|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 29, 2014 4:56:51 GMT -8
I'm thinking about moving criticals for multiflips to the first card flipped instead of the last card flipped. Here's why: - Faster feedback, feels more rewarding.
- Critical successes are automatic successes (and critical failures automatic failures), so there is no need to keep flipping once you've flipped a critical result.
In the case you're flipping for an attack, you would keep flipping after it's already established you've flipped a critical hit, since you will add any subsequent checks flipped to damage. |
|
Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 29, 2014 6:01:29 GMT -8
Hmm, I like that, for the reasons you mentioned. It could be argued that it removes some suspense, but if players want that, it's easy to house rule (it doesn't make an impact on mechanics).
Question: I thought we weren't adding all checks from multiflips to damage?
|
|
|
|
Post by directedbyme on Jul 29, 2014 9:17:31 GMT -8
I like a skill card or magic item that allows you to use a crit no matter if its first second or third.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 29, 2014 9:38:59 GMT -8
Good idea directedbyme! One idea for skills that have particularly potent mechanical effects (such as what you mentioned) is to put in the text of the card "Return this card to the GM after using this skill." That way its a one-time use, and since the skill is written on their character card they put it back in their hand for the next session. Ziphion - the additional checks don't count towards resolving the attack (as you will use the best card flipped for that) but they will count towards damage. That way a +5 strength character can do more damage than a +3, instead of just a greater chance at the same damage. At least, that's what I'm planning on at the moment. |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 29, 2014 11:08:08 GMT -8
Granted, it looks kind of uneven when you plot it out. But, maybe the second chart is showing us what we want to see. By the time you get to +4 and +5 in your abilities, you start getting greater and greater returns, as opposed to the incremental increases you got before. By that time in character advancement you are sacrificing other abilities to focus on doing damage, and can really make your character a bad-ass (most appropriate term I could think of). I guess what I'm saying is, high returns are not always a bad thing.
I'm kind of embarrassed to say this, but it all the years I played d20 (and similar systems) I never once got a character to max level. In fact, most characters I played never even got close. There were so many exciting abilities to unlock at those higher levels, so many insane build possibilities, but in the end it didn't matter because the games never went that long. In the end it was kind of a big let down, at least that has been my personal experience. I wanted Simple System to be different in that it would allow players some potent options right out of the starting gate, with lots of cool options opening up to them along the way that they'll actually get a chance to experience before the game fizzles out. And maybe that just might be enough to keep games going that otherwise wouldn't! Hey, if I wanted to make a ridiculously powerful melee fighter, and was able to start doing really great damage after 3 or 4 play sessions, I'd still felt like I'd worked for it and would be really motivated to come back next week and knock some more heads around.
My motto is "Play What Feels Good", and I'm all about giving players what they want. I'm interested to hear your comments, what do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by directedbyme on Jul 29, 2014 11:13:43 GMT -8
Will there be a way to level/create your enemies in a way that will ensure that they are of relatively equal power? Like encounter levels or Hit Die in D&D? Or points in Champions?
|
|
Ziphion
Full Member
Resident Mathematician
Posts: 132
|
Post by Ziphion on Jul 29, 2014 13:06:01 GMT -8
I really like the idea of shorter campaigns with faster progression. D&D drags soooo much. Out of 30 levels in 4E, my main group has advanced from level 2 to level 7 in ten months, since we only play about once every two to three weeks. It's an enormous accomplishment to bring a character from humble beginnings to fulfilling one's glorious Epic Destiny. I would love to have a system where the players felt like they were getting stronger every session, with a full campaign lasting less than a year of casual play.
Since the simpler, more straightforward method (just looking at your one card and using that for damage) seems to fit into a nice linear progression, I think that should be the baseline, honestly. But I would absolutely love for there to be a skill for combat-heavy characters to take that allows them to use all checks for damage (including on Hero Points and any other mechanism that allows you to flip multiples). For a double red, that's one extra damage on average; for triple red, two and a quarter. I think this fits perfectly into what a skill is supposed to do: allow your character to go beyond the "default" in an interesting way.
directedbyme, it should be possible to create a quick and easy way to assess how challenging an enemy is to defeat, based on its stats and special abilities. I plan to work on my simulator today and make it so that it doesn't just do opposed flips, but actually simulates one-on-one combat between characters, at which point I can begin to analyze how the different stats compare; eventually, I'll be able to sic parties of opponents against each other, and use all that information to make something similar to the encounter level guidelines in D&D. (although Derek probably already has something like that.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 29, 2014 13:43:17 GMT -8
I'm working on a checklist/survey style system for determining opponent difficulty as opposed to a detailed level driven system, to keep things simple. Kind of a "what's your score" test like you'd find in a fashion magazine (ha!). Don't want to go into it too much in this thread, and I'm still fleshing it out anyway. Hopefully I can streamline content creation enough that content creators have plenty of time for play testing! P.S. Please don't releasing anything without lots of play testing  |
|
|
|
Post by Dashing Inventor on Jul 29, 2014 13:59:37 GMT -8
Ziphion - Leaving it to a skill would be simpler.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulooshun on Jul 29, 2014 14:00:30 GMT -8
Playtesting? I'm sure Starbright is already converting his settings to Simple System...  I've been holding back on developing anything because although I have a setting I'm pretty sure I want to hack the core rules to help it reflect the theme and pace better. I also need to see what the licensing is like in case it is prohibitive (for me), and I'd be gutted to spend development time on it if that's the case. Ziphion your work simulating things sounds amazing. I look forward to the results! |
|
|
|
Post by paulooshun on Jul 29, 2014 14:09:26 GMT -8
Also wanted to add that the idea of maximum level being attainable without a campaign that lasts a decade is very appealing to me. In most games I get struck with the urge to make new characters, try new skills and abilities and playstyles. It's a real issue if we're in a five year campaign but if you could get from level 1 to maximum inside of a few months of casual play it would be great.
|
|
|
|
Post by directedbyme on Jul 29, 2014 15:14:56 GMT -8
I plan on doing tons of playtesting before any release! I will be demoing B&B at the Online RPG Convention called AetherCon in November as well as Gateway 2014 Labor Day Weekend
in Los Angeles. Thinking about running a demo in Orange County. It's a new con called OCrge Con in November (they have a Kickstarter right now). Also the actors from my web series (Game Knights) will be playtesting too!
|
|
