|
Pvt.Scott posted:I could see that for something where players roll the damage dealt to them, or the total rolled is the cost of some action or failure, etc. The current example is shooting at a target. Add your skill (higher skill value is better) and the target's Heat (players want to keep their Heat low) together, then roll a d12. If you roll lower than the Skill+Heat value, you hit the target. I figured this is more intuitive than what was originally planned where you have the usual style of Skill 8+, with a bonus to the rolled dice based off of the target's Heat. It'll also be nice since there can then be 'crit' style effects where something happens on a certain roll of dice, and I wont have to include explanation that you determine crits before adjusting dice or whatever.
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
Fashionable Jorts posted:roll a dice roll-over or roll-under systems are fine, do what you want, but THIS is unforgivable
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 06:16
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:roll-over or roll-under systems are fine, do what you want, but THIS is unforgivable I will go to my grave using singular 'dice'!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 08:18
|
|
|
This is a (starter) set of 29 4.75"x2.65" cards with a 6-sided Z-fold instruction sheet and a set of color-coded dice. I want to present this without any additional introduction/explanation, since it should be able to speak for itself at this point: http://buddingheroes.com/protov5.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 09:20
|
|
|
MJP posted:Okay, so after my second PAX Unplugged, I started to brew an idea and it kinda seems like it might work. I pressed on with a very basic version to get an idea of flow. I'll be looking to add events as a mechanic somehow, but for now this is just something I'd test with wooden dowel rods for the lights and coins for the meeples on a printout of a South Beach hotel with rough light placement areas. I'd love to get some input on whether this seems like a realistic starting case to build on. quote:1) Each player gets one free Light to place on their Hotel at any specified starting position A few ideas of random events, which can be purchased. Not sure if it's a "purchase the event, it plays immediately" or if it can be held in reserve: quote:Bad Ad Campaign – skip the next free Guest roll.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
I'm finally pulling the trigger. I'm nervous as all hell, but it's time to get it off my bucket list. ***********************************************  Hodgepocalypse - Dark Revelations - the Role-Playing Game After many years of tinkering, tweaking and so forth, I finally got the Hodgepocalypse ready to go for publication: - Witness the wonder of post-post-apocalyptic North America reinterpreted in its own twisted and often comical glory. - Seven new species as well as new twists on classic races. - Species talents that allow your character to develop their natural abilities. - A Class/Path System that allows customization in your character along with archetypes. - Modern weapons and equipment - Vehicles and the rules for driving them. - New Spells and a spell malfunction table. Arriving on December 24th, just in time for Christmas on drivethrurpg. If you want a free copy, to have a game run online, or the gm package for your own group please contact me on @drevrpg or drevrpg@gmail.com #5e #dnd5e #dnd #drevrpg #dungeonsanddragons #apocalypse https://www.drevrpg.com
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2019 17:51
|
|
|
I've just set up Just the Two of Us Jam, a game jam on itch.io for 2-player rpgs, interactive fiction games, Bitsy games, and similar stuff! You might have heard of/read/played established 2-player games like Murderous Ghosts by Vincent Baker, Mars Colony by Tim Koppang, or De Profundis by Michal Oracz, or newer games like Together We Write Private Cathedrals by Ben Roswell and say what you mean by Riley Rethal. The only requirement (outside of no bigotry etc.) is that your game has to be mainly meant for two players, so there's a huge scope of possibility. It starts on 01/01/2020 at 01:01 (GMT) and ends on 02/02/2020 at 02:02 (GMT). If you can, please give it a boost on Twitter: https://twitter.com/SpeaktheSky/status/1205374217501466624
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 07:52
|
|
|
UnCO3 posted:I've just set up Just the Two of Us Jam, a game jam on itch.io for 2-player rpgs, interactive fiction games, Bitsy games, and similar stuff! This looks pretty interesting; hoping some things pop up that might be good to play with my daughter, since convening her friends for regular sessions is agonizing even for a professional cat herder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 15:55
|
|
|
Just waiting on the printers now
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 05:12
|
|
|
That's awesome!
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
I was messing around with a class-less dungeon crawler stripped down D&D game, largely inspired by Into the Odd, and I got an idea for how to do magic that I liked but was wondering if there was a more elegant way to incorporate it within the setting. All characters start out as level 1 adventurers with no class or particular special abilities other than maybe a few granted by your species such as darkvision and the like. All characters are capable of casting magic from prepared scrolls, and the spell system would be level-less so that any spell is usable at any level (but maybe put in something so that spells get bonuses from the level of the caster). In the setting all magic is elemental in nature and the spells are like contracts with elemental spirits, with each scroll requiring complex rituals to create and the secrets of their creation are largely confined to the priests of the elemental temples. The idea that I had was to include a mechanic in the game that would allow characters to attempt to use scrolls to form a direct contract with the elemental spirit and have permanent access to that spell, but each character would only be capable of obtaining one spell per character level and once a character has formed a contract with the spirit of one element they are not allowed to cast any spells (even from scrolls) of the opposing element. Basically if you meditate on the various runes and seals written on a scroll and manage to commune with the fire spirits in order to have Fireball permanently engraved on your soul then the water elemental spirits want nothing to do with you and will not give you access to their power from here on out. There's 6 different elements total, so a higher level character would be able to obtain spells from up to 3 different elements and there's plenty of possible combinations that allow characters in the game to share access to magic as they find it since spells that are useless to one character would be able to be learned by others. I was kind of wondering what the best way to potentially distribute spells would be in the game itself though. Should they be something exclusively obtained from finding scrolls among enemy loot? Should the characters possibly come across ancient shrines to the greater elementals and enter a trance state to try and bargain for power? Should they have to join one of the elemental cults and gain access to power as a reward for helping to raise the cults prestige? Would the cults be furious to find out that you've been double dipping between multiple elements instead of remaining pure?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
and I'm happy to report it's finally here.  Thank you everyone for your help. https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/297793/HodgepocalypseC-Dark-Revelations--The-RolePlaying-Game changed urls since the previous links so https://www.hodgepocalypse.com/2019/12/the-hodgepocalypse-cometh-on-christmas.html https://www.hodgepocalypse.com/2019/12/what-is-hodgepocalypse.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2019 12:37
|
|
|
That's amazing, congratulations!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2019 10:58
|
|
|
Ty kindly. This has been the most enjoyable experience so far. Anybody who's also nearly done, let me know. I am practicing shameless promotion and want to help other people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
Time to make fully automatic weapons illegal since they're frustrating to write rules for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
As part of my design process for my Cutting Edge Cyberpunk RPG Project I tried to focus some of my thoughts by writing up the Mr Robot climax as a gameable process. If anyone would like to take a look, your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. It has pictures!
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2020 00:48
|
|
|
Fashionable Jorts posted:Time to make fully automatic weapons illegal since they're frustrating to write rules for. The best I've been able to figure out in a level based system is to make it based on the character's skills and powers to make them amazing. Arnie and Sly aren't 1st level characters. :p https://twitter.com/drevrpg/status/1214561272550739970 I got 4 modules at the "can polish off in a month" and trying to see which grabs you first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2020 17:43
|
|
|
Fashionable Jorts posted:Time to make fully automatic weapons illegal since they're frustrating to write rules for. The biggest problem with automatic weapons is that suppression mechanics (the main reason to use bullet hoses) are frustrating for a lot of players. I think there's a perception that a character is being "made" to seek cover or face penalties/attacks/what-have-you. I think the mechanics are just strongly suggesting a sane course of action, but I'm usually the "tactics guy" at the table. I'm the only player I've run for or played with that has dropped prone and sought cover in a gunfight, which has made my characters the sole survivors of multiple encounters. Low-level D20 Modern springs to mind, with guns that are quite likely to take out a character of 1st-3rd level character in one hit, with auto-fire guns including an AoE with a save to avoid damage in a system where save bonuses are likely going to be rock-bottom. Chaosium Call of Cthulhu has you roll to-hit for every bullet in a burst if I remember correctly, making Tommy Guns an instant death for any mortal targets in sight. That was twenty years ago, though, so it's pretty fuzzy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2020 21:50
|
|
|
shades of eternity posted:The best I've been able to figure out in a level based system is to make it based on the character's skills and powers to make them amazing. I'd like to vote for the Garrison of Gore, since I don't have a Twitter account.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2020 21:51
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:Chaosium Call of Cthulhu has you roll to-hit for every bullet in a burst if I remember correctly, making Tommy Guns an instant death for any mortal targets in sight. That was twenty years ago, though, so it's pretty fuzzy. You roll to hit once, and if you do hit, you roll a 1dX where X is the number of bullets fired in the burst, to see how many bullets hit. For example, you can take an M16 and dump the mag into some monster and roll a d20 to see how often you hit. If you rolled a 14, that means you have to roll for damage 14 times. It's a brutal and risky system, but otherwise not very realistic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2020 21:57
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:The biggest problem with automatic weapons is that suppression mechanics (the main reason to use bullet hoses) are frustrating for a lot of players. I think there's a perception that a character is being "made" to seek cover or face penalties/attacks/what-have-you. The main game I've seen suppression fire work clearly in is D Vincent Baker's Apocalypse World where shooting to kill and shooting to suppress are separate moves and one is riskier than the other. But the players roll all rolls in that game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2020 23:39
|
|
|
One of the editions of Shadowrun (2nd? 3rd?) had a suppression fire mechanic that was basically "if you enter this area, you're probably going to get shot." It was up to players if they wanted to stay exposed or not. And that's how suppressive fire is supposed to work. It is in a very real sense an area-denial weapon. It is also worth noting that AW2's excellent lay down fire move is player-facing. The MC-facing version of the move is generally either inflict harm as established or tell them the consequences and ask. FWIW, if I have done my due diligence as an MC to establish that an area is being suppressed and a PC elects to move through it anyway, I have zero problem saying, "awesome, but first take 3-Harm minus armor and make the Harm move for me" as a precondition to whatever it is they're trying to do. Because AW2 lacks the "harm-per-tick" battle mechanic, Vincent recommends that MCs be way more "weapons free" once the battle moves have been invoked (because now you're ... in a battle, and that's an inherently dangerous place to be).
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 02:23
|
|
|
Ilor posted:One of the editions of Shadowrun (2nd? 3rd?) had a suppression fire mechanic that was basically "if you enter this area, you're probably going to get shot." It was up to players if they wanted to stay exposed or not. And that's how suppressive fire is supposed to work. It is in a very real sense an area-denial weapon. I want to say that Stars Without Number has something similar, but I’m not near my books. E:fixed
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 04:27
|
|
|
The main thing with suppression generally is that it has to be very clear why such an action might be preferable to another action that has a better chance of directly neutralizing the enemy. Action economy is king - why take two turns when you could take one?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 05:24
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:The main thing with suppression generally is that it has to be very clear why such an action might be preferable to another action that has a better chance of directly neutralizing the enemy. Action economy is king - why take two turns when you could take one? When used against the PCs, it sets up a tactical puzzle to solve, if nothing else. If PCs use it, the melee guy can maneuver in to do his business? If the system or setting has character consequences for gunning down people (sanity/humanity loss, pay or status docked for excessive body count, loss of intel, morale, xp isn’t awarded for kills or is minimal, etc) there’s some reason for players to use suppression. If the system is fairly lethal, not dying is an incentive, maybe? I can’t really say much concrete, as I’ve never really had a chance to run or play in a dedicated tacticlol game where such mechanics could get a good outing. As to why not just shoot mans in the face, maybe suppressive fire has some minimal guaranteed mechanical effect, whereas shooting to kill is all-or-nothing (d20 combat for example) and has a poor chance to connect due to cover, atmospheric conditions, lighting, range, etc. Modern firearms are just kinda weird from a play perspective, since they level and dominate the playing-field so heavily in real life. “Cool detailed background for your 18 Str Barbarian, bro,” says the kobold manning a Vickers from inside a bunker.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 08:51
|
|
|
I was fiddling with a more granular combat model for my game recently, and I decided to treat suppression as a mechanical enforcement of its purpose in combat - degrading the performance of the enemy, rather than firing with the aim of creating casualties. I had it as an ammo-intensive, but guaranteed effect players could use to break overwatch or stop a melee bruiser closing on the team, etc. How this intersects with 'damage' is worth considering, though, since a system treating damage / hit points in the abstract might still qualify the threat to morale created by suppression as a form of damage in itself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 09:38
|
|
|
I did it. Literal years of work have been compressed down into a 79mb zip file of PDFs/images that has finally been sent to the overseas manufacturer. No more tweaks or changes. 36 shrink wrapped 70x120mm cards, 4 small sheets of 2-sided punchout tokens, a z-fold instruction sheet, 6 dice, and a shrink wrapped full color 2-part box. I feel so weird right now e: It's now officially official  
Sentient Data fucked around with this message at 16:25 on Jan 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:The main thing with suppression generally is that it has to be very clear why such an action might be preferable to another action that has a better chance of directly neutralizing the enemy. Action economy is king - why take two turns when you could take one? This is why I think that suppression should always be part of a graduated level of success on basically every shooting attack. As long as you manage to put shots into the general area of the target, the target will be discouraged from poking their head out. By making this an inherent part of the shooting people mechanics, players won't have to sacrifice shots that might hit in favour of shots that might discourage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 17:28
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:This is why I think that suppression should always be part of a graduated level of success on basically every shooting attack. As long as you manage to put shots into the general area of the target, the target will be discouraged from poking their head out. By making this an inherent part of the shooting people mechanics, players won't have to sacrifice shots that might hit in favour of shots that might discourage. Now if you want to talk about the psychological effect on the receiving end or being under fire, the there are a number of tabletop wargames that have rules that deal with this - generally called "shock" or "pinning" or something similar. Basically, it's an effect (that builds up over time being under fire) which must be overcome in order to perform useful actions. In some cases it's a binary thing (you either overcome it and can take your action as normal, or you don't and can't) and in some cases it's a steady degradation of your effectiveness which eventually leaves you unable to act. That is something I don't think I've never seen in an RPG but which I think could be really cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
Sentient Data posted:I did it. It is game design withdrawl. Do something different for the next bit before your game design bug gets a hold of you again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
I am working on draft 2 of a game and really hemming and hawing over whether to keep the *World move structure I had or break out into a looser 2d6 thing. I like the way *World moves can really help direct the fiction in appropriate ways, but they can also be sort of restrictive for some players. But if I ditch the move structure I have to find new ways to direct appropriate outcomes and aaaaagh Do people have thoughts on established structure vs DIY and how to lock into a rule ecosystem? This is one of the things I always come back to and obsess over when I know I should just make a choice and move the hell forward.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 20:46
|
|
|
Ilor posted:The problem with this approach is that the actual mechanics of the two types of fire are very different. In targeted fire, you are taking the time to acquire a target, steady your weapon sufficiently to aim, and squeezing off a single round that is intended to be as accurate as possible. When performing covering fire, volume is preferred over accuracy - you're only steadying your weapon for just long enough to get it pointed in the general direction before firing, and you may not have acquired an actual target at all (instead just firing at a particular area). These are two very different modes of engaging an enemy and have completely different objectives. In very broad terms, sorta kinda, but the suppressive effect exists regardless of which type is attempted, and by treating fire-to-actually-hit-the-target as having no suppressive effect a lot of games remove a very important dimension from firearms combat, which is that trying to kill the target suppresses them. In a lot of tabletop RPGs, you have to waste time that could be spent killing the target on suppressing them, which is not a dichotomy that exists in real life. (And broadly I don't think it should exist in games either, because it's rarely a fun dichotomy: it tends to create generate states where, as discussed earlier, nobody ever bothers using suppressive fire.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:In very broad terms, sorta kinda, but the suppressive effect exists regardless of which type is attempted, and by treating fire-to-actually-hit-the-target as having no suppressive effect a lot of games remove a very important dimension from firearms combat, which is that trying to kill the target suppresses them. In a lot of tabletop RPGs, you have to waste time that could be spent killing the target on suppressing them, which is not a dichotomy that exists in real life. (And broadly I don't think it should exist in games either, because it's rarely a fun dichotomy: it tends to create generate states where, as discussed earlier, nobody ever bothers using suppressive fire.) Hmm, I’ll have to mess around with some mechanics later. In 5e this would be easy, as you’d just give the target disadvantage to do things and maybe limit movement. I could see having a track similar to exhaustion, where you would have to spend actions to recover levels of morale, with the highest level leaving running away to gain cover or hunkering down as your only options. Purposeful suppression fire could just do morale damage in a small AoE and grant an overwatch reaction against movement or fire in the area. E: Elf SWAT
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 22:28
|
|
|
I think it depends on how useful the effects of suppression are from a mechanical and teamwork perspective. I bought Patrol recently and it does something along the lines of what you said - you can take Precision Fire actions that inflict suppression on a hit, and Suppressive Fire which can inflict minor damage, but always inflicts suppression. Suppression is graded, so multiple attacks on a single target can pin a target down, forcing them to take evasive or retreat actions. I think a non-damaging suppression mechanic (or reduced damage, at the very least) can be a robust alternative to a straight damage attack if the effects are strong enough. If suppression can reliably pin down, disadvantage or disable an enemy, that opens up the opportunity for other team members to take decisive attacks or manoeuvre out of harm's way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
Sentient Data posted:I did it. Congrats!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2020 09:37
|
|
|
Hey so I've been trying to write a game again and I need people to look at it (even though I haven't playtested it yet). The Gauntlet is a solo, single-move PbtA game about fighting your way through a building of assholes to rescue someone who was taken from you. As you progress through the game, you add or remove options from the single move. I'm not sure how the pacing is yet (I have the player fight through five floors, which may be too much for the resource grind I have in place), but right now I'm thinking more about readability and clarity of how the game works.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
I love it. Solitaire RPGs have fascinated me since the "Choose Your Own Adventure, but with stats and dice" games back in the 80s. For the unlockable healing and +drive moves, are you supposed to spend drive once (and only once) to unlock it, and then have it available once per floor after that? They seem like no brainers so why gate it on spending drive instead of just starting with them as standard moves and less starting drive?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2020 05:46
|
|
|
Paolomania posted:I love it. Solitaire RPGs have fascinated me since the "Choose Your Own Adventure, but with stats and dice" games back in the 80s. For the unlockable healing and +drive moves, are you supposed to spend drive once (and only once) to unlock it, and then have it available once per floor after that? They seem like no brainers so why gate it on spending drive instead of just starting with them as standard moves and less starting drive? The central mechanical idea is that the player needs to spend Drive to get a long-term benefit, but now that you point this out I see how that's a problem. I do want to keep something in place where you have to buy better 10+ options, though, so I should re-evaluate the options and see how I want this to work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2020 17:04
|
|
|
Instead of buying a regen ability that the game shouldn't technically require to win since it's an optional purchase, how about having drive act like a fairy in Zelda? If you die but have a certain amount of drive, it's spent letting you heal in place - if you don't have enough, then game over. It rewards those that don't need it, and provides a risk-reward on spending then past a threshold
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2020 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 07:18 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/drevrpg/status/1220381774368231424 trying to get feedback on my pc critters for Hodgepocalypse 5e.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2020 16:14
|
|