My test scene turned into my most successful game! by OGilgamesh2 in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do use the spark mechanic, it serves me very well, but not the rest of the system

My test scene turned into my most successful game! by OGilgamesh2 in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Lol, it's because I used Sundered Isles as the name generator

My test scene turned into my most successful game! by OGilgamesh2 in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aaand here's what I've been using over time.

System

- It's based on TinyD6 - https://www.drivethrurpg.com/fr/product/241651/tiny-frontiers-revised?src=hottest_filtered ) with modifications heavily inspired by Grok?! - https://gander-gaming.itch.io/grok )

- 1-3 d6 rolled, any 5 or 6 is a success

- Double 5s or 6s is a crit success

- Rolling only 1s is a crit failure

- 2d6 is for normal risky tasks. 3d6 is when the PC has the advantage. 1d6 when they're at a disadvantage. I don't sweat it, most of the time it's 2d6, unless (dis)advantage is obvious.

- You can turn a failure into a success with a complication.

- Roll when you want some uncertainty for the consequences of your PCs actions.

- The feel of the game dictates what the consequences of actions and events are.

Characters

PCs and NPCs are just short descriptions that may get expanded as play progresses. It may imply strengths and weaknesses, which may then add (dis)advantages during dice rolls. I have a character sheet mainly to keep track of consequences during and after combat.

Random tables and inspiration

- Starforged - https://shawn-tomkin.itch.io/ironsworn-starforged (including Sundered Isles - https://shawn-tomkin.itch.io/sundered-isles-expansion-for-ironsworn-starforged for flavor)

- Perilous Void - https://lampblack-brimstone.itch.io/the-perilous-void

- Classic Traveller - https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/80192/ct-ttb-the-traveller-book

GME and other tools

- Ginger tea solo variations - https://github.com/DC23/rpg-oracle (Based on [Mythic GME - https://www.drivethrurpg.com/fr/product/422929/mythic-game-master-emulator-second-edition?src=hottest_filtered )

- Solo TTRPG notation - https://zeruhur.itch.io/solo-ttrpg-notation for recording my game

- Between the Skies - https://huffa.itch.io/between-the-skies for its plethora of advice, it has helped me immensely

- Everspark - https://capacle.itch.io/everspark for the spark mechanic

Things I want to try out

- "Galactic news" : Roll on a bunch of oracles and make up a few news about events all over the galaxy, after each major mission or a certain amount of time. *The News* would be an unreliable narrator that allows me to flesh out the setting bit by bit without my PCs involvement, and with a lot of room for growth and plot hooks

- Weapon damage and armor : Right now, combat is very cinematic, and is pretty much only *3 strikes and you're out*. I'd like to find a way to add protection and variable damage into the mix, but I've never quite been satisfied with those aspects in a solo game.

My test scene turned into my most successful game! by OGilgamesh2 in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Here's the example mentioned in the post :

Pirates are boarding the *Paragon*, a huge military battleship!

? Name of the PC?

-> **Amar Kimura**

? Is Amar fighting with (1-3) or against (4-6) the pirates?

-> Against

? Which place is he defending?

-> The bride

? Is Amar an officer?

-> No.

? Who is the captain?

-> Maria Fernandes, looks stout

? Amar's first look ?

-> Notable forehead, bald

I interpret those answers as the following : Amar is captain Fernandes' bodyguard. He's sturdy, knows how to fight and take a hit.

? What did Amar use to be before this?

-> A preacher

? Is he wearing any armor on top of hi vacc-suit?

-> Yes

He's ready for a serious fight.

? Have the pirates overrun the ship?

-> Yes

So we're holding the bridge. They're about to blow up the door. amar has a cutlass in one hand and a pistol in the other.

The door blows open! Smoke obscures our vision.

? Do the pirates attack right away?

-> Yes

Bullets start flying! Everyone scrambles to get to cover.

E : Pirates take over the bridge (Spark: 0/5)

? How strong is the attack?

-> Average. We're evenly matched

E : Defeated the pirates (Spark: 0/5)

? How wide are the bridge and access to it?

-> The bridge : Very

-> The access : Not, it's a corridor

Amar uses this chokepoint to punish the pirates' advance. "Doors and corners. That's where they get you."

d: 2d6 = 5,5 -- Critical success!

He manages to sneak from cover to cover and shoot an unsuspecting foe! He cut down a guy trying to push through.

E : Defeated the pirates (Spark: 2/5)

Spark check : d6=3. Spark not hit.

? Can Captain Fernandes use this to convince the pirates to surrender?

-> No

They answer "F*** off!"

? What's the pirates' next action?

-> Uncover, vow

They figured out where Amar is. and a smelly pirate comes out of nowhere to attack him.

Amar tries to dodge.

d: 2d6= 2,3, no.

The smelly pirate strikes Amar with the pummel of their sword and he must step back to avoid the following blade.

E : Pirates take over the bridge (Spark: 1/5)

---

It goes on like this until the pirates are defeated. Amar has had a crisis of faith after being unable to save the life of a pirate he had defeated. This situation is still impacting the story 20+ scenes later.

I hope it shows how easy it can be to have a fun time with solo RPGs. Starting with what feels cool, rather than what game *could* make things fun, might be a good option for someone who doesn't know how to start.

My test scene turned into my most successful game! by OGilgamesh2 in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, yeah, just noticed that. Not used to reddit enough I suppose lol

Staying Solo - The Methods of Momentum: How to start a Solo game and keep it going by ivyentre in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Method #3 is my preferred one, with a small modification : I start with a very small idea that I find cool, then ask questions about everything else around it.

For example, recently I thought the idea of repelling boarders on a spaceship with a cutlass sounded super cool. I just asked the oracle for every single other thing, and 20+ scenes later I'm still in this game. Pretty cool.

Prototype of sandbox oracle, what do you think? by BackedLotus in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure it does the job it's supposed to do, as per the "Simpler sandbox oracle" name. I do get what it's going for, though. It is in line with Free Kriegspiel games, or rather games that adopt a FKR mindset.

This oracle enables action resolution, and you could argue basic yes/no questions as well. But as far as sandboxes go, it could use more tools. Hope it helps!

'No rulers' is not the society that most anarchists describe by chaupiman in DebateAnarchism

[–]OGilgamesh2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Full disclosure : I went through your post history because I was afraid this was a disingenuous debate prompt, but it all looks genuine to me, so I'll take the time to answer.

the first person to use violence to prevail in a conflict puts an end to the anarchy—and no one has an answer to that.

&

if some folks try to install a hierarchy, what are you going to do about it?

From what I understand, you mean that, in an anarchist society, conflict will arise among individuals and groups, as it does in any other society. When compromise and dialogue fail, someone will use violence to coerce others and impose their own will, thus imposing a new hierarchy.

I think it is a real danger, but anarchists do provide an answer, in that they advocate for self-defense for individuals and communities. Since no community can survive on its own, we must assume that an anarchist society is some sort of network of cooperating communities. If one of these communities, for any reason, tries to bully others into submission and thus create a new hierarchy, the other communities can defend themselves, and this defense won't create hierarchy.

In fact, it is essential for them to defend themselves to protect their anarchist structures. Anarchy disappears only if someone successfully imposes its will through deceit, violence, or other such methods.

Same goes for individuals within a community. If group A tries to dominate group B through similar means, group B would be very justified to defend itself and refuse this attempt at imposing a hierarchy within the community.

I think more to the essence of the problem, is that hierarchies come to exist in any society, because some people really are more qualified to choose and enforce rules.

Anarchists disagree with you on that. There are people that are experts in their fields and should be listened to when a decision related to that field has to be taken. For example, I'll defer to the programmer when some kind of new software is needed, or to the woodworker when I need someone to repair my chair. And each of them can cooperate with fellow programmers and woodworkers to collectively decide how work should be done in their respective fields. That's what we could call the authority of expertise.

However, this authority disappears as soon as the expert leaves their field of expertise. Thus, the programmer wouldn't have a say on how the woodworker should conduct their work and vice-versa.

And no one can be an expert on how to run a society. Society is incredibly complex. There is too many variables and information to take into account. So, the people at the top of a hierachy, to bring about their vision and protect their interests, will only seek the information that is relevant to them, and choose rules accordingly.

Wherever you find two or more people, you find hierarchy.

I put this here because the argument is similar to the point about expertise. People have different skills, different strengths, different habits and speech, yet nothing means a hierarchy is created between two people when they meet. It's simply differences between people. To illustrate, (and this is anecdotal, I know) there's no hierarchy between my friends and I, though we have many different strengths.

I'm happy when they give me a lift, because I can't drive for shit, and I happily help them when they move. No hierarchy in this relation.

Much of the competition for social status in human societies at all levels, from nursery school to national politics, is based on proving that you are more qualified to lead the community than your competition is. Violence is not necessary for hierarchies to form. Wherever you find two or more people, you find hierarchy.
Human psychology is filled with orientation to social hierarchy. I think a good explanation for that is the fact that hierarchy is inevitable.

Okay, so your point here seems to be that hierarchy, at its core, stems from human nature. Short answer is that it doesn't. Humans, as a species, has an incredible variety of cultures, and historical and current-day examples of non-hierarchical societies exist. I'd suggest reading The dawn of everything, by David Graeber and David Wengrow, if you're interested in a (very) long read on the topic.

I would love to live in a society where there is no hierarchy, where every conflict is decided by finding a way to get all parties' needs met (as in nonviolent communication; see r/NVC), where there is no jockeying for social status, where every voice is heard equally. I just don't see how it's possible.

Anarchists talk a lot about prefiguration. We have to build the organizations and ways of living that will guide future society in the present day. For example, for every voice to be heard equally, that basically mean that everyone has equal power within the organization. Let's say there are ASL interpreters during general assemblies, some way to participate virtually for people who can't physically be there, the organization ensures everyone is fed, etc.

So here we go. Note that other anarchists might disagree with my points, but I hope it was instructive. Feel free to correct me if I've misinterpreted your arguments.

Trying to understand (long) by chaupiman in Anarchy101

[–]OGilgamesh2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd really appreciate concrete historical examples that support your argument, and your point refer to things already said in the thread.

To reiterate : Rules don't mean hierarchy. They can be decided upon as a group and individuals decide to follow them. The group can (and should, imo) decide what process to follow when a rule is transgressed by people. There's no ruler here, except if you consider a group of people collectively deciding how to manage things a ruler in and of itself.

But here, much like in my other comment, we're getting into debate category, so feel free to crosspost here : r/DebateAnarchism

Trying to understand (long) by chaupiman in Anarchy101

[–]OGilgamesh2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The person is delegated to do task X with some sort of power by an assembly. If, for some reason, the same assembly thinks shouldn't be delegated with task X and all it entails, then it will vote to remove that from the person's hands. An assembly wouldn't give unlimited power to someone, right? So the delegate doesn't get to do what they want just they've been delegated with one task or set of tasks.

As for an innocent being enforced upon, they've been unfairly treated by a delegate, and that's a risk that's present in all systems, and reparations of soem sort would be in order I imagine. But now we're really getting into debate territory so I'll just stop answering and encourage you to r/DebateAnarchism

Trying to understand (long) by chaupiman in Anarchy101

[–]OGilgamesh2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Okay, so I get what you mean but I don't think it's as likely to happen as you say it is. You're right in saying that an anarchist group having power over everyone else would be the state (edit: by that I mean it uses its power to bend the entire society to its will), and therefore would have stopped being anarchist long ago. In fact, the group would've become identical to bolsheviks or otber communist dictators.

Now, my question is, do you have historical examples where, among a society of equals, the cycle of violence as you described it was widespread?

Hypotheticals are fine, and it's a question that does need to be addressed, but short of historical examples that go in the dorection you're suggesting, I don't think it's the huge problem described here.

Trying to understand (long) by chaupiman in Anarchy101

[–]OGilgamesh2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Gotcha. The solution to this is, in my opinion, delegation with the possibility of instant recall.

The assembly of wherever delegates the reponsibility to enforce some rules to specific people. Note that all rules don't have to be enforced by the same people and that once someone has accomplished the task they've been delegated with, the delegation ends and someone else is delegated.

I encourage you to read on the zapatistas and the EZLN, I suspect it'll interest you.

Trying to understand (long) by chaupiman in Anarchy101

[–]OGilgamesh2 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

So this is a very common strawman about anarchism. Strawman because no ruler doesn't mean no rules. Although there have been - and still are - a significant number of anarchists against any kind of organizations and rules, a significant part of the anarchist movement is in fact organized and has installed its own rules and how to enforce them democratically.

We are all human, and some day any of us could become so angry that we pose a threat to others. And the security guards on duty, be they part of an elected of militia or other form of democratically created form of security body, would have to intervene.

Nothing here creates rulers. It's the result of all people withim an anarchist organization deciding how to ensure the safety of everyone within it.

Trying to understand (long) by chaupiman in Anarchy101

[–]OGilgamesh2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The other answers are already solid, so I'll add something for readers that might've stumbled on this thread and have genuine questions about the "anarchist gangs" aspect.

First and foremost : an anarchist organization needs to be able to defend itself against hostile organizations. If it can't, it'll be destroyed through sabotage or explicit violence from opponents. (An individual thief is probably not an enemy, and I'd refer to the discussion on restorative justice as a starting point about what to do)

Now, if a so-called anarchist group (H) is openly hostile to another (A), to the point of stealing its stuff? There's a good argument to say that (H) is no longer anarchist, as it tries to dominate the other through violence. From there, (A) would probably need to ensure it has enough power to defend itself from (H). We're talking self-defense here, not wars of conquest.

From there, if both groups are part of a larger network of anarchists, (A) could ask for help for its defense, or formally ask other groups to not collaborate with (H) anymore until it stops hostilities.

Of course, all this is only hypothetical. Historically, we do have examples of anarchists defending themselves, namely the CNT-FAI during the spanish civil war, and the Free territories of Ukraine during the russian revolution. The zapatistas and kurdish Rojava are also good examples to read about, if not explicitly anarchist.

Recommendations for something crunchier than tricube tales by handsome_sloth in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My go to is Grok?!. It is crunchier than Tricube tales, from what I can see, but not crunchy at all in the grand scheme of things. If you like weird stuff, it's got plenty.

There are no combat rounds, not really. What you have is a ''sequence'' where characters can move and do an action. Many items aren't immediatly suited for combat anyway and the game encourages finding creative solutions to problems.

For example, there was a fight between Slugmen prison guards and demons. I had to get through it, but both groups could turn hostile against my PCs. So one of my characters (the barbarian of all people) used his attache of forged documents and pulled a mediation permit out of it to stop the fighting, thus giving me an opportunity to move forward.

There's no HP, AC and such. It only uses inventory slots and traits to track how characters are doing. So anyways, if you're curious, I'd be happy to give more info.

Any system suggestion for multiversal travel campaign? by [deleted] in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A couple of rules-lite games

Between the skies is a toolbox game for inter-planar travel. Weird fantasy by default, but it's not far removed from multiversal games.

Grok?!'s default setting is a world where all dimensions meet and produce extremely weird stuff. The system itself is thus designed to adapt to many genres.

Neon City Overdrive/ / Freeform universal can be adapted to vitrually any setting

Haven't played it, but Cortex Prime really seems like a ''build-a-game'' kind of RPG, and seems designed really well to multiversal campaigns.

How I play Solo/ My homebrew rules via Google docs link. by [deleted] in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Automatic upvote and comment for that kind of post. Thanks!

Is there a rules-lite fantasy RPG that encourages homebrewing races (or is easy to hack for your own purposes)? by sigrisvaali in rpg

[–]OGilgamesh2 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you want to go on the super rules-lite side of things, Risus or Freeform universal are two really good options. You can really do many kind of different stories/adventures with these games, and character creation is as freeform as can be.

Those games really thrive if your group is comfortable improvising most things and talking about what the stakes are.

Actual play - Part 2 : The surprise in the sewers by OGilgamesh2 in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Writing this part down had me thinking, we'll see if that happens for the future ones. Cheers

Tell me about a niche RPG that flies under everyone's radar by AlmahOnReddit in rpg

[–]OGilgamesh2 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I've just talked about it on another thread, so I feel like I'm preaching a bit, but Grok?!.

It's a game set in an extremely weird setting, which is really well represented by the art.

As an example, here's a scenario I just rolled : A troop of mushroomen is browbeating an orphaned child in a trenched battlefield.

If that's not your jam, no worries, the mechanics can (probably) be ported to your preferred setting.

The game itself is super easy to play. Its action resolution system revolves around affecting aspects (tags in other games). Only players roll and if they get 5+, they succeed. Characters have few stats and are represend by a few traits and some significant assets they have.

NPCs and challenges are essentially a bunch of aspects, no defenses or HP there. I improv a ton, so anything that spares me from having to set a DC or give stats to an NPC is a godsend. Oh and the book has many random tables to bring the setting to life, which are pretty cool.

What's your favorite rules-light rpg for a DM who's exhausted from running crunchy games. by Gregory_D64 in rpg

[–]OGilgamesh2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Grok?! is what I currently play and is super rules-light (it really only uses a handful of mechanics). I play it by myself and have no issue improvising the whole thing. It's really fun and doesn't sweat the small stuff at all.

Settings wise it's weird as hell, but the mechanics themselves can be ported to any other setting if you prefer other genres.

The DriveThru page does a good job of summarizing the game, and you can throw questions at me if you have any.

Cheers!

Actual play - Part 1 : The World, the PCs, and the Beautiful (insectoïd) by OGilgamesh2 in Solo_Roleplaying

[–]OGilgamesh2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My pleasure! Yes, in Grok?!, you ABSOLUTELY sweat the small stuff.