|
Post by Stu Venable on Jul 26, 2013 15:01:10 GMT -8
I've already received emails from about 10 people, including notes from one playtest game already! It's already clear that there will be some changes and additions to the next version -- I'm hoping to have it out mid-August.
Simplified dice mechanics. For the most part, the "3d6=1 success" mechanic will go away and be replaced by modifiers reflected only in bonuses and penalties to the size of your dice pool. In many ways it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. The point of it was to limit the size of dice pools. But the benefit of limiting dice pool size is not enough benefit for the added complication. This will require extensive editing, but it will result in a clearer system that's easier to learn.
[b}TNs Won't Move Once Set By the GM[/b]. This kind of goes hand in hand with the point above.
The Next Version Will Include Character Advancement Rules. These were always in the works, but I will accelerate their release. It will be far more expensive in build points to advance your character than it costs to build it during character creation. It will also include point costs to add, remove or change Cores.
There Will Be Some Tweaks to the Combat System. I've received some valuable feedback and questions regarding combat. The changes won't be huge, but there will be some.
The Next Packet Will Come With a Fantasy Scenario. I'm about half finished with the second playtest adventure. It's a fantasy game (no magic yet) in the setting I'm developing, called Blood, Blade and Tusk. It is set in the 1400s in Europe, 200 years after armies of Orcs mysteriously appeared. It's dark and there are few good guys. Think the Inquisition Meets an Orc Apocalypse. The adventure is more hack-n-slash than "Incident at the Speedy Mart," to further test the combat system. This may be one of those situations where players might want back up characters...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2013 20:39:11 GMT -8
These comments are on revision 1.1:
Do you mind if I post some comments here? Or do you only want it private. I guess if you want feedback kept private, you can delete this. I like seeing other people's feedback because I don't want to spend a lot of time repeating stuff you've already seen, and perhaps other people's insights might change my own opinion.
First, I think its good to change the 3d6 mechanic, because it was complicated, and because it isn't mathematically sound. 1 success may be worth 3 dice to a skilled person, but it is worth 6 dice to an unskilled person.
As a GM, I am not thrilled with "Education", because it doesn't seem clear at all where people would use Education and where people would use something else. Take "House" from the TV show, for example. The guy had very good perception, but it could also be argued that it was education that was making the big decisions, because he had to know all of the odd diseases that could result in the suite of symptoms. I could easily see a player making a case for Education for almost everything except raw physical skills. I could see Lawyers, Doctors, even wilderness survivalists relying on Education to solve a lot of problems. I do like its effects on skill points, but I think I need more clarification on where education comes into play, especially when I have to decide which statistic to choose (Education/perception) for white-collar profession like attorneys, detectives, and doctors.
I like that you resolve bluff and diplomacy with GM Fiat. Its my preferred playstyle.
My gut instinct is that 4 Cores is about 1 too many, although I like both the mechanic and its implementation.
SKILLS: Break-In and Lock picking seem to be overlapping a bit. Add that to the modern system (a huge number of locks require magnetic keycards - businesses, hotels, etcetera)... I just don't see physical locks as much as I used to. I think these skills could be combined. Spy Electronics seems to be overlapping with the keycard access.
"Spy electronics" skill seems nice, I might remove the electronic door locks, but this is already nice with including bugs, tracking devices, remote cameras, and things of that nature.
I might include a skill for climbing/rappelling.
I am not sure that "Teaching" is that useful of a skill. I prefer to play more action-oriented games, and any time that characters would use the "teaching" skill would be a down-time that I wouldn't typically be playing... I'd cut to the next scene with more drama or action. I am also not sure that "Read Crowd" would be that useful in the circles that I play with, because GMs LOVE to warn PCs that the crowds always either panic or riot, otherwise they wouldn't be in the scene... I don't recall ever having a scene at like a Macy's parade or Disneyland in which the crowd was simply going about its business.
I probably wouldn't break martial arts and unarmed combat into two skills. They are already look pretty wimpy compared to gunfire, and it seems costly, as buying up "martial Arts" basically costs double the skill points of an automatic handgun, and the handgun is doing a LOT more damage (especially if it gets additional hits for automatic fire).
ACTION ORDER: Its not entirely clear to me if you roll dice for reaction time and count successes (5s and 6s), or if you simply total the dice. It looks like you total the dice (that's what the rules say), but this is different from your core dice-pool mechanic.
Agility seems a tad overpowered, for its use not only in initiative but gunfire. In most 1-on-1 combat, the first (skilled) person to act with a gun is going to win the combat on the first round.
COMBAT: Assault Rifles look slightly unbalanced. A very high Agility character is not only likely to go first, but I could see them rolling 9 dice (5 agility +4 skill). Even if an opponent dives for cover or is at close range, and the attackers suffers -2 dice penalty, they are still almost sure to hit, and they will get an additional 1-2 additional hits for near misses (or extra hits). Scoring 3 hits with an assault rifle does 6d6+9 damage, and I cannot imagine any character surviving that. Even 2 hits at 4d6+6 averages 20 damage, which puts out of commission even the toughest opponent.
EQUIPMENT Kevlar vest is an omission.
FEAR AND TERROR: I see this is incomplete, but I was wondering if this is meant to be permanent loss (as in Chthulhu's sanity) or if this is something that heals.
Very minor nitpicks: (Page 43) I am not a gun fanatic, but my understanding of laser sites is that you are only looking for the final dot, like with a laser pointer, and that smoky or misty environment doesn't matter at all. To make something better you ameliorate, not meliorate. (I can't recall where I saw this).
Overall, I'd say this draft is better than 95% of the early draft material I've seen. Well done.
Personally: I am a bit of an "optimizer", I would crank up agility to "Gifted" and perception to "Above Average" for purposes of combat (at the minimum for both). Strength seems like a dump-stat. I'd find out the best gun the GM would let me have, and upgrade that skill to "Expert". (I wouldn't put it at Master, because that would be painting a bullseye on my character), I'd spread the other skill points among social, academic, or investigative skills, depending on what the rest of the party wanted to do.
I'd be very nervous GMing this in combat, because if one of my NPCs ever got a shot at a character, it seems like almost certain to put the character out the first time I targeted them. I understand that you want combat to be quick and decisive, but I like combat to last at least 2 rounds, because I want the characters to have at least 1 chance to think about whether they should retreat or surrender or change tactics. If combat lasts only 1 round, the only decision is whether or not to have combat to begin with, and once the decisions made, it is final. (my personal sweet-spot is combat that lasts 3 rounds, with combat that lasts 2 or 4 rounds as being sub-optimal, and combat that lasts only 1 round or 5+ rounds being terrible.
|
|