From: magnus@brisk.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: net.rpg: Return of the FAQ
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 19:49:15 GMT


Frequently Asked Questions

net.rpg

Last Update: 14 Dec 1992

Magnus Alvestad

magnus@ii.uib.no

--
OBS: We have gotten into a dead period. Please keep up the discussion
so we can make some way before xmas. Then everyone can take a printout
of the faq with them for christmas pondering.

-Magnus

	net.rpg will be a traditional paper-and-pen based roleplaying
game developed on rec.games.design. These are some points that we have
views on and our decisions (if we ever make any). 


Q1.	What will the system be called?

A1.	The working title is net.rpg


Q2.	Should the system be skill-based or class-based?

A2.	A career / life-path controlled skill-based system with a
large degree of configurability depending on the genre and campaign. A
C program to make a life-path generation system based on asking the GM
questions has been suggested. There will also have to be a
point-allocation version. 

ketil suggested that the skill-system should be hierarchic, with
expensive root skills and cheap leaf skill. Martial arts would be a
root skill and langsword could be a leaf skill.

Ysgarth had a skill system where each skill had components. Talent,
Practice and Essential Knowledge. This is generally (bell) considered
to be a Good Thing, but perhaps a littly heavy for daily use?


Q3.	Should net.rpg be multi-genre?

A3.	Yes. Spike reminds us that we have to plan for 'difficult'
genres like superheroes up ahead. 

We also have to keep in mind that what really makes a game is the
genre description. A good example of a game with a KISS game system
and a brilliant genre is Cthulhu. We have to put a lot of work into
the genres.


Q4.	Should there be one game mechanic?

A4.	Not decided. There has been some opposition to using just one
kind of dice because it has been suggested that it makes for boredom.
Then again it is a lot more elegant, and will probably be. 

Well - one mechanic does not neccesarily mean one dice type.

torbenm suggests that we should use a small number of game mechanics,
so we don't have to force everything into one.


Q5.	What will the one game mechanic be?

A5.	There have been some proposals:

One large dice seems to be the most practical, either d20 or d%. This
will then be modified by the skill or task used. Either you roll and
then add the skill and see how high you get, min. 100 for a marginal
success, or you roll and try to get below your skill.

First might be better because it is more compatible with the Success
Level / Result Points system sketched in A6. 

jbridson proposed using a deck of cards. This did not seem to meet
with a lot of enthusiasm, though. The FUDGE system uses this approach,
so we shouldn't. 


Q6.	What does the result of the game mechanic tell us?

A6.	The degree of success or failure. Suggestions:

1.	Each skill its own result table. Unpractical.

2.	Detailed descriptions of all the general levels of
success/failure, including examples + links to actual results in most
skill descriptions, including numerous examples.

3.	There will be a success table, where you find a Success Level
or how many Result Points you get. Some skills use Result Points to
achieve a more realistic success resolution, other skills and tasks
that there aren't skills for normally use Success Levels. 

There was a table for this posted, but I don't have it - repost?


Q7.	Combat; detailed or streamlined?

A7.	Detailed and Streamlined. We don't want to make another Prince
Valiant - we are aiming for considerable realism, or at least
believeability. On the net experts in all fields are available, we
will use them. 

mathers suggested that we use a map-based combat system. magnus does
not think should be required, but it might be nice for an optional
rule - especially in those mother-of-wars battles.

The combat system has to be scalable, so you can calculate results on
whatever level you want, from armies vs. armies to units vs. units to
team vs. team to person vs. person. 

ketil suggested a pentration-oriented system for man-to-man combat.
This is a system that would allow for a lot of realism, but it would
probably be too cumbersome for daily use. Then again, maybe we should
decide to make the combat system, lethal. Then penetration would be a
good thing. It might make it less tempting for the GM to throw a ton
of orcs at the characters too..


Q8.	How do you roll for damage?

A8.	You already did that when you rolled to hit. Factors are how
well you hit, strength, weapon type, quality, armor, toughness. Some
people (ralph) think that damage does not increase with skill. He
seems to be a minority, though.

There are also weapon considerations that must be observed here.

If we go for the pentration, damage will be integrated.


Q9.	Hit points or wounds?

A9.	Hit points distributed onto body parts, but also with a
'central HP bank' that you draw from each time you draw from a body
part. When you get low, you are wounded and cannot perform some tasks.

The penetration system makes for something more like this;

Wound Record for Peter:

Old wound in left leg, below knee; +10 fatigue points for actions
involving that leg (walking, running, carrying..) A support bandage
will reduce this to +5.

Half of one finger missing on right hand (cut by sword), -5 on skills
involving dexterity and right hand.


Q10.	Hit locations?

A10.	When you roll a d100 to hit, you just switch the digit to find
the hit location. If you want to hit a spesific location, you can
subtract from your to hit roll (before making it), and add (or
subtract), to your hit location roll. 

This is maybe a bit too cinematic. Any other ideas for hit locations.
Maybe you could say what you tried to hit before you roll. If you hit
well, you hit what you tried to hit. If you hit, you hit close, if you
barely hit, you hit far away from the 'target location'.

If you hit someone wiht a special body structure, you just roll for
what part of him you damage, for example agility. A one hit point
damage to agaility would be a minor leg wound for a biped.

tdunn said this: If you have a higher skill, you get to roll more dice
at the hit-location table, and then you choose one of them. Not very
realistic? 

If we use the penetration system, it will tell us all about the hit
location. The general idea is that you should hit somewhere close to
what you aimed for if you hit at all. (ketil, post the formulas for
this, please.)


Q11.	Character Generation?

A11.	We don't know yet - but see A2. There will be a career
creation framwork built based on your genre and campaign. There is a
lot of choice on the side of the player (and of the GM). When you
generate a character, you roll up (or calculate) a lot of stats. When
you copy these to the Player Sheet, you just copy the ones you will
need in that campaign / genre.

I you should some day need another stat, you can just find it on your
Character Generation Sheet. 

The bad guys have the same stats as the characters do. Just better :-)

cffitzge said something important: If we can create characters just
the way we want them to be, why should we look for advancement,
adventure and all that? magnus thinks the fun should mainly be in the
role-playing itself, not so much in advancement.

Classes, if we do decide to have something like them, should only
represent a talent in a certain direction, says fts5729.

magnus has sketched a character generationa alternative where you
first find (roll for or select) a lifepath, including parents,
education etc. - and then calculate stats based on this and an
(maybe optional) roll.

See also Q19.

jbridson (robert) is only one of several proposing weaknesses. If you
play with a 'restricted' character generation, a weakness would give
you extra points to distribute among positive attributes / abilities.

Old wounds could be weaknesses, see Damage above.

Nick_Janow thinks it is important that it's possible to create a
completely random persona, with everything decided by the dice. This
will bring an extra dimension of challenge into the roleplaying.

leet suggested that at each point in your lifetrack where there was a
choice, you could spend a point to get a skill, or get a point for
getting a weakness. When you are out of points, you start the game.
magnus thinks there is a problem with this; you don't know before you
start when you are born - this could be important for starting values,
possibilites, parents etc.


Q12.	How do I improve?

A12.	All characters in a party get the same amount of experience
from each adventure/part - then they can distribute them to any skills
used during that adventure. There seems to be a strong majority for
skill advancement vs. levels.

bell wants to give experience points for time played. He does not
quite fancy the entire idea of experience, because it tends to give
players the wrong motivations.

magnus says a few words about advancement not only in strength, skills
and so on - but also in maturity, values, principles and maybe in some
genres mental illnesses.. :-)


Q13.	Human touch.

A13.	There has been some discussion as to where the 'human touch'
should be focused. magnus suggests that the human touch is essential
in details as well as in the grand picture, while mav wants this to be
saved for the campaign and the "role-playing". He wants the rules to
take care of all the small-scale effects. 

OBS: The human touch is when the GM determines effects and such
himself, instead of them being stated in the rules/tables. Also when
'Outstanding success' is translated by the GM to 'You backstab the
villain as you planned. Your long dagger penetrated through his chest
and created a big spray of blood onto his comrades, who freeze in
panic and terror.'


Q14.	What should be in net.rpg?

A14.	At least this (according to RDT111 and others):

System for creating characters
Mechanics for learning skills
Mechanics for using skills
Combat System
Advancement system
Campaign Advices
Customization Guidelines

Genre spesifics:

Magic system
Equipment lists
World outlines
Races (including monsters)


Q15.	Are there any attributes yet?

A15.	jliukkon proposed these:

Build
Fitness
Consciousness
Subconsciousness / Instinct

also these from Brian:

Brian> Physical:
Brian>  Strength:
Brian>   Power, Build, Speed
Brian>  Toughness:
Brian>   Endurance, Resistance, Pain-threshold
Brian>  Dexterity:
Brian>   Accuracy, Agility, Flexibility

Brian> Cognitive:
Brian>  Reasoning:
Brian>   Logic, Comprehension, Faith
Brian>  Wisdom:
Brian>   Intuition, Charisma, Perception
Brian>  Knowledge:
Brian>   Memory, Experience, Studiousness

Brian> Energy:
Brian>  Magic:
Brian>   Invocation, Alteration, Channeling
Brian>  Psychic:
Brian>   Equilibrium, Synchronicity, Essence
Brian>  Innate:
Brian>   Control, Force, Focus

There is disagreement as to whether the stat tree should be freeform,
balanced or binary. We will have to agree on this before we make the
tree. I think freeform is the most adapable alternative. IMHO it makes
it easier to add/remove stats/brnaches. Makes the calculation of
scores harder, though.

Here's a freeform tree:

Level 1         A1)  All abilities
Level 2         B1)  Physical   B2) Non-Physical        B3)  Magical
Level 3         
(Under Physical)        C1) Reflex      C2) Strength  
(Under Non-Physical)    D1) Personality D2) Willpower D3) Intelligence  
(Under Magical)         E1) Luck        E2) Power
Level 4
(Under Reflex)          F1) Dexterity   F2) Balance     F3) Quickness
(Under Strength)        G1) Brawn       G2) Constitution
(Under Personality)     H1) Charisma    H2) Creativity  H3) Attract.
(Under Intelligence)    I1) Memory      I2) Reason
(Under Power)           J1) Capacity    J2) Resistence

and here's a binary tree:

			All stats
		Physical	Mental/Magical

			Physical
		Fortitude	Coordination

			Mental/Magical
		Mental		Magical	

			Fortitude
		Constitution	Strength

			Coordination
	Hand-eye (Dexterity)	Whole body (Agility)

			Mental
		Willpower	Intelligence

			Magical
	Power/Resistance	Luck/Intuition/Sensitivity


Q16.	What is this modularity that people talk about?

A16.	It is 'hiding methods behind information' - for example, the
stats on your character sheets are independent of the method used for
creating them. So, they could be generated through a life-path system,
rolled up, just written down, or some combination. The rest of the
rules will then be able to use these stats, without 'knowing' how they
were generated. Generalize this, and some interesting thoughts will
pop up in your head.

Each method will be a way to generate/process/use information from
other methods (or the core rules?). There will be several methods that
exclude some other methods. For example, you can only use one method
for one skill. (This was proposed by dalamb and processed by method
magnus. :-)


Q17.	Magic? How does it work?

A17.	There has been some discussion.

First some people (me and ketil) think that magic should be largely
restricted to NPCs. PCs should only be able to use petty or
preproduced magic (magic items) - however we realize that a lot of
people out there want to use magic, so:

There are different kinds of magic. Some (wizard/spell magic) is based
on intelligence and knowledge of magical arts. Almost like a science.
With an unreliablitity depending on genre.

Maybe there should be two kinds of wizard magic, the scientific kind
and the very unreliable strange forces-kind. Of course, you would
normally not want to have both in one genre. (Maybe the scientific for
NPCs and the unreliable for PCs. :-)

Then there is clerical magic, where you ask a god for some miracle or
other, and it happens. This is based on faith, willpower and of course
your standing with the god in question.

Then there is psionic magic:

		: 
that it effectively has sub-sentiences in it.  As one of these
sub-sentiences, if a psionic changes his view of what reality is, and
concentrates hard enough 'reality' will actually change.  The biggest
problem with this, though, is that any other sub-sentience is likely
to be very convinced that the universe actualy is the way it seems,
and is going to be increasingly sure of that as the piece of the
universe that the Psionic is trying to change becomes more and more
important to the observer.  Thus, it's almost impossible to use
Psionics to affect another person against his will (because anyone
who's alive is very sure
		:

I think this is very exciting. It could work in wonderful ways and
create so many strange and fascinating situations.

Also remember that the GM just uses the magic that he wants in his
game / genre. No reason to critizise something someone else has
proposed jsut because you don't want it all - someone else does. Now
if you think it'd be better to *change* it, that's something else.


Q18.	Skills, how do they work?

A18.	Well, there are a lot of ideas here. ketil suggested that
there should be a lot of skills, organized into a hieriarchy. For
example, below a skill 'Computers', there would be at least
'Technical', 'Programming' and 'Use'. Different leaf skills would
depend on different stats.

The border between skills and stats is getting a bit misty, maybe we
could just put them all in a conglomeratical hieriarchy?


Q19.	What's a LPE?

A19.	It's a Life Path Element.

This was suggested by dalamb - you put together a lot of LPEs to
contruct a lifepath. These LPEs are of a format similar to this:

	Permission to change certain skills or stats (by spending
points, choosing from a list, random rolling...) Also weaknesses that
you must take (or choose from a list of them).
	
	Access to items (F.ex chivalry LPE lets you acquire chivalric
weapons and armor. (For free, pay points or pay money))

	Requirements for skills, age or other LPE completed.

	Cost of LPE in age, points etc.

The GM would create new LPEs as neccesary. Most would include some
textual background information to be fleshed out by the player.
	
	
Q99. 	How do I discuss aspects of net.rpg?

A99.	Post on 'rec.games.design', but remember to put NET.RPG in the
Subject, with the sub-subject, for example "NET.RPG: Exp Points".
Maybe there will be a rec.games.netrpg group. Time will show.


Q100.	What's next?

A100.	You tell me what you think about the ideas I have presented
and the assumptions I have made. If there is too much discussion on
one issue, I will cut the cream and decide. 

It might be better at a later stage to distribute that responsiblity,
so different people decide about different parts of the system.

jbridson suggested this time plan:

	Decide what skills represent. 
	How do stats work with skills?
	Extrapolation at both ends of scale.
	'Shells': char-generation, damage, hit-location etc.
	Genre-spesific rules
	Source material

In other words; mechanics first and then things like the character
generation. The toughest part first.. :-)

We must also decide *What is a characteristic?*. (Spike)


Q101.	What people are working on net.rpg?

A101.	Here are some of them, in no particular order:

Those that are listed as committee members may be so if there is a
committee. I'm not sure at the moment. sos has a cynical attitude
about committees.


magnus@ii.uib.no		Maintainer of FAQ, committee member
mav@cs.uq.oz.au			Lore creator, see 13.
tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu		<no to tables - 1 net.rpg no way!>
 also first to say "net.rpg: I am all things to all people" 
RDT111@psuvm.psu.edu		Committee member
mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au	<combat on hexmaps>
ketil@ii.uib.no			<hierarchic skill system>
bell@beethoven.cs.unc.edu	<skills,mechanics>
cffitzge@IASTATE.EDU		<mostly single-genre>
fts5792@cs.tamu.edu		<classes=talent>
jbridson@kean.ucs.mun.ca	(robert) <weaknesses>
Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca	<random char-gen>
sos@oz.plymouth.edu		<multiple net.rpg's>
cleggp@aix.rpi.edu		<integrate, don't compromise, system1>
(Spike)				<planning, d6>
morrow@thorogood.rutgers.edu	<1 style, 1 game>
torbenm@diku.dk			<committee = ouch!>
jliukkon@cc.helsinki.fi		<stats>
leet@acsu.buffalo.edu		<life-path>
dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca		<hiding methods behind information>
Newsgroups: rec.games.design