Say you were building a game system as a hybrid of two existing systems. I guess like the way Fuzion is Hero+Interlock[cyberpunk], or Icons is Marvel Super Heroes + FATE.
What systems would you pick, which bits would you use and why?
UA's Madness Meter + DC Heroes's resolution mechanics and attributes+TSR Conan RPG's skill system + WHFRP 1e's crit tables + Army of Darkness's Mass Combat Rules+ Godlike's setting
What's the Madness Meter?
And how would you plan to use Conan's skill system (I guess you mean the one where you use a skill category total as a default for untrained use?) with DC Heroes' resolution system?
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;702116What's the Madness Meter?
And how would you plan to use Conan's skill system (I guess you mean the one where you use a skill category total as a default for untrained use?) with DC Heroes' resolution system?
The Madness meter is a sanity system that tracks a character's exposure to certain triggers (violence, self-harm, etc), wherein characters can get 'hardened' against certain stimuli, but in doing so inch ever closer to a psychotic break. It's probably the best published sanity system Ive used, and I think it would ve perfect for conveying the psychological tolls of war. the Conan skill system would be pretty easy to convert, it would just be a matter of scaling the skill ratings to the point ranges of Attributes and defining what each point level means in general terms. It wouldn't be much different than how I converted it to FASERIP, except that DCHereo's exponential progression would be abstracted a little (though tends to be anyways with the mental/social attributes).
I suppose you could add together all the character point costs for skills, then convert the total back into a skill number ata higher Factor Cost.
I'd be interested in seeing the MSH conversion too, if its not super-secret.
CP2020's resolution and (heavily adjusted) skill system, UA's madness meter, and Exalted's initiative system, the battle wheel.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;702126I suppose you could add together all the character point costs for skills, then convert the total back into a skill number ata higher Factor Cost.
I'd be interested in seeing the MSH conversion too, if its not super-secret.
I just took the concept of Talent Pools and divided the MSH talents into these, then reduced the ratings to a scale of 1-3 (as I had added a Rule of Diminishing Returns so that any Attribute test was only modified by a max of +/- 3, with a few exceptions. This was mainly just to keep modifier-crunching to a minimum).
I don't have my notes from that time because the system's evolved a bit since then, but you can still see the Conan influence.
Currently I use Talents & Specialties, with Specialties indicating specific skills and Talents general areas of knowledge. The Talents/Specialties I currently use are:
ACADEMICS
Anthropology, Archaeology, Geography, History, Law, Linguistics,Mathematics, Politics, Psychology, Sociology
ATHLETICS
Acrobatics, Brachiation, Climb, Parkour, Ride, Skate, (Sport), Swim, Throw
CHARM
Carouse, Etiquette, Grace, Leadership, Savoir-Faire, Seduction,Taunt
CHICANERY
Bluff, Disguise, Hide, Forge, Larceny,Lockpicking, Pick-Pocket, Subterfuge
MARTIAL ARTS
Earth, Fire, Metal, Water, Wind
MEDICINE
First Aid, Herbalism, Pharmacy, Psychiatry, Surgery, Vet
MILITARY
Artillery, Command, Demolitions, Dogfighting, Military Weaponry, Tactics, Tank
OCCULT
Cryptozoology, Demonology, Folklore, Myth, Parapsychology, Theology
SCIENCE!
Astronomy, Biology, Botany, Chemistry, Genetics, Neurology, Physics
SKULDUGGERY
Arson, Burglary, Death Traps, Intimidation, Poison, Torture
SLEUTH
Cryptography, Espionage, Forensics, Observation, Interrogation, Streetwise
SURVIVAL
(Environment), Fishing, Forrestry, Hunting, Mountaineer, Stealth, Tracking
TECH
Computers, Cybernetics, Electronics, Hacker, Mechanic, Robotics
VEHICLES
Astro navigation, Boat, Drive, Mecha, Motorcycle, Navigation, Pilot, Submarine
WEAPONRY
Archery, Fencing, Firearms, Jousting, (Weapon Specialist)
There are also Special Talents, which are things like Bookworm, Circus, Fast-Draw, Gearhead, Jack-of-all-Trades, etc.
Specialties are rated as follows:
-Journeyman - The degree of competence of a professional
x2 - Master - Leader in the field
x3 - Grand Master - Best in the world
Talents are rated as follows:
- 3 or more levels of Specialties
x2 - 9 or more levels of Specialties
x3 - 27 or more levels of Specialties
If your familiar with MSH, Talents provide a Shift bonus, so that you count an Attribute as 1 or 2 ranks higher on the resolution chart, which provides 1 of 4 colour results indicating degree of success.
What I've done is made it so that Talents/Specialties provide an Active Bonus, when used uncontested, or Passive Bonus in contested rolls/combat.
A Passive bonus provides a shift just as in MSH, from 1 to 3 ranks based on the combined Talent + Speciality. The Law of Diminishing Returns applies, but extra levels can offset negative modifiers.
An Active bonus, otoh, alters the colour result from 1 - 3 "phases".
If a character has a Talent but not the relevant Specialty to the task, the Talent always provides a Passive bonus.
Percentile skills with dice pools, in a more elegant (I hope) way than the one chosen by the developers of CoC 7th ed.
Quote from: TristramEvans;702451If your familiar with MSH, Talents provide a Shift bonus, so that you count an Attribute as 1 or 2 ranks higher on the resolution chart, which provides 1 of 4 colour results indicating degree of success.
What I've done is made it so that Talents/Specialties provide an Active Bonus, when used uncontested, or Passive Bonus in contested rolls/combat.
A Passive bonus provides a shift just as in MSH, from 1 to 3 ranks based on the combined Talent + Speciality. The Law of Diminishing Returns applies, but extra levels can offset negative modifiers.
An Active bonus, otoh, alters the colour result from 1 - 3 "phases".
If a character has a Talent but not the relevant Specialty to the task, the Talent always provides a Passive bonus.
Vaguely familiar with MSH (have run one-offs of it about three times). Enough that it makes sense, thanks for the enlightening :)
Quote from: MatteoN;702463Percentile skills with dice pools, in a more elegant (I hope) way than the one chosen by the developers of CoC 7th ed.
Interesting. Two core mechanics at once? I haven't seen the new CoC edition so can't comment there.
Its not quite a simple as taking the rules wholesale, but the current game I am working on is essentially a d20 game, with Advantage/Disadvantage from Next, Initiative from Savage Worlds, armour from d20 Conan, sword styles from Honor + Intrigue, careers from Witch Hunter: The Invisible World and Damage resolution from 7th Sea. I am probably forgetting a few influences.
It is all based on what worked really well at the table for the group from playing various games.
I've been toying around with something that's sort of GURPS + DC Heroes.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;702474Interesting. Two core mechanics at once? I haven't seen the new CoC edition so can't comment there.
My idea is to have broad abilities rated 0 to 99 and narrow "binary" specialties. Abilities are checked with a roll of 2d10, used to generate a number in the 0 to 99 range: if you possess the appropriate specialty, the ten's digit is the lowest result rolled on the dice, otherwise it's the highest result. If the number thusly generated doesn't exceed your ability's rating the check is successful. A "double", that is a result of 00 or of a multiple of 11, determines a critical success or failure.
When the action attempted is particularly easy, you roll 2d10 and one or more bonus dice (d10s) and pick the two lowest results; likewise, when the action is particularly hard, you roll 2d10 and a number of penalty dice and pick the two highest results.
When it's important to know the "margin" of a character's success, the roll is subtracted from the ability's rating ("blackjack" rolling wouldn't work). This is the only arithmetical operation that may be required to resolve an action (well, except adding 2d10 +
nd10).
If I'm not wrong, in CoC 7th ed. sometimes you roll a single one's die and several ten's dice, picking the the highest or lowest ten's digit.
Never seen that one before. Hmm, doesn't seem that its possible to have a straight d100 roll result from the system?
Maybe you could just have Specialty directly reduce difficulty [potentially from hard to normal or normal to easy] - currently, if I understand it, seems you could often be taking the lowest of the two highest as the tens place or vice versa.
Quote from: J Arcane;702479I've been toying around with something that's sort of GURPS + DC Heroes.
A version of GURPS that scales up and down well, that would be great.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;702641Never seen that one before. Hmm, doesn't seem that its possible to have a straight d100 roll result from the system?
You'right. The system is "percentile" only in the sense that abilities are in the same range as in percentile-based system (but maybe I could limit the number of specialties a character can possess to half the number of specialties that exist "under" an ability, so that on average your base chance of success with that ability is equal to your percentile rating?)
The main point of having abilities in the 0 to 99 is that I like character advancement to be made of small and frequent steps; I want to combine BRP's advancement system with Unknown Armies': if a player fails an ability check that has relevant consequences during the game, they check that ability's box. At the end of the game session each player receives a number of XPs (0 to 5, 2 on average) that must be immediately spent on the abilities whose boxes the player checked during the game session. (I know, I know: what if in a session a character doesn't fail any task?)
QuoteMaybe you could just have Specialty directly reduce difficulty [potentially from hard to normal or normal to easy] - currently, if I understand it, seems you could often be taking the lowest of the two highest as the tens place or vice versa.
I don't understand what you're suggesting (due to my linguistic limitations), sorry. If you have a specialty you always take the lowest result as the ten's digit, and if you don't have it you always take the highest result. When an action is hard, however, the two results are the highest in a poll of 2+n dice, and when it's easy the results are the lowest in a pool of 2+n dice.
Major characters have a pool of bonus dice to manage, that can be added to the bonus dice granted by an easy action or subtracted from the penalty dice imposed by a hard action.
I've always wanted to bring warhammer, dragon warriors, and d&d together but have never satisfactorily brought then into a synthesis.
Quote from: MatteoN;702720I don't understand what you're suggesting (due to my linguistic limitations), sorry. If you have a specialty you always take the lowest result as the ten's digit, and if you don't have it you always take the highest result. When an action is hard, however, the two results are the highest in a poll of 2+n dice, and when it's easy the results are the lowest in a pool of 2+n dice.
Major characters have a pool of bonus dice to manage, that can be added to the bonus dice granted by an easy action or subtracted from the penalty dice imposed by a hard action.
Sorry I probably needed to go into it in more depth.
Its just an idea but basically what I was proposing was a difficulty scale which would go something like:
[I]Very Easy[/I] 3 dice, use 2 lowest
[I]Easy [/I] 2 dice, lowest as tens
[I]Standard [/I] Roll d100 normally
[I]Difficult [/I] 2 dice, highest as tens
[I]Very difficult[/I] 3 dice, use 2 highest
[I]Impossible? [/I] 4 dice, use 2 highestThen a Specialty would reduce a task's difficulty by a level e.g. Difficult to Standard, or Easy to Very Easy.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;702771Sorry I probably needed to go into it in more depth.
Its just an idea but basically what I was proposing was a difficulty scale which would go something like:
[I]Very Easy[/I] 3 dice, use 2 lowest
[I]Easy [/I] 2 dice, lowest as tens
[I]Standard [/I] Roll d100 normally
[I]Difficult [/I] 2 dice, highest as tens
[I]Very difficult[/I] 3 dice, use 2 highest
[I]Impossible? [/I] 4 dice, use 2 highest
Then a Specialty would reduce a task's difficulty by a level e.g. Difficult to Standard, or Easy to Very Easy.
Oh, I see. That would certainly work. However, I think I prefer to have binary, unrated specialties. When creating your character you pick a subset of the specialties your character's profession grants them, and a few freely chosen specialties. Since they have a major impact on your character's chances of success, very rarely should you be allowed to pick new specialties after character creation. I see the full list of a character's specialties as both the character's résumé, and a tool for protecting the character's "niche" in the group. Let's say that the thief starts with a rating of 40 in Melee and the warrior starts with a rating of 70; since the advancement system implements diminishing returns it's possible that after a number of sessions the two characters will have the same rating in Melee; however, if they possess different specialties, they will still fight very differently from one another. On the other hand, each player will have a (and possibly more than one) small pool of bonus dice to manage in the same way as you were suggesting.
May I ask for a suggestion related to my project without derailing the thread? (If the anwer is no, please don't reply my message!)
I still have just a vague idea of the combat system. I was thinking of having the difference between the level of success of the attack (critical success or normal success) and the level of success/failure of the defense (critical success, normal success, normal failure, critical failure)*, that is a number ranging 0 to 3, be the number of penalty dice that affect a roll made by the defender against the "ability to avoid being injured and keep on fighting". The weapon used by the attacker would also add (as many as its rating) penalty dice to this roll, whereas the armor worn by the defender would add (as many as its rating) bonus dice. The result would always have the lowest number as the tens' digit, unless the weapon is magical or otherwise extraordinarily dangerous for the defender (e.g. a silver weapon against a werewolf, a light saber against a vampire :D).
Now, the possible results of this roll, like of any other, would be:
critical success
success
failure
critical failure.
Critical success would obviously mean that the defender is completely unscathed by the attack, whereas critical failure would obviously mean that the defender is taken out of the fight by a permanent (or fatal) wound. What effects would you attach to the other two results, considering that penalty dice would tend to outnumber bonus dice and I wouldn't want to use hit points?
* When two opposed rolls score the same level of success, the winner is the roll the generates the largest margin of success (=ability-roll).
That's very similar in conception to the WHFRP3E dice pool mechanic (though its much more complex, in conception if not implementation. Might be worth a look for ideas.
Quote from: TristramEvans;704074That's very similar in conception to the WHFRP3E dice pool mechanic (though its much more complex, in conception if not implementation. Might be worth a look for ideas.
Thanks! Doesn't WHFRP3E use custom dice without numbers on them? I don't think there's a free quickstart, right?
Quote from: MatteoN;704077Thanks! Doesn't WHFRP3E use custom dice without numbers on them? I don't think there's a free quickstart, right?
Yeah, it uses custom dice, and the system was the basis for the new Star Wars rpg. I don't think there's a free preview as such, but it should be relatively easy to google up some of the many intensive reviews and hacks of the system if you don't want to shell out for the book.
Quote from: TristramEvans;704078it should be relatively easy to google up some of the many intensive reviews and hacks of the system
Right, thanks.
Quoteif you don't want to shell out for the book.
I'm still saving up for RQ6 :)
Quote from: MatteoN;704080Right, thanks.
I'm still saving up for RQ6 :)
RQ6 is better AND cheaper, honestly.
Fate Core + Street Fighter RPG + Rolemaster.
Use the resolution and aspect mechanics of Fate Core with a solid, crunchy martial arts maneuver system (and the health levels) with Rolemaster-style critical hit charts that handed out automatic Consequences, Advantages, and Boosts.
I've been trying to make this work for awhile. I don't think I'm there yet.
Quote from: TristramEvans;704082RQ6 is [...] cheaper
This is shocking. :rant:
I would want to mash up Pendragon's Vices/Virtues with a few other things (madness meters, FATE aspects) to come up with a really strong freeformish traits system.
I'd probably go with a roll-between mechanic (roll over obstacles, or highest obstacle +1 for each additional obstacle / roll under skills and/or gear (lowest of the two probably)) overall. Probably on 2dwhatever. I'd also probably write most of the game in the "moves" format from the recent World games just because it seems like an okay fit for the whole post-roll-decisions thing.
When it came to big trait rolls, GM would call for them when they make sense (can't stand a points-based system here). The PC would use a fitting trait as if it were a skill, while another trait (minus whatever to leave room in the middle) could be an obstacle.
The nice thing here is that there's no need for pre-existing dichotomies. If you're fleeing from a place and your friend gets trapped in the rubble, your loyalty to them is tested against your desire for self-preservation.
Anyway, if you roll under the obstacle you have to act according to the obstacle BUT you can ignore it by reducing the trait being used as an obstacle. If you roll over the "skill" you can't act according to the "skill" BUT you can ignore that by increasing that value.
In either case you take stress of some kind (which will hopefully prevent people from just ignoring traits all the time). Eventually, you can max out or eliminate aspects of your nature through play, at which point you always act according to that impulse or you just stop using that impulse for these kinds of checks (it will neither hinder nor help you anymore). There would also probably be ways to gain new traits.
Non-drama stuff would work vaguely similarly, in that you could ignore failures for a price that depends on what caused the failure. So if your target's cover prevents your shot, you can move to hit them anyway. If it's their armor, you hit them but don't hurt them as badly. If it's both, you have to move *and* you won't hurt them as much. And so on.
Finally, I'd probably mash all of the above up with a lifepath-based system where characters can get themselves into some deep shit, but have options to bail themselves or each other out in ways that will form relationships and character traits that will be used in play. I'm a bit fuzzier on the details here.
Quote from: MatteoN;704072Now, the possible results of this roll, like of any other, would be:
critical success
success
failure
critical failure.
Critical success would obviously mean that the defender is completely unscathed by the attack, whereas critical failure would obviously mean that the defender is taken out of the fight by a permanent (or fatal) wound. What effects would you attach to the other two results, considering that penalty dice would tend to outnumber bonus dice and I wouldn't want to use hit points?
Hijack away...I know I was complaining about wanting a thread split lately in helpdesk, mostly there I just wanted two useful threads.
Anyway, you could always have a failure represent some sort of major injury and success represent a minor injury. Perhaps two tables of results, some of which might impair the character's fighting. The less detailed option would be a penalty on the next save, although that could be considered a sort of 'hit points'.
If you have a lot of luck points flowing, you could also skip penalties and just have failure representing a character being unconscious, since the luck points granting re-rolls will effectively function as 'HP' until they run out.
I have no idea what I'd do in answer to my own question here, either.
What I was trying to determine really was how to pick 2 systems so that when you combine them you get some sort of synergy, but I haven't figured out how to do this without actually going ahead and writing the mash-up of the two games.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;704490Anyway, you could always have a failure represent some sort of major injury and success represent a minor injury. Perhaps two tables of results, some of which might impair the character's fighting. The less detailed option would be a penalty on the next save, although that could be considered a sort of 'hit points'.
If you have a lot of luck points flowing, you could also skip penalties and just have failure representing a character being unconscious, since the luck points granting re-rolls will effectively function as 'HP' until they run out.
I would like to try to design the system without resorting to tables. The effect of a failure would have to be not too harsh if failures turned out to be as frequent as I think, but am not sure, they will (is this phrase even remotely syntactically correct?) since when weapon and armor cancel each other out the roll would be made with 0 to 3 penalty dice, depending on the difference between the attacker's level of success and the defender's level of success. So, while a one-time penalty on the next roll in case of a success might be appropriate (for a moment you're in shock, it was a near thing that that blow hit you), I wonder if the effect of a failure being a permanent (for the rest of the fight, that is) penalty of one die wouldn't make the combat
too gritty for low-powered characters (a high-powered character with a large pool of bonus dice to spend would be able to ignore a one die penalty for many rounds). On the other hand, maybe a permanent effect is needed in order to prevent fights from dragging on.
Thank you for you reply!
Quote from: MatteoN;704072May I ask for a suggestion related to my project without derailing the thread? (If the anwer is no, please don't reply my message!)
I still have just a vague idea of the combat system. I was thinking of having the difference between the level of success of the attack (critical success or normal success) and the level of success/failure of the defense (critical success, normal success, normal failure, critical failure)*, that is a number ranging 0 to 3, be the number of penalty dice that affect a roll made by the defender against the "ability to avoid being injured and keep on fighting". The weapon used by the attacker would also add (as many as its rating) penalty dice to this roll, whereas the armor worn by the defender would add (as many as its rating) bonus dice. The result would always have the lowest number as the tens' digit, unless the weapon is magical or otherwise extraordinarily dangerous for the defender (e.g. a silver weapon against a werewolf, a light saber against a vampire :D).
Now, the possible results of this roll, like of any other, would be:
critical success
success
failure
critical failure.
Critical success would obviously mean that the defender is completely unscathed by the attack, whereas critical failure would obviously mean that the defender is taken out of the fight by a permanent (or fatal) wound. What effects would you attach to the other two results, considering that penalty dice would tend to outnumber bonus dice and I wouldn't want to use hit points?
* When two opposed rolls score the same level of success, the winner is the roll the generates the largest margin of success (=ability-roll).
Quote from: MatteoN;704553The effect of a failure would have to be not too harsh if failures turned out to be as frequent as I think, but am not sure, they will (is this phrase even remotely syntactically correct?) since when weapon and armor cancel each other out the roll would be made with 0 to 3 penalty dice, depending on the difference between the attacker's level of success and the defender's level of success.
What about this solution:
CRITICAL SUCCESS: the attack hit you at full force but left you completely unscathed. The attacker is blown-away, and perhaps harmed himself while trying to hurt you: they have a penalty die on their next roll.
SUCCESS: you have no trouble enduring such a small amount of damage and pain as the attack was able to inflict you.
FAILURE: the amount of damage and pain the attack inflicted you is more than you can easily endure: you have a penalty die on your next roll.
CRITICAL FAILURE: the attack hit you at full force and left you devastated. The damage and/or pain call a halt to your fight.
What would I hybridize? The Stars Without Number system with the old-school (1E/2E) Shadowrun setting. Psionics would have to be tweaked a bit to give us Shadowrun magic, but, otherwise, I find SWN a more elegant ruleset than the Shadowrun rules, which tend to be a bit on the complex side of things.
Hybrids are tricky business.
But I guess I'd mash up WFRP's career system, Kult's madness/enlightenment system, Stormbringer's summoning magic, nWoD's Virtues and Vices, Runequest 6's Combat Styles and Special Effects, and a setting somewhere between Ravenloft: Masque of Red Death, Solomon Kane and Jack Shear's Gothic Earth.
Here's another, simpler one: DC Heroes' resolution with FUDGEsque player-defined and numbered traits in lieu of atributes, advantages and drawbacks; plus Wild Talents' build-your-own-powers.
Quote from: TristramEvans;702101UA's Madness Meter + DC Heroes's resolution mechanics and attributes+TSR Conan RPG's skill system + WHFRP 1e's crit tables + Army of Darkness's Mass Combat Rules+ Godlike's setting
Godlike uses ORE.
Nemesis (free download) adapts the UA Madness Meter to ORE.
Wild Talents has a more expansive powers system and Kerberos Club has a build-your-own skill system (e.g. instead of picking up Marksmanship, Riding, Ettiquete, Military Science etc. you make up a skill called "An Officer And A Gentleman").
I realize that you're not an ORE fan but that gives
me ideas. I've been meaningful to give Wild Talents a spin for some time now... Not a fan of Godlike per see but I'd love to try a pulpier, more Hellboy/Weird War II sort of game with this combo.
Quote from: J Arcane;702479I've been toying around with something that's sort of GURPS + DC Heroes.
My interest is piqued. Care to elaborate?
Quote from: golan2072;711100What would I hybridize? The Stars Without Number system with the old-school (1E/2E) Shadowrun setting. Psionics would have to be tweaked a bit to give us Shadowrun magic, but, otherwise, I find SWN a more elegant ruleset than the Shadowrun rules, which tend to be a bit on the complex side of things.
I've just released a cyberpunk sourcebook for Arcana Rising, itself now in print (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/121426/Arcana-Rising), called Welcome to Neuro City (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/121828/Welcome-to-Neuro-City?src=s_pi). Between the two books you should have no trouble at all doing just that.
Neuro City was basically written because I couldn't be arsed to learn SR rules all over again and I already had an urban fantasy game.
Quote from: The Butcher;711106My interest is piqued. Care to elaborate?
I wound up writing Roulade: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3hWDeEiNI5aRWF1QjVqY25lTU0/edit?usp=sharing
It's more a cross between FUDGE/Fate and DCH in the end, and I don't know yet if I like it. Have a gander though.
Quote from: J Arcane;711394I've just released a cyberpunk sourcebook for Arcana Rising, itself now in print (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/121426/Arcana-Rising), called Welcome to Neuro City (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/121828/Welcome-to-Neuro-City?src=s_pi). Between the two books you should have no trouble at all doing just that.
Neuro City was basically written because I couldn't be arsed to learn SR rules all over again and I already had an urban fantasy game.
Thanks for the heads-up! Definitely on my to-buy list.
SR has a very cool setting, especially its older variants (SR1/SR2), and especially if you go over the top with Pink Mohawk, but in my experience the rules are quite cumbersome and difficult to teach to new players, especially ones without RPG experience.
Of course, with SWN and its cyberpunk supplement Polychrome I can also run a "Shadowrun" campaign with aliens instead of Metahumans and Psi instead of Magic.
D6's ease of use, modular advancement, and escalating costs with (some other game's) balanced library of character options. Hero, maybe? GURPS? Something like that.
Boot Hill 1E + 13th Age
I used Boot Hill (old TSR wild west miniatures rules) as the base combat system and brought in the "background" parts of 13th Age to give characters depth. (13th Age uses "backgrounds" as a catch-all to replace skills.)
I actually threw in some scifi elements and ran a quick Firefly campaign. Much fun.
Something else I've been musing on lately is a different way of crossbreeding the systems: take several systems, boil down the stranger conceits of each system to become class features of a class, so you have a game where players can sort of play any of several systems at once. Obviously core mechanics (how combat works) needs to be consistent but there are probably ways of rationalizing some of the differences in how skills and the like operate.
e.g. idea for a game where fanatical Mormon gunslingers, crazed sages, crashed space people, mutants and standard dungeon-grubbers battle Cthulhu and his cults:).
Classes:
Dog (Dogs in the Vineyard): conviction class feature, you can initiate social combats and opponents have to give in or start fighting back. Free gun.
Sage (Call of Cthulhu): get an Education score, percentile knowledges (number of points based off EDU mostly), but a Sanity score due to too much Forbidden Knowledge.
Traveller: crashed space dude, roll for terms of service (giving more specific 'class skills') and a few starting tech items.
Delver (DCC): get a Luck score, a secondary skill relating to your old mundane occupation, and a merry band of henchmen.
Mutant (MSH? Gamma World?): gets some randomly determined super powers. Limited skills, relies mostly on natural powers.
Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;712952Something else I've been musing on lately is a different way of crossbreeding the systems: take several systems, boil down the stranger conceits of each system to become class features of a class, so you have a game where players can sort of play any of several systems at once.
This is an idea I too had, but I think it takes a deep understanding of many systems to be able to come up with a playable and fun system (you might be up to the task).
Thanks!
(My problem is that I'll probably get distracted by some other idea in about 5 minutes though).