PDA

View Full Version : Things a generic system should cover



Grod_The_Giant
2013-12-25, 02:44 PM
I'm thinking about preparing a new draft of my homebrew system (STaRS) soon. The core of the game is very light and very generic, and-- in practice-- has worked quite well. For this draft, I'd like to include a chapter of "supplemental rulings," or something like that-- suggestions on how to use the core rules to cover things like mass combat or vehicles, or simply weirder powers like shapeshifting.

So, I ask you, Playground: what kind of things would you like to see covered in a section like that?

EDIT: I am going to include a few short campaign settings with attendant rules elaborations. I'm thinking:

Gritty horror, with some mechanics for high lethality, sanity, escalating tension, things like that.
Pulpy sci-fi, with some mechanics for vehicle combat, psionics, and alien races.
Epic fantasy, with an example magic system, monsters, and suchlike.
Warren Ellen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Authority)-esque superheroes, with all attendant rules.

And either a spy/heist setting, or something with cosmic demi-gods (probably involving a lot of realm management stuff).

hymer
2013-12-25, 03:18 PM
I realize this may not be a popular or fashionable view, but I do believe everyone should be forced to wear flannel trousers.

That aside, I think these days the most difficult bit may be the expectation of handling the crossovers. Cthulu in space, demons and cybernetics, that sort of thing. Ninja-pirate-zombie-robot seems to be what people want these days.

erikun
2013-12-25, 05:34 PM
For a generic system, some extra rules I like to see include:
(in no particular order)

companions, how to acquire them and how to use them
magic system
vehicle movement, combat, and damage
city/resource construction and guidelines
social interaction and conflict
monster/opponent construction and guidelines

This is, of course, assuming that the basics (functional system, guidelines for what is reasonable and what isn't, realistic expectations) has already been done and works well.

SimonMoon6
2013-12-25, 07:45 PM
Things I judge a game system on it's ability to handle:

(1) Shapeshifting. Can you become other people? Other animals? Aliens and mythical creatures? Inanimate objects? Partial transformations? (And there shouldn't necessarily be time limits on these transformations.)

(2) Meta-Powers. Naturally, superpowers should be a part of any generic system. But can you affect powers with a power? Can you copy someone's powers? Neutralize someone's powers? Steal (copy and neutralize) someone's powers? And while the base version of meta-powers should only affect powers, do you have the possibility to expand this to affecting other things, like skills, equipment, and magical spells? Is the game system designed to do all of this easily? Can you do all of this with a minimum of arithmetic?

(3) Ridiculous Power Levels. Can a character who can move planets with his bare hands be built (regardless of whether a PC can ever have such a character) with ease? By that I mean, not having to roll 10000000d6 damage in combat and not having any kludge like, "Oh, you still only do 1d6 damage in combat; you just take the Lifts Moar Stuff advantage 1000 times."

Airk
2013-12-25, 07:46 PM
A generic system should include a reason to use it instead of the dozens of other generic systems.

jindra34
2013-12-25, 08:08 PM
Honestly it only really needs one thing past the core mechanics: The ability to extrapolate out how new things would work.

Slipperychicken
2013-12-25, 08:13 PM
-Playing as or becoming monsters (or other beasts which are normally opponents, such as hobgoblins, vampires, trolls, dragons, etc).
-Mass combat and large-scale battles.
-Chase Scenes
-The PCs try to run a country. How does it work?


Also, under the "wealth" spoiler, I believe you meant to say "country" rather than "county".

WbtE
2013-12-25, 09:42 PM
It needs to explicitly state its "default session". I believe that D&D"s success is largely due to the game doing what it says on the tin. (Vampire: the Masquerade could also be seen as a straight title.)

Slipperychicken
2013-12-25, 09:59 PM
It needs to explicitly state its "default session". I believe that D&D"s success is largely due to the game doing what it says on the tin.

Also because it has all the visibility, with many people outside the hobby thinking that D&D is the only roleplaying game in existence.

Airk
2013-12-25, 10:47 PM
It needs to explicitly state its "default session". I believe that D&D"s success is largely due to the game doing what it says on the tin. (Vampire: the Masquerade could also be seen as a straight title.)

I would actually suggest that Vampire does a better job than D&D of setting expectations "on the tin" - D&D has a lot of verbiage that implies the game is more than what it is, IMHO.

WbtE
2013-12-25, 11:14 PM
Also because it has all the visibility, with many people outside the hobby thinking that D&D is the only roleplaying game in existence.

The visibility had to come from somewhere. It's not turtles all the way down. :smallsmile:


I would actually suggest that Vampire does a better job than D&D of setting expectations "on the tin" - D&D has a lot of verbiage that implies the game is more than what it is, IMHO.

D&D has a lot of literal dungeons and plenty of literal dragons, especially since the 80s. Vampire: the Masquerade has a lot of literal vampires but its masquerade is generally figurative (there are some literal masks, but it's not really what the game is about).

Grod_The_Giant
2013-12-25, 11:40 PM
Thanks for all the suggestions so far.


A generic system should include a reason to use it instead of the dozens of other generic systems.
Fair point. (Short answer: it's gamist rather than narrativist (my big issue with FATE), and its mechanics and scaling are better defined than some similarly light games I've seen.)


Honestly it only really needs one thing past the core mechanics: The ability to extrapolate out how new things would work.
I was actually thinking about trying to present the rules in a sort of "expanding circles" format-- start with the basic mechanic, and then layer on more and more complexity, explaining how you extrapolate outwards at each step. Not sure how I'll do that, but it's a thought I was having, and I'm glad it's a thought someone else had, too.


It needs to explicitly state its "default session". I believe that D&D"s success is largely due to the game doing what it says on the tin. (Vampire: the Masquerade could also be seen as a straight title.)
Not quite sure how I'd do this for a totally generic system. I might include a few setting sketches, I suppose? (Was thinking that'd be a good idea, anyway). Or an example of play? I had a cleaned-up actual play chatlog in an older draft...

WbtE
2013-12-26, 04:48 AM
it's gamist rather than narrativist (my big issue with FATE), and its mechanics and scaling are better defined than some similarly light games I've seen.

...

Not quite sure how I'd (state a "default session") for a totally generic system. I might include a few setting sketches, I suppose? (Was thinking that'd be a good idea, anyway). Or an example of play? I had a cleaned-up actual play chatlog in an older draft...

I guess my concern is that if the game doesn't have something that it's clearly about, then people new to roleplaying are going to be lost. You could try giving it a default setting that's at the crossroads of genre, something like Sigil but with any distinct Planar society swamped by Westernvilles, Little Sicilies, Chinatowns, and more exotic ghettoes and dotted with super-science societies, justice "guilds", adventurer lodges and so forth. The City of a Billion Stories or some such thing. Not entirely sure what the characters would be assumed to do there, but you're saying it's a Gamist RPG so I assume that there's something resembling "victory conditions" - if not for a campaign, at least for a scenario - so that might clear things up.

JeenLeen
2013-12-27, 10:07 AM
I was actually thinking about trying to present the rules in a sort of "expanding circles" format-- start with the basic mechanic, and then layer on more and more complexity, explaining how you extrapolate outwards at each step. Not sure how I'll do that, but it's a thought I was having, and I'm glad it's a thought someone else had, too.


I like this idea. One way I could see to implement it would be to describe the rules twice, but with different methods. I realized a while ago while reading different sourcebooks and trying to write my own game that rules are generally put in at least two styles. Unfortunately, I'm having trouble phrasing it well, but most seem to describe the details and rules via paragraphs and examples. This is helpful, but for some complicated things, it can get confusing (at least for me.) The other method is to use bulleted lists to go over the main concepts and then, in order, go through all the steps.
For an example:

1) Narrative (using oWoD mage)
If you decide to cast a spell during your turn, declare your desired effect, your foci, and roll your Arete at a difficulty of 5 + Spell level (plus or minus any modifiers, such as for vulgar magic or witnesses. See page xx for details.)
Based on the desired effect and the number of successes, the Storyteller can determine what occurs. The target of the spell may try to dodge, resist, etc., depending on its abilities and the spell cast. Remember that you need at least 2 successes to impact anything outside your self (your own Pattern.) Remember to assign Paradox, if applicable.

2) Detailed

To cast a spell on your turn in combat:
1. Declare the spell, noting effect and foci.
2. Roll Arete at 5+Spell level, plus or minus modifiers (see page xx).
3. Determine outcome:
3a. If applicable, the target reacts. This may decrease successes.
3b. Storyteller declares how the spell impacts the target.
3c. Storyteller determines how much Paradox, if any, is earned.


The latter is takes up a lot of time, and it can get insultingly detailed at times. But I find it helpful for me to organize my thoughts when going through a system, and very helpful to understand complicated ideas (such as sub-systems or expanded systems you want to add.) Particularly if the ideas run contrary to what other games tend to do or uses similar gaming terms for different uses.


Of course, this means a lot more work for you and you have to be very careful to reflect any changes in both areas, lest you contradict yourself. But putting it down two ways means that it should get clearly relayed.


Not quite sure how I'd do this for a totally generic system. I might include a few setting sketches, I suppose? (Was thinking that'd be a good idea, anyway). Or an example of play? I had a cleaned-up actual play chatlog in an older draft...

I liked how FATE (think it was FATE) put examples of play, with both mechanics and rp perspective, from a few different storylines into the rulebook. It let you see, for example, how to run it class fantasy, sci-fi, or modern.

Jlerpy
2013-12-30, 10:18 PM
If it works at widely differing scopes of power, it should explore that and show how it's handled in the main rules. GURPS, for instance, can get weird at higher point budgets and requires a firmer grasp to work with there, whereas Savage Worlds breaks down long beforehand.

I would expect a decent generic to cover:
Space opera
Fantasy adventure
Supers
Espionage/thrillers
at a minimum

CarpeGuitarrem
2013-12-31, 11:18 AM
Things a generic system should cover?

EVERYTHING.

:smalltongue:

AMFV
2013-12-31, 06:08 PM
If it works at widely differing scopes of power, it should explore that and show how it's handled in the main rules. GURPS, for instance, can get weird at higher point budgets and requires a firmer grasp to work with there, whereas Savage Worlds breaks down long beforehand.

I would expect a decent generic to cover:
Space opera
Fantasy adventure
Supers
Espionage/thrillers
at a minimum

Not to be a wet blanket, but setting s have been released for Savage Worlds that cover almost all of those genres, I believe it might actually be all of them. I'm not sure how well the system handles it, having only skimmed it, but they definitely exist.

Jlerpy
2013-12-31, 06:24 PM
Not to be a wet blanket, but setting s have been released for Savage Worlds that cover almost all of those genres, I believe it might actually be all of them. I'm not sure how well the system handles it, having only skimmed it, but they definitely exist.

The two paragraphs are separate thoughts.

And I've read Savage Worlds' handling of supers (both the Super Powers Companion and Necessary Evil); it's terrible. I can see it doing a better job with the other things in that list, but it's a generic that scales poorly.

Grod_The_Giant
2013-12-31, 07:37 PM
I'm working on five short campaign setting write-ups to include with the main rules: gritty horror, pulpy sci-fi, epic fantasy, Warren Ellen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Authority)-esque superheroes, and... well, I was thinking something cosmic and godly, but now that I think about it something on the spy thriller/heist end of things might work better. I'll probably also offer shorter thoughts on a few more (Steampunk? Western?), bundled with a section on how to design your own setting.

But right now, I'm looking more for specific rules that I need to cover, like erikun and SimonMoon6 listed. So far, I've got:

Chase scenes
Companions
Extremely high power levels
Mass combat
Meta-powers
Playing as monsters
Realm management
Shapeshifting
Social conflict
Vehicles

Anything missing? It doesn't have to be vital; I wouldn't mind hearing "I always like it when a system has good rules for ______."

AMFV
2013-12-31, 07:45 PM
The two paragraphs are separate thoughts.

And I've read Savage Worlds' handling of supers (both the Super Powers Companion and Necessary Evil); it's terrible. I can see it doing a better job with the other things in that list, but it's a generic that scales poorly.

Well the point was that it had been at least attempted and probably with some degree of success, obviously a generic system isn't going to cover specific cases as well as a system intended for those cases, that's just the way that is.

To answer the OP:

I would want to see some method of handling combat, some method of resolving social encounters, and some method of performing tasks, I'd like to have it so that focusing on one of those doesn't impede all of them.

JBPuffin
2013-12-31, 10:46 PM
If it doesn't have a setting, it should have clear ideas on how to do the basics (fighting, diplomacy, etc.), have examples for some of the optional stuff (cars and motorbikes, magic in at least three varieties, etc.), and be clear enough that random rules can be added without much trouble (encumbrance, ruling a dominion, fighting a demon without pants, etc.). It should also be able to port in various characters from real-life media and allow for crossovers, but that's not completely necessary (although it'll get you more fans in the long run...)

If there IS an established setting, and said setting is a kitchen sink like it ought to be for a general game, than the same rules as above apply...except you can say outright what's expected of a campaign and then give reasons and methods to change those assumptions.

Oh, and either way, it needs to allow for some form of travel system. Not just wilderness travel, more like Skyrim's version of fast travel (in that it stil takes time, but you aren't going to get lost and all that shiz).

Grod_The_Giant
2013-12-31, 11:40 PM
Oh, and either way, it needs to allow for some form of travel system. Not just wilderness travel, more like Skyrim's version of fast travel (in that it stil takes time, but you aren't going to get lost and all that shiz).
Isn't that the GM just saying "OK, it takes you a week to get there" and not bothering to waste time with random encounters?

Jlerpy
2013-12-31, 11:43 PM
Yes. You could further codify it, in terms of only being able to do so on the way to places you've already been, but mostly "fast travel" is just handwaving.

Grod_The_Giant
2013-12-31, 11:51 PM
Yes. You could further codify it, in terms of only being able to do so on the way to places you've already been, but mostly "fast travel" is just handwaving.
Bah. Video gamey in the worst way.

jindra34
2013-12-31, 11:56 PM
Bah. Video gamey in the worst way.

At least give someway of figuring speeds from stats. Let the person running it decide whether to gloss over it or not, and how.

Grod_The_Giant
2013-12-31, 11:57 PM
At least give someway of figuring speeds from stats. Let the person running it decide whether to gloss over it or not, and how.
Ah. Speed for overland, multi-day travel (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm#overlandMovement)? That makes a bit more sense.

DrewID
2014-01-01, 12:14 AM
Anything missing? It doesn't have to be vital; I wouldn't mind hearing "I always like it when a system has good rules for ______."

It would be a benefit of there are rules or at least well-written guidelines for creating on-the-fly NPC's in a method less complicated than rules for generating a player character.

DrewID

Mutazoia
2014-01-01, 08:40 PM
Something I've always wanted to see a generic system do is this:

Let's say we have the Amazingly Interchangeable Role-playing System(TM). Now AIRS does the whole generic system shtick but unlike GURPS or other systems, there is no "BASIC" rules then a bunch of splats to different settings. Each setting is a stand alone game that can be played all by it self. Each separate book contains (in addition to the "core" rules needed to run the game) setting specific "splat" material. So we could have AIRS meets the Wild West, and play Cowboys and Indians with out having to buy a players guide, a GM's guide and a wild west splat. We could have AIRS meets Cthulhu and have a gothic horror game with out buying a separate splat for THAT. You could mix the two systems and play "Cowboys and Cthulhu" simply by mixing the setting specific information from the two books.

As for "rules that generic systems gloss over or have to splat later."

Rules for different modes of travel: Sea travel, Air travel, etc. Original AD&D listed prices in the PHB for buying ships. TSR didn't get around to actually crafting rules for sea travel for almost another decade.

A more comprehensive way to differentiate between lethal and non-lethal damage. TSR's reboot for the Top Secret game handled this wonderfully (IMHO). Not only did they use hit location charts, but each location had boxes that tracked damage (see spoiler below). Non-lethal damage was marked as a slash in the box...lethal damage an X. When all the boxes in a particular location were filled with slashes, that area became useless (broken arm for example) and further non-lethal damage was converted to lethal damage...you started changing slashes to X's. The number of boxes in a location was determined by your Con (essentially). This made things like fist fights or martial arts combat slightly more realistic (you could pummel people for only so long before they took serious damage).

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_HPQou-R6PDE/SvhraeqIHXI/AAAAAAAAApc/fAUsKrAYrxk/s400/TSSI_Sheet_4_FRONT.jpg

Which brings us to....

Hit location charts. Sooner or later some player is going to want to make a called shot. Shooting a gun out of somebody's hand, lopping of a head, knee-capping some one to slow them down, what have you. You need to be able to track damage to individual locations separately to do this right. Not to mention those clumsy, random blasters don't auto-seek the torso, especially when fired blindly around a corner or on the run.

Pricing for things that are not equipment. Sooner or later your space jockey is going to want to make the Kessel Run in 11.9 parsec's, buying his Spice cheap and selling it high. It's amazing how many systems will give players a ship (space, sailing, what ever) and expect the holds to remain empty, or the poor GM to make stuff up on the fly. Now I'm not saying that you have to work out all the trade prices before hand, but basic costs for generic items like "Spices (common)" and "Spices (rare)" would be nice. Maybe a simple table for trade rates (+/- % of price depending on factors like how far the item is exported and how rare the item is at destination).

Vehicle construction costs. Half the fun of the old Mech Warrior game was designing your own Mech (once the rules came out). Players are always going to want to modify their [Vehicle] or custom build one. Having some basic rules in place will wet their appetite and save the GM the headache of trying to make costs up on the fly.

Jlerpy
2014-01-01, 09:26 PM
Something I've always wanted to see a generic system do is this:

Let's say we have the Amazingly Interchangeable Role-playing System(TM). Now AIRS does the whole generic system shtick but unlike GURPS or other systems, there is no "BASIC" rules then a bunch of splats to different settings. Each setting is a stand alone game that can be played all by it self. Each separate book contains (in addition to the "core" rules needed to run the game) setting specific "splat" material. So we could have AIRS meets the Wild West, and play Cowboys and Indians with out having to buy a players guide, a GM's guide and a wild west splat. We could have AIRS meets Cthulhu and have a gothic horror game with out buying a separate splat for THAT. You could mix the two systems and play "Cowboys and Cthulhu" simply by mixing the setting specific information from the two books.

Isn't that pretty much how BRP works? There's Call of Cthulhu and there's Runequest, both released as separate games, but based on the same engine.


As for "rules that generic systems gloss over or have to splat later."

Rules for different modes of travel: Sea travel, Air travel, etc. Original AD&D listed prices in the PHB for buying ships. TSR didn't get around to actually crafting rules for sea travel for almost another decade.

Really? I'm sure I remember them from the DMG, but maybe I'm remembering the old Rules Cyclopaedia.


A more comprehensive way to differentiate between lethal and non-lethal damage. TSR's reboot for the Top Secret game handled this wonderfully (IMHO). Not only did they use hit location charts, but each location had boxes that tracked damage (see spoiler below). Non-lethal damage was marked as a slash in the box...lethal damage an X. When all the boxes in a particular location were filled with slashes, that area became useless (broken arm for example) and further non-lethal damage was converted to lethal damage...you started changing slashes to X's. The number of boxes in a location was determined by your Con (essentially). This made things like fist fights or martial arts combat slightly more realistic (you could pummel people for only so long before they took serious damage).

The One Roll Engine works that way too.]

Mutazoia
2014-01-01, 10:25 PM
Isn't that pretty much how BRP works? There's Call of Cthulhu and there's Runequest, both released as separate games, but based on the same engine.

Yeah but if I remember correctly (it's been a while since I've played either) they don't intermix very well even if they use the same engine (some of the "meat" of both games are off scale from one another)




Really? I'm sure I remember them from the DMG, but maybe I'm remembering the old Rules Cyclopaedia.

What was in the DMG was so basic as to be useless for much else other than "we hop on the boat, are we there yet?"




The One Roll Engine works that way too.

Never heard of it lol

SimonMoon6
2014-01-02, 12:36 PM
Isn't that pretty much how BRP works? There's Call of Cthulhu and there's Runequest, both released as separate games, but based on the same engine.


Yeah, back in the late 80's/early 90's, I ran a multi-genre game that used what I called the "Chaosium" system, since Chaosium published Call of Cthulhu, Runequest, and a bunch of other games (some Michael Moorcock universes (at least Elric and Hawkmoon) got their own games and they had a superhero game called Superworld... and I think there was a Ninja game or maybe it was a Runequest supplement).

My main problem was that most games that just tack on superheroes at the end usually do an extremely poor job of representing superheroes. Superworld was no different. So, eventually, since superpowers and superheroes become more of a focus, the game system had to change.

ComatosePhoenix
2014-01-02, 12:49 PM
Two things, Mounted combat because Jousting ftw.

Westerns, because shooting. especially revolvers. I am a sucker for old revolvers and pistols.

DrewID
2014-01-02, 05:53 PM
Something I've always wanted to see a generic system do is this:

Let's say we have the Amazingly Interchangeable Role-playing System(TM). Now AIRS does the whole generic system shtick but unlike GURPS or other systems, there is no "BASIC" rules then a bunch of splats to different settings. Each setting is a stand alone game that can be played all by it self. Each separate book contains (in addition to the "core" rules needed to run the game) setting specific "splat" material. So we could have AIRS meets the Wild West, and play Cowboys and Indians with out having to buy a players guide, a GM's guide and a wild west splat. We could have AIRS meets Cthulhu and have a gothic horror game with out buying a separate splat for THAT. You could mix the two systems and play "Cowboys and Cthulhu" simply by mixing the setting specific information from the two books.

The problem with that is that when you want to use AIRS for Western, Espionage, Horror, and Generic Dungeon Fantasy, you may have only bought 4 books, but in doing so, you've paid for four copies of the common rule-set. And the kind of people who do that (i.e. buy the basic set AND four or five genre books) are the kind of people you as a publisher want to make happy. As opposed to the customers who were going to just buy Western (and they were probably more likely to be drawn to a genre-specific game system).

DrewID

Dunkoro
2014-01-05, 05:30 PM
Things I'd like to see in a generic system:

1. Don't force the GM to come up with everything. Make lists of examples of Skills/Knacks/Boosts/Powers.

2. Define at least one magic/psionic/whathaveyou system, that is balanced in one particular environment, so that a GM has something to extrapolate from. (Uses per day/encounter/Recharge? Versatility?)