Hi there 
So, i think i'm set on making NEW rpg my next system for a 5-year campaign starting soon.
I'm modifying the system to my tastes and buying all avalaible material on the web, but i almost never run rpg systems without customizing them, so here i have a couple questions
For now, i only had one single playtest scenario, but i'm not sure i like the "pinning down" mechanic, especially considering the FAQ that says each attacker should track his own bonus. (also, i'm not sure if you are supposed to get pinned down when you have no cover -- the text seems to imply you do)
It's a very clunky mechanic, hard to remember each round, especially when i'm having multiple opponents with very complex attack patterns like i usually do.
I am considering removing it, or at least relegating it to an monster-only exploit to be used when it is interesting to do so.
I'd love to ask, from a game design standpoint, why was this mechanic introduced. I would like to change it but, not having played enough, i really wanted to understand it before trying to change it.
Was it intended as a way to have less static combat in the fights? If so, i might consider introducing "movement action" each round instead.
Was it intended to balance melee vs ranged combat, considering that melee needs to use actions to reach the enemy? If so, i might consider adding ammo counters to ranged weapon, requiring a reload every 3-5 attacks
Was it something else? What do i lose or gain by removing it, from a balance/design standpoint?
Thanks
So, i think i'm set on making NEW rpg my next system for a 5-year campaign starting soon.
I'm modifying the system to my tastes and buying all avalaible material on the web, but i almost never run rpg systems without customizing them, so here i have a couple questions
For now, i only had one single playtest scenario, but i'm not sure i like the "pinning down" mechanic, especially considering the FAQ that says each attacker should track his own bonus. (also, i'm not sure if you are supposed to get pinned down when you have no cover -- the text seems to imply you do)
It's a very clunky mechanic, hard to remember each round, especially when i'm having multiple opponents with very complex attack patterns like i usually do.
I am considering removing it, or at least relegating it to an monster-only exploit to be used when it is interesting to do so.
I'd love to ask, from a game design standpoint, why was this mechanic introduced. I would like to change it but, not having played enough, i really wanted to understand it before trying to change it.
Was it intended as a way to have less static combat in the fights? If so, i might consider introducing "movement action" each round instead.
Was it intended to balance melee vs ranged combat, considering that melee needs to use actions to reach the enemy? If so, i might consider adding ammo counters to ranged weapon, requiring a reload every 3-5 attacks
Was it something else? What do i lose or gain by removing it, from a balance/design standpoint?
Thanks
Last edited:
