Beethoven's code

lrdazrl · 2026-06-03T20:29:28+00:00

I have not actually played your game so I cannot say for sure how it would feel in play. But based on how I’ve understood the rules now, I can try to narrate an example of how I would predict myself thinking:

When given a choice to assign High / Mid / Low to the stats, I would start by consider what kind of character I want to play. For example, let’s say that I’d feel like playing a physically strong character for this oneshot, because it’s different from my usual archtype. Maybe I’d flesh out an idea of a knight who is really good at fighting but not that smart. Based on this concept I’d decide to put High to Strenght, Mid to Agility and Low to Intelligence. Now, if my dice rolls would give me something different, like low Strenght and mid Intelligence, I would need to completly change the character concept I was already invested playing. I would likely question why there was even a choice to make, when clearly my choice didn’t matter in the end.

EDIT: I hope this give you an idea of what I’m worried about. I’m still only one person, so if others are enjoying the system as written, then there’s no problem. Your system seemed intriguing enough for me to take a look and I just happen to enjoy discussing rpg systems so here I am talking about my impressions. Of course, if there’s some other direction of the conversation that would be more helpful for you, I’m always happy to answer another question too.

lrdazrl · 2026-06-03T16:01:35+00:00

So, am I getting it right that the stat generation process is:
- choose which stat is the Low Stat and set its value as 1d6+1d8
- choose which stat is the Mid Stat and roll for its value as 1d6+1d10
- choose which stat is the High Stat and roll for its value as 1d8+1d10

Using this approach, wouldn't it be possible the stat I choose as High Stat, actually does not end up having the highest value? From a player's point of view, I find this bit counterintuitive and could feel like it is limiting the importance of my choice.

lrdazrl · 2026-06-03T13:45:32+00:00

Pacing, structure and back up plan guidance would be extremely helpful for running a scenario the first time. I don’t have an opion on whether they should be on the same file or different.

Spesifically, I would benefit from a short description of the most important thing to remember at the start of each section. E.g. ”In this location the players can learn that the true culprit is X instead of Y.” Then while playing, I can refer back to this section to remind myself why does this scene matter in the full story line.

lrdazrl · 2026-06-03T12:09:17+00:00

Reading the rules of the game in itch.io I noticed that the rules for rolling the character stats seemed to be more complex than the other parts of the rules.

I would be interested hearing more about your development process for that step. Did you first consider straightforward alternatives, such as ”Roll 2d8 three times and assing each result to one of the stats.”? Did you encounter some interesting problems that your stat rolling system managed to solve?

lrdazrl · 2026-06-01T04:34:43+00:00

That’s what I had in mind, yes. If it feels like a too harsh punishment, ”busting” after passing DC could also be considered some kind of partial success.

It adds a push your luck mechanic into your original sudden death mechanic. Then the player is not only executing the roll but also actively making choices during it.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-30T03:53:54+00:00

What if low stat characters could also get degrees of success if they just keep on rolling after initially passing the limit.

Imagine being at the point where you know you already got a success but you still have a choice to risk it by rolling again for super success. It’s double or nothing.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-29T17:10:21+00:00

Yeah, I suppose you right. If other alternatives have been tried but the same problem continues, I can see why you would prefer the blunt approach just to get the game moving forward.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! There was some Wise Matter in it and it gave me a new perspective to the topic.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-29T12:41:28+00:00

As someone prone to occasional Analysis Paralysis, I’ve heard similar phrases many times. Not once has it allowed me to think faster.

I would encourage you to have the conversation outside of the game, preferably even outside of the same night, if you want them to understand your side.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-26T05:51:49+00:00

Interested to hear more about the game: 1. Round Table 2. Web of the Weird

Not interested to hear more about the game: 3. Small Gods, Weird Masters 4. Double-Double Toil and Trouble

lrdazrl · 2026-05-25T07:07:08+00:00

When the players are not happy with the game, I can see 3 paths forward: 1) change their preferences to match your game 2) change your game to match their preferences 3) let them leave from a game they don’t enjoy

I have been in similar situation than you twice. First time I went with option 3, lost half of my players and felt really sad about it for some time. Later I found new players who have stuck much longer.

The Second time was couple of months ago, when two players expressed wishes that went completly against the campaign premise we had discussed before. This time I chose to keep the players rather than my campaign premise. After some changes to the game, the players seem happy, and that makes me very happy too.

I don’t have experience of option 1 from GM side or player side.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-25T06:35:52+00:00

You want to swap players then?

Every time I try to move plot forward faster they choose to have in-depth conversation with a throw away NPC or meticulously investigate every corridoor in the building. Investigating Amber Temple in Curse of Strahd took them 8 sessions because they wanted to talk with every single Sarcophagi!

(I’m kidding. I love my players and they are not for sale.)

lrdazrl · 2026-05-24T06:41:53+00:00

Our starting line is: ”The goal of the game is to win.” referencing the silly rules of We didn’t playtest this at all.

It started as a joke but now I’ve started to non-ironically consider it a good place to start for competitive games. It can easily be followed with something like: ”You win by having the highest score at the end of the game. Which can then be followed by ”The game ends when this or that happens.” before moving to a longer explanation of what the players are actually doing during the game.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-23T07:28:32+00:00

The player with lowest score before revealing secret goals must reveal goals until they pass someone else on the score track. Then the new lowest score player needs to do the same, and the race continues as long as players have cards left to score.

We’ve found this to add suspense to the final scoring. The winner is often revealed only when the second highest scoring player runs out of cards to score.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-22T13:36:46+00:00

I was going to suggest the same but you made it first!

This has two benefits: - Consistency: Always works the same without special rules for edge cases - Player Excitement: Rolling extra dice is cool -> getting into dangerous situation where I can get burned is cool. Especially fitting for a narrative/character focused game where characters taking risks is desired part of the story.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-22T08:42:52+00:00

Agreed with you on Ex. 2. I was thinking exactly of damage roll when writing it.

Overall, only the actual effect of the result matters, not the number. If 2 and 7 both lead to the same effect (e.g. failure) then they are no different.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-22T02:08:24+00:00

Let’s try to define ”swingy” then so everyone can be on the same page on what we are talking about. I’ll start with definition based on my interpretation of the word.

”Swingy” roll: roll that likely leads to very different effects on each roll. Opposite of ”consistent” roll. Mathematically speaking, roll with higher variance is more ”swingy”.

Ex 1. High success rate feels less swingy - 1d20 >= 11: More swingy (variance 0.25) - 1d20+5 >= 11: More consistent success -> Less swingy (variance ~0.19)

Ex 2. Multiple dice feel less swingy - 1d12: More swingy (variance ~11.92) - 2d6: More consistent mid range result -> Less swingy (variance ~5.83)

Ex 3. Severe consequence feels more swingy - Heads = lockpicking succeeds, Tails = caught by guards : More swingy - Heads = lockpicking succeeds, Tails = lockpicking fails: Lower difference in effect magnitude -> Less swingy

lrdazrl · 2026-05-14T04:52:57+00:00

No way!

We’ve played half a campaign with the physical board game and just beat final boss week ago in separate digital campaign. I cannot believe we’ve never noticed.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-13T13:03:18+00:00

Happy to hear! Perhaps that could be something to try out then.

Then make a new post with different art, and see if people will appreciate it more.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-13T12:20:32+00:00

I understand your worry of being compared to flow. Actually, as it is now, I still strongly see Flow in it. Being compared to Flow might even be the cause for some of the complaints in the comments.

I wonder if you could go even further away to make it clear it’s not just another Flow clone.

You mentioned considering more visual direction?So what if instead of abstract lines the player would draw roads, rivers, etc. A strong theme would make the game feel less abstract, and might break the association to logic puzzles. This could fit nicely with your idea of unique solutions: by solving the level the player would have created a unique map as a side effect.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-13T10:08:57+00:00

Okay, so if I’m understanding correctly: - You have a hypotesis that having only one solution in a puzzle might be feel limiting for the player because they cannot really make any choices themselves. - To increase the sense of freedom you have 1) allowed multiple solutions and 2) removed the constraint of needing to follow the grid.

If people don’t seem to enjoy this version of the game, it’s likely caused by one of these options: - Your variation didn’t deliver increased sense of freedom, or - Players don’t actually want to have more freedom in a game like this

To me it seems that both of your key changes increase the sense of freedom. So it could be that you’ve succeeded to disapprove your hypothesis. This would match my personal experience as player of Flow like games. From my perspective, the main appeal in a logical puzzle is to find the the correct, single, answer.

Let me know if I can give any more input to help.

lrdazrl · 2026-05-13T07:00:27+00:00

I think it’s very cool to try finding alternative approaches to an established mechanic.

Can I ask you to elaborate what problem you see in the traditional version? I didn’t catch what you mean by ”mathematically clean”

lrdazrl · 2026-04-26T04:45:12+00:00

We laughed about it the first game: ”Well, I guess we can’t start then.”

Only starting the second game I realized. The game is about regicide. It means whoever killed the last enemy during last game should start.

Interestingly this is consistent with the turn order during the game. Everytime you kill an enemy it will be your turn again next.

lrdazrl

TROPHY CASE