From: towo@swob.nullnet.fi (Mika Toivola)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 22:45:14 EEZ
Distribution: world
Organization: Sweet Oblivion

magnus@brisk.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad) writes:

> 	FAQ> Q3.  Should we be multi-genre or just one?
> 
> 	FAQ> A3.  We seem to be gravitating toward the multi-genre end
> 	FAQ> of the spectrum.
> 
> Why not, concentrating one two-three 'default' genres. These should be
> quite different, like fantasy, Space sci-fi and War today with modern
> weapons, tanks etc..

        Sorry, but I really belive we should let the players & GM have 
ANY kind of background for their adventures, especially so since we're 
trying to make the best possible (compromise) system. I believe it would 
work. We just have to construck the system in a way that really mirrors 
the real world, i.e. needs not serious balancing.

> 
> 	FAQ> Q4.  Should there be just one game mechanic?
> 
> 	FAQ> A4.  Yes, to whatever reasonable extent is possible.
> 	FAQ> Everyone does, of course, agree with the concept of a
> 	FAQ> simple mechanic.  Making one mechanic for all (or as many
> 	FAQ> as possible) situations does make the system simpler to
> 	FAQ> learn and remember.
> 
> I don't really know about this. Yes, I know it's simpler - yes I know
> it's more elegant. But personally I have this feeling that a
> one-mechanic (in the one-dice sense) can be boring in a way. If no one
> agrees with me on this one, I'll just forget it.
        I beg to disagree, for the reason you presented: universality. 
I'm sure GM's (and players why not) will make their own little special 
rules for thei own special situations anyway.

> 
> 	FAQ> Q5.  Okay.  What does the game mechanic look like?
> 
> 	FAQ> A5.  We don't know yet.  There have been several
> 	FAQ> proposals, but none has taken the lead yet:
> 
> All the proposals are based on d20 systems - IMHO d20s are too small.
> We should use d100s. These give a much wider range of results, making
> for a better implementation of critical 'hits' / 'misses'. 
> 
> Open-ended-ness is nice though. How about this:
> 
> You roll 1d100, if you roll 5 or less, you roll d100 again and
> subtract the result. If you roll 95 or more (or more) on the first
> roll, you roll again and add. Then you add modifiers. 

        I personally dislike open-ended thinking, but I rather like to 
use a combination on dice, so thet the probability chart is a bell-curve 
(I hope I'm making myself understood). So that a result in either end of 
the table is MUCH less probable than the average one. Personally I like 
the idea of three (3) dice, since 2 don't give a curve sharp enough, and 
4 would probably be too clumsy. Say that we would use 3 dice of D10, the 
chance of throwing a 3 is 1 against 1000 (I think), sounds like 
improbable enough. That would give us a scale of 3->30. What do you say? 
No need for re-throwing :-)

> 
> 	FAQ> * One generic result table with descriptive results such
> 	FAQ> as "Average" and "Spectacular" success.  These success
> 	FAQ> levels may be described further in the individual skill
> 	FAQ> descriptions.
> 
> This is the way to go. With both a) detailed descriptions of the
> success/failure levels (including examples), and b) links to actual
> results in the skill descriptions, including examples of critical
> failure results.
        As far as I'm concerned: Agreed on.
> 
> 	FAQ> Q7.  Combat:  Detailed, or streamlined?
> 
> Uhm.. detailed and streamlined? :-)
        Yes, I say two systems, one used normally, the other in "mass 
combat" situations (or when playtime is running out :-)
> 
> 	FAQ> Q8.  Combat II:  How do I roll for damage?
> 
> 	FAQ> A8.  You already did when you rolled to hit.  The
> 	FAQ> concensus is that the damage should be partially
> 	FAQ> reflected in how well you struck your blow.  Other
> 	FAQ> factors might be strength, weapon type and quality, and
> 	FAQ> armor and toughness.
> 
> Agreed. And the skill of the attacker. I think we should have a Hit
> Location chart. This would go from 01 to 200 - and you get your hit
> location by switching the digits of your original, unmodified d100 to
> hit roll, and then adding your skill with the weapon / attack form.
> 
> Maybe it should also be possible to add here by subtracting from the
> to hit roll (you have to say so before you roll, of course) -
> representing an attempt to go for a soft spot, with a piercing attack
> that will be deflected if you miss. 
> 
> These are details though.

        Yes. Note that in figuring out the damage we should not take into 
account the skill, since it was already used in checking how well the 
blow hit. You are stuck with the D100 now, let's get the basics straight 
first, you seem to be fine-tuning already :-)
> 
> 	FAQ> * Keep it Simple, Stupid.  Hit Points are easy.  Wounds
> 	FAQ> are hard.
> 
> Hit points are simple - if you put hit points on each hit location, or
> general hit area (at least), it's a bit more realistic and
> complicated. I cannot swallow the general one-big-hp-pool idea.
> 
> Then we could have a big hp pool in addition, so every hit subtracts
> from both hit points. Is that worth the hassle? If you're down to 0 on
> your big pool, you're dead meat. If you're down to 0 on a body area
> HP, that part is dead meat.. :-)
        Yeah, sounds good, sorry, I mean sounds OK for the game. If you 
use a Top Secret SI -type "cross the damage boxes out" system, it 
shouldn't even be too big a hassle. Why not give a minus to skill equal 
to the damage the bodypart has taken that is being used?
> 
> 	FAQ> * A Wound System doesn't have to be hard.  But we don't
> 	FAQ> seem to agree on what type of wound system to use,
> 	FAQ> exactly.
> 
> ..or if you're down to .5 HP on a part, it's hard to use it / you
> can't use it? What do you think?
> 
> 	FAQ> Q10. Combat IV: Can I strike vital blows to the head?  If
> 	FAQ> so, how?
> 
> Well, I suppose we could do it like this .. If you want to hit a
> spesific location, you f.ex subtract 20 from your hit roll. Now you
> cna use those 20 on the hit location chart ( plus or minus ). You
> might still not be able to hit the head, but the chance is larger.
        Sorry, I quite couldn
't figure out what you're saying there. Are you still talkin D100?
> 
> Of course your head HP would be lower than f.ex chest HP, so a
> violent, smashing or crunching attack to the head should be able to
> finish off the victim. Or at least send him dreaming.
> 
> 	FAQ> it's possible a shot to the arm should be able to hit the
> 	FAQ> chest if it misses its mark.
> 
> This would be pretty nifty - any good ideas on how to do it? I mean -
> if you miss with a called shout - you hit a close body part?
> 
> 	FAQ> We also haven't decided how to make a hit location system
> 	FAQ> work for non-human critters such as dragons, squid, and
> 	FAQ> three-headed ogres.
> 
> A hit location chart with most body setups, and then individual hit
> location charts on those that need their own (like the 3headed ogre).
> 
> 	FAQ> Q11. Character:  How do I create one?
> 
> 	FAQ> A11.  Well, give us time.  Rome wasn't built in a day.
> 	FAQ> It seems we want to have enough characteristics/
> 	FAQ> attributes to give a sense of detail, but we don't want
> 	FAQ> too many, either.
> 
> I like the TW2000 character generation system. Maybe the simplest way
> of doing this genre-independent would be to have a large number of
> stats, and then a genre-spesific character sheet listing just relevant
> stats for everyday use. (But having all the stats on a Complete
> Character Description With All the Small Bits Included)
> 
> 	FAQ> * Will the bad guys (be they thugs, dragons, or giants)
> 	FAQ> have the same attributes, just in different ranges?  Or
> 	FAQ> will they be described completely differently?
> 
> Same stats is the most elegant solution. Makes for a simpler combat
> system too, when you can just turn the cards around.
> 
> 	FAQ> * What are the attributes, and what are the ranges?
> 
> They should be weighted, like 3d6, 4d6 (minus something?) Well in fact
> a 0-99 range would perhaps be nicest, but harder to load. 10d10? 
> 
> 	FAQ> * Are the values from zero up?  Or can a character have
> 	FAQ> negative strength, which makes his die rolls lower?
> 
> Ahm.. no I don't like negative stats. No good reasons though. 
> 
> 	FAQ> Q12. Character II:  How do I improve as a character?
> 
> I don't have a clue. Well, roleplaying should be rewarded, but that's
> so easily affected by the player's charisma and ability to present his
> thoughts and ideas.
> 
> Maybe all characters should get an equal amount of experience points
> after solving a part of the struggle, surviving etc. - and then every
> player can distribute these points on skills he has used. The more he
> puts on a skill, the larger is the chance that it will rise, and with
> more.
> 
> 	FAQ> A14. First, I think we should discuss those questions
> 	FAQ> above that don't have definite answers yet.  Perhaps
> 	FAQ> there should be some committee that makes decisions after
> 	FAQ> a subject has been talked to death.  I don't know.  I
> 	FAQ> just wrote this FAQ.  Don't bug me.
> 
> Discussion, that's my middle name. Well in fact I don't have a middle
> name. I have an initial though. It's "Y" - so it's not very initial
> alphabetically speaking, but it serves its purpose.
> 
> 	FAQ> it might be best to have some people making the decisions
> 	FAQ> once a subject has reached critical mass.
> 
> Ok, that's me. :-) Any objections?
> 
> -Magnus (!kibo)


--------
towo@swob.nullnet.fi (Mika Toivola)
Sweet Oblivion (+358 0 8092678, V.32bis 8N1) Official SRP Headquarters
Newsgroups: rec.games.design