Custom Roleplaying Ruleset: Constructive criticism please?

[DaMunky89]

This is part of something I've been working on for awhile, and there seems to be a great deal of RP-knowledgeable people here, so I figured I'd see what you guys think. Basically, I'm making my own roleplaying game system, because D&D is too much paperwork for my tastes, CoC is too 1st Edition, and diceless games complicate things in the attempt to simplify them.

Please don't TLDR me. If you don't want to read the whole thing, skip to my combat system. I mainly want you guys to critique that, and the other stuff is here as background information.

Stats
My game will be using only three statistics:

Speed - Movement speed, agility, and dexterity.
Strength - Compare to D&D's strength and constitution.
Intelligence - Awareness of surroundings, general insightfulness, magical prowess.

The average normal human has 10 points in each stat, though they can tend to vary up or down one or two points in any given area. No stat may be lower than 3 points. Note that this minimal system has certain consequences; fast people will always be dexterous, strong people are also sturdy, 'intelligent' people can't be oblivious.

Also, low 'intelligence' doesn't mean a character is automatically stupid.. they just aren't particularly aware or insightful. They might lack common sense, or just be oblivious. This is why I've been putting 'intelligence' in sterilizing quotes; I'm not using it in the typical sense of the word.

Primes
In addition to choosing/generating/buying their stats, players may pick (a GM determined) number of 'primes'. Alternately, a player may pick two "half-primes" instead of one prime. These are applied to the offensive or defensive side of one stat, and help players define what their characters are really good at. These may not be applied to the worst stat of the three, if there is a worst stat.

Primes act as a +6, half-primes as a +3.
Offensive rolls involve causing something to happen, defensive rolls prevent something from happening.

So, for example, if a warrior chooses an offensive strength prime, he'll get +6 to melee attacks, but no bonus for blocking attacks (which also uses STR).
An archer who chooses a defensive speed prime gets +6 to dodging, but no bonus for ranged attacks (which are SPEED based too).

Core Mechanic
For any general check, you do the following for the appropriate stat:
result = (stat value) - 1d20

For checks that require something more specific than pass/fail,
result 6 or more = great success
result 3 or more = success
result 0 = barely passed
result -3 or less = failed
result -6 or less = badly failed

In situations where this would apply, rolling natural 1 is a critical success, and natural 20 is a critical failure. Weird, huh?

Combat System!
Characters with higher speed go first, unless caught off guard.

Attacks:
1) Attacker declares an attack.
2) Defender chooses 'dodge' or 'block'.
3) Attacker rolls 1d20. This is then compared (using the core mechanic) to stat1, determining whether it hits, and stat2, determining damage.

Melee - stat1 is speed, stat2 is strength.
Ranged - stat1 is speed, stat2 is speed.
Magic - stat1 is intelligence, stat2 is intelligence

4) If the defender chose 'dodge', subtract half their speed from result1.
5) If result1 is 0 or positive, attack hits. Otherwise, attack misses.
6) If the attack hit, calculate damage.

Melee damage = 6 + 2*(result2)
Ranged damage = 4 + (result2)
Magic damage = 4 + 2*(result2)

7) If defender chose 'block', subtract strength from damage.

Dodging is the first time division appears in my rules. Anywhere you have a decimal, you round to the nearest whole number.

"Magic damage" is only present as a model for the strength of wizard-type attackers while I'm testing my system, and will eventually be replaced by a spell creation system. Similarly, base damage 6 for melee and 4 for ranged is with generic starter weapons, and subject to change based on weapon power.

Basically, what this means is you roll one die and perform just a couple simple math operations for any given attack. The whole point of my making this system is to speed the combat up. I'm intending to eliminate the "what do I roll for this?" and the need to carry a 1 at any time. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html)

Health Points: Damage equal to 1.5*STR knocks a character out. 2.0*STR kills.

Movement: This can vary by DM, but here's the way I like best.

There are 6 seconds in 1 turn.
10, the average speed, corresponds to 10 m/s, the average human running speed.
Therefore, SPEED*6 is the number of meters a character can move in one turn if they do nothing else.
If you use squares 10 meters on a side, a character with 10 speed may move 1 square per second, or 6 squares per turn.
No moving part of a square, unless the DM wants or cares about that level of detail. Round to the nearest whole! This issue is moot if you're using measurements instead of a grid.


That's all for now. Tell me what you think please? Even if you don't feel like taking the time to critique, or didn't read the whole thing, any comments or suggestions are welcome.

[Zeta Kai]

Well, I like the simplicity of your system so far (& I especially like the 3-stats-only thing), but that core mechanic is very counter-intuitive. It reminds me a lot of THAC0 from AD&D, where everything else about the system is High=Good/Low=Bad, but the odd man out is High=Bad/Low=Good. I'm sure that once you're used to it, it's fine, but a more intuitive mechanic would be much better received.

I didn't get to the combat system yet, but the core mechanic deserved focus, IMO.

[DaMunky89]

post
I agree that "1 is good" feels sorta backwards, but I'm not sure how I'd change it without complicating the stats system. I think I originally got the idea from how percentage-based dice systems such as CoC have you roll underneath your ability scores on a d%.

So that's one thing to consider. How can I change the core mechanic without adding numbers or calculations to the system? If I can, should I? You do mention it's probably just a matter of getting used to it, and the part of my system I'm hoping will draw players in is my character creation. (Excluding character's background, it takes like 5 minutes tops.)

Also, when you look at the battle system you'll notice I'm using one roll for the accuracy and the damage. This means that not only is a good roll going to hit, but it'll hit harder. I like having it this way because you're rolling once instead of twice, and also because as a D&D player it felt weird to me when I natural 19'd my to-hit and then got crap on he damage roll. But, what are the mathematical implications of this? Does it still simulate real-world combat damage to some degree?

Edit: And I looked up THAC0, being enough of a newb to not know the abbreviation offhand. I can see why my system reminds you of this:
THAC0 - (roll on a d20) = AC Hit

[urkthegurk]

I think you're on the wrong track. rather than subtracting your roll from your stat, you can add it, but roll 2d6 instead. Then you have a bit of a bell curve, it fits with your idea of specializations for defenses and attacks, etc. You'd have to re-write the pass/fail table of course.


If I were you, though... what I'm getting from this is that you want to cut out most of the stats in favour of a storytelling-oriented game. In that light, I think it would be easier to simply 'trim' the D+D character sheet. Your ability scores don't leave much room for nuance, and they are one of the easier part of D+D for most people to understand. Just get rid of the whole 'ability score bonuses' thing and have it instead that if you have a six in strength you get +6 on strength-related checks. Makes sense from the simplicity perspective.

Let characters have armor that reduces the amount of damage an attack deals, rather than AC. Protective gear has to do something.

And then you have specializations: fast, strong, or magic. You can learn to do things outside your specialty, but its... harder. in some way.

Anyway, that's enough feedback from me. Lets let someone else have a go

[Ichneumon]

It seems good, although I think it is a bit needlessly complicated, but that too has it's charm. I'm wondering though, what would offensive and defensive uses of intelligence look like?

[DaMunky89]

some helpful things
Hm. Well I don't really like the 2d6es, as that changes the range of possible values from 1-20 to 2-12, which is a totally different scale. Your suggestion does make me think 2d10s might be a good idea for 'realistic' campaigns in which you don't want the random element to be such a wildcard. The main thing to consider is it kills criticals. (They become a 1% instead of a 5%.) I'm not sure how you mean I should "add instead of subtract" though. Like if I roll a 10, and my stat is 15, I get a 25? That changes the system alot.. so I'm probably misinterpreting that part of your suggestion.

While I do like story-driven games, my point isn't to shift the focus off of combat.. just to make it eat less game time. Nobody likes waiting half an hour for the round to end so they can take their next turn. I think there's something very wrong with the way it takes many RPs nearly an hour to complete even the most trivial of encounters. But yeah, ultimately I want the whole system to be fast and smooth enough that it never feels like a chore.

Armor may or may not be a factor, depending on the setting. In a fantasy world, players with armor will just get a bonus to damage blocked. The first campaign I intend to host with this, however, will be in a parallel timeline late 19th Century Europe, and most characters won't be wearing anything that heavy.

Fast, strong, and magic are just three generic archetypes I've come up with for the purpose of testing my system. Part of the game I haven't told you guys about yet is skills. You get a DM-determined number of them (usually 5), and within certain guidelines can basically make up what they do. This is where a great deal of the character customization comes into play. More skills, ability points, and even primes will be awarded at certain levels, but I've yet to explicitly write out that part of the system yet.

Furthermore, in non-magical campaigns (or just if the DM wants to use it), there's a mechanic called "Cunning Strike" I came up with to make Intelligence useful. Characters with 13+ Intelligence can use that instead of their Speed to determine if they hit with a melee or ranged weapon. In this way, 'archers' can use swords semi-effectively, and 'fighters' can use bows.


It seems good, although I think it is a bit needlessly complicated, but that too has it's charm. I'm wondering though, what would offensive and defensive uses of intelligence look like?
I'm not sure how you mean by "needlessly complicated". Compared to D&D for example, which has *shudder* attacks of opportunity, this seems alot simpler, to me at least. But, regardless of our opinions on the matter, if you have suggestions for making this simpler than it already is, I'd love to use them!

Offensive Intelligence rolls will be things like using magic, making knowledge checks, diplomacy (but very much in combination with roleplaying).

Defensive Intelligence rolls will be things like resisting mental attacks, seeing through bluffs, etc. These admittedly won't be used as much as most of the other rolls.

Thanks for the comments, everybody!

[mikeejimbo]

For your core mechanic, instead of taking your stat and subtracting your roll, you should just do a "roll under your stat" mechanic. Roll 6 under your stat is an exceptional success, 6 over it is a critical failure, etc. The math works the same then, but you don't have to do subtraction. I mean, if I were playing the game, that's how I would do the math in my head anyway.

[DaMunky89]

postOh, well yeah definitely. My original post is explicitly stating how the math works, but when I actually say it out loud to players, that's probably what I'll do.

An initial explanation would go like "Okay, so you have to roll under your stat to pass."

Or if they're doing a difficult task "You need to roll three lower than your stat to pass."

That kind of thing.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

The main thing to consider is it kills criticals. (They become a 1% instead of a 5%.)

I'd say that's a feature, not a bug. In the d20 system, you have a 5% chance for awesome success and a 5% chance for abject failure, regardless of level. Having a 1% chance to do something awesome and no arbitrary failure chance means (A) skilled people aren't screwing up more often than amateurs and (B) you can make crits more special.

[DaMunky89]

regarding crits
I agree. The pseudo-Bell Curve provided by 2d10 is more realistic, for the most part.. but you don't always want realism. In terms of which I'd use, personally, it depends on the theme I'm going for. A high-fantasy campaign, for example, definitely 1d20. On the other hand, it's worth considering for my non-magical and/or gritty settings.

[Ichneumon]

If I ever create a rpg-system I am going to use 2d8+1d4 as a standard roll and make them roll lower than their ability to succeed.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

If I ever create a rpg-system I am going to use 2d8+1d4 as a standard roll and make them roll lower than their ability to succeed.

:smalleek: I feel a great disturbance in the Playground, as if millions of statisticians suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced....

[DaMunky89]

*lol* I think (read: desperately hope) he was kidding.

Edit: Though on the other hand, it'd be cool if somebody made a program that shows the mathematical distributions of various combinations of dice rolled.

[Ichneumon]

*lol* I think (read: desperately hope) he was kidding.

Edit: Though on the other hand, it'd be cool if somebody made a program that shows the mathematical distributions of various combinations of dice rolled.

I was, although I AM considering making a system. I have certain ideas, but nothing really "unique", more a combination of d20 houserules combined with different versions of other systems, plus my own intuition what I would prefer and like about a system.

Such a program would be very useful indeed. I'm not sure how you should calculate it.

[DaMunky89]

I could program something like that if I weren't lazy. It'd take me about a full day's work to do in Java. Basically, you consider all possible combinations the dice can result in, then tally up how many times any given number in the possible range shows up.

For example, with 1d20, you can get any number 1 to 20 5% of the time, because it's evenly distributed.

Then you just have it spit out a bar graph.

[Ichneumon]

I could program something like that if I weren't lazy. It'd take me about a full day's work to do in Java. Basically, you consider all possible combinations the dice can result in, then tally up how many times any given number in the possible range shows up.

For example, with 1d20, you can get any number 1 to 20 5% of the time, because it's evenly distributed.

Then you just have it spit out a bar graph.

I also know how to calculate the average number you will roll, in case of 2d8+1d4 it will be 11.5

[DaMunky89]

average #
Oh, yeah. That's what I've been doing while I was creating this system.

"Subtract half your speed from result1 to dodge" sounds simple, but there was a whole mathematical proccess that went into it. I wanted somebody with average speed, when swung at by somebody with an average melee attack, to dodge 50% of the time.

If somebody with 10 Speed swings and hits, their result had to be 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0. Therefore, the average result of an attack that hits is 4.5. Seeing as I want dodging to work about half the time in the average case, somebody with 10 Speed should be able to reduce the attacker's result by 4.5. My system rounds decimals to the nearest whole, and 5 is half of ten. So, dodging ability should be equal to half of speed. This means if somebody with 10 Speed swings at somebody else dodging at 10 Speed, they need a 5 or lower.

That's not to say you'll always have a 25% chance to hit. This is the average case between two users of equal speed, both of whom are dodging. If a PC swings at a somewhat sluggish goblin, it'll probably get clobbered right away.

The important thing is that the whole dodging mechanic boils down to "subtract half your speed from their result1". It's simple to use!

[PairO'Dice Lost]

I could program something like that if I weren't lazy. It'd take me about a full day's work to do in Java. Basically, you consider all possible combinations the dice can result in, then tally up how many times any given number in the possible range shows up.

For example, with 1d20, you can get any number 1 to 20 5% of the time, because it's evenly distributed.

Then you just have it spit out a bar graph.

Heck, if someone really wants it, I could give it a shot; I've been mucking around with Perl graphics and OpenGL on a whim lately, so it would be good practice for me.

[Ichneumon]

Heck, if someone really wants it, I could give it a shot; I've been mucking around with Perl graphics and OpenGL on a whim lately, so it would be good practice for me.

I'd like to see it and possibly use it for making my "system", so if you would enjoy doing it, please try. Although I wouldn't want you to go through much trouble.

[DaMunky89]

Don't feel obligated, but if you end up making that, I'll take a look too:
shwankymunky [atnospam] gmail [dot] com

[mikeejimbo]

I could program something like that if I weren't lazy. It'd take me about a full day's work to do in Java. Basically, you consider all possible combinations the dice can result in, then tally up how many times any given number in the possible range shows up.

For example, with 1d20, you can get any number 1 to 20 5% of the time, because it's evenly distributed.

Then you just have it spit out a bar graph.

Ouch, Java. Do it in C, kid.


#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define ARBITRARY_LARGE_NUMBER = 10000;

int main (char **argv)
{

char *stuff = NULL;
char aChar = NULL;
int numDice = 0;
int dieSize = 0;
int i = 0;
char*[ARBITRARY_LARGE_NUMBER] tempArray;
char *tempString = NULL;
int sum = 0;

printf("Enter the roll you wish to simulate");

getline(&stuff, ARBITRARY_LARGE_NUMBER, '\n');

while(aChar != 'd')
{
aChar = stuff[i++];
strcat(tempString, aChar);
}

i++;

numDice = atoi(tempString);

tempString = "";

while(aChar != '\n')
{
aChar = stuff[i++];
strCat(tempString, aChar);
}

dieSize = atoi(tempString);


for(int j = 0; j < dieSize; j++)
{
tempString = "";
for(int jj = 0; j < numDice; jj++)
{
sum += jj;
strCat(tempString, j);
strCat (tempString, ", ");
}
tempArray[sum] = tempString;
}

for(int k = 0; k < tempArray.length; k++)
{
printf(tempArray[k]);
printf(" = %i\n", k);
}

}

Whatever, something like that. I'm sure that's buggy, it's what I could do in a few minutes.

Edit: Like for example, I didn't return anything and I have the main function declared incorrectly. Meh.

[DaMunky89]

code
I haven't learned C yet.. *lol* It looks like your example code is in Java, though. Is that Java? Heh. I will try compiling this.

[mikeejimbo]

I haven't learned C yet.. *lol* It looks like your example code is in Java, though. Is that Java? Heh. I will try compiling this.

No, it's in C. Java's syntax is very similar to C++, which is rather similar to C.

[DaMunky89]

Huh. That's cool. It also explains why I wasn't able to compile it in Java when I tried that just now. *lol*

[mikeejimbo]

Huh. That's cool. It also explains why I wasn't able to compile it in Java when I tried that just now. *lol*

You probably couldn't even compile it in C without cleaning up some stuff. I'd be liable to say "Oh, d'oh" at myself for trying to. Now, this program wouldn't display it very nicely either.

Come to think of it, what would be better would be a program that statistically analyzes your rolls. You know, like with the mean and standard deviation.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Come to think of it, what would be better would be a program that statistically analyzes your rolls. You know, like with the mean and standard deviation.

Your wish is my command.

Here's the program (in Perl, so I don't know if it'll make sense to you C and Java people)...


#!/usr/bin/env perl
use strict;
use warnings;

my ($input, $num, $size, $str, $sum, $temp, $total);
my @results;
my @stats;

print "Enter a dice expression:\n";
chomp($input = <STDIN>);
while($input =~ m/(\d*)d(\d*)/g)
{
($num, $size) = ($1, $2);

for (1..$num)
{
push @results, [1..$size];
}
}

my @perm = permute(@results);
for (@perm)
{
$sum = sum(@{$_});
$stats[$sum] += 1;
$total+=1;
}

print "\tResult\tTimes\tProbability\n";
for (0..$#stats)
{
if($stats[$_])
{
$temp = $stats[$_]/$total;
print "\t$_\t$stats[$_]\t",sprintf("%.4f",$temp),"\n";
}
}
print "\nMean: ",mean(@stats),"\tStandard Deviation: ",sprintf("%.4f",std_dev(@stats)),"\n";

sub permute
{
my $last = pop @_;
unless (@_)
{
return map [$_], @$last;
}
return map { my $left = $_; map [@$left, $_], @$last } permute(@_);
}

sub sum
{
my $s;
for (@_)
{
$s += $_;
}
return $s;
}

sub mean
{
my $s;
my @arr = @_;
for (0..$#arr)
{
$s += $_ * $arr[$_] if $arr[$_];
}
return $s/$total;
}

sub std_dev
{
my @arr = @_;
my $t;
my $mean1 = mean(@arr);
for (0..$#arr)
{
$t += (($mean1 - $_)**2) * $arr[$_] if $_ and $arr[$_];
}
my $mean2 = $t/$total;
return sqrt($mean2);
}
...and here's the output:


Enter a dice expression:
3d6
Result Times Probability
3 1 0.0046
4 3 0.0139
5 6 0.0278
6 10 0.0463
7 15 0.0694
8 21 0.0972
9 25 0.1157
10 27 0.1250
11 27 0.1250
12 25 0.1157
13 21 0.0972
14 15 0.0694
15 10 0.0463
16 6 0.0278
17 3 0.0139
18 1 0.0046

Mean: 10.5 Standard Deviation: 2.9580

It currently only handles a single XdY expression, but I'm working on making it handle compound expressions like, oh, 2d8+1d4.

EDIT: Aaaand it now handles compound expressions. The code in the first spoiler block is the new version.


Enter a dice expression:
2d8+1d4
Result Times Probability
3 1 0.0039
4 3 0.0117
5 6 0.0234
6 10 0.0391
7 14 0.0547
8 18 0.0703
9 22 0.0859
10 26 0.1016
11 28 0.1094
12 28 0.1094
13 26 0.1016
14 22 0.0859
15 18 0.0703
16 14 0.0547
17 10 0.0391
18 6 0.0234
19 3 0.0117
20 1 0.0039

Mean: 11.5 Standard Deviation: 3.4278

[mikeejimbo]

Yeah, exactly like that! And being Perl, I imagine you could throw that up on a webpage easily? That would be handier for this sort of thing anyway.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Yeah, exactly like that! And being Perl, I imagine you could throw that up on a webpage easily? That would be handier for this sort of thing anyway.

Indeed; add a few lines and change the program extension and it's trivial to put online. I don't suppose you know of any site that might be able to host it?

[mikeejimbo]

Indeed; add a few lines and change the program extension and it's trivial to put online. I don't suppose you know of any site that might be able to host it?

Unfortunately I don't. I think Tripod used to allow Perl, but I don't know if they still do, or even if I was ever correct about that. I am by no means a web programmer, so that kind of thing isn't in my knowledge base.

[erikun]

Alright, nothing too revolutionary with my commentary, but I'll try my best.

Stats
Have you considered using "Perception", "Insight", or "Spirit" rather than Intelligence? It seems to be more what you're looking for. Also, Perception would be an appropriate attack stat for ranged weapons (bows, etc.), meaning you wouldn't have as much dependance on Speed.

Primes
I will admit, I'm not sure what purpose Primes serve in this system.

Core Mechanic
I'm a bit confused here. I assume that 6+ is a great success, 3 to 5 is a success and 0 to 2 is a "barely passed", but what is -1 to -2? I would think it's a failure, but that's apparently -3 to -5. Is it something like this?

6 or more = great success
3 to 5 = success
-2 to 2 = barely passed
-3 to -5 = failed
-6 or less = badly failed

Secondly: don't do something just because it's usual. It can make the system unique, but a unique yet confusing system isn't as good as a common, comprehensive one. The idea behind old D&D THAC0 is that a bonus/penality which applies to AC would apply to THAC0, also. -1 AC is equal to -1 THAC0, so it didn't matter which roll you stuck it on. (Conversely, -1 AC is the same as +1 to-hit in 3e D&D.)

Combat System!
As said in stats, possibly too much emphasis on Speed. 3 Str, 20 Spd, 3 Int is far better than 10 Str, 10 Spd, 10 Int, despite costing less point-buy wise. You're also going to dodge virtually everything, and have large amounts of accuracy/damage with bows.

If you want to speed things up (compared to 3e D&D) then take a look Muntants and Masterminds. The basics of combat look like this:

roll d20, add your attack bonus
compare to opponent's defense (AC) to see if you hit
if hit, defender rolls d20 and adds their toughness
compare to the damage the attack deals (a static number)
Making the roll means you've shrugged off the effect. Missing the roll by a little means you were hurt, but can still fight. Missing the roll by a lot knocks you out.


I also have my own (who doesn't?) very simple system, which is basically "roll d8, add bonuses, subtract defense, apply damage." It's not well fleshed out yet, though.

[DaMunky89]

If you compiled that as a program, you could probably get away with uploading it to the "OpenRPG Dev II Character Sheet Repository" here:
linklinklink (http://openrpg.wrathof.com/index.php?)


post
I was calling it 'Wisdom' instead of 'Intelligence', which fits a little bit better, but I like 'Perception' and 'Insight' better, so maybe I'll use one of those. Changing ranged attacks to INT instead of SPEED is kinda big though, and I always intended speed to be the primary stat for archers/thief types.

Primes are just bonuses to your stats.. I thought I explained them pretty thoroughly. It's just to add some variety to character creation.

Pass/fail is meant to be straightforward. 0 is passing by the skin of your teeth. Positive numbers are good, negative numbers are bad. The greater the number, the greater the success or failure.

This isn't something I'm doing just to be unique.. it just seemed like the most direct way to compare any given roll to your stat.
D&D's way: Roll dice, add bonus from stats, add circumstantial bonuses, compare to DC.
My way: Roll dice, subtract, compare to result needed.

D&D requires an extra step. D&D might not have a circumstantial bonus, but then, if the "result needed" in my system is 0 like it is 90% of the time, that doesn't need to be considered either. I know I haven't even begun to list the types of weird bonuses D&D might need you to account for, either. Even then, this is just the core mechanic. D&D combat as a whole is far more complicated.

As for that archer you describe, he's what I call a "maxed build". I've taken them into consideration when I made this system, and they aren't very feasible. Granted, anything is better than 10-10-10, which no player would pick if we were doing full point buy (like you'd need to get a 20-3-3).

A magician with 3 Speed, 10 Strength, and 17 Int could easily drop such an archer in one hit. If he rolls anything below an 8 the archer can't dodge it. Note that my answer to the maxed build is not a maxed build. This magician would be pretty slow, moving just 18 meters a turn, but his ranged attacks and the fact that it takes 15 damage to K.O. him makes up for it.

I like the M&M system better than D&D's way, but this is a minimalist RP, and I'm happy with the level of complexity it supports on one roll per turn. Thanks for the comments! You seem to have spent a decent amount of time typing them up.