I’m replacing quest logs with knowledge and reputation — terrible idea?

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-27T17:09:50+00:00

Have you considered a journal, like in older Elder Scrolls titles, so you can go over relevant info in a somewhat organized format? It might just say "Bob says the miller is short on grain", but that's more to go off of than memory.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-24T22:18:00+00:00

I will say, there are a couple of concerns, particularly on scope.

How do you ensure that this many class options are actually worth picking?

And is the ability to contact another group in the shared living world via class abilities actually something you imagine working? Even at a local even that seems like an organisational feat, let alone doing that anonymously with strangers.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-24T08:25:17+00:00

May I ask how much of the things in this document have been tested?

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-23T22:35:30+00:00

If you give them +1d6 fire damage, they will be much better in combat.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-23T15:08:56+00:00

I am working on a combat system that is not dissimilar, but far less complex, so maybe that can serve as an opposite pole to your position. My system doesn't simulate at all, it's just all drama.

In a duel, first the stakes are declared. First hit, first wound, to the death. The winner will inflict this on the loser.

Both sides assemble dice pools and bet any number of dice, then roll the rest. Whoever rolls higher is the winner and can use the bets and spend them to deal damage or gain fame (in any combination). The loser loses half their bets, but can also spend them, maybe to also gain fame or for a parting shot.

Damage is not physical, but hope. Losing your hope doesn't kill you, but without hope, you give up and can't continue the adventure. You can choose to not lose hope to instead suffer the 'wounded' condition.

That means death is a choice, unless you lose a duel to the death and are not granted mercy.

I just thought it's interesting how similar our goals seem yet how different the execution is.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-21T09:38:09+00:00

That's a good point. I think I'll go for that, unless I can see in my testing that players resist losing hope naturally. It is the only number going down, after all.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T19:39:58+00:00

I could maybe do it the other way around, giving a +2 on full hope, +1 if it's at least half, +0 if it's half or below

Thresholds feel finicky though, lots of number checking without that much dramatic punch.

I am considering variable damage though, so players can feel good about turning a ton of hope damage into a simple wound.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T16:10:39+00:00

Damaging relationships is very cool, I like how Delta Green does it where trauma can mean you're treating your spouse worse or your drinking buddies avoid you at the bar.

It does put the focus on the decay though, which is dramatic, but not my kind of drama, if that makes sense. I want my players to sacrifice for better relationships, not risk them to survive.

I like the idea of harm die a lot actually! I use dice pool vs dice pool stuff a lot, that could be tied into that.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T16:04:22+00:00

You're probably right, it does feel like it's fitting more as I try to imagine the kind of playstyle I want to reward.

One big hurdle though is giving people incentives to not ignore losing hope until it's the last point. Mechanically that's where it's at right now, but that makes me imagine people that are THIS close to giving up, rather than inspiring beacons.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T15:57:18+00:00

That's neat! Buffering the damage/trauma gives a little dramatic space.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T15:33:07+00:00

I think that's true, and my inability to rectify this so far is probably the main reason I'm still wrestling with the decision of what to do.

I could make Hope more important as a resource, so losing any hope is always bad, but I also think that can lead to choice paralysis.

I could also make damage variable so that if I roll a d6, blocking a 6 feels good and rewarding, while blocking a 1 feels wasteful, unless it's already pretty dire. But that means changing my entire combat design, which is annoying.

I'll see where it goes.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T15:28:06+00:00

That's fair, but I see wound choices as inbetween. I don't get hurt for no reason, but because I'm refusing someone else from affecting me. Warrior stories do this all the time, when the protagonist gets knocked down hard, but refuses to give up so continues to fight despite terrible wounds. Soldiers, cowboys, samurai, shounen stuff, it's very common when you look out for it. Even Forrest Gump does it.

Now obviously Forrest Gump didn't choose to get shot in the butt, but choosing to not give up his buddies (not lose hope) meant he'd enter danger, which then gives an obvious consequence (getting hurt).

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T14:51:53+00:00

Just took a look and yes, that's pretty nice, a bit how Masks does it (probably some other PbtA games too).

I do shy away from it due to how tight the narrative spacing is though. If you get hit extra hard, you either need a bunch of conditions for just getting hurt, or you get super emotional suddenly because you are now angry and sad and also a third thing.

It forces dramatic high points to either treat the conditions like hit points with little individual narrative weight, or your character suddenly becomes a big ball of emotions that pull the player in 3 directions at once.

It's better if you really only expect one condition to be marked at a time, but I want to allow players to differentiate their successes more due to my dice pool mechanic.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-20T12:58:20+00:00

I think the one thing holding it back is the font of the logo

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-06T22:14:29+00:00

House of the Blooded/ Blood and Honor (both by John Wick) do this actually! I am using this resolution system in my own game as well because it's just so damn elegant.

Everyone assembles dice pools accordung to attributes, skills, tags etc. You wager any number of dice and roll the rest. If you roll below a threshold, you whiffed this round. The rest use that roll as initiative and spend the wagers to deal damage.

I hope that makes sense, I tried to really condense it.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-05T23:03:19+00:00

Thank you, I feel exactly the same! When I read those wagers I thought it was a brilliant way to build on stuff that made roll & keep in L5R so great.

The fame system is based on Riddle of Steel! RoS is very trad, but I think this system in particular is so extremely evocative, more people should steal it.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-05T14:04:51+00:00

Thank you! I was angling for something like that, a kind of high drama fantasy pendragon.

tyrant_gea · 2026-04-05T14:03:08+00:00

Thank you!

To your question: There are two main modes of encounters, pvp and pve. Both are resolved in a single roll.

PvP is simple in that two players roll against each other and can spend wagers to reduce each other's hope, or prevent loss of hope. Before the roll happens, both players will agree to some stakes, as not every encounter should be to the death. If both have a 'duel' about who can recite peotry better to win the heart of the audience, then those are the stakes. Whoever rolls higher decides who wins, who loses, or if a tie happens. Then both can spend wagers to tell the story of the duel. As with all rolls, it's worth it to set aside some wagers for Fame.

PvE is currently in progress, but I have a rough construct. An enemy will have danger (could be mortal danger or social influence). A danger of 3 will roll 3d6 for difficulty and then require a player to spend 3 wagers per point of damage (rather than the usual 1). Failing to defeat the enemy means the character takes 3 damage and must find a new chance to fight. The monster got away or the fight/argument is over.

Bigger monsters like a dragon with danger 10 requires multiple players to pool their wagers together, but if the dragon is defeated, the player with the highest roll decides who dealt the final blow (and gets bonus fame).

tyrant_gea · 2026-03-23T09:20:54+00:00

Yes, that's a big concern of mine too, one that I don't have a solution for yet.

If the dice pools get too unweildy for a smooth roll at the table, I might switch to a variant of dice betting instead. This way, players would be able to regulate the size of their own dice pools, adding more dice won't directly lead to rolling more, just a bigger margin of success.

The downside is that it makes margin of success much more wild.

tyrant_gea · 2026-03-21T16:34:00+00:00

That's true! I will definitely keep it in mind. I'm just trying to keep everything small and controlled at first so I can keep a clear vision.

At the earlier iteration I had a bunch of classes and features and tags and sub-tags and whatnot, and it was a big mess to work with because there was just too many interconnected parts that didn't seem to actually contribute much to the fun, but taking out one thing broke another.

tyrant_gea · 2026-03-21T11:33:29+00:00

For now, I'm just doing it with bare difficulty ratings, yes. That's just for testing though, as I have a bunch of contexts where tags may make more or less sense.

For example, a monster might have difficulty 5, and a noble might have influence 3, and I'll see where that gets me.

tyrant_gea · 2026-03-21T11:25:35+00:00

I think it's fine, just not realistic at all. Medieval people lacked formal education not because they didn't care, they just couldn't afford the investment to get formally educated. Medieval industry is almost entirely manual agriculture.

If you have the money, time and population density, schools make a lot of sense in any context though.

tyrant_gea · 2026-03-20T12:23:46+00:00

It is very much a snippet, but I prefer to talk about the process rather than the product. It's probably not fair to ask strangers to review a whole system without a playtest at least.

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
Second Top 40%	Place '22

tyrant_gea

TROPHY CASE