The Odyssey System -- Stripped-down Hot Rod d20 rules

[GMSkarka]

What was behind the decision to divorce perception tasks from Wisdom and to make them their own Ability score?

To be honest, this is something we're still arguing about.

My thoughts:

I've always felt that perception was crammed into Wisdom (it wasn't there in 1st Edition -- I think it was added in 3rd (I don't have a copy of 2nd Edition handy)) -- because they knew it was needed, but had no place else to put it.

Wisdom as common sense? Sure. Wisdom as "mental strength" as opposed to Intelligence being "mental dexterity"? Sure. Wisdom being intuition? I can even see that, although it's a stretch.

Perception, though? I'm not so sure. How does being Wise go hand-in-hand with sharp eyes?

Hence my preference in this case for separating Perception into an Ability. Keeping in mind that Odyssey is also being designed initially for use in THRILLING TALES -- a pulp game, where investigation (hence, perception) is a critical part of the action.

 

[GMSkarka]

* You're a d20-head, and I'm not. What level of compatibility with more "standard" versions are you shooting for? E.g. will these stat numbers work out broadly on par? (I'm guessing that's the whole idea.)

The numbers will work out exactly -- instead of concerning ourselves with what you rolled to get the bonus, we only list the derived modifier. So, instead of saying you have a STR of 17, you say that you have a STR of +3.

* Couple of examples of Edges?

Sure!

Improved Investigation: The character is trained to notice things that mundane investigators might miss. A character with this Edge that comes within 10 feet of a clue to a crime or other mystery is allowed to make an Perception check, even if the character is not actively searching for clues at the time.


Man Without Fear: A character with this Edge gains a +4 morale bonus on saves to resist fear effects and on checks to oppose Intimidation attempts.

Esoteric Knowledge: This character's cases often involve the strange and unusual -- as a result, she has amassed a vast amount of esoteric knowledge. The character can make a special esoteric knowledge check with a bonus equal to her level + her Intelligence modifier to see if she knows anything relevent about clues, people, places or things. The check will not solve a crime, but might provide leads for the character to follow. The DC of the check is determined by the GM, based on the relative obscurity of the information (usually within a range of 15 to 30). Requires: Improved Investigation

* Toughness save - the version in True20 is hideously complicated - not helped by errors in early versions of the rules, but in any case with too many different conditions and results to keep track of in one's (OK, my) head. Please tell us that yours isn't like that!

Ours isn't like that. Ours is closer to the Mutants & Masterminds version, but with failure results being 1 or more steps moved along a Condition Chart (similar to SW:SE).

 

[breschau]

Good luck with the project. I have liked Thrilling Tales in the past so I was look forward to the new release. I can't say the updates you've provided since the op have excited me all that much.

Abilities:
Finally! I've hated the pointless ability scores since day one of 3rd edition. You guys and True20, oot. That makes two games without the scores. Let's campaign for more.

Skills:
I haven't played without skills since the days of AD&D. I have no interest in going back to a skill-less system. Using an occupation system to hide the skills is a bit of an over-reach. Considering what a crucial role skills play in all the source material (i.e. pulp magazine shorts, pulp novels, pulp serials, etc), that's going to be a hard sell for the dedicated pulpster.

Perception:
You could go so many routes with this instead of adding a new ability. I'm hoping a 4E knock-off of Take 10 with which ever version you do. I'm so tired of knowing something's going on when I have to roll, but know I'm not aware of it because of a bad roll. You could do and average of Int, Wis, Cha bonus (to cover all the mental abilities). You could go with the best of all three, the best of any two, etc. There's many ways to do this without adding another ability.

Damage:
I love M&M and think that's so much easier than tracking hp.

 

[Armadillo]

Wisdom as common sense? Sure. Wisdom as "mental strength" as opposed to Intelligence being "mental dexterity"? Sure. Wisdom being intuition? I can even see that, although it's a stretch.

Perception, though? I'm not so sure. How does being Wise go hand-in-hand with sharp eyes?

Presence of mind can translate into greater awareness of your surroundings. This is link between Wisdom and Perception is a part of traditional and contemporary Asian literature and folklore.

 

[Jackelope King]

Wisdom as common sense? Sure. Wisdom as "mental strength" as opposed to Intelligence being "mental dexterity"? Sure. Wisdom being intuition? I can even see that, although it's a stretch.

Perception, though? I'm not so sure. How does being Wise go hand-in-hand with sharp eyes?

Fair enough. What would wisdom be used for task-wise then, beyond Will saves?

Hence my preference in this case for separating Perception into an Ability. Keeping in mind that Odyssey is also being designed initially for use in THRILLING TALES -- a pulp game, where investigation (hence, perception) is a critical part of the action.

True. Were it a more generic system, I'd disagree more, but for a game where investigation is meant to be central, I think it gets a thumbs-up.

Good luck with the project. I have liked Thrilling Tales in the past so I was look forward to the new release. I can't say the updates you've provided since the op have excited me all that much.

Abilities:
Finally! I've hated the pointless ability scores since day one of 3rd edition. You guys and True20, oot. That makes two games without the scores. Let's campaign for more.

Skills:
I haven't played without skills since the days of AD&D. I have no interest in going back to a skill-less system. Using an occupation system to hide the skills is a bit of an over-reach. Considering what a crucial role skills play in all the source material (i.e. pulp magazine shorts, pulp novels, pulp serials, etc), that's going to be a hard sell for the dedicated pulpster.

Perception:
You could go so many routes with this instead of adding a new ability. I'm hoping a 4E knock-off of Take 10 with which ever version you do. I'm so tired of knowing something's going on when I have to roll, but know I'm not aware of it because of a bad roll. You could do and average of Int, Wis, Cha bonus (to cover all the mental abilities). You could go with the best of all three, the best of any two, etc. There's many ways to do this without adding another ability.

Damage:
I love M&M and think that's so much easier than tracking hp.

Please, sir, stay out of my head

 

[GMSkarka]

Considering what a crucial role skills play in all the source material (i.e. pulp magazine shorts, pulp novels, pulp serials, etc), that's going to be a hard sell for the dedicated pulpster.

I disagree, whole-heartedly.

Here's a quiz -- what were the Shadow's skills? Doc Savage's?

The answer is simple-- whatever was needed at the time. All pulp heroes pulled previously-unknown skills out of the air from story to story. He needs to be able to fly an autogyro? Sure! He needs to be familiar with lost Incan language? No problem!

The easiest way to simulate this is to use Ability checks to cover actions -- with occupational areas of knowledge (as well as Edges) to reflect those things which are common "schticks" at the core of the character (Savage's invention ability, or The Shadow's investigative skills).

In other words, it's not so much "no skills" as "ALL skills" -- everybody has a shot at doing everything, with bonuses given to those with the proper occupations or Edges.

 

[GMSkarka]

Fair enough. What would wisdom be used for task-wise then, beyond Will saves?

Tests of Faith, for those campaigns with supernatural elements, for example.

As I said, we're arguing about this one. The question is whether or not there's enough there for two Abilities, whether we should be splitting Wisdom into two abilities (Perception and Willpower, forgoing the "Wisdom" title, entirely), or just leaving it as is.

 

[Tim Gray]

As I said, we're arguing about this one. The question is whether or not there's enough there for two Abilities, whether we should be splitting Wisdom into two abilities (Perception and Willpower, forgoing the "Wisdom" title, entirely), or just leaving it as is.

Bingo. It's long bugged me that the Wisdom stat lumps perception/intuition and willpower together. Of course everyone sees stats breaking down in a different way, but to me those don't sit together... and it's not really what "wisdom" means either.

(In some of my own games I use Wisdom as an attribute that's very like intelligence; and Presence to include both charisma and willpower, which seems a more natural combination. And Awareness as a separate one. But then I don't have to care about compatibiulity with anything.)

I know you don't want everyone chiming in with their own schema, but if it were me I might turn Wisdom and Charisma into Intuition and Presence. The former would include the empathy and common sense bits of Wis. Might muck up the balance between different saves though.


BTW, I hope this won't be too pulp-focused...

 

[breschau]

I disagree, whole-heartedly.

Here's a quiz -- what were the Shadow's skills? Doc Savage's?

The answer is simple-- whatever was needed at the time. All pulp heroes pulled previously-unknown skills out of the air from story to story. He needs to be able to fly an autogyro? Sure! He needs to be familiar with lost Incan language? No problem!

Yes, the ships move at the speed of plot in fiction, but this is an rpg based on that fiction. This rpg will also involve that most dastardly cad, the gamer. Those gamers are a nasty bunch. If you give them something like you described above, they will all be Savage and Shadow. I know you will say that's the point, and I almost agree. You're forgetting the Fabulous Five and Pat. You're forgetting all the Shadow's agents. There has to be some limits otherwise the players can do anything. That's not fun. If they can make any kind of check then why team up? Sure, Savage gets a +2 to invention, and Shadow a +2 to investigation, but that's not fun.

The easiest way to simulate this is to use Ability checks to cover actions -- with occupational areas of knowledge (as well as Edges) to reflect those things which are common "schticks" at the core of the character (Savage's invention ability, or The Shadow's investigative skills).

In other words, it's not so much "no skills" as "ALL skills" -- everybody has a shot at doing everything, with bonuses given to those with the proper occupations or Edges.

You're right that with ability checks replacing skills, everyone does have a shot at doing everything, but, that's the way it is now, with skills. You are right that with your occupational bonuses to certain checks, that adds to the character, but, I call them trained skills.

My point here is I see no point in taking the system far afield. The OGL comes with feats and skills. You're essentially renaming them Edges and "occupational areas of knowledge" respectively, that seems silly and wasteful to me. Why do that when the function almost identically? It doesn't make sense that you would do this unless you plan on claiming them as Product Identity. This move does make sense from a publisher's stand point, but you've already stated, and we can all see, that they're the same.

Your example of Savage and Shadow can be used for either of our arguments though. Again, you call them OAoK I call them trained skills.

 

[GMSkarka]

This rpg will also involve that most dastardly cad, the gamer. Those gamers are a nasty bunch. If you give them something like you described above, they will all be Savage and Shadow.

A long time ago I discovered that if you spent all your time trying to error-trap against powergamers, you'd end up beating the joy out of a game. There's *always* gonna be some twit who doesn't get the point, and you shouldn't worry about trying to force them to be good players. Hence, I design the games I want to play, for the sort of player I prefer to have at my table. It means that I miss out on some of the "common denominator" mass-appeal money, but in the end, I like what I've done.

You're forgetting the Fabulous Five and Pat. You're forgetting all the Shadow's agents. There has to be some limits otherwise the players can do anything. That's not fun. If they can make any kind of check then why team up?

This is covered by varying character levels. Main heroes start at a higher level than supporting heroes --which means that their level bonuses are higher, and they have more Edges. We provide ranges, depending on what you're looking for in play style, but for an example, I'd do Doc at, say, 9th level and the rest of the Fabulous Five at 5th, with Pat at 3rd-ish.

Why team up? Differing occupations, differing Edges, differing power levels.