PDA

View Full Version : RPG Creation Brsinstorm



SovietBear
2016-05-30, 11:43 PM
Hi I'm SovietBear I'm currently making my own tabletop rpg game and thought maybe I could get some help/criticism/feedback
So here's what I have so far, I'm making a fantasy futuristic clash with steampunk roots.
As of now I have several classes including: Swordsman, Cyborg, Gunsmith, Forgemaster, Beastamer, Mechanic, Ranger, Charmborn, Gearkeeper, Hybrid Mutant, Soldier, Titan
Races only Human

So I'll include a more in depth breakdown of each of their stats at a later date but for now I'll leave it at that, any suggestions more classes or possible races are welcomed as we'll as any thoughts or concerns
Thanks

JoeJ
2016-05-31, 12:51 AM
Have you come up with the basic game mechanics yet? IMO that's the part that needs to be working before anything else.

Fantasy future + steampunk sounds like an interesting mix. If I were doing something like that, though, I wouldn't use classes. There's no advantage I can see to forcing players into a limited number of predetermined career paths, particularly when you're dealing with a genre that's not as well known as D&D-type fantasy. And it's easier to adjust things when you can deal with each ability separately rather than as part of a package.

Arbane
2016-05-31, 01:10 AM
What RPGs have you played/read besides D&D?

Are you planning on making the game system for the fun of it, or because none you know fit your ideas? (If the second, I'm pretty sure someone here can suggest a system or two that might be a good match.)

Honest Tiefling
2016-05-31, 10:38 AM
You've only mentioned setting elements, not game elements. Would making a setting be more appropriate, or an all-out game?

Lvl 2 Expert
2016-05-31, 01:11 PM
I've got my doubts at that classes list. To me, these seem to be occupations, classes as D&D uses them: Swordsman, Gunsmith, Forgemaster, Beastamer, Mechanic, Ranger, Gearkeeper, Soldier, Titan (assuming it means like a mecha pilot or something). These however feel more like races: Cyborg, Charmborn, Hybrid Mutant. Maybe not really in the D&D sense, but it doesn't really feel like a choice: become a soldier or a cyborg. I'm becoming a cyborg to be a better soldier. One is an operation, the other is experience. Now let me use this robotarm to lift that rocketlaucher.

Sure there's always multiclassing, but maybe consider to make them something else, to let people trade in parts if their humanity at any point in the game from improvements or something. Maybe have the rewards for the sacrifice be higher further along in the adventure, and give some sort of penalty to picking a new type of improvement (cyborg, mutant, charmborn/charmbecamelater (whatever that is), beastman, steampunky alchemy elementalbound thing or something, stuff like that) while you've already got stuff from another type, to prevent everyone from being a cyborg mutant from the start.

Maybe I'd even make the parts you trade in really literal. If you want a cyborg type face modification to give you heat vision (or a laser eye, or immunity to headshots) you need to make some space and lose either depth perception, smell, human language use, half your hearing or a bundle of points in charisma. And no backsies, that left eye has long been eaten by a vulture. It's going to be a jungle of rules and subrules, but they mostly only come into play during the upgrade scenes, not during every round of combat, so that's still kind of okay.

EccentricCircle
2016-05-31, 03:13 PM
Sounds like a cool idea.

The first thing you probably want to do is get your core mechanics sorted out. Before working out which options to include its well worth spending a few weeks trying out different mechanics and dice systems, playing around with numbers and probability curves until you find something that works well, and has about the right feel for your game.

Think about the range of possibilities you can get out of a dice roll. What kind of rolls do you want your players to be making? How often, and for what purposes? what kind of probability curve do you want? What should the chances of various options coming up be? Do you even want to use dice, or would another resolution system work better?

Think about what the basic statistics are, and how these interact with the dice rolls. Do your characters have a basic array of abilities like D&D's Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha array, or would something more fundamental like Mind, Body and Spirit work well?

How does the world you are creating, and the sort of stories you want to tell in it affect the kind of abilities that a character can use? What should everyone be able to do, and what is more specific to certain classes or options?

Once you have a basic framework start play testing straight away. You will probably end up throwing out half of the ideas you use in the first framework, so don't spend months laboriously crafting the perfect classes and options until you are sure where you are going with it.

You will probably want a skill list of some sort, but for the first game I'd recommend not writing one before hand, but rather making it up as you go along. You can spend hours pouring over other game systems seeing which skills you want in yours, but its often easier to just assign each player a more general "background" let them do things in the game, and if it fits with their character then let them do it. Write down all of the skills that your players ask to use. Then you can reverse engineer a skill list based on that, and it will be tailored to the sorts of stories you are telling. stuff that never comes up won't come up, and you won't suddenly find that you've missed an important area that didn't occur to you when you were writing.

You can then reverse engineer the character creation system, once you have a better idea of how the game plays and what sort of options you want players to be able to reach.

I'd recommend doing two or three fairly open playtests over a few months before you sit down to write your game properly. Leave plenty of space in between to change anything that doesn't work and tidy up the bits that you like. Don't be too attached to anything at this stage, an idea might look great on paper, but if it isn't helping you to tell the right story then throw it out.

I hope this helps, and good luck!
Making a system is a long and often frustrating process, but once you sit down with a group of friends to play a game that you made it is really worth all the blood sweat and tears. So stick with it, even if it all seems to go wrong in the early tests.

CharonsHelper
2016-05-31, 03:38 PM
And it's easier to adjust things when you can deal with each ability separately rather than as part of a package.

Actually - the opposite is true.

Ability X on its own might be fine, but combined with Ability Y and/or Ability Z it's stupidly broken. If the game has classes, you can just make sure to avoid putting Ability X in any class which has Ability Y or Z. Or possibly the reverse. Ability B would be a terrible trap option on its own, but with C and D it's quite useful. If it was on its own some newbies would grab it because it sounded cool and be gimping their characters, but stick them all in a class together and it works fine.

Classes allow you to limit ability interactions to a manageable level. It makes game balance much more viable in a crunchy system. (Not to say that games with classes inherently have better balance, but point-buy systems which aren't simplistic and/or abstract are inherently unbalanced.) It gives you a lot more design space.

It also helps new players to a system because they only have to learn their own class's abilities instead of every ability in the game before picking something.

Classes also encourage players to play various roles within the group, making them somewhat reliant upon each-other to form a unit together and avoid stepping on each-others' toes.

Now - I do like the feel of classless point-buy systems, but I'm never seen a crunchy one with halfway decent balance. I actually kind of like the hybrid systems, where there are classes which direct your point-buy into various categories. You get most of point-buy's customization, but you can maintain decent balance & don't step on each-others' toes too much.

JoeJ
2016-05-31, 06:39 PM
Actually - the opposite is true.

Ability X on its own might be fine, but combined with Ability Y and/or Ability Z it's stupidly broken. If the game has classes, you can just make sure to avoid putting Ability X in any class which has Ability Y or Z. Or possibly the reverse. Ability B would be a terrible trap option on its own, but with C and D it's quite useful. If it was on its own some newbies would grab it because it sounded cool and be gimping their characters, but stick them all in a class together and it works fine.

Classes allow you to limit ability interactions to a manageable level. It makes game balance much more viable in a crunchy system. (Not to say that games with classes inherently have better balance, but point-buy systems which aren't simplistic and/or abstract are inherently unbalanced.) It gives you a lot more design space.

It also helps new players to a system because they only have to learn their own class's abilities instead of every ability in the game before picking something.

Classes also encourage players to play various roles within the group, making them somewhat reliant upon each-other to form a unit together and avoid stepping on each-others' toes.

Now - I do like the feel of classless point-buy systems, but I'm never seen a crunchy one with halfway decent balance. I actually kind of like the hybrid systems, where there are classes which direct your point-buy into various categories. You get most of point-buy's customization, but you can maintain decent balance & don't step on each-others' toes too much.

When you find a problematic ability in a game without classes, you can simply remove or alter that ability without worrying about dependencies. You can remove it from the game, temporarily or permanently, without having to give that class something else to replace it.

Not having classes also makes it easier, not harder, for new players, because you don't have to try and guess what somebody else intended the class to be when they put together abilities A, B, and X. It also helps players avoid the mindset of playing a class rather than a character. And it doesn't require a creative player to try and bend and squeeze their character idea to make it fit the available class list.

And as for balance, before you can have a meaningful discussion of that, you have to decide exactly what you're trying to balance, and why. That is, what design goal requires one particular type of balance rather than some other type.

CharonsHelper
2016-05-31, 06:56 PM
When you find a problematic ability in a game without classes, you can simply remove or alter that ability without worrying about dependencies. You can remove it from the game, temporarily or permanently, without having to give that class something else to replace it.

Except, when you have classes, you aren't balancing abilities individually. You're balancing classes as a whole. So if an ability is making the class OP, then it either needs to be nerfed or removed entirely. If it was replaced with something of equal power then the class would still be OP, making the change moot.

CharonsHelper
2016-05-31, 07:01 PM
And it doesn't require a creative player to try and bend and squeeze their character idea to make it fit the available class list.

This I will definitely say is an advantage of a classless system. If you're the type of player that goes into a system with a character concept already in mind, classes can limit your options. (Calling them the 'creative' players is a bit misleading though. Arguably, creating a satisfactory character to fit a game's setting & system is the more creative act.)

Point-buy inherently gives more potential options, and that's really at the root of the balance issues. The greater the customization, the greater the inherent potential balance issues, especially the uncontrolled customization of a pure point-buy system. If character balance is a non-issue in the system then point-buy is great, hence my mentioning abstract systems being perfect for point-buy. (FATE etc.) I'm not a huge fan of such, but I know that many are.

SovietBear
2016-05-31, 10:29 PM
So far I've dawdled in some light d&d as well as a little pathfinder and thought that making my own systems would be fun but also I wanted a more flexible and easier to manage turn system so I incorporated much of the movement and basic maneuvering from pathfinder but implemented my own turn system revolving around action points.
Basically a character gets 10 AP per turn to use whatever items, abilities, attacks they like. So a lighter weapon could be used anywhere from 3-5 times per turn while a heavier weapon would only get 1 or 2 uses while still providing a consistently higher DMG output to fewer enemies.

Also one thing I've been struggling with that I'd like to incorporate is a vertical movevement system on almost a 3d scale and while Ik I should work on the basics first it still is an idea that I ponder often so any ideas for that would be great.

But so far for classes similar to the dark souls series the classes are starting points rather than defining features even the more defining classes like cyborg or mutant can be achieved from any starting class choosing that starter is just a push in the right direction and one of the things I've written probably about three hours of so far is a plethora of starter gear and abilities allowing the player to tailor a specific class to their liking.
For Example:
I have a very basic armor system where each piece of armor, shield, etc. has it's own Armor Rating and Magic Armor Rating ten points of either will result in nulling one point of damage of that type (So 100 AR and 40 MAR would reduce an attack dealing 35 DMG and 15 Mdmg to doing 25 DMG and 11 Mdmg) so if u were a Swordsman u could have anywhere from a high DMG output low armor build to a more supportive sponge like character that can absorb a lot of dog for allies but can't really devastate a foe with their attacks

Also guys I have kind of a wacky schedule so I can only get on and read ur guyses suggestions Mon-Wed also I can only get on with my semi-deep of a phoneso don't think I've just abandoned u or something I'm really glad to have some good feedback and while I have more than enough ambition in some areas I really lack the know how so in a way u guys are making this as much as I am and if anyone wants to collaborate more in depth just let me know some way to get in touch or i need be I'll get my # to u whether that's messenger or a phone number and I can send some more specific info
PS don't be shy about telling me something shouldn't work the way it does or should be changed and while I'm not willing to change everything I'm willing to adjust any or all of the systems I already have thought up

And with that I bid you all adieu

PPS I realize that the whole "Give me contact info" thing sounds kind of scamish or fake I just want a better way to get in touch with anyone who really wants to help so like I said just let me know some way to send u my phone number or fb profile info or whatever way is easiest for u and I'll send u my info instead if that makes anyone a little less wary of my offer

Anonymouswizard
2016-06-01, 05:28 AM
Have you come up with the basic game mechanics yet? IMO that's the part that needs to be working before anything else.

This, I'm currently writing a game under the working title of Infinity Drive (after the name of the warp drive which is allowing free exploration of space compared to the older wormhole techniques), where the current draft is literally about 11 pages of rough mechanics (of which I still have vehicles, contacts/allies, and employees to go).

I recommend playing some more systems, I've played D&D, GURPS, Mutants and Masterminds, Unknown Armies, All Flesh Must Be Eaten, World of Darkness, and additionally have GMed Dark Heresy, Call of Cthulhu, and Shadowrun. Infinity Drive started because I like GURPS, but wanted a science fiction game that I could explain to new players and have characters made in a single session. There have been revisions, the latest being combining Strength and Constitution into a single Physique stat (as Strength's main bonuses were to give you hp, carrying capacity, and melee damage [while also factoring into speed], all of which can be mitigated with technology).


So far I've dawdled in some light d&d as well as a little pathfinder and thought that making my own systems would be fun but also I wanted a more flexible and easier to manage turn system so I incorporated much of the movement and basic maneuvering from pathfinder but implemented my own turn system revolving around action points.
Basically a character gets 10 AP per turn to use whatever items, abilities, attacks they like. So a lighter weapon could be used anywhere from 3-5 times per turn while a heavier weapon would only get 1 or 2 uses while still providing a consistently higher DMG output to fewer enemies.

Note that this will bog down combat a lot. I generally avoid such systems like the plague because trying to work out how to get optimal use from your action points can lengthen a player's turn from the already long 5 minutes to over 15 minutes, especially if they are able to take multiple actions (especially attacks). I think it'll also highly encourage light weapons with rider effects so that you have multiple chances of applying deliberating status X in a round.


Also one thing I've been struggling with that I'd like to incorporate is a vertical movevement system on almost a 3d scale and while Ik I should work on the basics first it still is an idea that I ponder often so any ideas for that would be great.

Trust me, it's not really worth it. I can be done relatively easily until you get to ranges, just give everyone Z coordinates, but how do you measure ranges when elevation is taken into account?


But so far for classes similar to the dark souls series the classes are starting points rather than defining features even the more defining classes like cyborg or mutant can be achieved from any starting class choosing that starter is just a push in the right direction and one of the things I've written probably about three hours of so far is a plethora of starter gear and abilities allowing the player to tailor a specific class to their liking.

Why have classes then? It sounds like what you want is a point-buy system with some pre-made packages for inspiration.


For Example:
I have a very basic armor system where each piece of armor, shield, etc. has it's own Armor Rating and Magic Armor Rating ten points of either will result in nulling one point of damage of that type (So 100 AR and 40 MAR would reduce an attack dealing 35 DMG and 15 Mdmg to doing 25 DMG and 11 Mdmg) so if u were a Swordsman u could have anywhere from a high DMG output low armor build to a more supportive sponge like character that can absorb a lot of dog for allies but can't really devastate a foe with their attacks

Overly complicated, why don't you have one point of armour negating one point of damage? I don't feel like dividing my armour ratings by 10 just to know how much damage I soak.

CharonsHelper
2016-06-01, 06:07 AM
I'm with Anonymouswizard - it sounds there are too many moving parts. Those are the types of things that can work well in a video game because all of the calculations can happen 'behind the screen', but doing them in a TTRPG will likely slow action to a crawl.

Armor as DR can work, and I actually prefer the feel, but I have no idea why you want a 10:1 ratio for damage. Though if you've only just played D&D/Pathfinder, you might need to consider all of the ways that DR would shift a game's balance.

Really, you should probably start with mechanics, and then add content. Otherwise you'll have to redesign your content from the ground up every time you design a new mechanic.

MrStabby
2016-06-01, 08:53 AM
I've got my doubts at that classes list. To me, these seem to be occupations, classes as D&D uses them: Swordsman, Gunsmith, Forgemaster, Beastamer, Mechanic, Ranger, Gearkeeper, Soldier, Titan (assuming it means like a mecha pilot or something). These however feel more like races: Cyborg, Charmborn, Hybrid Mutant. Maybe not really in the D&D sense, but it doesn't really feel like a choice: become a soldier or a cyborg. I'm becoming a cyborg to be a better soldier. One is an operation, the other is experience. Now let me use this robotarm to lift that rocketlaucher.

Sure there's always multiclassing, but maybe consider to make them something else, to let people trade in parts if their humanity at any point in the game from improvements or something. Maybe have the rewards for the sacrifice be higher further along in the adventure, and give some sort of penalty to picking a new type of improvement (cyborg, mutant, charmborn/charmbecamelater (whatever that is), beastman, steampunky alchemy elementalbound thing or something, stuff like that) while you've already got stuff from another type, to prevent everyone from being a cyborg mutant from the start.

Maybe I'd even make the parts you trade in really literal. If you want a cyborg type face modification to give you heat vision (or a laser eye, or immunity to headshots) you need to make some space and lose either depth perception, smell, human language use, half your hearing or a bundle of points in charisma. And no backsies, that left eye has long been eaten by a vulture. It's going to be a jungle of rules and subrules, but they mostly only come into play during the upgrade scenes, not during every round of combat, so that's still kind of okay.


Maybe look at some of the gestalt rules knocking around for D&D and variants where you level 2 classes simultaneously. Then split the classes in two and level one "class" class and one "race" class each level up?

Regarding action points, its a good system but tough to keep track of. Personally the best RPG I have played for this is probably D&D 5th edition with its action, reaction and bonus action each turn and abilities that move actions to bonus actions to reflect them being quicker. It is much more crude than action points but captures a similar spirit.

Regarding complexity - your final output needs to be simple but a first draft for testing can be complex to allow you to text every mechanic and to see which ones to keep.

So two questions:
1) How much do you want the results to depend on dice/randomness, how much on someone in a DM type roll and how much on the characters skills. So a d20 system is a solid starting point as you can tune the prevalence of static bonuses available in the game to make randomness as powerful as you want.

Personally the game that I think has the best die mechanic ever is actually the old boardgame Bloodbowl. For certain actions you roll a certain number of dice and one or other players pick a result - for improvements certain icons from the dice change their meaning (for example pushed back and knocked down becomes reduced to pushed back only). The combinations, raw effects, and overall strategy that this enabled was pretty good. As it wasn't an RPG it was somewhat simplified put personally I liked it.

Are you even using dice mechanics at all? You could use cards - drawing a card to represent a result and part of the advancement process being represented by altering the deck of results you draw from and part from how you interact with it.

2) Is the focus on being a game, a simulation or something else? Would you have a fun mechanic that didn't well represent anything in real life? Would you add a feature that would be realistic, if it wasn't a lot of fun (ok, obviously not - but how much complexity in representing the world are you after?).

Anonymouswizard
2016-06-01, 09:18 AM
Maybe look at some of the gestalt rules knocking around for D&D and variants where you level 2 classes simultaneously. Then split the classes in two and level one "class" class and one "race" class each level up?

Sorry, anything that reminds me of the S.U.E. System is automatically a bad idea.

However, for the game as presented, allowing a player to select two 'classes' would be rather nice. Maybe they can begin with two classes and all the abilities from each or a single class and extra skill points (to be honest, I'd pick the latter most of the time but know many people who would prefer the former).


Regarding action points, its a good system but tough to keep track of. Personally the best RPG I have played for this is probably D&D 5th edition with its action, reaction and bonus action each turn and abilities that move actions to bonus actions to reflect them being quicker. It is much more crude than action points but captures a similar spirit.

To be fair, 'standard, move, and minor' is a common way to track actions, with the number of minor actions a turn varying and move sometimes being readable for similar 'in-between' actions.

Maybe I should write up rules for quick actions (if I do I'll be applying an 'each action once a turn' limit, because some things could become abusive).


Another thing to consider is how customised characters can be at character generation. There are people like me who'll spend a week tinkering their skill spread for a decent mix of 'fits character concept' and 'is useful to the party'. But there are other people who prefer to make a character in five minutes without having to make detailed choices.

Lvl 2 Expert
2016-06-01, 10:03 AM
However, for the game as presented, allowing a player to select two 'classes' would be rather nice. Maybe they can begin with two classes and all the abilities from each or a single class and extra skill points

I like that idea. It allows for "Xtra power" cyborg soldiers and such, "moar utility" soldier medics and the likes and "mad skillz" specialists.