Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 27, 2014 11:09:56 GMT -8
I have a few character card questions.
Under derived stats, for Defense, it says Agility + Wisdom. Does this mean if a character has +1 in Agility and +1 in Wisdom that they flip yellow (+2) for their defense flip? What about if they have +3 in Agility and +3 in Wisdom? There's no +6 on the character card, so what does that mean? Flip FOUR red cards? I realize that's unlikely given how advancement works, but I just thought I'd ask.
The little lightning bolt indicates power points, right? I notice that it's Build plus Resolve, meaning it's always equal to hit points - 3. I don't know much about how powers work in this system since the demo doesn't touch on it, but wouldn't it make sense to give some love to the other stats? Like maybe power points equal Intellect plus Strength. Especially since Agility-based characters get equal bonuses to offense and defense when they level up; I think to make it fair, Strength-based characters should get some other combat benefit.
Regarding flaws: the rules say you can choose to remove a flaw instead of gain a new skill when you level up. From a mechanics standpoint, why would a player ever choose to do that, since you can always just ignore your flaws? In fact, they are actually a benefit since they generate hero points for you.
This isn't exactly a character card question, but it's related: the Guard and Thug opponent cards don't seem to follow the derived stats for Hit Points and Defense; the guard has 2 Build and 1 Resolve, so if he were a player character he'd have 6 hit points, but he only has 5. Similarly for the thug, he has one fewer hit point than the derived stats say. Also the thug has 0 agility and 0 wisdom, but his defense is 1. Do opponents have different rules for these stats?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by paulooshun on Jul 27, 2014 15:18:07 GMT -8
Doesn't it go from multiflip-blue to multiflip-red? That would make it a 6 level system.
|
|
Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 27, 2014 15:33:51 GMT -8
I'm not sure what you mean? +4 means you flip two red cards and pick the best result (according to the updated rules), +5 means flip three red cards and pick the best; I'm asking whether +6 translates to flipping four red cards in a hypothetical case where the sum of Agility and Wisdom are +6.
|
|
|
|
Post by LordAnubis on Jul 27, 2014 18:03:17 GMT -8
The preview of the rule book on Kickstarter says that during the process of turn up/down, if you you go past highest or turn down past lowest then you just flip another card for each extra turn up/down, I imagine that would be applied to this scenario as well, but the preview is old at this point so hard to say.
|
|
Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 28, 2014 5:25:59 GMT -8
Ah ok, I hadn't seen that. It makes sense to make it open-ended and just keep adding extra cards, but I just wanted to confirm that was the case.
I had an idea today about derived stats. Hear me out:
HP = Build + Strength + 3
Defense = Agility + Wisdom (as before)
Power Points = Resolve + Intellect
That way, "physical" stats contribute to your physical health, and your intelligence and perseverance contribute to your ability to perform fantastic feats. I like that this splits up Build and Resolve a bit, since those two are often almost interchangeable. And if you have the three different fantasy archetypes in your game (Warrior, Thief, Mage), and assuming their primary attack stats are Strength, Agility, and Intellect respectively, then each of them gets an automatic bonus to a different derived stat. What do you guys think?
|
|
|
|
Post by directedbyme on Jul 28, 2014 10:30:20 GMT -8
Ziphon,
I like your derived stats idea! Make all the abilities help to create the derived stats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 28, 2014 12:20:31 GMT -8
I see what you are saying ziphion. However, I felt it was more logical to calculate the derived stats the way I did rather than split them evenly across all of the different abilities for mechanical balance. For example, Build represents how physically stout your character is, and using Strength to derive life points along with Build would make the two abilities seem sort of redundant. On the other hand, characters with high Resolve have the mental fortitude (or just plain stubbornness) to keep going despite any physical damage they've suffered, allowing them to go longer in a fight, ergo a higher life point total. My reasoning was similar regarding Power Points, which are basically the reserve of energy you have to call upon extra-ordinary abilities. It makes sense to me that the more physically robust your are (build) the more of an energy pool you would have to draw from, and you could add to that the pure exertion of your will (resolve). As you can see, part of this is down to your character concept and makes for a deeper roleplaying experience (in my opinion) as you could have a character who is physically weak but so stubborn that he refuses to quit and therefore basically able to ignore damage, or not too intelligent, maybe even primitive, but with a deep pool of energy to draw on to use all sorts of powers. The above scheme likewise doesn't segregate "physical" characters from "mental" characters, as both can stand a fair chance in a fight if built properly. And a "balanced" character can be even stronger, but at the cost of specialization. Each ability has its own advantages, those that don't contribute to the derived stats are more 'specialized' and players will invest in them to gain specific advantages that they wouldn't have otherwise: - Strength - pull off feats of strength, physically influence the environment, do higher melee damage
- Intelligence - Solve puzzles, interact with technology, create/fix items, best others in mental challenges and games, decipher codes, learn new languages, etc.
- Charisma - Influence others, succeed in bluffing, diplomacy, intimidation, etc.
One possible work around if you have a very specific character build in mind and want to maximize your derived stats (Life Points, Power Points, and Defense) would be to select a skill that allows you to use a different stat for your derived abilities. For example: - Bruiser - Your great physical strength is the key defining attribute of your self image, and you rely on it to deal with almost any challenge you face. Use your Strength when calculating your Life Point total instead of Resolve.
- Cosmic Comprehension - You have opened your mind to the universe, and come to understand it as few others can. Use your Intelligence when calculating Power Points instead of Build.
Skills like that can drastically influence your character's derived stats and the whole focus of the character, but as the number of skills you posses is limited you have to sacrifice the specialization that other skills can grant. Keep in mind too that there could be skills that increase your defense, life point and power point totals or otherwise influence how these are spent. Removing a flaw would be a purely story/character driven decision, such as a character who decides they've overcome an addiction or had a change of heart (and thus are no longer "Cruel"). On the other hand, the GM can award players new flaws at any time (say they are abusing performance enhancing drugs, such as combat stims, or loose a limb/eye in a fight), and players may even roleplay to gain specific flaws, either to further the narrative of their character or to gain the mechanical advantage of having flaws. |
|
Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 28, 2014 14:14:53 GMT -8
I realize not all of the abilities need to serve a purpose in combat (see Charisma), but what was really sticking out to me was the fact that it's sort of hard-coded into the rules that ranged characters are more effective in combat than melee characters. Each point in Agility improves a ranged character's offense AND defense, while each point in Strength only improves a melee character's offense. Yes, you can alleviate this with skills, but then you're sacrificing a skill slot, which the Agility guy gets to use to further improve his combat performance, or add some fun out-of-combat perk. And Strength doesn't seem like it would necessarily have more out-of-combat utility than Agility, since for every "break this door" or "lift this heavy thing", there's a "keep your balance" or "pick this guy's pocket" or what have you. I feel like if an ability doesn't help you in combat, it should have a lot more utility out of combat (again, see Charisma).
I'm thinking of the skills being balanced in this way (very roughly speaking):
Strength: High combat utility (melee attacks, Life Points), low out-of-combat utility
Agility: High combat utility (ranged attacks, Defense), low out-of-combat utility
Intellect: High combat utility ("magic" attacks, Power Points, stabilize dying), low out-of-combat utility
[or, perhaps in a sci-fi setting like the one in the demo, moderate combat utility (Power Points, stabilize dying), moderate out-of-combat utility (hacking)]
Build: High combat utility (Life Points, Dying Flips, ability to run without complication), low out-of-combat utility
Resolve: High combat utility (Power Points, even better Dying Flips), low out-of-combat utility
Wisdom: Moderate combat utility (Defense, stabilize dying), moderate out-of-combat utility (perception etc.)
Charisma: Low combat utility (maybe intimidation), high out-of-combat utility
Instead, as they are, the derived stats make Strength and perhaps Intellect seem less useful overall than the other stats. That could make some players unhappy, if the character they want to roleplay doesn't perform as well mechanically.
Going back to the idea of archetypes, it makes sense for a "Warrior" with high Strength to be able to stay standing longer; a "Rogue" with high Agility to be more evasive; and a "Wizard" with high Intelligence being able to perform more extraordinary powers. I like the idea of those perks being linked with your primary combat ability, but, still being accessible to anyone by boosting Build, Wisdom, or Resolve, which each give other perks as well. That means you can still have a dullard character with high Resolve and therefore high Power Points.
Regarding redundancy between Strength and Build: One of the reasons I thought it would be a good idea to rearrange the derived stats was actually the perceived redundancy between Build and Resolve. As is, they are interchangeable with regard to Life Points, Power Points, and presumably most endurance-based trials encountered by a character, and they're nearly interchangeable with regard to Dying Flips. If only Resolve contributes to Power Points and only Build contributes to Life Points, they are further differentiated, which I think is good. Strength and Build both deal with physical fitness, and therefore I think it's not too crazy to have them contribute to Life Points.
Regarding Resolve and Life Points: What if there was a power or skill that allowed characters to make a Resolve flip when they took damage, and if successful, that damage could be postponed until after the combat was over? That way they could clench their teeth and keep fighting, but once combat was over, they would take the hit. That kind of goes in line with the idea that Resolve-heavy characters can survive longer in a fight.
---
If removing a flaw is purely an RP decision, then I don't think it should be at odds with mechanical decisions like adding a skill. I think it might be more fun to let players choose as many flaws as they like, roleplaying them as desired, and keep skills as a separate thing. I don't see skills and flaws being equal and opposite, they're like apples and oranges to me, and they both contribute positive things to a character.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 28, 2014 17:16:18 GMT -8
I see what you're saying about skills and flaws being different from a mechanical standpoint, perhaps it would be best to allow players to choose a skill and eliminate a flaw (if they so choose)every time they advance, so as not to discourage roleplaying by requiring players to forego choosing a skill.
In the Star Wars Roleplaying Game (both d20 and Saga Edition I believe) your "Use the Force" checks were based off of intelligence, and that always bothered me as I felt it should have been based off of wisdom, or at least have given you the option. So, I made it a house rule that players could choose which of those two abilities to base that skill off of. I encourage anyone to do the same for their Simple System games, if they feel that asking a player to sacrifice a skill is too much. Either that or if any one of your players wishes to change which ability their derived stats are based of off that you allow them to do so, provided they can make a decent argument for it in terms of their character. That will actually help them to have a strong character concept in mind, or think of a compelling back story. Simple System is not meant to be rigid, and it should never get in to way of telling stories.
As far as Agility vs Strength in combat, to an extent this is based in reality. Ranged weapons are preferred in the modern world and will always have advantages to melee weapons. This can be counteracted through specific skills, or the setting you are playing in may favor melee combat (and thus have a limited number of ranged weapons or especially powerful melee weapons).
|
|
Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 28, 2014 19:15:02 GMT -8
As I understand it, Simple System is much more "gamist" than "simulationist", and it boils down complex ideas into simple mechanics instead of attempting to create a hyper-realistic reflection of reality. For example, Agility is already a fusion of the ability to aim well and the ability to dodge well. So I don't think the "real world" argument applies here. The system allows players to not get bogged down in the details of getting +1's to this and going from d6's to d8's on that, just follow these very simple mechanics, and trust that it works fairly. And if a system asks you to trust it, it needs to be trustworthy. It isn't fair to have melee characters intrinsically half as battle-capable as ranged characters, hard-coded into the vanilla system. The system is supposed to be setting-agnostic, and if they're playing a swords and sorcery campaign, sword-wielders will get the short end of the stick unless the setting itself works to "patch" the intrinsic imbalance (by, for example, making melee weapons more powerful than ranged weapons, or adding powerful melee skills). I think that's too much to ask of content creators. If people want to play a Simple System campaign "in the modern world" where ranged weapons have the edge, then they can add powerful ranged weapons to their campaign; they should start with a balanced system, and then imbalance it in any direction they choose.
And the same goes for GMs of individual games. They can create any house rule they choose, but they shouldn't have to do so in order to fix an imbalance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 28, 2014 20:46:10 GMT -8
In play testing the current scheme has worked pretty well, I personally haven't witnessed any imbalance between ranged and melee combatants except when it comes to melee fighters having to move into position to attack. Keep in mind that armor is an effective way to negate damage and usually requires the character to turn down their agility (and therefore their defense) so the agility boost to defense can be lost pretty quickly, whereas characters who don't rely on agility for defense are unaffected by this.
Simple System may not be "simulationist" but I will say approximating realistic outcomes was a guiding principle behind the design, along with keeping it as straightforward as possible. Personally I would prefer an inherent bent towards realism, with Setting Cards - such as skills, powers, and items - accounting for any particulars of the setting that are more unrealistic.
I'm working on guidelines for content creation (as part of the "Content Creator's" backer reward package) that will help content creators understand the specifics of the system and how they can make simple tweaks to their designs in order to get the appropriate feel for their setting. Content creation is something that rightly requires a lot of forethought, and hopefully creators will feel free to come to the forum to seek advice.
|
|
Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 29, 2014 5:42:42 GMT -8
I'm sorry - let me take a step back. I misinterpreted your last post. I thought you were saying you were aware of a significant and noticeable imbalance between Strength and Agility, and you were defending it on the grounds of realism, so that the base system discouraged players from going melee. That's what I was responding to, but I realize now that's not what you were saying, and I apologize for my tone regardless.
Armor is a variable I hadn't considered, since it dings Agility characters twice if they want the extra damage reduction. As long as that damage reduction outweighs the penalty to evasion, I think you can maintain balance. You know, my simulator would be a good tool to use to find out. Right now it only tests opposed flips, so I need to upgrade it so that it simulates actual one-on-one battles between characters, but once that's done, we can run tests on Strength + Agility, Wisdom vs Resolve, Heavy Armor vs Light Armor, or even things like Weapon A vs Weapon B.
Thanks for responding, and for all your hard work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 29, 2014 8:59:08 GMT -8
I'm very happy to have people like yourself active in posting here on the forum, it's helping Simple System to be a better game and it helps me see areas where I need to more clearly articulate myself regarding design decisions and provide clearer guidelines/explanations for those eager to play and create Simple System products.
|
|
|
|
Post by directedbyme on Jul 29, 2014 9:01:38 GMT -8
In regards to melee vs ranged in real life, it may be more advantageous to shoot from a far but you have to take into consideration cover and obstacles. Hitting someone at ranged should be inherently harder than in melee because that is how it is in real life. Also, shooting comes with the possibility of hitting an innocent or having a backfire or jam. But I do agree with Ziphon about the derived stats...It would be nice if Resolve contributed to Power Points and Build contributed to Life Points (to mitigate stat dumping). I am creating a fantasy setting and your wizard, rogue and fighter point makes sense to me too. Wizard = Int, Rogue = Agl and Fighter = Str.
Simple System rules!!!!!!!
Thanks Derek for including us in these important decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 29, 2014 9:57:26 GMT -8
One more option to consider, especially for settings that have very defined classes (i.e. Wizard/Rogue/Fighter) is the class/race card. I know I haven't said much about this as of yet, but these are a powerful option to quickly create archetype characters and will have the option for inherent skills and flaws. For example, the Wizard Class could start with the "Cosmic Comprehension" skill I described above, without costing the player any skills.
I lament that I haven't been able to show off all that Simple System has to offer just yet, because I'm still so busy finishing it! I've got lots more interesting stuff to show you guys, bear with me and keep those ideas coming!
|
|
