How many of you have tried designing youor own game?

[Torm]

The more recent, I've both helped a friend with playtesting a Star Trek d20 variant (which could not be stretched all the ways we saw Screenwriters stretch Star Trek technology, so it never went past the "Reconstructed Star Wars" stage)

Yep, there was that, and the other D&D-with-characters-that-merge-with-spaceships concept I was playing with - neither worked very well, but I'll be darned if Eberron didn't go and steal some of my brainwaves from the latter idea. I may actually develop my ship combat system from that into something FOR Eberron, yet....

I'm presently working on another project - could tell ya, have ta kill ya, blah blah blah - that I think has the potential to be something very cool, playable, and unique. The only thing I'll let slip right up front is that I believe it to be the first RPG product designed from the ground up with the FEMALE gamer in mind. I'll let y'all know when its ready.

 

[Vargo]

I've worked on two.

I did one update, and started work on a full game of my own.

The update I was doing was to the Kimagure Orange Road RPG, which can be found here:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/4286/korrpg.txt

The idea was to convert it from an anime-themed roleplaying game to more of a "college weirdness" RPG.

Basically, I cleaned up some of the rules, corrected some grammar, and expanded the psionics list a bit, including rules for "latent psionics" for average joes as opposed to full-fledged espers. For example, instead of teleportation, you had "convenient entrance" meaning that your character could walk into a scene from a door or window that nobody was on the other side of, even if there was no way for you to get back there in the first place, e.g. a closet or a bathroom, as long as nobody could see you arrive there. There were lots of other "incidental" powers like that, and it looked like a lot of fun.

Then I accidentally rm -rf / that computer. Ouch. Never bothered to go back and do the changes.

The second one was an anime-based RPG, that was based on a 2d6 system combined with cards ala TORG. There was a three-way "trump" system - Humorous actions trumped Dramatic actions, Dramatic actions trumped Realistic actions, and Realistic actions trumped Humorous actions. So if you made a horrible joke (an actual attack), and somebody shot you (a realistic action) your joke would be negated, but you could make a pathos-filled speech, while dragging yourself to your feet clutching the bleeding wound and threatening the shooter's very mortal soul (a dramatic action), which would negate their attack. Somebody pointing out a humorous oversight of your dramatic speech would negate its effect, etc. Negation could actually be done from any of the three types, it was just easier (+5 bonus IIRC) from the type of action that trumped the action taken.

There was also a "pawaa appu" effect, through the cards, that helped to simulate the anime-style of being beaten into a bloody pulp by a superior opponent, then dragging yourself off the ground, wiping the blood off your mouth, and proceeding to open up a can of whoop-ass on the perp who did it to you.

I ran into trouble getting the cards to work right, gave up on it, and never came back.

 

[Modin Godstalker]

I have played various roleplaying games since 79, so I have seen lots of different types of game mechanics. Have also tried my hand at writing several different games.

My problem was always making a game that was fairly realistic, yet simple at the same time.

What I always wanted to do is combine the die mechanic of d20 with character creation/improvement of Runequest. No classes, improvement via use.

 

[kigmatzomat]

I devised two systems (one looked very much like Fuzion only 5 years early and the other was a bit more Shadowrun). Both went nowhere for the simple fact that mechanics are dross without a story.

Very few settings are mechanics dependent or so thoroughly integrated with the rules. Only Earthdawn and Shadowrun really seem to be tied to their mechanics. Virtually everything else could get twilight zoned into another ruleset and still be fine (D&D, CoC, Mage/Vampire/WW, GW, T2000, Deadlands, SW, ST, CP2020, CF, etc).

So as WotC demonstrated with Eberron, the setting's the thing. Good story makes up for crappy rules (see all White Wolf games) but the best rules mean squat to a bland or pathetic storyline.

That's the main reason why so few people I know of play GURPS. The world-building effort just didn't seem worth it.

 

[Anthraxus]

Me, but that's only because I had no idea D&D really existed during Grade 7, all those years ago...

Imagine my shock, excitement, (and a bit of dismay) when I found out that there was an entire published ruleset that detailed what I was trying to do for a few years, and held together when muliple characters were involved...

Wow. You just described the situation that got me into D&D, almost exactly. 7th grade and everything!

A friend and I were designing a game with skeletons, ghouls, and other monsters using card-sized pieces of paper. This was just after we had read the novel "Hobgoblin".(IIRC)

Then my friend gets the AD&D players handbook for his birthday, and we dove right in.
"Boy, this is alot easier than making our own game," we might have said.

-A

 

[s/LaSH]

Currently I'm playtesting my Twilight system, with an eye towards eventual release (probably as PDF). So yeah, I think it's safe to say I've tried my hand at this sort of thing.

The hardest bits, of course, are making something new - because otherwise what's the point? To that end, I've looked at a whole bunch of subsystems, gotten feedback, and done testing, and wound up with something that should play like a movie or book, down to a need to talk to your enemies in combat. Is it marvelous abstraction, gritty realism, or the World's Most Elegant Mechanic? No. But the numbers line up the way I want them to, the system does some new things that are central to gameplay, and once I've completed playtesting I'll know if they work the right way...

(In the past, I've done a chunk of design on other projects, including a previous version of Twilight, an ancestor project called Nocturne, and some weird stuff involving stuffed animals. The previous Twilight was criticised as being too combat-oriented and having stat imbalances - Agility was the uber-stat. So I fixed that. Nocturne was just too number-heavy - it required multiplying by d100+50/100, and the magic system was completely out of whack and didn't distinguish between instant and temporary effects, thus leading to the Lycanthrope Incident, in which a fire mage with plenty of space failed to injure a transforming mage who slowly turned into a giant wolfbeast, ran up, tore the fire mage's arm off, and beat him unconscious with it.)

 

[ThoughtBubble]

I've spent quite a bit of time creating games. I have a pretty good sampling of them tucked away in notebooks somewhere.

The most successful one I made was during highschool. After a couple of weeks of thought, it was put together during a weekend and refined the next week in playtests. The whole system was made with the idea of reducing the dependance on die rolls, being pretty quick, and relying a lot on fiat and judgement calls. Essentially, you had different levels of attributes that would add to a die roll. A wizard might find a spell's value by adding magic+magic attack+Channeling+light+"rainbow beam"+Eqipment Mods+Die roll.

It was easy to put together, easy to introduce people to, easy to build characters, easy to track, easy on the mind, and over the top was a mere step away. So it spread through the school pretty quickly.

It was, however, not without its downsides. There was no content. You had to build your own (tends to be an issue with anything I design). On the mechanics end, first and foremost, there was no real limit on attributes, so there was no reason not to upgrade your base attribute and forget the rest (except for spells). Second, everyone was a wizard. Since warriors couldn't have a spell list, they were almost always one class behind in power, though this was almost offset by their typically having better base attributes. The game also rewarded specialization to an insane degree, so everyone found their niche, and pumped out those attributes as much as possible. And that led to play difficulty issues (the firemage one shots the ogre, or the orge one shots him). There were no social attributes, so everything in that realm was up for grabs. Finally, with no real hard and fast rules for spells, there wasn't a built in reason for not having every attack be an area effect everything. The game was pretty much held together by the DM's will.

It was fun to hear about the games run by people I didn't really know in that system. But, upon reflection, it was pretty much custom made for that audience. And now, I'm thinking of hammering those remaining problems out, and giving it another run some weekend.

There's been a whole slew of failures, slight systems modifications, and thought since then. I'm in the middle of a game inspired by the powerset for the megaman games, where each character is randomly given a signature move from a pre-generated list of modifiers. It's sort of a weekend draw up and kill 3 hours plan. This started after I realized that excel can do a lot of the balance testing and calculation for me. I've got all the mechanics in place (looking very similar to the D20 system), and all it's really waiting for is me to generate some content.

 

[Ry]

The problem is a strange one. I don't want "realism", but rather "assumed realism". In other words, I want dueling to work the way people assumed it worked at the time, including all sorts of fancy trick maneuvers of dubious quality. Equally, I am trying to base the magic on the styles and manners of assumed magic at the time (i.e. necromancy mainly is used for calling up the dead to either get the dirt on your opponents or to find out where treasure is buried, etc.). The whole notion is to come up with a game that fits the mindset of an era.

I made a very similar attempt about 5 years ago, and it produced the best game I've ever run. I was going for the assumed realism of the middle ages martial hero - basically, that knightly rank was a good measure for martial prowess, and the associated incredible power of the high-ranking armored knight. I used a cards+dice system that was very tarot-influenced; here's the system in 2 paragraphs:

Characters had a rank (0-peasant to 7-lord), 2 stat points (general things, like Strength), and 2 skill points (specifics, like Fencing). Actions were determined by characters adding their rank to 2d6, or adding their rank to a card they played (players had cards ranging from 2-12 in value, and I made them myself with random fantasy art). Players made all the actions against NPCs which "always rolled a 7." - thus, players could exert a certain measure of control over their fate in the game (though they only had 1 card at a time). There was no damage mechanic besides me just describing damage in the game (so hits were successful attack actions, but depending on what armor the character was wearing they were described from bruises to cuts, with really, really good hits being lethal or near-lethal).

Here's the key, though - the modifiers were built around what I wanted to encourage; thus, a horseback rider charging a peasant received +1 for higher ground, +1 for charging, and could apply a skill bonus for Riding to the attack, as well as the bonuses he might have for say, lance and strength. Likewise, the mass combat system worked to give the same flavor; 2 peasants acting together received +2, 5 peasants +3, up to 10 peasants +7 - effectively making a "Lord" equal to a hundred peasants working together (although it would take him longer to kill them than the lucky shot they needed to kill _him_). Beyond this, of course, were the "DM's best friend," where I just added or subtracted bonuses based on circumstances (like wounds) that developed throughout the battle.

As for problems, the system has really only 1: I can't figure out how to balance subsystems with the core mechanic. Thus, there's no damage system, and no magic system. Worked great for my game - a very gritty, epic, large scale good-versus-aberrant-evil story - but as yet, I haven't determined how to get a magic system together that is even remotely cohesive with the flexibility of the core mechanic.

 

[Viking Bastard]

I created a rule-set I used for future-based games when I was 13-14. I spent
quite a lot of work on it and used it for a few campaigns quite successfully. Then
I started playing other games and forgot about it. During last summer, I found
that old RPG stuff buried in some boxes. The stuff wasn't as bad as I'd imagined
it. In fact, it was quite good. It was GURPS.

 

[iblis]

Yeh, I made one years ago. I was in my early teens.

Basically it was classless, point-buy all the way. Generic fantasy.

I had hm..maybe 10-12 stats (I think), you know, to cover absolutely everything and a couple just in case, kinda thing. I know they included Strength, Health, Speed, Agility, Intelligence, Intuition, Willpower, Presence, Appearance...er, I've forgotten the rest. I think the names are right there.

Magic was flexible, modular, fairly simple, with categories such as the physical elements alongside others like Spirit etc. Sorta like roll-yer-own spells. No fixed spell-lists. Magic Points (read : Spell Points, more or less) and resourcefulness were the 'limiting factors'.

Combat was a little like Rolemaster or Warhammer - love those criticals! - in that it was fairly detailed in some ways, and a bit nasty. It had weapon speed, and armour that was better or worse against different weapon types (e.g. piercing or slashing). There were armour and hit locations, which are house rules round here (for D&D) even now.

I ran into problems when starting on the monsters. WAY too much work required, I thought. Of course what I could, and probably should have done is convert stuff like monsters from other systems. Doh.

Someday I might try again. It had promise in some ways. Definitely had a lot of flaws, but hey...it was fun.