Alternity 2e Wish List

[dm4hire]

Getting back on track, I've been thinking about the mentioning of getting rid of either careers or professions as a few people have brought up. First I have to agree careers seem to have been put in place to give the game a semblance of character classes or in more modern 4e terms, character roles. In a system that was trying to incorporate a point buy system there was no reason for that so in my opinion getting rid of them wouldn’t be a bad start. Second I’m wondering why these two categories just couldn’t be combined and then perhaps expanded upon to form a general background category during character development. My thinking here is that the backgrounds section could be expanded to allow for more customization of the character, including not just a profession/career section but racial background and other options as well.

 

[Sadrik]

I didn't save my 2e books but I did save my Alternity books. I think they are great just to flip through and read every once in a while. Very imaginative and interesting.

However, I think the system is a little clunky, I would really like to see an improved version of it --> skill based, multiple success types, modifier as a die roll, handle multiple genres etc. I would like to see the rules be a simple and easily purchased and thrown around pamphlet-like 20 page book. With many options and additions to the system added by way of the setting books, Star*Drive, Dark*Matter, StarCraft, Mass Effect etc. I don't see this as being too big of a seller though. Honestly I would be happy with a clear merged implied setting. That way they can publish a lot of material based on that and then do one-off books for the other settings. The key here is a clear rule set that is easily implemented and modified into a host of genres. For me, Alternity represents cool settings more than a dense rules set. At least that would be my bias.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I love sci fi, and I love Star Wars but I still maintain Star Wars is fantasy not sci fi.

Mass Effect is sci fi and I wanted to make a game based on Mass Effect for my own purposes. I always loved alternity, but I tried to fit mass effect into some of the games with support now like Traveller. I felt it hard to match the feel of Mass Effect with Traveller.

When I revisited alternity, I was able to make Alternity Mass Effect races, Biotics was a cinch to convert, and I even decided I wanted to merge Mass Effect with Stardrive.

While I don't play Mass Effect, I know enough about it to think your idea is pretty solid. I'm a bit puzzled, though, that given that Traveller is a "hard" sci-fi game that you weren't able to get it to work with that ruleset.

 

[Zhaleskra]

After noticing all the posts about system clunkiness, I have to say that there are times I consider clunky mechanics to be a good thing. For example, I was in a "pulp" sci fi game, but using Hero system. Smooth mechanics don't feel pulpy to me.

 

[slwoyach]

Interesting, I prefer rank benefits to feats for things you should be able to do anyway when you have enough skill.

*More clarity among the three versions of unarmed combat. Perhaps everyone has a Brawl unarmed attack, but only martial artists have the appropriate martial arts unarmed attack ratings.

For me, the feats would be anything you don't roll for and allow you to use skills in new ways. I don't like rank benefits actually, because different characters would use skills differently. The extra attacks granted by skill with blades is appropriate for a duelist using a rapier, but not a berserker using a great axe. He should get benefits like added damage, extra bludgeoning attacks (stricking with the haft), abilities to knock people prone (again with the haft), etc.

 

[slwoyach]

No reason it can't be both.



And the source: Ryan Dancey on the Acquisition of TSR

I think he knows more than both of us. I just wish WotC didn't go overboard (going the other way) when they made d20 Future. It was like the worst parts of Alternity had been distilled, rather than the best.

WotC has a history of dishonesty. "No, we aren't working on a new edition. Honest." I don't believe a thing that comes from the WotC office. It's anecdotal evidence to be sure, but I knew tons of people who played Alternity. It was the go to system for most DND players when they wanted to play a little sci-fi.

 

[DMH]

Alternity had perks. Perks are feats.

Feats were intended to be (for the most part) useful in combat, something not well-covered by skills.

Feats yes, perks not really. They, and flaws, were meant to customize characters as well a provide some balance for the alien artifact rules.

When Jim posted the idea of optional rank benefits, the engine suddenly got a lot more interesting. Customizing heroes to a level the books don't allow is a nice lure for new players and GMs. I just wish someone had come up with it before 2000. It wouldn't have saved the line, but it might have kept more players.

Anyways, the reason I enjoy Alternity over all other game engines is that it is so easy to tinker with. Changing professions, skill prices, ability score limits not to mention FX, mutations and mindwalking. If I create a setting, I alter the rules to fit it. How many other games are that easy to mold for a setting?

 

[slwoyach]

When Jim posted the idea of optional rank benefits, the engine suddenly got a lot more interesting. Customizing heroes to a level the books don't allow is a nice lure for new players and GMs. I just wish someone had come up with it before 2000. It wouldn't have saved the line, but it might have kept more players.

How is an optional rank benefit different than a feat with a skill rank requirement?

 

[DMH]

They are rank benefits you have to pay skill points for. Here is the thread for the idea (though you have to get down 5-8 posts before the first one):

AlternityRPG.Net Forum -> Skill synergy or advanced skills?

 

[slwoyach]

But how is it different? They both cost skill points and require a specific number of ranks to purchase.