DICE PACKS BUNDLE
Page 3 of 9 First 12345 ... Last
  1. #21
    Isamill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    previously NZ but now Mt Isa Qld Australia
    Posts
    58
    I believe that Ardem is leaving the server up all of this weekend to have a nosy at the ruleset and make your characters (including a back up Bwaaahahahahaha - Ardem just possessed me for a moment there)

  2. #22
    Ardem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    920
    Yes it is up all weekend based on the IP in the calendar, this way you can review the ruleset which the details are in the library, and make your character if you choose.If i happen to be around I will say Hi, as I did for Isamill and gave him a run down.
    Last edited by Ardem; January 11th, 2014 at 08:32.

  3. #23
    A man in his mid-twenties steps onto the plane. Dressed in a light-tan Valentino sports jacket, dark designer pants, and dark Prada shoes, he carries what looks like a men's European purse over one shoulder while he removes his Armani sunglasses with his free, pedicured hand. He poses, as if for the camera <whose frame does NOT freeze>, and the following caption displays itself across his face, blocking him out entirely:

    Gage Phillips
    Men’s Fashion Magazine
    Model


    With an assured smile on his face, Gage notes those that have already arrived as he moves his way down the aisle to his seat across from Eliza. Settling in by the window, he surreptitiously removes a magazine from his bag and slips it onto the open seat cushion next to him. On it is his same assured smile plastered across the cover. He then busies himself with looking around and out the window or through his bag; taking care to appear nonchalant should anyone decide to make comment.

  4. #24
    Had a busy weekend. Haven't had a chance to look at the server. Will get a chance to review it on Monday if you're ok with leaving it up that long.

    I still owe you a write-up, Ardem. Will work on a back-up too, as I'm thinking I'm going to need one. Maybe Gage's sweet, middle-aged, NRA card-carrying, pistol-packing Aunt might do. Just a shame they'll never meet in-game as he'll be dead by the time she comes around. He's the nephew she never wanted...

  5. #25
    Ardem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    920
    Thanks for the games guys.

    Was some valuable input as well, first I just write up a quick synopsis.

    After a flying, a flash of light as seen by some passengers, all electronics and the engines cut out. The pilot made a good landing under trying circumstances however one the passengers was unlucky obtaining a broken leg in the process. The group of passengers split apart with the co-pilot and 2 passengers staying behind with he wounded person to help. The Pilot and the party lead down through the hills luckily choosing the correct path out of the wooded terrain.

    After coming across a war veteran, who unfortunately did like the Eliza did not appreciate the japanese girl in his small wooden shack. However with a bit of charm, the party managed to get a small amount of information with rumours and some weapons however rusty and in some case unusual, gave the part a little comfort.

    Leaving the old man, they headed to the west, down the only road out of the mountains, coming across at late teen girl, who obviously been raped and physiological damaged, no sooner had the found the girl a pair of bikers come around aiming to separate her head from her shoulders. However they did no expect to see what appeared to be a bearded lumberjack in the middle of the road. This put them off where the girl suffer a wound to the head and soon after ran off into the forest.

    Gage after pointing a rusted rifle that he knew did not fire scared the bikers off, as Mark swung and missed as they flew by.

    The party continued down the road until they found the biker group with had come across a group of campers who was slowly doing the most foul things to them one by one. Outnumbers and Outgunned the party made the wise choice of going around.

    Then disaster struck. The decided to traverse down a slope, where Hershel Walker slipped and fell rupturing his spleen. The old guy just who had absrobed so much damage over the years caught a sharp rock, that put him in all sorts of pain and needing medical help. He screamed like a little girl not once but twice, which alerted the bikers.

    He managed to redeem himself by pushing through the pain and walking with the pilot helping him.

    The ganger came on however the rifle all but stopped one bike in there tracks again which was nonfunctional. The single biker tripped and fell allowing for some damage to the target. The biker ran away as did the others after the damage he received.

    Thus ended the game for this week

  6. #26
    Ardem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    920
    Some rule changes that were suggested that i going to implement for next week, based on feedback please let me know if you believe this will improve or take away from the game. Also remember this help you as much as your opponents.

    Changing
    - Skill Values are rounded up and not down, as skill of 3 give you two dice in action dice.




    Undecided
    - Initiative currently is Perception + Intelligence + 1d10 roll, I came to the reasoning on this, the longest wait time in a combat arena, is not how coordinated a person moves. Aka a person diving will tend to dive the same speed as a a more highly coordinated person, the longest time I feel it is the thinking of what a person is going to do with the limited information at hand. However some people feel it should be Perception + Coordination, I would love feedback on this and will make it so for the next game.

    - Skill amount currently we have (determination + intelligence)x15 to work out a number of skill of 90. Based on a real life civilian. Is it too little or is it too much, I have had a call on both sides.

    - Max skill on character creation, is it smarter to put a maximum of 8 or would we have a character like Stephen Hawkins playing that would have a skill of 10, or should we limit a maximum of 2 skills that can be over 8, so far I not seen a plus or minus on specialized versus generalists characters however I found some like Mark currently johnnie on the spot as he is more generalists. But I have felt everyone has had something to contribute.

    - Target number and rolling higher then, I don't think this matter much as if I was to change it, it mean the base target number will be 6 rather then 5, to me it unimportant once you know it then it does not matter.

    - Rule of one, this can be taken out of reducing success however if you roll a 1 and have no success its a critical failure, this will reduce critical fails at the same time, this does allow the GM to create interesting events, as long as they are realistic.



    Decided
    Some things I have decided not to be changed, and I understand it may not be to everyone liking, much likes other rulesets, for instance there are aspects of pathfinder I love and hate. The reasons I have is made this decision, I built the ruleset with a vision in place and around a chage here for s single value, it would not work as I aimed for. Hopefully people can understand and I really do understand if this is a ruleset you do not like and want to pull out, at the end of the day its all for fun. <smile> sorry for the general disclaimer above.

    - Action and Knowledge are separate, with action at half the points however we are testing rounding up. Action skill more then 5 is too much. I limited opposing rolls where possible, another roll that I feel does not enhance the game and also its another roll that slow down combat, I need combat to be very fast, as in circumstance you may have more then normal amount of enemy and friends in a combat game. I need more then 5 dice for knowledge checks, as it give a gamesmaster the ability to block out based on success different outcomes on success, one or two or three is sometimes not enough detail.



    Why did I use a certain test latest game
    - Performance Check, instead of deception, I feel deception is more of an oral skill, in this case I felt gage was performing a) showing he knew how to fire a rifle and b) look like a experience combat veteran. It hard to determine if a gun is loaded so the lie was in the performance, he was also putting on a show to expose himself and say look at me I have a gun now run away. This is why I used performance.

    Coordination Check on the slope, it was a pretty steep slope of about 70-80 degrees, which was do able but if you slipped you would fall and hurt yourself, perhaps it was a GM slip up and made it sound more easier then what it seemed. A slip would of bounded down the slope and impacted quite hard on a rock until you stopped. You had no aids such as rope or even hold each other hand to help. Two people fell however one walks away with a bruise the other injures themselves as bad as it could of gotten.


    Feel free to tweak you characters for the next game as long as you do not change the general feel of the character. Thanks so much for the play test it was a blast.
    Last edited by Ardem; January 20th, 2014 at 08:15.

  7. #27
    Ardem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    920
    Some comments from Gage which I would like to share.

    Rolling
    This game has a LOT of rolling in it and that means a lot of randomness. Falling down an embankment and suffering a mortal wound is certainly possible (realistically speaking), probably not heroic in any sense, and definitely frustrating for the player cursed with the lousy string of rolls. But is it needed? If that’s the flavor of game you’re aiming for, go for it. Otherwise maybe a little less rolling. This coming from a guy that uses D&D’s “Take 10” rule as often as possible.

    This is more a GM personal play style then the ruleset then I can however scale back the rolling, that is more a personal preference in the way of GM then the ruleset. Also I used a lot of rolls this game to get used to the ruleset. Nothing in the ruleset tells a GamesMaster when to roll, they make the decision. As for the falling down I think I think I understated the slope. As for Take 10, personally not a fan, I would rather the character come up with a better way of achieving verbally and if the solution is worth of a non roll that in itself is an award.

    Also the mechanics right now seem tipped toward Critical Failures without offering any means of Critical Successes. With 1’s stripping away successes it doesn’t take much when we’re only rolling 1, 2 or 3 dice. 10’s, however, don’t end up being anything special beyond counting as a success and a whole boatload of successes don’t gain you anything beyond a regular success. It can be a downer when I roll 3+ successes on a hit and then proceed to roll a 1 on damage. Maybe you want to keep it this way. Or maybe you can relook at cutting back on 1’s power, boosting 10’s power, or otherwise working in some kind of Critical Success. I know you talked about being cautious when adding to the damage roll since the d10 roll can generate a 9 or 10 just as easily as it can a 1 or 2. More on that later, though.

    Hmm I do not want to make it too complexed, and I am not sure if the number of 1's that appeared were an unlucky amount of normal, it had to say in a single session, one thing I can toy with is a 10 can not be removed by a 1. I do not want to head down the road of 10 equal a reroll like in WOD, also we not seen it in melee but multiple bullets will see a wound per bullet making combat even deadlier. At this stage I not wanting to change this until i seen more evidence it there is more failures then success in a game. But will keep a count next game to see where we stand at, I would like to see 10% Critical Failures 30% failures and 60% successes. On damage, in many respects the disappointment is no different then if a person successful counter rolls, many times I had in Shadowrun 3-4 success and see the opponent pull out 4 body checks for 0 wound. The difference is I have removed counter roll, more on damage below.

    Lastly on this topic, I have to agree with others that needing a 6+ on a TN 5 roll is a little confusing. In my mind the Target Number is the number you want to hit. That’s how I associate it anyway. So if you’re looking for a 6+ generally, maybe just set the default TN to 6. If not, well the cognitive leap for players isn’t THAT big. heh

    Target Number to Beat v Target Number to Get, this is not a huge leap and more of an adjustment for me as Game Designer cause I can make these changes for next game, happy to try it and see if it works better for you as a player

    Attributes
    I like them. They appear to cover a decent spread of abilities and we’re 3pts above average. This is good, but since the game doesn’t allow for these points to advance any, would you consider bumping up this number a point or two? Also perhaps the rolling option offers too much of a spread. 2d10+4 means 6 is painful and 24 is overpowered. Maybe something like 10d10 (with a default TN) plus 10 would give a range of 10-20. And a way to start with slightly more than 15 (or 10-20) would be to offer 5 Bonus Points to help round things out; 2 to raise an Attribute or 1 to raise a Skill.

    You are right attributes do not change because the time to change it would be much longer then the event. Having said that there is nothing to stop a person saying I going to weightlift every day for 6 months to increase my strength and the GM says yup no problem.There is nothing stopping me add a third method of 1d10 + 10 (you actual do start with 15 points as you get a +1 on male or female so the base score is 15 not 14.) There is a risk and there should be a reward on the average being higher, so I might make it 2d10+5 for the other method.

    Skills, Part 1
    I like the variety of skills you offer. If you’re wanting to make sure you have enough, a good source I’ve looked to is the Alternity game system. Their skill sets are broken down pretty well with lots of areas to look. Also, I understand your reasoning that Attributes don’t necessarily have to be included in skill rolls, but I have a hard time putting aside the concept that a big, strong man punches harder and better than a little, weak woman. It would seem that Strength would factor into that somehow.

    Skill are unlimited, I have only listed the base skills you would need. I have chosen a base set that is really aimed at survival rather then everything. Having said that if I see a really good base skill I would add it.

    We also talked about how a 3 in a skill is as good (or bad) as a 1 when halving Knowledge checks into Actions. The suggestion at the time was to round up. But this might make scores of 10 next to useless. At 9, one extra d10 on a Knowledge check isn’t going to do much more and you already get 5d10 on the Action check. So why burn the point on a 10? I can think of a few ways around this if that is something you’d like to explore. Otherwise tweak it or keep it as you like.

    Skills, Part 2
    The way I categorize it in my mind, a rank of 1 means barely familiar with the skill, a 3 is average, 5 trained, 7 advanced, and 9 masterful. This is especially true if the Action check rounds up. I’m curious what you think is reasonable as far as how many skills a character will have points in. Can Average Joe have two 7’s, four 5’s, a bunch of 3’s, and a scattering of 1’s? Or does average keep you to a few 5’s and mostly 3’s? Plus is it possible to assume a base understanding of concepts that don’t require points? I’m sure any competent adult without skill in cooking can read the directions on a box and make himself some noodles or a frozen dinner. This came up once when Eliza tried to bluff the Biker but doesn’t have any skill in Bluff. There are basic skills that don’t require special training to attempt (anyone can try to jump or climb something) and specialized skills that do require training (I couldn’t even begin to perform brain surgery). So is there a way to allow rolls on basic skills even if you don’t have points in them? Going down that road might require a slight restructuring of the skill system.

    I was thinking the same thing that 10 is useless, so the maximum for a skill would be 9. On the parts where a skill of 0 makes a no attempt, the best I can think of is a +3 to modifiers, however this still does not sit well with me, the reason being say some the harder skill other then deception, such as military, ground. A attempt to start the engine would be a 5 for a person with this skill this would then make it an 8, they could start the engine and possible drive the tank, even though in there widest dreams never even know what the tank was. This is more unbelievable to me. I think the important area is more around character creation, perhaps there needs to be certain skills where you must have a single point aka deception, negotiation and trading. But in character creation there may be a great reason why you have 0 concept in trading. Lived your life in a hippie commune and never left until now. More thoughts needed.


    Damage
    Currently the damage is a straight 1d10. This means that a grazing scratch has the same likelihood of showing up on the roll as a headshot that kills outright. Is this your aim? If so, enough said. If not, there are a few ways to introduce a Bell Curve so most damage lands in the middle with the lesser and greater results turning up less often. This has the added benefit of being able to add in bonuses due to high strength or good attack rolls without pushing everything up to 10 too easily. More on that later if interested.

    Damage is designed, there is no active dodging or defending. I conclude wrong or rightly that the ability to hit a target via is on the onus of the attacker, as all people will do the best they can to move out of the way. However damage done in these certain are a combination of factors and I believe luck is an important attribute. You can get a full blooded swing and the target has stepped back 1/2 inch, on grazing him, which would of been a deep gouge. Or you have lined up a shot only for the person to pivot his torso 20 degree missing the heart and getting a standard wound, or vice versa the person is unlucky as it was a crap shot although on target they moved in such a fashion which causes them death. This is a deliberate game design choice, it was also a way to remove counter rolls which legth the combat and I feel is unrealistic behaviour, read comments on dodging below.

    Lastly, have you set down rules concerning daily food and water intake? I haven’t read through the rules fully, so maybe I’ve missed that. In-game we haven’t really dealt much with the fact that no one has eaten anything for the past 20 hours.

    Yes they are in there modifiers are applied, however these might be relaxed as I don't kick food modifiers in till day 5 and water ones till day 3.
    Last edited by Ardem; January 20th, 2014 at 08:07.

  8. #28
    Ardem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    920
    Thoughts on dodging.
    My view on dodging or defensive counter rolls is very negative, I believe that if you are dodging a bullet you are either diving or moving at haste which gives you modifiers already. I dislike where I see someone diving and avoid combat only to not be penalized by it when they attack. I do have actively defending which gives you a +3 in melee but unable to attack that round, and and you do have the ability to move, aka dive for cover or run fast for cover. My view on combat differs from the oWOD, Shadowrun and DandD concept of defensive combat. I know the where an case can be made, I am a better sword fighter then my opponent we both using sword so I should be able to beat him by blocking him. My suggestion would be to walk around your opponent, which adds a +1 modifier to you and him, if you have more dice this will not impact you as much. I am stronger then my opponent I should be able to get my attacks in better, then I would say grapple the play this is where strength tests are used well a counter strength you can get an attack where the opponent cannot. Perhaps there is some new modifiers that can be thought up rather then changing the system, perhaps additional to 'actively defending' could be 'parry and attack', which give +2 to both you and your opponent.

  9. #29
    I like those thoughts on dodging. I agree that bullets cannot be dodged. Those things are just moving too fast for people to track and react to. If someone pulls a gun, the best way to defend yourself is to run away or dive for cover. This is probably the case for other high speed projectiles too, like arrows. I also like the idea of lots of moving around in combat. D&D actually frowns against that with their Attack of Opportunities when running through threatened squares, but it would make sense as you're beating on your target that you're dancing around each other (boxing, wrestling, fencing, and cage fighting all come to mind).

    I think incorporating some kind of dodge component in melee is a good idea. A professional boxer or martial artist is going to have an easier time of blocking, ducking, or knocking aside your attacks before they beat you senseless. I don't know if you need to make it +2 though. +1 might be enough. Or maybe players could choose one or the other depending on whether they're performing a Light Defense or a Heavy Defense? My question is, what happens if you have 2 guys on you? Does this penalty apply to both of them? Or just one? Maybe this is where skill comes in? Someone with a 5 in unarmed combat is going to have an easier time fending off multiple opponents than someone with Skill 1. So what if you can apply this penalty to 1 target for every d10 you have in your Action check?

    Now at the risk of sounding like WoD, what about firearm attacks that are made within melee range? It happens in movies all the time. Bad guy pulls gun and monologues as he walks up to hero. Once within reach, Hero jostles the gun away so the shot misses. Wrestling ensues and then bad guy ends up shooting himself, but not before the Hero gets off some stinging comeback comment. Basically if your attacker is within reach where you can knock his gun aside and spoil his attack, would you be able to perform an "Actively Defending" maneuver then?
    Those of you who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand.

    FG License: Ultimate
    Server Alias: crazy cave dashing ninja
    TeamSpeak Server: ts.fg-con.com
    TeamSpeak Password (case sensitive): Dungeoneers

  10. #30
    Oh and for the record, Gage misspoke when it came to the Bikers. The word he was looking for was "savages" or "barbarians", not "cannibals". I realize that changed the whole meaning. heh. They were not eating the people they killed. Just having sex with the dismembered bodies. Neither of those a real pleasant image.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
FG Spreadshirt Swag

Log in

Log in