Tell me about your games, do you use variants of a house system? What's the basic goals, methods, and feel of the rules as you see them?
:popcorn:
Quote from: gleichman;642503Tell me about your games, do you use variants of a house system? What's the basic goals, methods, and feel of the rules as you see them?
Hi Gleichman. If you want I am happy to send you PDFs our games. Based on what you are looking for in a system, I do not believe they will match your tastes, but you might enjoy other aspects of them. In fact I believe we hit a number of red flags from your thread on design.
Our system is skill based, uses pools of d10 against target numbers set either by your opponent's defenses or set by the GM based on some recommendations in the rules sections (this last part has evolved a bit over each product and refined slightly).
Characters all have skills ranked between 0-3. You can effectively get to a 4 with Expertise (which supply a bonus under the right conditions). Plus you can gain up between 1-3 effective ranks as a bonus for various conditions.
Defenses are made up of passive numbers that serve as the TNs for skill rolls against you (and there are six defenses).
Resolution is handled by rolling one d10 per rank of your skill and taking the single highest result. Result of a ten produces a more spectacular result.
For combat you follow up your attack roll with a damage roll against the opponent's Hardiness rating. If you succeed you score a wound, if you get a ten you score two wounds (there is an optional method for counting successes on damage but this is not the default system).
Dice pools cap at 6.
Goal of the system is to be lightweight and fade into the background during play. It is also intended to be fast. So it is rigged to make it relatively easy to hit. In addition the emphasis is on things like roleplaying and investigation, so combat is pretty lethal (though not so lethal that one hit kills are likely--it usually takes at least two attacks to kill someone). All characters have the same number of wounds (varies from game to game but in most you can take 3 hits). For my style of play it works well.
In terms of flavor and style, the aim is not realism (in the sense I think you tend to go for) but plausibility. We want things to feel generally believable without getting too caught up in the details. Obviously this is going to be a problem if you are looking for something sim heavy. Most of the games also have something of a naturalistic feel to them (you are not playing larger than life heroes, you are playing people just like anyone else.
We also had the goal of keeping things short, sweet and cheap for our first four products. So the first four core rulebooks are all about 100 pages and cost 20 bucks.
There is more to the system, but this is the core concept. Right now we have the following settings:
Terror Network: counter-terrorism
Crime Network: Mafia
Horror Show: Horror tool-kit
Servants of Gaius: alt-history Rome
We are presently developing a new version of the game called Sertorius. This is a bit different. The aim is to be less rules light (it is still not super crunchy but we wanted more meat for this one) and basically characters are all powerful wizards.
In terms of development methods we playtest alot. We also do run probabilities, create Excel charts to vet for things.
It should go with out saying, none of this applies to Arrows of Indra which is designed entirely by Pundit and uses a completely different system from our other games.
Also, Bill (poster here) is my business partner and co-designer, so he may be able to shed light on some of our mechanics as well.
Quote from: Charlie Sheen;642510:popcorn:
You may be disappointed. If someone doesn't like my game, has a problem with the math or the design approach, I don't see the point in debating them (those are their honest opinions and you can't expect everyone to like what you put out). If he raises some good critiques that are relevant to what I am trying to do with the games, then I will certainly consider them as we develop the system for new settings. Frankly you can do a lot more with criticism than you can with praise. But I am not going to go toe-to-toe with Gleichman over this. He is entitled to his opinions (good or bad) about my games and I think it is a bit rude for publishers to take people to task when they express their views about a game online (unless they are saying something that is just blatantly untrue like the game is about killing puppies). Besides, I grilled him on his game in another thread, so I see no reason for him not to grill me on mine.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642521Hi Gleichman. If you want I am happy to send you PDFs our games. Based on what you are looking for in a system, I do not believe they will match your tastes, but you might enjoy other aspects of them. In fact I believe we hit a number of red flags from your thread on design.
I'm not so much interested in doing a review or finding another game to play, I'm just curious about your approach. And I don't have to agree with it for that and I not going to judge it in this thread.
So on the goals side, you wanted a light weight system that gets out of the way, and that need would seem to be why you selected a rather small range of skill in keeping with that goal- i.e. short handling time. Am I off base on that?
Was the choice of the d10 highest number die pool driven by that same need, i.e. you saw it as quicker than other options, or were you looking for a specific probability curve or other factor?
Does the target of the attack determine the Target Number, or does only the conditions of the attack (like range) matter? Is it both (if so, how are they weighted)?
If you were going for light weight, why is the damage roll split out from the attack roll?
You say it takes multiple hits to take someone down. Do you think this matches the results of of say a SEAL anti-terrorist raid? What about auto-fire? What about sniper fire? If it doesn't match, why not?
It appears from your post that the focus was to be on investigation and role-play. Is there mechanical support for either?
At 100 pages, how much is game mechanics, how much GM advice, how much setting information?
Any support for a map and minis?
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642537You may be disappointed.
He'll be disappointed, this isn't about one-upping someone and frankly for this thread it will be impossible for you to give a bad answer. This is about finding out how others approach game design.
Oh, about the PDF. Thanks for the offer but unless it includes really good designer notes I don't think it would answer many of my questions (and those it would are just lying the ground for another question).
Quote from: gleichman;642539Was the choice of the d10 highest number die pool driven by that same need, i.e. you saw it as quicker than other options, or were you looking for a specific probability curve or other factor?
Partly, but it was also subjective. I never really like games like vampire that much, but always found the d10 dice pools helped me not to think about the mechanics too much (especially if you take out counting successes). So for me it is a quick and easy way. It also is murky in terms of probability, which is something I wanted. You know its better to have 4d10 than 2d10, but most people have a harder time calculating probabilities on the fly with dice pools instead of say a d20 or d100. To me that felt more like life where I don't actually know my numerical chance of hitting someone in the face, but just have a general sense that it is easy or hard (a lot of people do disagree with this last point though).
QuoteDoes the target of the attack determine the Target Number, or does only the conditions of the attack (like range) ? Is it both?
The target does. The target will have ranks in a defense plus he can capture certain conditions to raise or lower his target number (for example in Terror Network cover will provide a bonus to evade). Range would affect the attackers dice pool. And the attacker can raise or lower his dicepool as well through conditions. So you have conditional bonuses and penalties on both sides ranging from -3 to +3 and -3d10 to +3d10.
QuoteIf you were going for light weight, why is the damage roll split out from the attack roll?
Because when I have tied those two together in the past, it was too restrictive for me and didn't give me enough flexibility with weapons. I know it can be done. But I just preferred to have the clean break between the two. It does add one extra step. And that does objectively complicate the game more, so it isn't as simple as it could be. But the goal wasn't to get to a minimalist level of simplicity, more to get to a manageable level of simplicity.
QuoteYou say it takes multiple hits to take someone down. Do you think this matches the results of of say a SEAL anti-terrorist raid? What about sniper fire? If it doesn't match, why not?
My goal wasn't to match the reality of a seal team raid exactly. I am not a gun expert and didn't pretend to be when I designed terror network (I have never fired a gun, never owned a gun and only read about them). So I did do some research in order to keep things inside the realm of reason, but most of my research for our Terror Network rules system was focused on things like agency structures and terrorist groups. The sniper rules increase the chances somewhat but to be honest I would probably go back and change them a bit if were to redo one of our modern games (particularly terror network).
But to answer this question. Network has never been quite lethal enough for my own tastes. Personally I would prefer for there to be greater lethality (either by inflicting an automatic wound on 10s on your attack roll or even automatic 2 wounds on 10s). But we found in playtest people didn't respond well to the game when it was too lethal like that.
That said, it is still pretty lethal. If you are rolling 3d10 for damage dice, that has about a 27 percent chance of scoring a 10, which would inflict two wounds (and the game has cumulative wound penalties). There is also something like a 2-3 percent chance of scoring two tens. So it is likely you will do considerable harm to a character with a damage pool of 3d10, and even possible you will drop them. If you use the Open Damage option (where you count successes) the chances of killing in one hit go up further.
QuoteIt appears from your post that the focus was to be on investigation and role-play. Is there mechanical support for either?
Yes. It depends on the game but in Terror Network for example we have skills like Forensics and we have mechanics for using agency resources. There are also (as much as I personally gripe about them) social skills like Command and Persuade (Terror Network has an Interrogation skill).
QuoteAt 100 pages, how much is game mechanics, how much GM advice, how much setting information?
Depends on the game. Some games go slightly above 100. I have Servants of Gaius next to me now and it breaks down as follows:
Intro: 5-9
Character Creation 10-33
Equipment: 34-43
Rules: 44-53
Running Servants of Gaius: 54-61
Servants of Gaius (info on the order): 62-65
Characters (NPCs): 66-75
The Minions of Neptune: 76-81
Other Threats (monsters and foes): 82-89
The Gods: 90-93
Caligula's Rome: 94-110
Keep in mind many "crunch" chapters also have flavor. For example the character creation section has a number of pages devoted to Roman Titles.
QuoteAny support for a map and minis?
Yes. We have rules for miniatures and grids in there. For example Terror Network has facing rules that rely on the grid and all the movement is expressed so you can easily do grid or no grid. Servants of Gaius has things like areas of control and closing rules (which interact with our reach mechanics). Terror network also has some rules for larger scale grid combat.
Quote from: gleichman;642548He'll be disappointed, this isn't about one-upping someone and frankly for this thread it will be impossible for you to give a bad answer. This is about finding out how others approach game design.
Oh, about the PDF. Thanks for the offer but unless it includes really good designer notes I don't think it would answer many of my questions (and those it would are just lying the ground for another question).
No real designer notes or anything.
I'll add my 2cents:
The Network game system attempts to catch the fine line between sleek playbility and enough crunch to make sense.
Lethality: There are optional rules that allow the gm to make the system as lethal as desired.
'Hit' and 'damage' rolls being distinct:
I personally prefer game systems where it is clear how stealthy, how evasive, how armored, and how tough a target is. The more abstract games often rub me the wrong way.
The highest die being retained certainly keeps the combat speedy compared to other dicepool systems I have seen.
I need to check out Servants of Gaius. I like the idea of the setting, but I'm a little sketchy on the mechanics overall. Paying attention to this thread.
Quote from: Zachary The First;642580I need to check out Servants of Gaius. I like the idea of the setting, but I'm a little sketchy on the mechanics overall. Paying attention to this thread.
I love the game, Zachary! I am a big fan of Crime and Terror Network as well. The system works as advertised - not a flavorful mechanic, but one which - like BRP - fades into the background nicely. highly recommended.
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;642584I love the game, Zachary! I am a big fan of Crime and Terror Network as well. The system works as advertised - not a flavorful mechanic, but one which - like BRP - fades into the background nicely. highly recommended.
-clash
Thanks for the info, clash! I'll have to see what the ol' gaming budget looks like this week, maybe. :)
Quote from: flyingmice;642584I love the game, Zachary! I am a big fan of Crime and Terror Network as well. The system works as advertised - not a flavorful mechanic, but one which - like BRP - fades into the background nicely. highly recommended.
-clash
I concur wholeheartedly!
BedrockBrendan, have you considered writing an advernture for Mongoose Traveller? I'd be interested in seeing your take on the Traveller game.
Quote from: jeff37923;642596BedrockBrendan, have you considered writing an advernture for Mongoose Traveller? I'd be interested in seeing your take on the Traveller game.
I don't really play much Traveller so I probably wouldn't be able to write a good module for it. I have played a bit, but not enough to really know the system and science fiction is something I like but don't have the same passion for as some others. I do think our modules are nice though.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642553It also is murky in terms of probability, which is something I wanted. You know its better to have 4d10 than 2d10, but most people have a harder time calculating probabilities on the fly with dice pools instead of say a d20 or d100. To me that felt more like life where I don't actually know my numerical chance of hitting someone in the face, but just have a general sense that it is easy or hard (a lot of people do disagree with this last point though).
A unexpected answer, and why this sort of Q&A is worthwhile.
What determines the number of dice in the Damage Pool?
The inclusion of the grid is also unexpected. What purpose does it serve in a lightweight system?
Quote from: gleichman;642608A unexpected answer, and why this sort of Q&A is worthwhile.
What determines the number of dice in the Damage Pool?
The weapon. In the case of melee weapons you can add in your muscle skill (this has varied from game to game though as some are modern and gun focused while something ike Servants of Gaius is all swords, clubs and bows.
Edit: also a 10 on an attack roll beefs up the damage roll, as do things like called shots to the head.
QuoteThe inclusion of the grid is also unexpected. What purpose does it serve in a lightweight system?
Two reasons.
The first is that we felt you needed an option to do either grid or no grid (sometimes even if you prefer no grid, some combats require it).
The second is our first network game was Terror Network and that demanded being able to make important tactical decisions. So we needed a grid. Its still a fast and lightweight game, but it is real hard to participate meaningfully in something as tactical as a swat raid if you dont have the grid. In later games the grid is more of an option for those who want it.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642553It also is murky in terms of probability, which is something I wanted. You know its better to have 4d10 than 2d10, but most people have a harder time calculating probabilities on the fly with dice pools instead of say a d20 or d100. To me that felt more like life where I don't actually know my numerical chance of hitting someone in the face, but just have a general sense that it is easy or hard (a lot of people do disagree with this last point though).
Couldn't someone just work out all the probabilities in advance, and write down all results on paper?
Or for that matter, write an app which does such calculations on the cellphone or laptop?
Quote from: ggroy;642614Couldn't someone just work out all the probabilities in advance, and write down all results on paper?
Or for that matter, write an app which does such calculations on the cellphone?
Yes you can. And I have done so each time we make a game. We also included a probability chart in our first release (though I believe there is a slight error in one of the columns). So you can absolutely do this if you desire. And I encourage the GM to know the probabilities. This is more for the players. Just as a general rule, i find most people will have a harder time figuring these out on the fly (though I have also found a couple of people who are quite good at calculating it).
Quote from: Bill;642561'Hit' and 'damage' rolls being distinct:
I personally prefer game systems where it is clear how stealthy, how evasive, how armored, and how tough a target is. The more abstract games often rub me the wrong way.
This is an interesting comment given that the description has such a narrow range for displaying the differences you seem to value. But I suppose some range is better than none, and you're clearly happy with what it provides.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642553But to answer this question. Network has never been quite lethal enough for my own tastes. Personally I would prefer for there to be greater lethality (either by inflicting an automatic wound on 10s on your attack roll or even automatic 2 wounds on 10s). But we found in playtest people didn't respond well to the game when it was too lethal like that.
Upon reflection I think this is the most interesting comment in the thread. It mirrors what happened early in the development of D&D and caused them to turn to Hit Points, and you ended up taking the same path for the same reasons.
Well, I think I'm done with my quiz. Thanks for the time and the answers.
Quote from: gleichman;642627This is an interesting comment given that the description has such a narrow range for displaying the differences you seem to value. But I suppose some range is better than none, and you're clearly happy with what it provides.
This is true to an extent because all damage rolls target hardiness and it isnt divided up by alot (though armor is factored ontop of your hardiness). But for me at least there is enough range to give me what I want. There are six defenses: Hardiness, Stealth, Evade, Parry, Wits and Resolve. Physical attacks target either Evade or Parry (ranged and thrown target Evade while melee targets Parry). Stealth is targeted by Detect rolls. Wits is targeted by things like Empathy and Deception, while Resolve is targeted by Rhetoric and Command skill (these are all skills from Servants of Gauis as they vary across different games). Damage Rolls all go against Hardiness.
I think what Bill point may have been referencing is a game he and I worked on before where damage and attack rolls were tied together (the game got lost in publishing limbo and we recently re-secured the rights, but I dont know whether it will be released or not). By the end of the design process we were both frustrated by the mechanic (Bill I believe was bothered by the abstraction of it, because the way the system worked, toughness and reflexes got factored into together for the hit and the damage. My gripe was more about not having enough flexibility on damage ranges). I think that game still worked for what we were trying to do, but when we both moved onto Network after we didn't want to touch anything with attack and damage bound together (now I wouldn't mind doing somehting like that in a game).
It would certainly be possible to do in Network. You could have each weapon do a different number of wounds depending on whether you get a success or total success. Instead of your hardiness rating being used as a static number against damage rolls it could just set the number of wounds you can take. Not saying we would go this way, but I have considered some possibilities here.
Quote from: gleichman;642629Upon reflection I think this is the most interesting comment in the thread. It mirrors what happened early in the development of D&D and caused them to turn to Hit Points, and you ended up taking the same path for the same reasons.
Well, I think I'm done with my quiz. Thanks for the time and the answers.
That is a fair comment. I did try to make Network reflect my tastes and Bill's but I also made it knowing others would be playing the game (and I realize my own tastes are pretty far outside the standard these days). So while I pushed for a lethal game, I only went as far as people seemed to enjoy. As the game evolved I added in more optional mechanics to use for my own campaigns so they can be lethal but I think most people who play our games stick with the default system. The core game could certainly be more lethal. In most cases I think we made the right design decision for our settings and the people who play our games. But I do think we made an error here in the case of Crime Network. I feel it should have been more lethal (because the mafia setting really needs one hit kills).
Though I should emphasize our wounds do not play out like D&D. You cannot dungeon crawl in Network, because your character will die (you can only take three wounds and healing takes a long time). What the wound pacing usually allows is for the character to realize combat isnt going his way and try to retreat. S po it gives you more of a chance when things go south (and usually within the first or second round of combat it is pretty clear what direction things are going).
Quote from: gleichman;642627This is an interesting comment given that the description has such a narrow range for displaying the differences you seem to value. But I suppose some range is better than none, and you're clearly happy with what it provides.
In regards to granularity, there are about 9 possible die roll values, and 12 defense values; potentially.
Its fairly close to a 1 to 10 scale for each of action and opposition.
And stealth, evade, armor, and toughness are all different values.
The game does not have the 'bucket of HP' dnd feel at all.
Depending on the genre, two hits usually put you down.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642635S po it gives you more of a chance when things go south (and usually within the first or second round of combat it is pretty clear what direction things are going).
This was exactly the main stated reason for HP in D&D. No doubt the details are different however given the systems differences. But the matching goal is noteworthy I think.
Just as aside, I'm not opposed to very simple resolution systems like this. My current favorite ground combat wargame (Force on Force) uses an even more simple system. Much depends upon other rules and the goal of the game.
I have nothing useful to add. I'd just like to say with no sarcasm that this thread has spawned some genuinely interesting discussion.
Quote from: gleichman;642638This was exactly the main stated reason for HP in D&D. No doubt the details are different however given the systems differences. But the matching goal is noteworthy I think.
Just as aside, I'm not opposed to very simple resolution systems like this and and by themselves. My current favorite ground combat wargame (Force on Force) uses an even more simple system. Much depends upon other rules and the goal of the game.
Is that the same as Ambush Alley?
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642644Is that the same as Ambush Alley?
That's the name of the company that publishes it (along with the excellent Tomorrow's War).
I think it may have been the name of an earlier game they did... or not. I'm not clear on the history. Excellent games.
Quote from: gleichman;642646That's the name of the company that publishes it (along with the excellent Tomorrow's War).
I think it may have been the name of an earlier game they did... or not. I'm not clear on the history. Excellent games.
I have a game by them called Ambush Alley. I remember it being pretty good (it was specifically for counter-insurgency miniature combat).
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642647I have a game by them called Ambush Alley. I remember it being pretty good (it was specifically for counter-insurgency miniature combat).
Link (http://ambushalleygames.com/) for those interested.
We did a quick 40K conversion to Tomorrow's War, played better and matched fluff more closely than any official product ever published. I can't speak highly enough of their game.
Anyone familiar with my tastes knows that I don't care for dice pools, and yet I think Servants of Gaius is amazing, on account of the setting material and how the system ties into the setting. If I run another Roman campaign, it will be with this system.
RPGpundit
I've never been a dice pool person, but I like what Bedrock does with it. Servants of Gaius is probably my favorite of the games using the mechanic, but that is due to the subject matter. I like Terror Network a lot as well.
I should note, I have done layout and graphic design work for Bedrock, so my opinion might be biased.
Richard
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;642553Partly, but it was also subjective. I never really like games like vampire that much, but always found the d10 dice pools helped me not to think about the mechanics too much (especially if you take out counting successes). So for me it is a quick and easy way. It also is murky in terms of probability, which is something I wanted. You know its better to have 4d10 than 2d10, but most people have a harder time calculating probabilities on the fly with dice pools instead of say a d20 or d100. To me that felt more like life where I don't actually know my numerical chance of hitting someone in the face, but just have a general sense that it is easy or hard (a lot of people do disagree with this last point though).
I used to believe that opaque probabilities were good, but I no longer do. While people in real life don't necessarily know their precise numeric chance of doing something, they also have a lot of intuition and feel about whether they are likely or unlikely to succeed that's missing in a tabletop RPG. I think knowledge of precise odds compensates for the intuition and feel that the player can't experience directly and that giving players the odds helps them make informed choices rather than guessing.
Quote from: RI2;643049I've never been a dice pool person, but I like what Bedrock does with it. Servants of Gaius is probably my favorite of the games using the mechanic, but that is due to the subject matter. I like Terror Network a lot as well.
I should note, I have done layout and graphic design work for Bedrock, so my opinion might be biased.
Richard
I saw your name in there as I was reading through last night. Really nice work.
Quote from: Zachary The First;643116I saw your name in there as I was reading through last night. Really nice work.
Thanks Zach. I did the graphic design and layout on Arrows as well, and that is some of my best work. Well it was until City of Clocks came out. :)
Richard
A comment on dice pools.
Many dice pool systems irritate me.
Dice pools do come in many flavors, however.
Network does have a very simple and sleek dicepool compared to most systems that use a dicepool.
Limited addition, no mental gymnastics, and no minigame involved.
Question for the Savage Worlds fans; Do you consider SW to be a dice pool system?
Quote from: Bill;643124Question for the Savage Worlds fans; Do you consider SW to be a dice pool system?
Not a fan of SW, but for what it's worth- no.
Quote from: Bill;643124Question for the Savage Worlds fans; Do you consider SW to be a dice pool system?
I agree with gleichman - with only two dice and the fact that you just take the result of the highest, SW is essentially just giving everyone a free re-roll all the time, rather than being an actual dice pool.
Quote from: Grymbok;643137I agree with gleichman - with only two dice and the fact that you just take the result of the highest, SW is essentially just giving everyone a free re-roll all the time, rather than being an actual dice pool.
Yeah; I wouldn't call two people a "bunch", so I wouldn't call two dice a pool.
RPGPundit
Is Vampire still a dicepool game when the characters are rolling 2 dice?
Quote from: Bill;644167Is Vampire still a dicepool game when the characters are rolling 2 dice?
Yes, since it just means you're being shitty at what you're about to do. To make a joke on the subject of "what's a group/pool", it's obviously 3, since that's the number of people law often considers a gathering.
Quote from: Bill;644167Is Vampire still a dicepool game when the characters are rolling 2 dice?
I never touched Vampire after 1st edition and so don't know (and couldn't care less) about it's current version. But if the number of dice rolled varies and allows for 3 or more dice in a single roll, than yes.
I have a simple definition you see and it may even be a common one, but it may not be standard. I think an early version of the dice pool concept (Shadowrun 1st edition perhaps) was defined by a 'pool' of dice that you assigned to specific tasks or parts of tasks while holding others reserve for different purposes.
To me there are two types of die pools.
The standard one, where you roll a few dice and note successes.
The strange distracting one where the two dicepools play poker together.
I don't mind the standard type if the number of dice you roll is controlled.
The strange type bothers me.
Quote from: Bill;644188To me there are two types of die pools.
The standard one, where you roll a few dice and note successes.
The strange distracting one where the two dicepools play poker together.
I don't mind the standard type if the number of dice you roll is controlled.
The strange type bothers me.
I don't have anything against dice pools as a concept. My main concern is that many implementations have greater handling time and more opaque probabilities than other methods, and offer nothing in return.
Of course these days with dice rolling apps the handling time issue can be addressed at least (albeit at some loss of physicality - if rolling dice wasn't fun in itself we wouldn't have the game of Yahtzee, after all).
Quote from: Bill;644167Is Vampire still a dicepool game when the characters are rolling 2 dice?
Yes, because you aren't always only rolling two dice.
RPGPundit
Quote from: gleichman;642503Tell me about your games, do you use variants of a house system? What's the basic goals, methods, and feel of the rules as you see them?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7B8WwcHcn8Q/URIYq4me06I/AAAAAAAAObY/8gaZ_R-qEXI/s1600/its-a-trap-mouse-meme-admiral-ackbar.jpg)
That was a good one TE :D.