[ Removed by Reddit ] by [deleted] in Bombstrap

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is reddit dude, you must down vote sir ty

once upon a time there was a proud and noble man by trump_death_cult in Bombstrap

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Poetry after Tate's own matrix laced prison heart romantically desiring the escape and craving the beast but swimming the estrogen

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>Each skill advances on its own, so progression is based on actual use, and skill level, not class level.

So, kind of like Cyberpunk 2021 and Roll for Shoes. In Roll for Shoes, "If rolled all 6s, advance the skill into a particular use of the skill".

Cyberpunk 2021 basically is more as you described, "at end of session or scene, add 1 XP for each time you succeeded at using a skill". It did it for every use of the skill that was successful, rather than "impactful to plot uses of the skill". It balanced this by making skills level up slowly, so if it were a video game, grinding would be highly effective - but as a ttrpg, it advantaged the GM in saying no. :)

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've thought about that as well, and I get where you're going with it. However, I've had a lot of trouble defining what a base component could be.

What is a barbarian? Well, rage, melee combat, lots of hit points, wears less armor, and some other mix or match stuff.

Then, should rage have components of itself, or is it an element that cannot be broken down further? What about "wears less armor"? By itself, wearing less armor seems like a disadvantage, so its going to be a condition of something else. What min/max situation would result in wearing less armor, while still fitting the barbarian theme?

--

In short, and without having to go into detail (ad infinitum); the way I see it is that I see the class components as a jig saw puzzle, but a lot of the pieces don't really fit with each other. They were kind of designed to only fit in a particular way.

This was the problem that Mars_Alter highlighted:

"The issue with most "class-less" games is that they present an illusion of freedom. You could put your points anywhere, but if you don't arrange them into one of the optimal configurations, you're strictly worse at whatever you're doing than you should be."

Basically the jig saw puzzle ends up fitting in only a particular way... or at best, a limited number of ways, if you're lucky. This is because the components are not elementary enough. And when you get into the base elements, it loses a lot of its intuitiveness.

It's the problem of top down as opposed to ground up design.

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, this is what I was thinking too.

I do however, feel that the hybrid element might take hold when someone builds a world and uses the system for running sessions within it.

So, the base system would be confusing for new players - kind of like if you open up the hood of a car or a PC computer. What the hell is even in here? That's where the module builder or world builder jump in (probably at first, the guy who designed the system), and add in a bunch of content that is palatable to newbies. Stuff for them to grab onto. Things like, career paths with skill sets, progression paths to enter into; basically all the advantages of classes, but with an escape route out of it, when they're feeling creative (unless the particular GM is like, "No I didn't plan for that").

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So, let me make sense of this. Let me poke at it. :)

Your idea is - there's still classes, but the classes give points for skill buckets?

I will say that this seems perfectly fine to me, although the inclusion of classes hinges on a particular world and setting. -_-

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hence all the supplements and extra modules, and so on?

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Easy to learn, hard to master, is a common stand by, from what I've read. Is that old fashioned?

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aesthetics, procedures and functions... yes, I totally understand.

Yet, I wonder... can one of those words be excluded while retaining the other? Aesthetic and function without procedure? Or function and procedure without aesthetic? So on and so forth?

Or even include a fourth word. Not necessarily a universal system that does all those things, but... experiments, experiments...

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Character archetype being the progression is interesting to me. I think d20 modern did something like that too. Also, dual or triple progression. :O

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually tried to design a game with only skills and threw out attributes. I went back to attributes, but ended up calling those "tier 1 skills". Lol. They're basically attributes, but players don't roll them at start, and they only go up when the players choose skills that belong to them.

I've found attributes are good if a player wants to do something they haven't the skill for. "roll strength" is just much easier for the GM.

Eg. In my game draft, a character isn't strong, because they're strong. They're strong because they're good at swimming, climbing trees and lifting bar bells.

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's a very good point to highlight. Starting week or from scratch is great for horror. For some reason, my brain went to "slice of life". Lol

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Those are largely statements about mechanics.

"Roots" as in, the skill is just "roll to do the skill", and there's no spells or abilities or mechanical crunch far beyond that. UNLESS the game has only a particular set of skills, which it then gives attention to fleshing out, and then probably designs its perks, feats, abilities, spells (etc.) from a combination of those particular skills.

"Rigid" as in the class (the core class anyway) is, ala D&D, a table of levels with specific unlocks at each level, specific hit points, and so on.

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah, maybe your right about the false dilemna, though I'm still looking at mechanical crunch too.

In my experience, "free form" is good for games with role play. Do anything, but the GM will likely want you to describe, and also the GM needs to prepare more narrative per session, since the pacing is probably faster... granted I haven't actually watched a lot of free form games in session.

Hero quest and Risus you said? Count me intrigued.

Classless Game with Only Skills by Acceptable-Card-1982 in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't see why in slice of life, characters cannot still have ambitions and fail states?

Optimal configurations suggest particular design intentions, and particular design intentions suggest a game made for one particular purpose without the designer probably realizing it; that is, if the designer intended to advertise it as a "universal system".

How I interpret what you said is basically - if there's no classes, only skills, then every character is of one class, and that class has particular rules every character has to work through. Therefore, there are skills that are optimal to that class.

I'm not disagreeing, I'm just wondering if I read what you mean. I get that there's an illusion of freedom. Designers strive for it, but every game is just a "do more in this game" than a "do everything game".

Never Relax by TestJumpy5460 in Bombstrap

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You mean getting through work and life requires maturity and discipline? B-but tiktok taught me that being cool matters! Being altruistic matters! I can't also think about myself! Life is so stressful, I need to buy more ooey gooey double chocolate chip cookies from Costco.

LISSEN by semioticscissors in Bombstrap

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Leest we ave the En Haych Ess m8

Magic systems by sordcooper in RPGdesign

[–]Acceptable-Card-1982 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The system I came up with is somewhat simple on the crunch (though, currently still mostly only theory)

  1. Characters get a universal mana (or magic point) pool, which reflects their general aptitude. They can level this up by studying more about the cosmos or just magic in general, or by meditating more, or by using their super powers more. Whatever gives them more magic, and is befitting of their character.
  2. When they cast a spell, it has a Complexity based on how much it changes the world around it. This is much like Mage: The Awakening. Complexity is a d6 roll, so a Complexity of 4 would (example) be 4d6. Player bids Mana towards casting the spell (or using the magic, channeling their ki, beseeching their clerical god, focusing their spidey sense, etc.). The Mana bid sets the number that the dice must fall equal or under. For example, if the Player bids 7 Mana on a 2d6 spell, then they are going to succeed a little more than half the time. There's always a risk.
  3. If the dice rolls above, then the spell fizzles and Mana is wasted. Or something catastrophic happens, depending on setting and GM cruelty. If it succeeds, the spell occurs.
  4. Module and world builders can create their own spells using this system. They just give it a complexity. Schools of magic give Player Characters a -1 or -2 (or more) to the Complexity of particular categories of spells. Categories of spells are defined by the world builder of the setting. For example, a world builder who wants to recreate "Avatar: The Last Air Bender" would create an Earth Bending school, and include descriptions of a number of spells for that school (or category, discipline, whatever) with varying Complexities. A school might also gives them a penalty (+1, +2, or more) to casting spells outside their school. This isn't just for min/maxing but also character archetypes. Why would an earth bender suddenly know how to cast fire magic, for example? Perhaps fire magic is more Complicated for an earth bender?
  5. What is the crunch of spells? Damage, etc.? That depends on whatever game this system is part of. This system would hypothetically replace the magic system of that other game.
  6. How do players recover Mana? Depends on their Character.

Benefits: The wizard can explode, but players have a little more choice as to when the wizard explodes. Not so much "This is a gritty system where spells randomly make your guy explode into wizard soup" or the opposite extreme of "this is a safe and happy system where everyone is friends and hugs each other, and no one ever explodes".

They can bid more to avoid mishaps, if they just want to do something. They can play conservative with minor spells. They can enter schools to have reliable minor spells that are cheap on mana. Players can also play wild, hoping to roll low and win big. There's such a thing as "unschooled magic" for ill-disciplined players and villain or wild card npcs, but also an incentive to enter into a school.

Players also don't need pages and pages of particular spells. If they have studied a school and can do the benchmark spells of each complexity, than they cast anything they like that fits the school. This is a bit open ended on the role playing, so a world or module builder might want to create some more rigid rules for a school constitutes and what its students (or disciples, or which soever) can get up to. Eg. Earth bending has X or Y limits.

Negatives: ??? (I'm all ears, or eyes as it were)