PDA

View Full Version : Different Systems: How do they handle it?



Fiery Diamond
2010-08-23, 04:06 PM
So, I am considering fiddling around with making a fantasy RPG system. I don't want it to be a carbon copy of D&D, but I'm running into a stumbling block: The only system I've ever played is D&D 3.5 (well, one session of 4th Ed, but that doesn't count, and I didn't particularly like it). I've been doing some research on D&D variants (Pathfinder, dungeons wiki Races of War, dungeons wiki skill variants, etc.). A lot of it is interesting and worth considering. However, I read on here time and time again about how there are other systems that handle certain issues of balance/realism/you name it better than D&D does. So, in my quest to come up with sufficient background research for different ways of handling different aspects of RPGs, I come to the playground in search of aid.

The question/request I have of you all is pretty much two-fold:

1) Will you present me with/direct me to/summarize for me (in the event that doing either of the first two is not legal, because I certainly don't want to cause that kind of problem around here) how different systems handle various aspects of pen-and-paper, dice-rolling RPGs? They don't necessarily need to be d20; I'm thinking of making my system d% (primarily) anyway.

Examples of aspects I want input on include (but are not limited to):

* Combat (attacking, defending, damage, saves/resistances, health, dying, weapons/armor)
* Classes, Leveling, and Class Abilities (I do want to have classes and levels, and have an idea of how I want to go about it, but input on this may greatly influence that)
* Magic (casting, spell slots/mana pools, renewability, restrictions, capabilities, limits, themes)
* Ability Scores and their affects on gameplay (again, I have an idea of what I want to do, but input may change it)
* Skills, including performance type skills (climbing, jumping, playing an instrument, etc.), manipulation type skills (handling devices, disguising, handling animals, etc.), passive type skills (spot, listen, etc.), and social skills (diplomacy, information gathering, bluffing, etc.), and such-like
* Keeping non-magic not inferior to magic



2) Will you tell me why you think that what you present might be a good way of handling things, or how you think it provides a better or just different experience than the way D&D does it? Further, will you tell me what kinds of things you think should have special attention paid to them, mechanically, in crafting a system?


Thank you, fellow playgrounders.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-08-23, 04:16 PM
1) Will you present me with/direct me to/summarize for me (in the event that doing either of the first two is not legal, because I certainly don't want to cause that kind of problem around here) how different systems handle various aspects of pen-and-paper, dice-rolling RPGs? They don't necessarily need to be d20; I'm thinking of making my system d% (primarily) anyway.
This is an unbelievably broad question - and your examples do not pare it down much. Not all RPGs approach their game as D&D does; in fact, most approach it from completely different directions.

What, exactly, do you want out of an RPG? If you want a fixed version of D&D3.5 and don't like D&D4, play Pathfinder. It fixes a lot of problems and is commercially available.

Or wait for Fax's d20r to be complete. It looks pretty good :smallsmile:

If you want something else, please lay out in more concrete terms what it is you desire. Once you settle on the purpose of your system, we can start talking mechanics.

This post brought to you by the PDP School of Game Design :smallcool:

Satyr
2010-08-23, 04:28 PM
Why not take a look at some awesome free games first?

There's Gurps Light (http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/lite/)which explains how stuff basically works in Gurps (admittedly minus about 95% of the options); The various D6 games (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=20448&it=1&filters=0_0_0_0), are also free by now, as is Tri-Stat (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=368&it=1&filters=0_0_0_0), Fudge (http://www.fudgerpg.com/files/pdf/fudge_1995.pdf), and of course the crown jewel of all free available games, Witchcraft (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=692&it=1&filters=0_0_0_0).


And I am pretty sure, there are many more out there.
Especially if you are interested in a percentage-based system, there are basically two - the BRP-games, like Call of Cthulhu and Runequest (there used to be a Runequest SRD for the previous edition, but I don't know what happened to it); and the Rolemaster games (including MERP, the original Lord of the Rings RPG).

Fiery Diamond
2010-08-23, 04:36 PM
This is an unbelievably broad question - and your examples do not pare it down much. Not all RPGs approach their game as D&D does; in fact, most approach it from completely different directions.

What, exactly, do you want out of an RPG? If you want a fixed version of D&D3.5 and don't like D&D4, play Pathfinder. It fixes a lot of problems and is commercially available.

Or wait for Fax's d20r to be complete. It looks pretty good :smallsmile:

If you want something else, please lay out in more concrete terms what it is you desire. Once you settle on the purpose of your system, we can start talking mechanics.

This post brought to you by the PDP School of Game Design :smallcool:

Sorry that I wasn't clear; perhaps this will explain:

I didn't mean that I wanted every poster to try to answer every aspect of the question. I meant to present the various things I wanted to get out of this thread, and expected each poster to address one or a few of the points that I brought up. The request intentionally covered a lot of ground, not because I expected every poster to be a guru, but because I wanted information on all of these things: a little bit on one subject from poster A, a little bit on another from poster B, etc.


Not all RPGs approach their game as D&D does; in fact, most approach it from completely different directions.

And that's part of why I want some information on how other systems handle things. I know a few parts of how D&D approaches things that I want (classes, leveling, certain abilities being associated with certain classes for example - though not necessarily in exactly the same way D&D handles them). Remember, I've never played any other system, so I don't even have any real idea of what other approaches to RPG that there can be. Thus, I need to be informed.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-08-23, 04:43 PM
Sorry that I wasn't clear; perhaps this will explain:

I didn't mean that I wanted every poster to try to answer every aspect of the question. I meant to present the various things I wanted to get out of this thread, and expected each poster to address one or a few of the points that I brought up. The request intentionally covered a lot of ground, not because I expected every poster to be a guru, but because I wanted information on all of these things: a little bit on one subject from poster A, a little bit on another from poster B, etc.
...I guess we could just post random things about various systems, but that doesn't seem productive.

I mean, I can name a half-dozen methods for randomly resolving Conflicts alone:
- Poker Hands (Classic Deadlands)
- d% (Palladium)
- d20+Mod vs. DC (D&D3.5)
- d20 under Ability Score (AD&D)
- Degree of Success Die Rolls (Mountain Witch)
- Dice Pool Success Test (SR4; nWoD)

but that's not going to help you design a game. From what I hear, you want D&D3.5-but-not-broken. If true, then play Pathfinder - it does a fine job. If you don't want to play PF, then I need to know what you don't like about Pathfinder - and what you don't like about D&D4 while you're at it.

Making a system isn't as hard as you might think, but it's impossible to do unless you enunciate what you want the system to be able to do first.

EDIT: If you simply want to see what the world has to offer, there's no better way than to try out new systems. Start with Satyr's selection and go up the price-point scale from there :smallsmile:

valadil
2010-08-23, 04:44 PM
For another rules heavy game, take a look at GURPS. The basic mechanics are pretty simple. Roll 3d6. If the result is lower than your skill or the target difficulty you succeed. Sometimes margin of success matters. There's an optional rule for just about everything you could ever do.

WoD is a pretty common second RPG for people. I think it ends up catching a lot of the people who aren't satisfied with D&D and want a system more focused on roleplaying. The basic mechanics include having 9 stats and a number of skills. Each one goes up to 5 points. Add a stat to a skill and roll that many d10s. If any are above a target difficulty, you succeed. More dice above means more success. It's a neat system because it allows nearly any combination of stat and skill. For instance your athletics skill could pair with agility, strength, or endurance depending on what you're trying to do. There's a lot of versatility there for such a simple and elegant mechanic.

Burning Wheel is popular these days. I haven't read it myself. I point it out though because it includes mechanics for encouraging roleplay.

Aroka
2010-08-23, 04:53 PM
Satyr's right - your question is impossibly broad. A "summary" of any one of the areas you want for any one of the dozens of games I know would run at least a page, probably several, if it were to include enough details and mechanics and special cases to be a useful explanation. The only way you can actually get the info you want is to read the games yourself.

For good games with interesting mechanics worth checking out just to know them, I recommend The Riddle of Steel (deep realistic combat), Artesia: Adventures in the Known World (character creation, lineages, magic, simple realistic combat), Trail of Cthulhu (different kinds of skill use, clue mechanics, character motivations), and I guess Conan d20 (better D&D).

Also, the RuneQuest SRD (http://mrqwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page) is available here (MRQ1; MRQ2 not out yet afaik). One of the best examples of a game with different but similar mechanics, compared to D&D.

Kaje
2010-08-23, 04:58 PM
I mean, I can name a half-dozen methods for randomly resolving Conflicts alone:
- Poker Hands (Classic Deadlands)
- d% (Palladium)
- d20+Mod vs. DC (D&D3.5)
- d20 under Ability Score (AD&D)
- Degree of Success Die Rolls (Mountain Witch)
- Dice Pool Success Test (SR4; nWoD)
And in Super Awesome Action Heroes, one of the primary mechanics is to have the player describe his action, and then all the players vote as to whether the action is awesome enough to succeed.

Xefas
2010-08-23, 05:05 PM
If you want some straight advice from genuinely successful indie RPG makers, here's a podcast interview with Luke Crane and Jared Sorenson (http://frontrowcrew.com/geeknights/20100727/luke-and-jared-on-rpgs/).

They have a few tangents here and there; some silly metaphor at the beginning, but by the end, you'll know a lot more about RPG design and what makes a good RPG both good and an RPG.

Fiery Diamond
2010-08-23, 05:11 PM
I see that some people have different ideas of what a summary is than I do. I'm looking for posts like valadil's (thank you), only with perhaps more detail. To give an example of what I mean by a summary, I'll give a summary of "Skills" for D&D 3.5.


Skills in D&D 3.5:

In D&D 3.5, there is a fairly long list of skills (more than twenty) that cover non-combat actions. Some of them are simply actions, like climb, perform (for playing instruments), jump, and open lock. Some of them are socially related, such as bluff (for convincing others of lies), or disguise (for disguising yourself as someone else), or gather information (self-explanatory). Still others involve stealth (hide and move silently) or detection (spot, listen, and search).

Each time you gain a level, you gain a number of "points" based on your class (for example, fighter gets 2 + a modifier related to an ability score called intelligence while rogue gets 8 + that modifier) which you can "spend" to improve your character's capability with specific skills of your choosing. Spending a skill point on a skill, for example jump, increases your "ranks" for that skill by one. There is a cap on the number of ranks you can hold (your level + 3 for some skills, your level + 3 / 2 for others, which is which depends on your class) per skill.

When you use a skill, you roll a d20 and add your ranks, as well as a modifier derived from an associated ability score (and sometimes other circumstantial, magical, or similar bonuses as well), and look at the total result. You compare that result to a target number that is determined by what you are attempting to do, this target is called a DC. If your result is higher, you succeed; if your result is lower, your fail. Occasionally there will be degrees of success or failure depending on how much higher or lower your total is. When the skill you are using is involved in interaction with another character (like Bluff), the DC is determined by an opposed skill roll by the other character, adjusted with situational modifiers.

Oracle_Hunter
2010-08-23, 05:18 PM
I see that some people have different ideas of what a summary is than I do. I'm looking for posts like valadil's (thank you), only with perhaps more detail. To give an example of what I mean by a summary, I'll give a summary of "Skills" for D&D 3.5.
...yeah, good luck with that.

I'd highly recommend either stating what it is you want to get out of a system (e.g. more realism, more lethal combat, faster combat, more granular skills) or trying out some free systems. In the case of the former, we can use our experience with systems to find something that serves the purpose you seek. In the latter case, you can experience different forms of system design and see what you prefer.

Merely reading over pages of rules summaries isn't going to get you anywhere.

Fiery Diamond
2010-08-23, 05:27 PM
Merely reading over pages of rules summaries isn't going to get you anywhere.

I disagree. It will help immensely. By getting a large variety of snippets for how various different systems approach various aspects of the RPG, I will be able to pull from them for inspiration, mimic bits and pieces of them, and open my eyes to multitudes of possibilities that I quite simply would not have even realized existed before. While that might not help you, or people you know, that happens to be the way my mind operates. To even say, "I want a game that looks something like this," and then proceed to describe things like realism, fast combat, lumped together skills, or somesuch closes doors before I even know that there are doors. There do happen to be a few things that I know that I want, and those are specified in the initial post. But other than those things, I want to know what kinds of possibilities exist before I start limiting my possibilities. And "reading over pages of rules summaries" is much easier, much faster, much more convenient, requires far less commitment to learning the entirety of systems such as by playing them, and is far less expensive than actually trying to go purchase every rulebook and play several sessions by myself of a bunch of game systems.

Kiero
2010-08-23, 06:02 PM
Your best bet is to go out and actually play some systems that aren't D&D 3.x. I can't really think of being in a worse position when trying to design your own game than having pretty much no experience outside of one system.

Fiery Diamond
2010-08-23, 06:29 PM
Your best bet is to go out and actually play some systems that aren't D&D 3.x. I can't really think of being in a worse position when trying to design your own game than having pretty much no experience outside of one system.

I know. And, in a more perfect world, that's exactly what I would do. The problem is that I don't have the needed things in order to do this: the time (it takes a lot longer to play something than to read a rundown of the rules, an a truncated rundown takes even less time), the people (it is difficult enough for me to get a group together to play anything, as I live in a rural community, so there really isn't any prospect of me getting people together for experimentation with systems), and the money (pretty self-explanatory; I don't have tons of cash to throw around). Lacking those three things, actually playing several different systems in order to get a good grasp of the possibilities is pretty much impossible, so I'm trying for what I view as the next best thing.

Believe me, if I had the resources necessary, I would play different systems to gain the exposure. Unfortunately, I don't.

arrowhen
2010-08-23, 06:38 PM
Fire up the Google and search for "Design Patterns of Successful Role Playing Games".

You're welcome.

Yora
2010-08-23, 06:52 PM
From what I learned about RPG-Systems in the last weeks that I tried to broaden my horizon, most RPGs follow two distinct design philosophies.

It probably began in AD&D and maybe even earlier, but in d20, you really don't do anything without rolling dice. There are attack rolls, damage rolls, saves, skills, and special attacks, and there are spells that improve your bonuses, spells that bestow penalties, modifiers for terrain, and so on. The basic design philosophy here is "How can we break down a situation into a die roll?".
A scene could be described as "He charges down the stairs, jumps over the goblin at the lowest step, and plunges his swords into the minotaurs chest." In D&D, you first ask what the distance is, and if it's within the characters range for the round (1). He might have magic that improves his speed (2), but also wear armor that impedes him (3), so this has to be considered. Then running down stairs is difficult, so he makes a Balance roll (4) against a set DC (5) to see if he stumbles, but takes a penalty to the roll (6)because of the uneven floor. Then he wants to jump over the goblin, so he makes a jump check (7) to see if he jumps high enough. He had a running start, so this also provides him with a bonus (8) to his jump roll. The goblin could injure him with his spear, as he flies overhead, so his action is paused and the goblin gets his turn making a stab at the character. First he makes his attack roll (9), but the character may not apply his shield bonus in this situation (10), and if he hits he makes a damage roll (11). And then the character makes an attack roll (12) against the minotaurs AC (13) to see if he hits the him. If he's successful he also makes a damage roll (14), but might have to consider Damage Reduction (15).

However other systems really don't care for considering all these little details. They rather ask "do we need to roll dice here so the character isn't guranteed instant success even though his idea is really stupid and would never work realistically?".
The most extreme example would probably be Risus, in which the player simply says "I tighten my grip on my sword and charage at the stairs. Taking several steps at once, I race towards the goblin at the end but at the very last moment leap into the air and leave him gawking at my feet. Using my momentum I jerk my sword arm forward and burry the blade in the minotaurs chest." And then he rolls his 4d6 (1) against the minotaurs 3d6 (2), and if he rolls higher the minotaur is left with only 2d6 for the following rounds.
Of course you coult calculate a lot more things, but Risus asks "Why?". Would it improve the story of the adventure if we regulate more things and role more dice? Questions like "After how many hours do you have to start making Fortitude saves before you get tired and suffer from the Fatigued status?" wouldn't be asked in such a system. The GM just decides when the characters get exhausted when it fits the plot. No need to have rule for that.

If you consider all the other systems, there are of course many more variations and degrees in which these two paradigms apply, but in general they come down to "Roll when you can." and "Role if you have to."

If you're very familiar with D&D, I suggest downloading Tri-Stat or GURPS Lite for free and just take a look at the basic rules. It's the special abilities that really make up 90% of the entire system, but you really don't get into those to get a good look at the basics. It really does a great deal to get a more expanded view on what RPGs can be like.

Kiero
2010-08-23, 07:05 PM
I know. And, in a more perfect world, that's exactly what I would do. The problem is that I don't have the needed things in order to do this: the time (it takes a lot longer to play something than to read a rundown of the rules, an a truncated rundown takes even less time), the people (it is difficult enough for me to get a group together to play anything, as I live in a rural community, so there really isn't any prospect of me getting people together for experimentation with systems), and the money (pretty self-explanatory; I don't have tons of cash to throw around). Lacking those three things, actually playing several different systems in order to get a good grasp of the possibilities is pretty much impossible, so I'm trying for what I view as the next best thing.

Believe me, if I had the resources necessary, I would play different systems to gain the exposure. Unfortunately, I don't.

What's the hurry to write a game now? How about waiting til you have some experience, then moving onto this project? You've got an entire life ahead of you.

Are you never going to move from where you live now? Have you exhausted all the resources in finding local players?

You have an internet connection. There are literally hundreds of free games (some of them quite good) out there (see this site (http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/freerpgs/) as a starting point). Money is not an object to trying out RPGs.

Savannah
2010-08-24, 12:58 AM
Many systems have quickstart rules that give you just enough to set up a character, which might allow you to get an idea of the game. For example: Call of Cthulhu quickstart (http://www.chaosium.com/article.php?story_id=87), a d% based game.


the time (it takes a lot longer to play something than to read a rundown of the rules, an a truncated rundown takes even less time)

Why don't you have the time? I guarantee that reading the rules won't give you the same insight that playing will.


the people (it is difficult enough for me to get a group together to play anything, as I live in a rural community, so there really isn't any prospect of me getting people together for experimentation with systems)

Play by post. This board, even, so you don't have to go anywhere new. (D&D 3.5 is the most common, but I've seen recruitment for Exalted, Call of Cthulhu, Trail of Cthulhu, Maid, GURPS, D&D 4, AD&D, various New/Old World of Darkness, D20 Modern, d20 Future, Pathfinder, various freeforms, and even more that I can't remember.)


the money (pretty self-explanatory; I don't have tons of cash to throw around).

Quickstart rules + playing online = no need for money.

Balain
2010-08-24, 01:48 AM
Like others said it really is best to actually try to play the games. If not at least read some of the books first. But forgetting that here is a run down of my favorite magic system


For magic systems my favorite was Ars Magica or Mage (oWoD)

There were 10 spheres of magic or schools or what ever they were called. I'll stick with Mage as the example cause I remember it just a smidge better.

The spheres in Mage are:


Correspondence

Deals with spatial relations, giving the Mage power over space and distances.

Entropy

This sphere gives the Mage power over order, chaos, fate and fortune. A mage can sense where elements of chance influence the world and manipulate them to some degree.

Forces

Forces concerns energies and natural forces and their negative opposites. Essentially, anything in the material world that can be seen or felt but is not material can be controlled: electricity, gravity, magnetism, friction, heat, motion, fire, etc.

Life

Life deals with understanding and influencing biological systems. Generally speaking, any material object with mostly living cells falls under the influence of this sphere.

Matter

Matter deals with all inanimate material. Stone, dead wood, water, gold, and the corpses of once living things are only the beginning.

Mind

Dealing with control over one's own mind, the reading and influencing of other minds, and a variety of subtler applications

Prime

This sphere deals directly with Quintessence, the raw material of the tapestry, which is the metaphysical structure of reality. This sphere allows Quintessence to be channeled and/or funneled in any way at higher levels, and it is necessary if the mage ever wants to conjure something out of thin air (as opposed to transforming one pattern into another). Uses of Prime include general magic senses, counter-magic, and making magical effects permanent.

Spirit

This sphere is an eclectic mixture of abilities relating to dealings with the spirit world or Umbra. You can contact spirits, travel through spirit worlds, etc.

Time

This sphere deals with dilating, slowing, stopping or traveling through time. Time can be used to install delays into spells, view the past or future. Time magic offers one means to speed up a character to get multiple actions in a combat round.

I was lazy so copied and pasted a lot of this info from a wiki for the game.



You would then have so many points in each sphere. 1 to 10. Anything above 5 was incredibly powerful.


Each point typically had the same affect for each of the spheres. 1 point let you detect. So a 1 in life you could detect life around you. For example you could tell there were exactly 1,345,234 bacteria covering you. A 1 in correspondence you could detect the space around you. For Example you knew there is exactly 4.2345 meters between you and some object.

A 2 in a sphere you could alter an existing thing in a minor way. So for example a 2 in force you could dim or brighten a light source or you could do do minor electrical damage.
A 2 in life you could make minor changes to your own body. So you could change your hair or eye colour or heal minor wounds.



You can then combine spheres to do what ever magic you want. You would say I want to cast a spell that does X by using spheres 1 2 3.

So say you have 5 life and 5 time. You could tell your GM that you are casting a spell that slows the aging in you and all your party members. From now on you all age one day in a year.

Mage also had a system for paradox and backlash. This won't be an issue with a fantasy setting.


If you say were playing modern day mage people in general don't believe in magic so you would have to make your magic look like it was happening in a way people around you would believe. So say you shot lighting bolts out your fingers at a foe people couldn't handle that so you would get paradox and have to make checks. The more paradox you have to greater the backlash (some bad effect) or you could instead use electicity to damage your foe but instead he gets a shock from stepping on the track of a subway track.

Aux-Ash
2010-08-24, 03:18 AM
I think a question that needs to be asked is: What do you want the rules to do? What purpose shall they serve in your stories? How are they supposed to challange the player?

The answer to that question is entirely dependant on: What is this game about? Is it an introspective game about personal growth? A hero journey in a lethal, semi-realistic world? A tactical combat roleplaying-game?

In what kind of setting the game takes place could also be very useful to answer, determining things like technology, fundamental laws of world and magic, the specific quirks of the world. But this is less important than the game's theme is.

First after that has been answered should you start thinking about what rules you want I'd say.
If it is about characterization, you may want to be very light on the rules to make sure it doesn't interrupt anything. Alternatively very easy to improvise.

If it about dungeoncrawling, then I'd suggest quick, easy (but complex) rules with lots of balanced options and a system for progression and reward.

If about surviving in a lethal world of intrigues and deception, the rules need to provide plenty of other challanges than combat. The players need alternatives to risking their character's health and wit needs to be rewarded. At the same time they often need less material rewards than dungeoncrawling since surviving often is reward enough.

Thrawn4
2010-08-24, 03:56 AM
Welcome to the intriguing hobby of world building :smallsmile:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_building

Expect your project to take a lot of time as you will constantly re-write it (at least that's what I do). So better start by taking a lot of notes and save the real writing for later.

"The Dark Eye" has a different approach. Every skill consists of three attributes (as in D&D mostly between 8 and 18) and an amount of skill points (between 0 and 20 mostly). The DM can modify it according to circumstances. The player has to roll for every attribute, and everytime he rolls more than his actual attribute value, he can use his skill points to compensate. For example, climbing depends on strength, agility and bravery. Let's say you have strength 16, agility 12 and bravery 15 and 9 skill points (already pretty decent). The DM says that the wall is very steep, so you get a malus of 6 points, leaving you 3 points. You then roll 16 (okay) and 10 (you spend two skill points). Finally you have to roll for bravery and one skill point left, meaning that you will succeed as long as you don't roll higher than 16.

Also, I dislike fixed character classes, points system is better as it is less restrictive.
And try to decide what kind of RPG you want to create, fluff is the most important thing.

EDIT: Ars Magica is also for free: http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=AG0204

Psyx
2010-08-24, 06:11 AM
You've kind of said 'I've read a Clive Cussler book, can you tell me about the other books out there, their plots, characters and use of language?'


Instead, it's best to tell you about D&D. D&D started everything off 30 years ago. It's had a few facelifts, but it's still essentially a model T Ford with a spoiler on it and a new paintjob. Since D&D came along, games have been invented that were based around non-combat mechanics, rather than just purely fighting, with better themes, settings and ways of doing...well... everything.

If you've only played D&D, then now is not the time to be writing a game. Firstly because you are only familiar with one (absolutely awful) set of mechanics. Secondly because the game you want to write has probably already been written. All you have to do is find it.


"I see that some people have different ideas of what a summary is than I do. I'm looking for posts like valadil's (thank you), only with perhaps more detail. To give an example of what I mean by a summary, I'll give a summary of "Skills" for D&D 3.5."

I can name 50 game systems off the top of my head, and would no doubt miss thirty great ones by doing so. I don't think you'll get that level of depth here.

If you narrow it down; what genre and setting are you looking for? High fantasy?

And why do you want levels? They are really poor, and 90% of games out there flush then around the U-bend where they belong. Most games allow characters to develop as the player decides these days, and give the player something every game session; so you don't need to wait a month to see your character get better, and have more flexibility.

potatocubed
2010-08-24, 06:25 AM
I'm going to add my voice to the chorus saying 'try some other systems'. The thing that all successful modern game designers will tell you about designing games, is that you get good by playing them. Not just RPGs either - board games, card games, sports, anything which attaches some sort of value to an arbitrary objective and is played for fun.

Also, you can read the rules all you like, but games operate differently in play (sometimes very differently) to how you might think they do upon reading the rules.

Start with the free ones: check out Satyr's post, the MRQ SRD that was linked up-thread, the Traveller SRD (I think Mongoose did one for that too?), the FATE SRD (faterpg.com, or see the link in my sig for a WIP game built off the FATE 3.0 engine), Wushu... all of these are different from each other and from D&D, and cost nothing.

That said, here is a wall of text on a couple of subjects you asked about:


* Classes, Leveling, and Class Abilities (I do want to have classes and levels, and have an idea of how I want to go about it, but input on this may greatly influence that)
* Keeping non-magic not inferior to magic

D&D is one of a very, very small number of games to use levels and classes. Rifts is the only other one that springs to mind, although there are probably others. Some games use pseudo-classes, like the clans in Vampire. When designing a game, you want to judge what sort of effect adding levels and classes will have, and whether you want that to happen.

For example: FATE has no levels or classes. Fatescape (see sig) has levels, but no classes. When designing Fatescape I left classes out because I wanted a game where players could create whatever sort of character they chose, without being forced to crowbar it into a particular class or set of classes. You can make class-based systems work this way, but for supreme flexibility a skill-based system is better.

I added levels to FATE, though, because I wanted something that levels provide - specifically, a chunk of 'D&D feel' and a concrete sense of character progression. Since Fatescape was written originally to let me use my Planescape stuff without using the 3.x or 4e systems, I needed enough 'D&D-ness' in there to hang the Planescape material on. Levels (and the magic system) are what provide that D&D-ness.

On the subject of magic... first of all, magic as typically viewed is 'bending reality to your will'. It is all-powerful and can do anything. So of course non-magic is inferior. Hitting people with a stick is just objectively less effective than finding their entry in the book of existence and scribbling all over it.

To balance magic and non-magic you need to either grant non-magic people some magic-ish powers (see 4th edition, Tome of Battle, Weapons of the Gods) or you need to hammer magic with so many restrictions that it's no longer automatically more effective than hitting people with a stick (Conan d20). Alternatively, you could ensure balance by making everyone magic (Exalted, Mage, Nobilis, Ars Magica) or you can sling the concept of balance out of the window and not even bother (Rifts, Ars Magica).

n.b.: Ars Magica is a bit of a special case in that every player has a mage character, a non-magical 'lieutenant' character, and about 20-odd minions. In any given game not all the mages are likely to be present, and everyone else plays their lieutenant character. Or at least, that's how it was the last time I played it which was ~12 years ago. So while mages are just flat-out better than everyone else, everyone has a mage to play with. They just don't play them all the time.

Another special approach is Shadowrun - mages are more powerful, but everyone in the setting knows it. If you cast a spell where people can see, you rise straight to the top of the KILL HIM NOW list - and we're talking about people with magic of their own plus guided missiles and helicopter gunships. It's a game-world balance for a game-mechanical issue.

In Fatescape, I added D&D-style magic so that I can use D&D material with it with a minimum of fuss. I tried to balance it by making powerful magic use require stunts (a limited and potent resource) or fate points (also a limited and potent resource), but because I haven't tested it yet I don't know how well it works. I suspect it might still be a little OP.

EDIT: Ars Magica is free now? Hot damn!

Swooper
2010-08-24, 06:46 AM
I'm not going to answer everything, but I'll try to give some insight on one of the points that hasn't been mentioned much here.

* Classes, Leveling, and Class Abilities (I do want to have classes and levels, and have an idea of how I want to go about it, but input on this may greatly influence that)
RPGs (and this goes for CRPGs as well) can be divided, roughly, into class-based and skill-based systems. Some go outside this norm (e.g. Houses of the Blooded and other games leaning more into the free-form direction), but not that many.

The advantage of class-based systems in a fantasy setting is that it gives the designer so much control over how the players will behave - they are bound to play e.g. either the warrior, the wizard, the cleric or the rogue because nothing else is available, and their options within these classes are limited. This can of course backfire with unexpected results (see: D&D 3rd edition, which was playtested like 2nd edition was played but not as the mechanics allowed), especially if there is a lot of classes. If you want a game about archetypes, this may be the way to go.

Skill-based systems tend to provide a much more sandboxy-er experience, which is both a good thing and a bad thing. A common problem is that it becomes too easy to just cherry-pick the best defense and the best offense (apparently, this is known as the "tank mage problem", referencing mages in plate armour) by pumping the relevant skills to the exclusion of others, while in a level based system will usually give you a balance of the two (the wizard will be fragile but possesses powerful offensive spells - a glass cannon - while the warrior has good armour and health but there is only so much damage you can do with a sword - a tank - and other classes fall somewhere in between). I'm not sure what the best solution to this is, but some kind of rock-paper-scissors method is probably a good idea to make sure no one defense will protect against anything and no type of offence trumps any defense.

Note: I use "defense" and "offense" in the broadest sense possible, it could be referencing social abilities or whatever works in the system in question, I only used the warrior-wizard metaphor because it's familiar.

Oslecamo
2010-08-24, 06:48 AM
Another special approach is Shadowrun - mages are more powerful, but everyone in the setting knows it. If you cast a spell where people can see, you rise straight to the top of the KILL HIM NOW list - and we're talking about people with magic of their own plus guided missiles and helicopter gunships. It's a game-world balance for a game-mechanical issue.

I must point out D&D also supports that kind of philosophy here and there (cough Inevitables, there's even one specifically built to hunt down wizards trying to break reality too much), most players just seem to ignore it however and seem to assume the worst the world has to face them is ragtag lv1 NPCs, nevermind all the fanatical outsiders with at-will teleport whitout error and divinations of their own on the MMs.:smalltongue:

Thrawn4
2010-08-24, 06:53 AM
I'm going to add my voice to the chorus saying 'try some other systems'. The thing that all successful modern game designers will tell you about designing games, is that you get good by playing them.
I agree.
But I also see a benefit in reading different systems, just to get a clue. Basically, there are those which are really simple and favor the atmosphere and those more complex that favor realism. A system can also be heroic (Just 5 Orks?) or gritty (****, the child has a pistol!).



EDIT: Ars Magica is free now? Hot damn!
Well, 4th edition at least.

potatocubed
2010-08-24, 07:17 AM
I must point out D&D also supports that kind of philosophy here and there (cough Inevitables, there's even one specifically built to hunt down wizards trying to break reality too much), most players just seem to ignore it however and seem to assume the worst the world has to face them is ragtag lv1 NPCs, nevermind all the fanatical outsiders with at-will teleport whitout error and divinations of their own on the MMs.:smalltongue:

This is true - I hadn't really thought of that. I think that system just works better in Shadowrun, though, perhaps because the game world does a better job of managing player expectations. I also wonder if it might be something to do with SR magic being less powerful than D&D magic - an elemental is an almost-untouchable combat monster, but a kilo of C4 rigged to a pressure sensor on the toilet seat will take out anyone.


I agree. But I also see a benefit in reading different systems, just to get a clue.

This is also true. You can get something from reading different systems, but I think you only get the whole picture when you play them.

Kiero
2010-08-24, 07:51 AM
the FATE SRD (faterpg.com, or see the link in my sig for a WIP game built off the FATE 3.0 engine),

There's two actual complete FATE 3.0 games with SRDs available, rather than linking to the 2.0 toolbox (which, lets be honest, is what FATE 2.0 is).

Spirit of the Century (http://www.faterpg.com/dl/sotc_srd.pdf) (Pulp)
Diaspora (http://www2.roleplaying.it/diaspora/diaspora.pdf) (Hard sci-fi)

And since you mentioned Wushu, here's the Open Reloaded edition (http://www.story-games.at/wushu/open_reloaded.pdf) (also free).

kyoryu
2010-08-24, 03:07 PM
However, I read on here time and time again about how there are other systems that handle certain issues of balance/realism/you name it better than D&D does. So, in my quest to come up with sufficient background research for different ways of handling different aspects of RPGs, I come to the playground in search of aid.


Define "better." If you could define your ideal game, what would it play like - not in terms of mechanics, but what would the 'feel' and focus of the game be?

D&D has been heavily maligned for at least 30 years for being unrealistic, having flaws, etc. These things are all true. However, every other system I've played (and that's been a few) has suffered from flaws, as well.

Some things to consider:

Power curve: How powerful is a starting character, compared to what a highly-developed character might be? D&D is cinematic - players start weak (less so in 4e) and become heroes that can challenge gods. On the other hand, GURPS characters frequently start out stronger, but have a much flatter growth curve.

Realism vs. cinematic: How realistic do you want the game? Keep in mind that realism often comes at the price of increased lethality and additional book-keeping.

Flexibility vs. stability: How flexible do you want character generation to be? More flexible systems are more difficult for new players, and additional flexibility leads to wider potential disparities in player power. More flexible systems also tend to incur an additional time cost when it comes down to actually playing.

And to chime in with what others have said - I'd really recommend playing at least one other system before attempting to design your own. And play it enough to get a truly good feel for it - its strengths as well as its weaknesses. Since you've played 4e, I'd ask what you didn't like about it (not as a defense of 4e, just as that may give us or you a better idea of what it is you're looking for).

Ignition
2010-08-24, 03:40 PM
This is a list of many, many RPG systems with short 'Craigslist'-style descriptions, with the occasional link to more in-depth information (http://www.feartheboot.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=10158). I'd start there and read through as much source material as possible - mainly because I have :smallwink: .

Ultimately, conflict resolution is less important than theme and setting; there are enough generic systems, Savage Worlds and GURPS and so forth, that can be used in many different genres and situations to the point that the real separation between systems are the amount of playtesting that goes into them, and the type of 'soft' content contained in the books. You can make any kind of conflict resolution - dice, rock-paper-scissors, "Yes But" debates - apply to any kind of theme, provided you put in the work to make it consistent.

Good luck!

Tyrrell
2010-08-25, 08:43 AM
EDIT: Ars Magica is free now? Hot damn!

Ars Magica fourth edition has been free for about eight years now. Ars Magica fifth edition has been out for six years now and is a vast improvement. However I did enjoy fourth edition in its day.