Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kannik" data-source="post: 9291422" data-attributes="member: 984">I really like the Silhouette system.&nbsp; As in “<a href="https://aurora.dp9forum.com/" target="_blank">create, edit, and publish the Silhouette Fanzine for 10 years</a>” + playtest/writing + create a bunch of supplements amount of really, really like. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />A big chunk of my fondness definitively has to do with the rich settings*, the cool mechanical designs, the great artwork, and how fresh the graphic layout was when they first emerged on the scene. But I am a fan of the system itself as well.&nbsp; There are many elements that were influential in crafting my gaming tastes, and many of the system concepts played a big role in the development of my current custom system:&nbsp; It was an attribute+skill dice pool system with a mechanic to avoid having to total up large numbers of dice.&nbsp; (Originally made for d8s, I think it works better with the broader statistical spread made available with those extra sides on the dice.)&nbsp; It was where I first encountered an explicit Margin of Success/Failure system, with both the narrative hooks as well as replacing the need for a random damage roll that was totally disconnected your action test.&nbsp; It was also one of the first skill systems I encountered where skills were not tied to a specific/single attribute.&nbsp; It used effects-based design (similar to HERO).&nbsp; It was pretty seamless to go between personal and mecha-based tactical action. On the whole, I found it pretty straightforward to run, with minimal complexity during play and with the story benefit of the MoS/MoF results. * As an example, when I first read Heavy Gear I appreciated that it created a base setting where neither of the two main sides could be considered the “good” one or the “bad” one – they (and each of the sub-states) were nuanced enough such that each had their empowering and their deleterious aspects.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kannik, post: 9291422, member: 984"] I really like the Silhouette system. As in “[URL='https://aurora.dp9forum.com/']create, edit, and publish the Silhouette Fanzine for 10 years[/URL]” + playtest/writing + create a bunch of supplements amount of really, really like. :) A big chunk of my fondness definitively has to do with the rich settings*, the cool mechanical designs, the great artwork, and how fresh the graphic layout was when they first emerged on the scene. But I am a fan of the system itself as well. There are many elements that were influential in crafting my gaming tastes, and many of the system concepts played a big role in the development of my current custom system: It was an attribute+skill dice pool system with a mechanic to avoid having to total up large numbers of dice. (Originally made for d8s, I think it works better with the broader statistical spread made available with those extra sides on the dice.) It was where I first encountered an explicit Margin of Success/Failure system, with both the narrative hooks as well as replacing the need for a random damage roll that was totally disconnected your action test. It was also one of the first skill systems I encountered where skills were not tied to a specific/single attribute. It used effects-based design (similar to HERO). It was pretty seamless to go between personal and mecha-based tactical action. On the whole, I found it pretty straightforward to run, with minimal complexity during play and with the story benefit of the MoS/MoF results. * As an example, when I first read Heavy Gear I appreciated that it created a base setting where neither of the two main sides could be considered the “good” one or the “bad” one – they (and each of the sub-states) were nuanced enough such that each had their empowering and their deleterious aspects. [/QUOTE]

Verification