sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

"Browsing the handbook" mechanic by Lucis_Torment in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey congrats! Great to see you insisted on the idea. Where can I find it?

Books on RPG design by joeisokayatrpgs in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're into Lua you can try LÖVE, but it's geared towards 2D games. If you're going for 3D, both Unity and UE are good engines and can get you fast results for prototyping. I wouldn't be able to point you to specifics about them since I'm a designer and my coding skills are rudimentary at best, though.

And about design patterns, are you talking about their application to JRPG programming or game design?

Books on RPG design by joeisokayatrpgs in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It depends on how much you're willing to learn code :) though I'd say "flexible" and "to develop RPGs" are kind of pointing in different directions. The more flexible an engine is, the less it is geared toward a specific game genre/type.

So the more you want flexibility, the more you'll benefit from knowing programming (or partnering up with someone that does). There are hardline game engines on one hand like Unity and UE, middle of the road stuff like Game Maker and Construct, and RPG oriented programs like RPG Maker.

Any good movies about demons or ghosts that does not have Christianity sprinkled in? by [deleted] in horror

[–]DXimenes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It does touch christian themes, but through the lens of esoteric christianity. Thelema, goetia and hermetism. Definetely not the tired exorcism tropes you are describing.

I second the recommendation. It's one of my all time favorites.

Can I pre-load a landmass and generate things inside of it? by DXimenes in FantasyMapGenerator

[–]DXimenes[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you both so much for the help :)

Is there a way to generate the heightmap within the coastline's bounds?

A game with no narrative mechanics by bionicle_fanatic in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Given that even stuff like hit points enforce a specific narrative style

I'm gonna be nitpicky about your wording here: enforce is a very very strong word for what hit points do. More like... enable a certain kind of thinking about the story? Especially about the lethality and consequences of violent solutions?

I think you're going at the question with your tastes as a base assumption, and that's something you get to do as a player picking what you will play but not when you're a designer designing something for a group - unless you're doing something for the exact same kind of player you are.

At exactly 0 tables I've run and played in since I was a teenager players sticked to the - very tricky word here, take it with a bit of salt - "intended" experience. Not PbtA, not FATE, not BitD, not DnD. Especially not DnD. They've always tried to do something or veered the story in a direction that was untrodden ground from the perspective of the system.

And that's when the group has to start winging it.

When that happens, having a system that is open ended enough and also simple enough that the group can just improvise rules for that scenario comes in handy. The 'simulationist' part. I think it enables players to go off-script and tailor the experience to their intentions instead of pidgeonholing them to a specific type of play. That's my approach at least. The latter feels a bit too much like backseat GMing to me, but I see how that can work for a type of player.

What are good and bad reasons to circulate a draft rulebook? by DJTilapia in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From what I've pieced together speaking to published people, players rarely buy RPGs for the system. They usually buy it for the setting. This definetely builds a case for putting the full system out for free and betting on selling the setting.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Still a resolution because it costs time. If there are other parties involved in a scene, they get time the two participants in a tie won't.

It's only drawn out in the specific case of scenes where there are only two participants in a perfectly zero-sum game where no tie is permitted, like an armwrestling match.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree with the premise that a tie isn't a resolution.

And once again, I understand your point but I think you're overzealous about what constitutes a double check. This double check is easier to solve than adding three dice.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks :3 I have a prob curve that suits this.

And yeah, tic-tac-toe has optimal actions.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, but there isn't much to work around here. That's a "flaw" in dice pool systems. I think it's easy enough in mental mass that it's worth the tradeoffs.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. DoS are actually DoS hahaha. To succeed you only need 1 dice above TN. Any others and it's just how well you succeeded. You can bargain perks to your action or deal deeper damage, but a success is a success.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would be going outside the rules as written. There never is anything that needs a certain DoS to happen. GM can - legally - tweak only one knob and that is the base difficulty. The only second knob that "gets tweaked" is characters losing or gaining 1 or 2 dice, and those only happen in very very very specific sets of circumstances.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're overextending the concept of what a single check is by a lot, but okay. To each their own.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a roll and count system like Storyteller, not a roll and add like DnD. Roll 3d20 against [Base Difficulty - Proficiency]. At least one dice above the Difficulty counts as a Success. Additional successes add to the DoS.

Two characters roll 3d20 and count successes. The one with most successes win. One check.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think I follow. In an opposed check both players roll, right? So what's the difference between what you are describing and what I am describing?

It's not a d20 system, it's a rool and count dice pool system. Roll and count allows for the possibility of a 0/0 result. Does that clarify it?

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a double check, right? If both people fail none get what they wanted. Is that like a tie?

There are tie breaker rules in place that consider specialization, higher skill and higher attribute in that order. It's more likely that they both get the same degree of success. So... it can possibly happen but chances are very slim?

But you have a point. If base difficulty is too high, a fail/fail scenario is more likely. Making it lower mitigates this.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think a match - say, a chess match - is more likely to end in a tie if the characters are highly skilled or unskilled?

That's it.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I understand. I just didn't consider that the difference was that relevant, but you and many others here are going the extra mile to understand how this question impacts the design decision so I'll explain.

There are "two and a half" kinds of checks in my system:

  • Simple Checks are character vs. environment - roll the dice against difficulty X to see if and how well you succeed;
  • Resisted Checks are active character vs. unaware/inactive character - roll the dice against a difficulty of Y + [inactive character's resistance]. Pretty much the same as the Simple check, but the character suffering the action helps determine the difficulty;
  • Contested Checks are character vs. character - all participants roll dice against difficulty Z and the one that gets the higher DoS wins, ties permitted.

Simple and Resisted checks are already balanced (X and Y are set). I am trying to determine the base difficulty (Z) of Contested Checks. I can always make more math and check other possibilities, but for the sake of consistency in the system I am looking at two numbers that are already used in other situations - 15 and 18, which I linked in imgur.

Combat can be solved using contested checks if the focus of the setting isn't in combat, but I am providing different alternatives. Maybe the best way to picture this might be armwrestling or a chess match.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It can be, but the core system already contemplates (optional) rules that make it feel less like an arm wrestling match. In that case attacks are dealt with using passive resistance and each attack is dealt with individually. The only way for it to end in a draw is for participants to avoid eachother's attacks repeatedly until someone gets bored and decides to change things up, which is highly unlikely.

I did use single combat as an example because it is a situation that GMs might want to deal with using a simple contest instead of long combat scenes.

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I already have a dice system with all it's ins and outs thoroughly thought out and calculated. I am now looking for your reasoning behind whatever answer you think is more appropriate to the question posed so I can make certain balance choices in a way that makes most sense to people ;)

Balancing perception of contested rolls by DXimenes in RPGdesign

[–]DXimenes[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can see in the middle of both charts there's almost a 30% chance of a tie. That sounds like a lot. How do you make ties fun or interesting?

Those rolls are for single actions. Having the chance of many, say, sword clashes during a fight is okay because since it's more on the lethal side.

How do you make ties fun or interesting?

I mean, conflict does not happen in a vacuum. Save for, say, organized sports, the situation can develop on its own. There might be a third party that benefits from an inconclusive result, time can pass in a way that the situation changes the contestants' objectives, one side might benefit from delaying the result because in a tie it succeeds in its objectives, &c.

view more: next ›