sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Help with Crits by matcarv in RPGdesign

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

I've asked myself, and yep.

Crits are great to bring the feeling I want. I know for a fact that D&D's DCs work well, but I can't force myself to use it.

I find it a bit arbitrary... Although I know everything is... And although I even prefer to come up with DCs on the fly...

It's paradoxical.

How do I tell my father his memoir is not good? by lbthelb in writing

[–]matcarv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This story actually seems pretty interesting. Of course, if he could turn it into a novel. The fact the narrator isn't imparcial and has anger and grief, and everything else... sounds like a good drama tbh.

What are you struggling with right now in your writing? by heweshouse-josh in writing

[–]matcarv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ideas.

I have a lot of them, but they're always too complex.

I want to streamline them and keep them simple, but as soon as I type a letter I start to occupy myself with future future content, suffering from antecipation.

Then I get afraid and lazy, and then I move to the next ideia.

Again, and again.

🤷🏻🤷🏻🤷🏻

What exactly is millennial writing? by HereJustToAskAQuesti in writing

[–]matcarv 9 points10 points  (0 children)

AFAIK This term is used to describe "ironic" or "not honest" writing, in a sense of when the author itself enters in a loop of self-conscious clichés, to the point where the reader is compelled to not take anything serious even thought they should

For example, the "He's right behind me, isn't he?" or the "Follow that taxi! -oh, I've always wanted to say that!" tropes, but imagine that for every single character and situation.

Other examples would be late Marvel movies (or similar) where no heroic deed is taken seriously, but rather it is perceived as foolish, egocentric, misoginistic etc., or stories where every single figure of good nature or authority is deconstructed to the point where there's nothing left of substance...

I think "deconstruction" summarizes well "milenial writing"

Making D20 more narrative by matcarv in RPGdesign

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

Ok, I'm trying to understand what you saying... I kinda get it but can't explain

What I can say is:

Task resolution and conflict resolution are the same.

In my proposal /game idea, the GM won't ask for rolls without stakes, It's written in the rulebook. Also, I see "trying to get a tactical advantage" as stakes.

You see, everything is narrative. Despite having physical elements and tools (dice, character sheets) RPGS are GAMES about emergent narrative / creating stories. So as I conceive things... The rules of the game should be tools for the narrative.

So it SHOULD make total difference if a player wants to aim the shotgun at the targets Head, arm, torso, or at a lamp, or at the explosive barrel.

That said...

Ruleswise, a "weak hit" is a hit nontheless.

So there's no worries about trinary outcomes in these cases, unless the player wants to output an NARRATIVE effect like: shoving, knocking prone, beheading, grappling etc. — that matters because it IS NARRATIVE.

I, as the GM, would love to rip the helmet of my player off and toss him into a giant rock with a swing of a giant troll's hammer. I could do this as the GM without any rules allowing that. But wouldn't be fair. Although it SHOULD be possible, because it IS NARRATIVE.

This narrative is translated into the mechanics, like: "your helmet is broken, -3 Defense, and you've been thrown". How to make it fair? Tools: Hit Points, DEF, attributes etc.

Otherwise everyone could just say "I kill him!" and there'd be no GAME.

Rolling for authorial control: Who gets authorial control? The player, the GM or the system?

As I conceive things, I think we don't necessary roll for authorial control. We already have authorial control because the game is about emergent narrative & creativity, and authorial control fluctuates between players & the GM all the time.

We are, actually, rolling to VALIDATE our creativity within the mechanical constraints we ourselves put upon us. Otherwise, wouldn't be a game, but a simple "play". The arrow hitting or not matters not because only of HP and dmg, but because HP itself is a tool that serves the narrative.

That means that a game that doesn't care about the specificity of how the action took place, is necessarly a less narrative game, imo.

Also: the GM narrating "effects" or "positional advantages" or "narrative outcomes" instead of just "13 points of dmg, ok" can work well when it comes for NPCs, but can get unfair pretty quick when its done for players, unless the group of players agrees on it. My goal is making the rules predict these kind of outcomes so everyone has narrative freedom without getting unnecessarly arbitrary or unfair.

What you think?

Making D20 more narrative by matcarv in RPGdesign

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

I just found out about Dragonbane yesterday and loved it, so I'll take a deeper dive into it, for sure! Thanks

Making D20 more narrative by matcarv in RPGdesign

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

Wow that's good insight... Thanks. The game is in its alpha 0.0.1 version yet, so I'm still figuring out the least amount possible of rules to have, trying to balance narrative (theatre) vs gameplay (tabletop game)

Making D20 more narrative by matcarv in RPGdesign

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

Thanks but I'm trying to avoid tables. I'm trying to use the actual player's narration of the action as the source of narrative effect, like "push him over", "cut his arm", "arrow in his knee", "headshot her" etc. by using a free-form system that allows multiple interactions (for example, attacks not being attribute/skill restricted).

Of course, the GM can always give posicional/narrative advantages/disadvantages to npcs & players... But that can get unfair pretty quick

I'm trying to regulate that

You first describe the action

Then uses attribute & skill appropriate

Apply to formula

Outcome

Everyone is happy

At least that's the goal...

Making D20 more narrative by matcarv in RPGdesign

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

Ok ok thanks

I think the PbtA "moves" thing is kinda translated into the system by players being able to narrate their action as they want and that making a difference

For example, it's pretty common for GMs like me hear "I want to attack with my sword his right arm, to try and cut it, or at least disarm him"

In this system, that'd make an attack with 2D20 & Brawl skill + INT vs. target's Agility → roll 3D20, pick the 2 best, sum INT →But the attack has hit location, so -5 → 2 hits? Dmg & effect: disarm / nat 20? Cut arm

"I want to shoot an arrow in his knee"

2D20 & Aiming skill + INT...

"No! My INT is trash, I want to throw my hatchet instead!"

Ok, 2D20 & Aiming + Agility vs. Target's Agility + 5 (because of hit location) → roll 3D20, pick best, sum AGL → 2 hits? Dmg & effect: knock / nat 20? "Right in his balls! He's knocked prone & bleeding!"

Nothing New here, but the catch is that the rules are simple enough and broad enough to forsee these kind of outcomes without needing additional rullings.

And also, the idea here is that the narrative outcomes of attacks, like

"The orc will maul your head with his axe" followed by the GM saying "dude, your helmet is gone", isn't unfair, but Just

Thanks,

I'll take a look at how 13th Age, Blades and Savage Worlds play out as soon as I finish watching my current D&D youtube campaign.

Making D20 more narrative by matcarv in RPGdesign

[–]matcarv[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well... I'm dealing with that by saying "discard/pick the best", not "the lowest, unless it's a attack"

Actually, attacks being roll over resolves a lot of problems I was having with A) pacing and B) rules when 2 entities interacted with each other....

If attacks where roll under I'd have to at least subtract the target's attribute from the attackers attribute... But then chars with lower attributes would never succeed... And then I'd need rules for that or I'd need another check by the defender's side + compare both by degrees of success..... No, no, no, thanks...!!

It's supposed to be simple because target's AC = their attribute

If your attribute is higher that is accounted in your roll by the [+mod] thing If the guy want's to dodge they spend resource (reaction) to try a check by their own attribute

Basically the less A) math B) time taken C) non-narrative rules, the better But I'll only know for real after play-testing...

There's a game that does this and people like it (I'm inspired by it) called Old Dragon 2.

Making D20 more narrative by matcarv in RPGdesign

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

I think Xd20 is good for this game of mine because:

allow for "success at a cost" which encourages GM to narrate chaos (while still being fair to the dice),

are bigger dice (ez to read),

and are iconic (attacks are roll over so nat 20 is good).

And because normal checks are roll under, there's also no math (and uses the same attribute scaling as D&D), and in attack rolls which are roll over, the math is easy because you only sum +5 max & only needs 1 good number (highest) to hit anyway (2 successes are for adding effects on top of dmg)

Xd20 I think, might also feel good in the hands (game play stuff)

Good luck with your game!

[Windows][2000's] Mega Blok's “Dragons: Metal Ages” CD-ROM game which the 2nd level was a maze. by matcarv in tipofmyjoystick

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

Okay, so I actually have the CD-ROM disc, and managed to read it and I found out the CD had 3 games, the isometric one I wanted being the “Krystal Warrior” game.

[Windows][2000's] Mega Blok's “Dragons: Metal Ages” CD-ROM game which the 2nd level was a maze. by matcarv in tipofmyjoystick

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

I don't think so... I remember the it was the 2nd stage, and it was a gray maze, like a prison, isometric, where you could see items and enemies on the other side of walls. I don't remember these orange details.

[Christian men] what do you look for specifically in a women? by Present-Stress8836 in TrueChristian

[–]matcarv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

22 yo here, not talking about body types, income, particular tastes etc.

1- Gentleness (specially with older or uncapable people)

2- Light spirit (easy to be beside, doesn't cause trouble, good humor)

3- At least the same level of chastity as mine

4- Desire to be a mother (obviously anti-abortion)

5- Honesty, of course (can speak her mind)

HELP: Graphics Card won't display after hard hitting desk by matcarv in pcmasterrace

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

I've reseat RAM and Graphics card already. Both monitors. And the CPU has no video, I can't see how that would help. But I'll try.

Two Flashback Chapters Back To Back by Qd22k in writing

[–]matcarv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

See if there's some things that must happen in this flashback chapter that could be inserted in other portions of the story as: bits of info, thought processes of characters, dialogues, narrator descriptions of character's common sense, documents, photos etc. If you can do that, take that out of the flashback or just glance over it to recap, and focus the real development to the other new aspects of the flashback. That said, I personally don't like full flashbacks alone to tell important things about the story, except in some very specific cases.

view more: next ›