Jump to content

desolate milkshake

Administrators
  • Content Count

    3,041
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    24

desolate milkshake last won the day on June 14 2016

desolate milkshake had the most liked content!

About desolate milkshake

  • Rank
    Administrator
  • Birthday 12/09/1988

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

9,508 profile views
  1. I'll pick one from my list I haven't talked to you about before. ๐Ÿง™โ€โ™€๏ธ Para-Magic from Final Fantasy 8. Except in certain rare circumstances, ordinary people can't use magic. They had to invent pseudo-magic. This is accomplished by binding spirit-like entities to one's mind at the cost of certain mental faculties. In this universe, the process of binding is called Junctioning, and the entities are called Guardian Forces. Once someone has a Guardian Force, they can use the ability to Draw or Refine magic. Drawing lets them take spells from ley-lines called Draw Points, or siphon energy from various monsters; the Drawn spells tend to be thematically related to the environment or enemy type. Additionally, Guardian Forces can be stolen by using Draw. On the other hand, Refine lets them turn certain items into spells, but only spells the Guardian Force would know. Once someone has acquired the spells, they can either cast them as pseudo-magic or they can Junction the spells in a similar way to Guardian Forces, which grants them superhuman attributes. Imagine Psynergy from Golden Sun if the Adepts had to use Djinn to access any of their abilities.
  2. An urban fantasy Earth mega-setting with a metaplot that spans across multiple time periods from BCE to modern. ๐Ÿคจ
  3. Risky move. Itchy trigger finger here.
  4. What brand or restaurant has the best lime chicken?
  5. Can we depreciate the 2013 article and have the various system creators maintain their own lists within their rule sets?
  6. Thanks for your response! My thoughts: The problem with Enhance should have been expected on my end. Roll12 is adapted from 2d6 + stat/skill mod systems. Enhance is not be able to replicate the probability distribution of + stat/skill mod. Specifically, the numerics of a stat/skill mod range from -3 to +3, whereas Enhance is a straight -1 or +1. My preference for dice games ultimately lies with such a system, whereas what I have now is extremely pared down. I agree with reducing ambiguity under improving or worsening an enemy's situation. Without clearly delineated rules in place to reference for what a "situation" entails, I wouldn't be surprised that players take the obvious mechanical benefit of doing or healing damage over an action that requires interpretation. For number of players, I don't expect that the basic rules would work well with over 2-5 participants unless they were separated into sub-groups and sub-threads. The addon rules might have made it more complex, but being able to make interesting or unique choices for PCs and NPCs means more rules. Even with your additions, the rules are less complicated than Candy Land, and definitely less than Monopoly's whopping 11 pages of rules. I'll change the 0 HP rule. I can see how it might be unintuitive. Granularity at different levels of HP is a possibility, but again I would expect that to be something in a stat/skill system that supports such nuances.
  7. Hi all. Really enjoyed checking in on this thread from time to time and seeing your feedback along the way. Super thanks to jaistlyn for taking ownership of the system and working it to the bone, and mega-thanks to all the players for rolling through any of the issues you had with it. If anyone has additional thoughts on alterations to the game mechanics, feel free to shoot me a PM or link me to anything you posted previously that you still feel strongly about. As an additional question, are such dice systems something you would like to see better supported in Terrenus (in terms of canon), and better supported on Valucre (in terms of technology)? If it's not something you would see yourselves doing again, then it isn't something we would spend a whole lot of time on developing further.
  8. That's probably true... for this market. But there are other markets that would choose a performative system. It comes down to how we built the site and its brand. We don't capture the performative systems market for similar reasons we never captured the "one liner" market.
  9. From my perspective it's mostly been new players, but they don't pursue it with regularity. Per Carlos' and Vansin's discussion, my hypothesis is that new players are interested in risking their characters in conflict and do want that risk tied to performance, like in any game, but they become disillusioned that T1 is tied to performance and drop it.
  10. Thanks for answering my questions. Let's start with an option that's both similar to what we already have and already exists. The battle system in the game Final Fantasy Tactics A2: Grimoire of the Rift (FFTA2) has striking resemblances to advantages and preparations. Preparations are MP 1. Characters have a resource pool called magic points (MP). 2. Characters begin the fight with 0 MP. 3. Characters gain 10 MP per turn. 4. Characters have a maximum MP value they cannot exceed. 5. Characters spend MP to use active abilities. Cost scales with power. The above is almost identical to preparations, but it does not involve the unnecessary narrative justifications, nor does it involve subjective judgments about whose preparations were applicable or valid. Advantages are Reaction and Support abilities 1. Characters may have a Reaction ability that activates when a trigger condition is met. 2. Characters may have a Support ability that modifies their attributes or active abilities. The above is similar in some ways to advantages, but does not involve mathematically weighing active abilities. All weighing is done by MP cost. Notable Differences 1. FFTA2 is a video game played on a grid and uses algorithms to determine accuracy and damage. T1 is a narrative game where spatial positioning and timing of events is subject to interpretation. As such, judging "what really happens" and "when it really happened" in T1 is arbitrary, baseless, and irrelevant. 2. FFTA2 is turn based. T1 occurs in real time. T1 should embrace the concept of turn sequence. We are literally taking turns on a bulletin board. 3. FFTA2 characters are limited in number of abilities and scope of their abilities. All abilities use the same resource with the same metaphysical underpinnings. T1 characters are freeform and inconsistent. All abilities are either superficial or provide unjustifiable benefit. 4. FFTA2 has character classes. This is not necessary as long as ability creation is moderated according to clear and meaningful standards. Explanation of Game Mechanics 1. In T1, the core game mechanic is bidding. We call bidding "preparing" and the currency "preps," but I will refer to it as bidding in this section. 2. Characters accrue currency and bid an amount of that currency against another character. 3. The other character must match or exceed the bid to break even or win. 4. Before Valucre, bids were originally made blind. Players had to deal with the factor of hidden information. 5. In modern T1, bids are noted in spoiler text. As such, the second player to bid has an advantage, as the first player to bid is still bidding against hidden information. In some ways, T1 is similar to blackjack, but instead of being limited to a defined suite of 52 cards players can invent whatever card they want to have in their hand. The goal to outbid the opponent is the same. FFTA2 resolves certain problems with the bid mechanic by introducing a resource pool (value of cards) and limitations in character creation (number of cards).
  11. I'll try to answer based on the Universal Fighting System (UFS) documentation. First, the rules of equalization and breaking equalization. When you create a character, it is equal to all other characters. Whether you are a fire-bender or an ice-bender is not relevant. It is correct to say that the difference is flair. However, you then assign one thing that defines what your character is better at than other characters on your character sheet. This is called an innate advantage. Its purpose is to break equalization in any situation where it applies. When your character is fighting, you may have one other thing on your turn that says why your character is better in that specific moment at what they are trying to accomplish. This is called an environmental advantage. Its purpose is also to break equalization in any situation where it applies. I've said that the purpose of these two categories of advantage are to break equalization. This is what equalization means in concrete terms: A quickdraw is always equal to an opposing quickdraw. One prep is always equal to an opposing single prep. Two preps are always equal to an opposing two preps. Three preps are always equal to an opposing three preps. Landing hits means breaking equalization. As a player, your goal is to create opportunities that allow you to make your quickdraw better than the opposing quickdraw by applying the advantages you have. The same logic applies to preps. Now, to discuss the examples you provided. My analysis is based on RAW (rules as written) and not RAI (rules as intended). A fire-bender and an ice-bender fighting in an arena filled with fire grants the fire-bender an environmental advantage usable at any point, since it is a feature of the environment. It does not grant the ice-bender anything. As such, the ice-bender is not equal. However, the ice-bender can create their own environmental advantage, use their innate advantage, or use their preps in an attempt to make it equal or break equalization in their favor. An ice-bender with an innate advantage that resists fire is superior to the environmental advantage of having an arena filled with fire. As above, the fire-bender is not equal, but must leverage the tools available to them to become equal or break equalization in their favor. To restate: all character powers begin equal, but once you add advantages they are no longer equal. That's the point.
  12. If you enjoy competitive RP in the same way that you enjoy a competitive video game, have you considered making rules similar those in a video game?
  13. Let me ask you a question. What do you enjoy about writing competitive scenarios?
  14. I wasn't saying either, but yes there is a "neater" way to RP a competitive scenario than using preparations and advantages.
×
×
  • Create New...