3
…the unpredictability of players’ actions. I don’t THINK I’ll ever write one. (Never say never. I am a Gemini and I might wake up one morning and suddenly do it.)
And I DO currently run a diceless initiative system in my “Code” games.
I’m not a fan of card-based TTRPGs. I can see the appeal.
3
2
I think this has been addressed incidentally in thoroughly detail with spreadsheets and charts etc. “Depends on the size of the modifier with d20” etc.
I’ve played diceless games - number of counters to spend, counters in a bag, points to allocate per round etc. Where the random factor is…
2
#TTRPGTHOUGHTS
1
Towards a new game (10) - randomising factors
One of the first notes I jotted down when I had these ideas swirling around my head and thought “do I need to look at writing a new game” was:
“Dice mechanic - d20 plus number is too spread out. 2d6 not enough”
1
I accept that I’m not in the mainstream and have a massive game in my experience around the 90’s etc.
So I’m always fascinated stories of with parallel evolution and the idea that people came to a conclusion (decades ago) it’s taken me 40 years to discover.
I always take everything you (and others) say with the intent it is meant.
Honestly, this is meant to be a safe space.
Shhhh………
(That’s the plan. Player bookings haven’t opened yet as far as I know but looking at all the great things on offer that’s top of my list….)
A figure, armed with sword and shield, confronts a suspiciously well-lit crystal set in ruins, deep in a forest.
no good will come of this
#digitalart #rpg #D&D
Three cool scientists introduce their work "Our new theory has been submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, but we feel its depths and intricacies are best appreciated on the limited-edition vinyl release."
My latest cartoon for @newscientist.com
So what you’re basically saying here is it’s an alternative to BRP I should be looking at if I want to offer to Referee at Chaosium Con?
YES!
EVERWAY!
That’s the one I own.
Where did I get EVERWHEN from? I’ve never even heard of that.
One for my #UK peeps:
See it.
Say it.
Sod it.
Good point, well made.
Some good ideas, (I like post 3).
Please Starmer don’t resign until Saturday!
It turns out what I actually NEED to write is a framework on how to create a satirical scenario at the last minute.
See? That’s ANOTHER project!
3/3
* Going quite well, thank you. I’ve got the character sheet and character generation sheet done which with the extant rules framework is all you need to get going.
What I need now is to write a brand new scenario. But I can’t write it until Friday because it needs to be satirical.
2/3
Are you MAD!
Set myself ANOTHER project?
I’ve only just reported on my last con. I’ve got to plan and set up for next weekend. (Write a new game and design a new scenario.*)
Plan for future cons. (Filled the gap on 16th with Southampton Comicon, thank you.)
And maintain my presence on here.
1/3
This is actually what I’ve started doing - unofficially - at cons and/or in time-dependent games.
“I think we can all see where this is going. Instead of just sitting here rolling dice, are you all OK with us calling here and just narrating the outcome.” I’ve said that more than once.
Ah!
EVERWHEN.
I’ve got that. I bought it for a fiver (I think, possibly a tenner) in The Works. I’ve run it.
It’s very hand wavey. You read a “Tarot” card to decide what happens.
If you’ve ever seen a Tarot card reading you know how subjective the outcome is.
…the way all you people describe.
Honestly, it’s like I’m living in a parallel universe.
2/2
Again a FATE comment that makes it sound like the perfect game for me. A game custom designed to scratch all of my itches.
But:
I DON’T UNDERSTAND fate!
The books just don’t read, to me, like the way all you people say they work.
I’ve never played a game of FATE at a con that’s been run…
1/2
MOST dungeon crawlers are like that. That’s what I’m working against.
But even with everything I do, I still find my super fast narrative games a bit boring.
Could you expand on this? I’m not sure I understand what you meant?
7
After all, Errol Flynn and Basil Rathbone didn’t just stand there fencing. They did something different each round. Up and down stairs, throwing things etc.
I do I just accept that I’m too easily bored?
7/fin
6
Insist players make a DIFFERENT narration each round or forfeit their roll (or have it reduced from multiplying to adding?)
Or just if their roll the previous round failed?
Or have cards which people draw each round with combat elements which affect the roll?
Or swap opponents randomly.
6
5
So I switched to the LOWEST of the two dice rolled and the current c. 3 round resolution.
Which is a little too long for me with the current simplicity of conflict resolution.
So how do we introduce more granularity and change into conflicts without over-complicating things?
5
4
But I couldn’t work out how to do it.
So then I set the damage as the HIGHER of the 2d6 rolled. PCs and opponents have 6 hit points. So. The chance of a 6 coming up and someone/thing being taken out in one blow is lightly under 1 in 3.
BAM! Fast, deadly, conflicts.
Playtesters HATED it.
4
3
And come to help with the spider. But, basically, combat starts and we’re locked into 5-15mins of die rolling.
I tried to avoid this at the design stage.
I was originally aiming for a game where players put their inputs in at the start of a conflict. Dice are rolled once. Everything sorted.
3
2
I’m finding doing the same thing for 3 rounds a bit boring.
“You’re being attacked by a giant spider - how do you respond” Fine. Roll the dice.
But there’s nothing to do in round 2 except roll the dice.
Same for round 3.
There will be some changes as other PCs dispatch their opponents.
2
#TTRPGTHOUGHTS
1
Towards a new game (9) - repeating the same thing is a sign of insanity. Attrition is boring.
This is probably a personal quirk. My games are currently “Theatre of the Mind”. Conflicts normally last about 3 rounds. All PCs “square off” against separate threats.
1
That’s why I’m pedantic about using the term “Referee”.