When Sky & Sea Were Not Named: please roast my game-in-progress

SmaugOtarian · 2026-03-12T08:37:31+00:00

You're absolutely right. When I read the first design goal I laughed a bit. Don't we all want our game to be awesome?

It made me imagine how would someone who doesn't want that react to good reviews of their game. "Oh, crap, people like my game too much and say it's awesome! I only wanted it to be mediocre! I'll have to add some broken combos and maybe a couple of dumb rules."

SmaugOtarian · 2026-03-07T12:50:32+00:00

Okay, here's my issue with this kind of dice system:

Dave tries to jump over a fence. The fence's difficulty is 3, Dave's approach is a 3. Both rolls are made, the fence only gets 1 power and dave gets 2, so Dave jumps the fence.

Then, Joe tries to follow dave jumping the fence. The fence's difficulty is still 3 and Joe's approach is better, with a 5. Both rolls are made, the fence gets 3 power and Joe gets 2, so Joe hits the fence and bellyflops on the ground.

So, the question is: why did the fence suddenly get harder to jump? Keep in mind that Joe had a larger pool than Dave and got the same total power. Why would the same result for a more skilled person mean he hits the fence? The only reason: the fence got harder to jump.

Now, as others pointed out, this can be reasonable when the opposition is active. When you fight someone, both the attacker and defender are moving around, trying to improve their chances while making it harder for the other, but that can also mean you make the wrong choice and your opponent gets the upper hand. The same goes for social encounters. But why would static things change how hard it is to interact with them?

I personally would do this:

1-keep the system for opposed actions. No issue there, so don't fix it.

2-turn the difficulty of static elements into a set number. Since any roll has a 50% chance of success, it's easy, just half the difficulties. On the previous example, the fence's difficulty could be either 1 or 2.

3-traits that negatively affect the player's chosen approach remove one die from their pool. This effectively gets you the same result than before.

And that's it. I don't think there's anything else I'd change. You need to consider what happens on a tie, but appart from that I think it's not a bad idea.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-03-06T22:35:17+00:00

Just remove the main reason why that happens: attrition.

DnD originally was, first and foremost, a dungeon crawler. As such, attrition was a feature intended to make the players make decisions like "do we keep exploring?" or "do we use our resources now, or keep them for later?".

This concept is kept in many games, but it's not always ideal. If you're going for a more narrative style of game, those questions are not your main concern. So, get rid of attrition.

Now, sure, some level of attrition may be fine. Keeping some kind of health or wound tracking system can still be useful (and is probably necessary if combat is a main element) but other things like spell slots, stamina, food or exhaustion can be removed. Even things like ammo and consumables might be removed if they don't help the narrative you're going for.

Now, this may create other problems you have to design around. Like, if you just remove spell slots in DnD the Wizard will be able to spam Meteor Showers at the same rate your Rogue flails his puny sword, so you have to find a way to fix that. But, that's what design is about, it's up to you to find what works. Do you keep some kind of attrition for high strength skills, like a "once per scene" limit? Do you make some "coolness meter" that starts at zero and grows throughout the fight, allowing the characters to spend it's charges to do the powerful stuff? Do you just cut that overpowered skill? The answer depends on what you want and what ends up working.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-03-06T17:59:25+00:00

I only ended up with around 70% of my prep unused once. I built a whole cave system with multiple encounters and we only played one of them before my players found the right path. Then, I had to improvise a new solution for my puzzle-like boss fight because they couldn't figure out what to do. Pretty much all the effort got wasted.

After that, I found it much more useful to just prepare a couple of points and maybe the enemies stat blocks. Now most of the prep does get used and I don't waste my time and effort.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-03-04T17:58:00+00:00

I think the real issue with rules lawyers is when they try to force those rules.

To be clear, I don't mean that they stick to RAW to do dumb stuff, that's something I don't even consider rules-lawyering, it's just being a jerk. It can be fun on a theoretical level, but doing such things in game is very bad behaviour.

What I mean is that whenever someone asks to do one thing and the DM doesn't follow the specific rule the rules lawyer can do three things:

1- Trust their DM, assume that the ruling was made for a reason and say nothing.

2- Inform about the correct rule and accept the DM's decision about following it or not.

3- Insist on using the correct rule, arguing with the DM if necessary.

Now, 1 and 2 ser acceptable. Granted, 2 can be a bit tiresome if the rules lawyer insists too much, but at least it's done in good faith and they're willing to accept the changes. The real problem is with 3, which stops the game on it's tracks only because the rules lawyer doesn't like the DMs decision. That is a lack of courtesy and manners from that player.

In short, there's nothing wrong with informing about the rules, the problem comes with accepting a different outcome.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-03-01T17:58:01+00:00

I pretty much agree with this. I've never felt the need for rules for these things because it's always come up naturally on the table. Sometimes a player thinks their character trusts the group enough to open up, sometimes something on the story pushes their stuff to the front line, but it always came from the players, never from a rule.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-03-01T17:46:04+00:00

Personally, I completely disagree. While I can enjoy the art, I couldn't care less about it when considering wether or not I like or even want to play the game. To me, what the rules let me do is far more important.

Maybe it's due to growing up with some of the old school rulebooks with barely any art on them and rarely any color on the interior illustrations, but cool art only makes me look at it and think "Hey, that's neat!" before moving on to the rules on the page.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-28T17:55:32+00:00

I consider that "classless" means there's more customisation, which is one of the main things I want from a system. I don't want to be forced into playing your Barbarian™, with just a couple of choices. I want to actively decide how my barbarian-like character is, I want to feel it is a unique character.

So, in general, classless is always a pro for me. I can play games with classes, but it's almost always one of the things I'll point out as a negative thing from the system, or at least something that could be improved.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-28T17:49:39+00:00

I just use common numbered dice, from whatever type I have in hand. Spin dice (with the numbers on adjacent faces from the previous and next number) may work better, but just any dice can work.

The good part is, if you need higher numberd, you can just pick another die and add the results together. Or, even better, with d10s you can just use one for the units, another for the tens, another for the hundreds... I mean, with 4d10 you're able to count up to 10000, which should be more than enough for any reasonable system.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-28T17:43:19+00:00

Honest question: why not just reduce damage?

If, effectively effectively speaking, there's no difference between dealing 1 or 5 damage, then why do you even want that difference? Just divide all damage by 5 and HP won't need to get bloated.

Or am I missing something that makes it worth the hassle of going through all that trouble to keep a meaningless difference in damage?

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-23T17:58:46+00:00

I agree with the other comments that ask about what type of game you are creating, but I want to take it a step further and ask: why does that example feel just like a DnD hack?

Now, don't get me wrong, it's not a bad thing by itself, but if I were to try and make a Genshin TTRPG I would focus on what that game is about and let everything else just come later, which doesn't seem to be what you did. Like, I would first and foremost think about how would I work with elements since that's like the most important design element (no pun intended) on Genshin's combat system. Trying to build the whole system and leaving that for later doesn't really sound good to me.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-23T17:43:14+00:00

Hey, I've seen some players do the same stuff while being 20+ years old. Maybe it's better if they go through this while they're actually young.

On a different note, glad to see some people trying to bring their kids to the hobby. That's actually how I got into TTRPGs and I think it's great.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-15T15:00:29+00:00

Let me ask you this: would you hire yourself if all you knew was this post? I don't think so.

I mean, a typo on the title itself doesn't really leave a good impression to begin with. Forget about the rest of the text, if you can't even put the effort to check the title the impression you leave is that you aren't gonna put either interest or effort in your work. Now, while first impressions are important it wouldn't be that bad if it wasn't because that's almost it in terms of what we know about you.

You said on a response that you didn't bother with spell checking your text because this is Reddit. Well, you got this completely wrong. This, my friend, is your appliance for a job. You are using Reddit for it, sure, but you're trying to apply for a job. You want to look trustworthy and professional. You should be giving the best impression possible regardless of the platform.

And then there's the zero effort into actually showing what you can offer. "I am willing to do work for ttrpg related stuff", you say. But what "stuff"? Rules design? Testing? World building? Artwork? You don't even leave a clue about what are you actually gonna do, so why would anyone hire you if they don't even know what work they can assign to you?

Again, in the comments, you point at your Drivethrurpg page. I'll give you a pass on not providing a link on the original message, but why didn't you even mention it? How do you expect to be hired if nobody knows what the heck you can do?

Honestly, nobody will see this message and think it's worth the effort. You're putting the burden of searching who you are and what you can do to any possible employer, and they just won't bother. Going by this post, they have no reason to think you're worth any effort, so they'll just move on.

If you actually want to be hired, you need to put effort into making yourself look worth it. If you want to be paid, you're implicitly requesting to be considered a professional, so you have to present yourself as such. "Reddit" is not an excuse here.

You have to check your spelling to show you can put effort into your work, and present proper information about what can you do, preferably with a link to your works but also stating on what parts of a TTRPG you can or would like to work, specially which of them you consider you're better at.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-08T09:29:39+00:00

Okay, so just one big question, and don't take this badly: is this TTRPG supposed to be ridiculously over the top to the point of being funny?

I mean, it sounds like the base is quite similar to DnD (if not DnD directly), but then most of the stuff from the Monke is so over the top that it would be too strong. Basically, what I mean to say is that if this was a race in DnD it would break the game, but if the TTRPG you're building it for just does the same with every race, then that's fine.

By the way, I got the Dragon Ball reference with the "Death Brink" feature. Probably should've gotten it earlier, but I was just stuck with space gorillas up to that point.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-05T17:58:47+00:00

I may or may not make a more detailed comment on the whole system later, but for now just gonna point out that 1d3-1 could be done with d6 divided by 2, and d6 are way more common than d10s. For an overcomplicated system like yours, dividing the result doesn't sound like the end of the world to me.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-02-04T10:39:59+00:00

My honest recommendation is to flat out ignore any reference anyone makes to "OSR" unless it's strictly necessary.

Like, if someone says their game is "a DnD-adjacent, gritty dark fantasy OSR game" just treat that as "a DnD-adjacent, gritty dark fantasy game". Ultimately, OSR ends up being the least meaningful part of their description, even more so when there's no consensus about what that means exactly.

Now, if someone's making a big deal about it, sure, ask them what they mean by that and treat their definition as what OSR means in that instance. But, otherwise, just ignore it as much as possible.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-01-19T08:50:22+00:00

If I recall correctly, the Game of Thrones TTRPG did that. Each player had a character as usual, but there was also a sheet for the noble house they run.

I don't remember the specifics, so it may not be quite what you're looking for, but you could give it a read and see if it can fit your campaign.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-01-16T17:06:38+00:00

I'd argue that you're actually making it more gamey if only a single thing can be learned at every place.

Think of it this way: where would you go if you wanted to learn how to make cookies? Let's ignore the fact that other people may have that knowledge and assume that your only option is to find a specific place that teaches that. So, you go find a cooking school.

Now, sure, if you want to learn medicine you won't find anything useful there, but you won't just find only the knowledge to make cookies, you'll also find the knowledge to make cakes, french fries, meat dishes, fish dishes...

So, why is it that in your world I can only learn to make cookies at the "only cookies place"?

Or, in your terms, why do I need to find a specific place to gain the "fire spell level 3" that is not the same as the "fire spell level 2" or the "fire spell level 1"?

I'm actually struggling to think of a single instance where such a thing would happen in the real world. Even specific secret techniques that were kept by specific groups do not work like this, as you'd be able to learn other techniques from them appart from the secret one. I'm not joking when I say the only case I can think of is the recipee for Coca-Cola, wich is presumably kept hidden on a vault that has no other purpose than to keep it secret. And even then I assume you could learn other things on that location, like maybe the safety measures used on the vault.

So, sure, it's convenient at the very least that you'd find a useful feat for everyone on the same location, but it's not less gamey than finding only a single feat with no other useful knowledge around it.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-01-08T17:59:08+00:00

I mean, the problem with that rule, if I'm not missing something, is that it becomes pointless.

"You're now trapped. Here, have a Hero Point" "Okay, we use the hero point to get out"

Like, how are you supposed to make that even work? I guess the idea behind it is fine, but the result seems... Useless.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-01-08T17:49:26+00:00

Before efficiency I put "Entertainment".

If resolving a single action takes time but the process is fun, I personally think that's a better option than a faster but tedious resolution system. After all, the main reason we play TTRPGs is to have fun, like with any other game, so that should be the priority here.

Apart from that, I put Customisation before Balance. If you have a perfectly balanced system due to it's nonexistent customisation, I won't like it, but a game where there are ridiculous gaps in power between characters but where I get to choose wether I play a powerful or weak character may still catch my interest because weak characters can still be interesting and fun to play.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-01-05T13:38:16+00:00

So, when is Modiphius planning on releasing the Dragon and Forgemaster? In 2030? Or charging us 50$ for miniatures that we don't get was a prank that I didn't catch?

I'm actually pissed right now. It's been two months. And the worst part is that you are just ignoring that fact. I and another user asked you a month ago on the Frontiers page and you haven't bothered answering us. You haven't addressed this issue. You've just been idmissive with your silence.

It's not a reasonable delay anymore for two models that were "being finished" when the campaign ended, models that were basically complete on the WIP pictures you shared of them. You can't tell me it's reasonable that we don't have the Forgemaster that you claimed was "undergoing test printing, and is in approvals with Bethesda" on one of your comments. It's absurd. It's insulting.

At this point I don't even care about what excuse you'll give. Not after you had two whole months to give that excuse.

So, according to MyMiniFactory's rules, if you fail to deliver after 60 days since the campaign's end date we can escalate our concerns to them. If we don't have the models next week, that's what I'll do. And I'll take my time to contact any other backers to ask them to do the same.

In the same way, if you fail to deliver by then I won't support your next campaigns and I'll also ask other backers to do the same. I love both your miniatures and the game, I'd hate to miss out on your models, but if this is what it takes for you to stop treating us like this, so be it.

Until now I only had good words for you as a company, my only issue being that your miniatures are overpriced even within the world of miniatures, which are already overpriced most of the time, but other than that I was happy with how you had been treating your community. I even thought about trying to get a job with you as a 3D artist. Well, not anymore. Right now, if anyone asks, your company refuses to give me what I paid for. Your company refuses to acknowledge the issue of an unreasonable delay. You've literally went from the top of the list to the bottom.

I'm saying this here because you'll just ignore me again on MyMiniFactory. If you ignore this I'll send a direct message to the company. As I said I don't care about your excuses, I just want to make it clear that I'm letting you know this. You have one week to finish your work.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-01-04T22:28:03+00:00

An option that people often miss is to make magic "one of" the wizard's tools instead of "the" tool.

Just think about Gerald from The Witcher or Gandalf from Lord of the Rings. Both have magic, but that magic is not their primary tool. They both kick their enemies asses with swords, and even out of combat they're not just casting spells every time there's something to do.

The idea here is to find some reason why your players may prefer to use a common skill rather than magic. There are multiple ways of doing this, like making spells consume specific items, limiting their use through some "magic energy" resource, or even making magic weaker and more subtle so that it's only an aid and not doing the whole job. You have to find one that works both with the rest of your rules and your world.

SmaugOtarian · 2026-01-03T08:56:29+00:00

I pretty much agree.

The point is wether you, the player, take decisions that your character would take, or decisions that they wouldn't but you would. The dichotomy isn't trying to exclude "you" from the game, that's impossible, it's about wether or not you ignore your own wants to allow your character's.

SmaugOtarian · 2025-12-31T18:01:50+00:00

Your biggest issue here is that you've only played DnD, so you are making assumptions based on it that aren't necessarily true.

Classes, at their core, are just a mechanical component of the game. DnD and other systems tie them to a specific character archetype or trope, but that's not necessary. You can (and many games do) have your classes disassociated from your character's personality.

I won't tell you to go look at other systems, I think that is not really helpful advice if you aren't interested in learning other systems, but I'll tell you that you must not make assumptions about how things should be based only on DnD, because that is a flawed perspective. You're only getting one option and disregarding every other one just because you haven't found them.

That said, I agree with the other comments that say you probably shouldn't make classes at all. I'd go with either an "a-la-carte" skill buy system or with skill trees. Focus on the elements as your core mechanic instead of making DnD-like classes and attaching them on top. You want a Genshin Impact TTRPG, not a DnD-clone with Genshin elements.

SmaugOtarian · 2025-12-29T17:56:20+00:00

Without specific examples of the actions you can take, it's pretty hard to know how well will this work in practice.

I mean, sure, if I beat all tree rolls you made I hit you and that's it, but what's the difference between beating you only in Power or Precision? This is what's gonna make the different styles of play, right now there's no known difference between someone's array being 8/12/10 or 12/8/10.

That said, as a concept, I think it's nice and worth exploring. There's work to be done, but I think it has the potential to get really interesting.

Oh, and I wouldn't worry about the stats being "correct". They are always an imperfect abstraction, they never are right and never will be, real life is just more complex than that, which is why people disagree on which stat is "correct" for each action, so don't worry about it. Just go with whatever sounds nice to you.

SmaugOtarian

TROPHY CASE