|
|
Post by WxMAN on Aug 9, 2018 9:36:08 GMT -6
I'm curious if anyone if our group has has ever considered designing an RPG system - outside of the typical quick homerule "fixes" to a given system.
If so, why did you do it? What were your goals in designing the system? Did you ever do any publishing? etc?
If not, why? Does it not appeal to your interests? Feel it is a waste of time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Aug 9, 2018 9:57:26 GMT -6
I've never thought about designing an RPG from the ground-up because the systems we usually use have worked fine for me. Plus, it seems like a lot of work for very limited return - D&D is always going to be the 500-lb gorilla, so trying to compete with that seems whacked to me.
So I'm generally more of the "house rule" fix kind of dude...
|
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Aug 9, 2018 10:12:12 GMT -6
As a group, we worked on a D20-based sci-fi system for a while. Not sure why, but it didn't get too far.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Aug 9, 2018 10:17:01 GMT -6
As a group, we worked on a D20-based sci-fi system for a while. Not sure why, but it didn't get too far. I don't recall that, to be honest... There was also your super-hero city thing, but that was (initially) more of a video game idea, I think... |
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Aug 9, 2018 13:16:08 GMT -6
As a group, we worked on a D20-based sci-fi system for a while. Not sure why, but it didn't get too far. I don't recall that, to be honest... That was where the Steel Ships and Space Marines name came from, I think. Seems like SQ was driving that. |
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Aug 9, 2018 15:28:35 GMT -6
I've never thought about designing an RPG from the ground-up because the systems we usually use have worked fine for me. Plus, it seems like a lot of work for very limited return - D&D is always going to be the 500-lb gorilla, so trying to compete with that seems whacked to me. So I'm generally more of the "house rule" fix kind of dude... I don't know if "compete" is the desire - but given I just came back from GenCon and got to experience all kinds of neat ideas and interesting systems.... things that couldn't really be replicated by a system like D&D. Clearly D&D is a touchstone in the tabletop hobby, but just like Monopoly is a household name in the board game hobby, it doesn't mean there aren't a ton of games out there that are much more interesting and fun to play. The point is that just because most are familiar with D&D shouldn't lock us in to that system for all fantasy games, etc - if there are systems that do the setting or feel of a game better, it seems like we should use that instead. |
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Aug 10, 2018 8:10:11 GMT -6
I had forgotten, but I have some notes lying around for what I referred to as the "Hollywood system."
It's a cinematic/literary simulation heavily inspired by Feng Shui but less over-the-top. At this point, I'd say it is more of a collection of sub-systems, little things I thought would work better. I stopped messing with it after a while for no particular reason. It's not nearly complete enough for publishing, but I suppose there's no reason it couldn't be completed, I just haven't been driven to that end. The niche hasn't exactly been filled the way I intended.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Aug 14, 2018 13:10:35 GMT -6
The real trick for a space combat system is finding a playable way to bring in the third dimension.
|
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Aug 14, 2018 20:25:03 GMT -6
That may be something a bit too difficult and I'm not sure particularly useful outside of more than a 1v1 scenario.... even then, I don't know what it would "buy" you... something I definitely need to think about
|
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Aug 22, 2018 18:02:45 GMT -6
@giger
Given you believe you are cursed to roll on the bad side of the bell curve - what would you like in a system (outside of being able to not roll shit) that would help poor rolling
|
|
|
|
Post by CommJunkee on Aug 23, 2018 11:41:24 GMT -6
@giger Given you believe you are cursed to roll on the bad side of the bell curve - what would you like in a system (outside of being able to not roll shit) that would help poor rolling Amber LOL!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Aug 25, 2018 10:39:10 GMT -6
Given you believe you are cursed to roll on the bad side of the bell curve - what would you like in a system (outside of being able to not roll shit) that would help poor rolling I don't have a problem with die-rolls, neverminding how I might dislike getting the short end of it—nobody likes that. In my own thoughts to the end of a "better system" I tend to dislike unnecessary die-rolling—excessive die-rolling, die-rolling when it doesn't serve any dramatic purpose, die-rolling when the outcome isn't even close. - Die-roll only when the contest is close and there is drama/tension riding on the result
- In D&D, if you have a +40 to hit an AC 10, you shouldn't bother rolling at all (unless there's a very specific, dramatic purpose for crit-hunting)
- My own "plans" (loosely termed) are to use a simple comparison of abilities to determine success unless (as above) there is either a dramatic reason to make a roll.
- This is really a "meta" system that could be incorporated into any system, but it might be preferable to have it mechanically supported by a/the system
Might be useful at some point to get together and discuss my eGURPS stuff—might be able to get some useful stuff out of it. |
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Sept 10, 2018 9:08:44 GMT -6
@comm: Have you played Numenera more than a one shot or two? I was curious since monsters are "ranked" from level 1 - 10 (I think?) and the GM never rolls to hit it the monsters can feel "samey"... ie a Level 1 Orc and a Level 1 Zombie are basically the same with different paint jobs. Might be useful at some point to get together and discuss my eGURPS stuff—might be able to get some useful stuff out of it. Would love to |
|
|
|
Post by CommJunkee on Sept 10, 2018 9:22:47 GMT -6
@comm: Have you played Numenera more than a one shot or two? I was curious since monsters are "ranked" from level 1 - 10 (I think?) and the GM never rolls to hit it the monsters can feel "samey"... ie a Level 1 Orc and a Level 1 Zombie are basically the same with different paint jobs. I have not had the opportunity to play Numenera. I am unfamiliar with the ruleset, Ethan has. |
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Sept 14, 2018 13:00:02 GMT -6
So here is weird question for those of us who like to lurk on the forum...
Assuming you enjoy combat while playing classes like the fighter, barbarian, rogue, etc - why? This isn't meant to be a "you shouldn't like this" question, I'm curious as to what you enjoy about it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Sept 14, 2018 15:05:51 GMT -6
Is this question about classes in-general or those classes? I don't like classes in-general, unless they're "more like guidelines than actual rules."
|
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Sept 14, 2018 15:55:37 GMT -6
Martial, non-casting classes... though it could also work for say, a ranger as they don't cast a lot either... this is more about, what do the fighter type / non-casting classes find fun in combat
|
|
|
|
Post by LabRat on Sept 14, 2018 16:11:16 GMT -6
Martial, non-casting classes... though it could also work for say, a ranger as they don't cast a lot either... this is more about, what do the fighter type / non-casting classes find fun in combat For me it is the risk of being more of a front line fighter. Don't get me wrong, I like spell casters too, but usually they are safely in the back and their big penalty is that a save wasn't made so X spell didn't happen. With fighters there's something a bit more....visceral when you engage an enemy. Sure it typically isn't as cerebral as spell casters but there's something satisfying with smacking something for a lot of damage but then running the risk of getting smacked back. Also with fighters in combat, you can always do something. You never have to sit something out, or worry about running out of spells, etc. That's why Clerics are my favorite class, they are versatile in melee and spell casting so its the best of both worlds. You can always do something when you are a Cleric |
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Sept 14, 2018 16:53:55 GMT -6
Me Like Smash Things. Rar!
I have a few reasons. The very first D&D character(s) that I played (D&D 1st Edition!) were Fighters (then later, Paladins) so that really had a big impact on how I approach fantasty stuff.
Further, most of the more fictional heroes that I dig are generally blade-type of characters. Conan the Barbarian, D’Artagnan & his fellow Muskeeters, Zorro, etc. I don't dislike magic-based characters, though I more often than not want it to be combined with some sort of swordsman type. Elric of Melnibone comes to mind there, as does Rand al'Thor, both of whom are tragic characters who are super badass fighters that happen to also be crazy powerful magic-users.
It's also a whole lot easier to really latch onto the Fighter type since history has a plethora of such characters - Minamoto no Yoshitsune, for example, or Leonidas - where spellcasters are wholly fictional.
YMMV
|
|
