology, but most life forms will be alien so perhaps instead have separate specialties for various biological types, i.e. Terrestrial, silicon-based, methane breathers, chlorine breathers, dextro-chiral carbon-based life. Or just do it by planet (in the standard setting you would just have Earth creatures + the new world's creatures; they're probably both oxygen-breathing carbon-based).
 
-Possibly Engineering should be a few separate skills rather than a single broad skill as these sorts of skills are pretty handy in SF games. Not sure how to break down best - Vehicles, Weapons, Electronics ?
 
-a general Athletics skill with Jump just being a specialty? (Maybe Run as well). Not so sure about 'Lift' or 'Push' as skills these not being things that benefit tremendously from training (just basic use of Strength, really).
 
-add Art or Perform etc. to the skill lists, and give a character one of these for free, and/or buy ranks at half cost? I think two separate skill lists may be more complexity than is ideal.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;571652On Luck: My preference would be that Luck could be an advantage that characters have the option of buying, rather than being automatically built into the system. (YMMV, but I actually like it when a random die roll causes the play session to go off at 90 degrees to what you expected..). So a character might spend some XPs and buy a luck point (one use) or a Luck ability that works once a session. I don't know, it seems to me that could be a workable compromise between no luck and having built in luck points?
 
I do like the idea of experienced characters having something that gives them an edge even where the youngster has high raw skill, but its hard to define exactly what that is - and I don't quite know how to handle giving that out mechanically. I don't think its luck exactly, but an ability to make maximum use of the situation, make decisions quickly, exploit opponents' weaknesses. More actions/round? A set of extra skills that experienced characters only can buy up e.g. Appraise Enemy, Cool Under Fire, Diehard, Combat Improvisation ?
 
 
On skills a few thoughts:
-APN mentioned the idea of specialties back a bit, these could be useful in resolving the question of how broad to make skills?
 
-For Science maybe a few broad science skills (Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Geology, Psychology ??).
One biology skill would probably do for a military focussed game. As specialties you could have Xenobiology, but most life forms will be alien so perhaps instead have separate specialties for various biological types, i.e. Terrestrial, silicon-based, methane breathers, chlorine breathers, dextro-chiral carbon-based life. Or just do it by planet (in the standard setting you would just have Earth creatures + the new world's creatures; they're probably both oxygen-breathing carbon-based).
 
-Possibly Engineering should be a few separate skills rather than a single broad skill as these sorts of skills are pretty handy in SF games. Not sure how to break down best - Vehicles, Weapons, Electronics ?
 
-a general Athletics skill with Jump just being a specialty? (Maybe Run as well). Not so sure about 'Lift' or 'Push' as skills these not being things that benefit tremendously from training (just basic use of Strength, really).
 
-add Art or Perform etc. to the skill lists, and give a character one of these for free, and/or buy ranks at half cost? I think two separate skill lists may be more complexity than is ideal.

Re: Luck

I'd like Luck if its a stat to be measured the same way as other stats, but perhaps only be called upon rarely, as a small bonus or extra chance at doing something. If its a pool it should be moved to another non-stat like category of character information, perhaps with health.

Re: Skills

I like broad skills, I think it might make a better game to play by keeping skills compact. No lists of specialties and sub-specialties. Just a big arc skill (which may be finer than say "Science!" but not by much.)

Example: Astonomy, Physics, Biology; no subs.  Electronics, Construction, no subs.

If the game is to be point buy we need to get the balance of skill costs and stats right. The rough table I posted earlier was an 'instant fix' to the question of point buy rather than something thoroughly thought out and playtested. Als, some skills will be far more useful and common than others (the science skills, whilst nice to have, won't be much use in a firefight).

With regards combat, I suggest one of two methods:

1) Attack vs a target number modified by cover, weather, light, other factors including whether the other target is dodging

OR

2) A tunnels and trolls style combat adds or perhaps a Champions style Offence and Defence combat value and opposed rolls.

Was the haste/dodging example I posted worth considering?

I'll amend what I've written so far (only 2 pages, because every time I think something is decided on, another idea pops up in the thread) and see what I can get done this weekend or before. Am aware we're not on a time scale here, but I think we have enough to start a rough draft for people to look at and possibly run examples/playtest.

Maybe we need a show of hands on luck:

1) Pool of points, gone when spent, earn more through play
2) a special ability available a few times (at best) through an adventure
3) a stat to be called on a certain number of times
4) something different - maybe the GM rolls 1d10-1 for every character at the start of play and keeps track without the player knowing whether they have 0 points, 9 points, or something in between
5) The hell with luck. I make my own. You got a problem with that?

On the Luck I'd vote #2, then.

With #3 - making it a stat - the big issue I see with this is that NPCs would have it as well, or they end up using different rules to PCs -either of these are IMHO undesirable.
 

Quote from: Silverlion;571766Re: Skills
 
I like broad skills, I think it might make a better game to play by keeping skills compact. No lists of specialties and sub-specialties. Just a big arc skill (which may be finer than say "Science!" but not by much.)
 
Example: Astonomy, Physics, Biology; no subs. Electronics, Construction, no subs.

Oh well, just refloating the idea but it could be unnecessarily complicated.  How about if its just kept very simple; perhaps buying a specialty costs a skill point and gives a flat +2 bonus, and there's a very short list (i.e. mostly what we have here already) as inspirations for a GM to approve new specailties that a player might want? If only to let people add some depth to their characters.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;571805; perhaps buying a specialty costs a skill point and gives a flat +2 bonus, and there's a very short list (i.e. mostly what we have here already) as inspirations for a GM to approve new specailties that a player might want? If only to let people add some depth to their characters.

Sounds passable to me.

Quote from: APN;571783If the game is to be point buy we need to get the balance of skill costs and stats right. The rough table I posted earlier was an 'instant fix' to the question of point buy rather than something thoroughly thought out and playtested. Als, some skills will be far more useful and common than others (the science skills, whilst nice to have, won't be much use in a firefight).
 
With regards combat, I suggest one of two methods:
 
1) Attack vs a target number modified by cover, weather, light, other factors including whether the other target is dodging
 
OR
 
2) A tunnels and trolls style combat adds or perhaps a Champions style Offence and Defence combat value and opposed rolls.
 
Was the haste/dodging example I posted worth considering?
 
I'll amend what I've written so far (only 2 pages, because every time I think something is decided on, another idea pops up in the thread) and see what I can get done this weekend or before. Am aware we're not on a time scale here, but I think we have enough to start a rough draft for people to look at and possibly run examples/playtest.
 

Stat purchase table looked fine I thought.
 
On the haste system: I did like having all initiatives be basically simultaneous since it speeds things up and also makes combat more chaotic. Haste as written would probably be used too much by players - I think instead of using the penalty exactly to break up the action order, use categories with higher penalties i.e. 'Quick Action: -2 attack, resolves first' (e.g. shooting from hip), and maybe a 'Very Quick: -4'.
Could move someone into the 'quick action' phase for free when someone readies an action/has the drop on someone, so shooting a guard who is already got you in their sights is at -4.
 
T&T group combat never quite did missile fire which would be the main combat for our game, I think standard to-hit roll vs. target number perhaps, with an option to dodge to push up the target number (perhaps having Dodge as an action, with a character able to make 2 actions but with both at a penalty - -2 maybe ?).

Quote from: APN;571783(the science skills, whilst nice to have, won't be much use in a firefight).

I'm instantly reminded of Star Trek: First Contact where they were constantly using their knowledge of the phasers to change the frequency or whatever to penetrate the Borg's constantly adapting shields. While maybe not something you'd use actually IN the firefight, it could be something used to affect later firefights.

For Luck, i liked the idea of buying Luck with Exp, but maybe make it so that the cost for additional Luck ramps up each time, so characters with 579,384 Exp can't just stock up on heaps of Luck while the characters with only 1,025 Exp can only buy one or two.

If not that, i would vote for either 1 or 2, but not 4, if only because keeping track of "secret" stats for the players is not something i'd want to do as GM. Keeping track of PC reputation is different, as that directly affects my notes on how NPCs are going to react to the PCs, but keeping track of Luck sounds like something i'd forget to do.

"That alien just squashed you like jelly... too bad... oh wait! you had a luck point, would you like to redo that entire combat and spend your Luck?" yeah... that would be me as GM.

Quote from: Silverlion;571766Re: Skills

I like broad skills, I think it might make a better game to play by keeping skills compact. No lists of specialties and sub-specialties. Just a big arc skill (which may be finer than say "Science!" but not by much.)

Muahaha! i kill it with science! and not just science, i kill it with Biology...  (anybody know Doctor Insano?)

I concur, the broader the definition of each skill set the better. This ties in with the question of note keeping and paperwork that is the Character Sheet. Will it be a quick reference of the character's skills and such, or an intensive spreadsheet of every skill in the game? (some D&D charsheets i've seen seems to go this route sadly)