Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Your Harebrained Ideas?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 9209268" data-attributes="member: 70468"><p>The way experience works is players set two individual goals at the start of the session and a group goal at the end. Group goals are intended to take several to complete. At the end of the session, a player gets 3 EXP for completing an individual goal (but no more than that even if they complete both) and 1 EXP for each one they help another player complete. If the group completes its goal, everyone receives 3 EXP.</p><p></p><p>Since the game is open-ended and sandbox-like, goals help players in picking and pursuing a course of action. They also serve as in-session reminders of things they indicated they wanted to do outside of the pressure of playing the game. This kind of “external brain” is inspired by my <a href="https://gettingthingsdone.com" target="_blank">GTD</a> practice. Players decide whether they complete their goals, and the group (by consensus) on the group goal. The referee can opine, but they don’t get a veto over whether a goal is completed (but if the whole group disagrees, the player should reconsider).</p><p></p><p>Characters gain ranks in skills, specialities, and proficiencies by spending EXP. The cost goes up with rank. Getting all the way up to rank +5 can be expensive, especially if your group does not give you a discount (e.g., mages buying combat specialities do not get a discount while warriors do). There is no control on how high or quickly you can buy ranks, but you actually don’t want to specialize hard in this system. Your level is based on total EXP acquired not by how much you have spent (to avoid punishing players for saving up for something).</p><p></p><p>As part of the resolution process, there are opportunities to help and contribute. Not having skills makes you worse at helping, which makes the rolls harder for everyone. There are two options to help. You can help, which lets you pick the method (skill) and approach (attribute). Successfully helping lets the target make their check at +modifier (based on your result). You can also do a group check. A group check requires you to use the same method, but you can vary the approach. For a group check, you designate a lead and everyone rolls. The best result is used to determine the result. Any failures reduce it by −2, but the leader can gain stress to prevent that.</p><p></p><p>Also, not having diverse skills limits the methods you can use to solve problems. If you want to manipulate someone into doing something, that’s Manipulation. If you want that outcome and have a terrible (or no) Manipulation, then you need to figure out some other method or find help. There’s just not a lot of flexibility in how skills are used. Where the flexibility comes is with your approach (attribute). You can use any attribute as long as it makes sense. Wisdom in particular lets you call on past experiences (which are noted on your sheet). For example, if you are trying to lure a bulette, and you can relate it back to your experience in the wilderness, then you can add +Wisdom instead of a different attribute.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I want there to be some progression, but it needs to not break the math. Rolling 2d10 mostly worked with static difficulties, but my players would occasionally forget which dice to roll. Using 2d6 pervasively makes it hard to roll the wrong dice, but now I have to make sure the math is calibrated right. I think factors will be a compromise that’s okay because it’s framed as an objective property rather than as a product of the referee’s discretion.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The thing I dislike is calibrating difficulties to progression. Your numbers go up, but so do those with the challenges you’re attempting. They might be “bigger” or described more superlatively, but moment-to-moment play is basically the same. The only time this feels good is when you’re dealing with the higher opposition early. For example, in Blades in the Dark when you have to be careful dealing with higher tier factions early but eventually rise to the point where you can bully them instead. That’s cool. Just picking fancier locks is not.</p><p></p><p>What high level play will look like in my homebrew system is still TBD. In theory, you know that things are out there that are nasty. The world is meant to be a “living world” type of setting (with various mechanics to support it). The players in my campaign want to loot the fallen capital. That’s their campaign goal. It’s still too scary at the moment though. They’re only 5th level. The max is 15th level, though I expect players will be able to continue spending EXP (as described above). Monsters are not capped and can be much nastier. You’ll need to bring resources to bear to deal with them.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Are the skill points tied to the skills and abilities used, or can you spend them freely?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kenada, post: 9209268, member: 70468"] The way experience works is players set two individual goals at the start of the session and a group goal at the end. Group goals are intended to take several to complete. At the end of the session, a player gets 3 EXP for completing an individual goal (but no more than that even if they complete both) and 1 EXP for each one they help another player complete. If the group completes its goal, everyone receives 3 EXP. Since the game is open-ended and sandbox-like, goals help players in picking and pursuing a course of action. They also serve as in-session reminders of things they indicated they wanted to do outside of the pressure of playing the game. This kind of “external brain” is inspired by my [URL='https://gettingthingsdone.com']GTD[/URL] practice. Players decide whether they complete their goals, and the group (by consensus) on the group goal. The referee can opine, but they don’t get a veto over whether a goal is completed (but if the whole group disagrees, the player should reconsider). Characters gain ranks in skills, specialities, and proficiencies by spending EXP. The cost goes up with rank. Getting all the way up to rank +5 can be expensive, especially if your group does not give you a discount (e.g., mages buying combat specialities do not get a discount while warriors do). There is no control on how high or quickly you can buy ranks, but you actually don’t want to specialize hard in this system. Your level is based on total EXP acquired not by how much you have spent (to avoid punishing players for saving up for something). As part of the resolution process, there are opportunities to help and contribute. Not having skills makes you worse at helping, which makes the rolls harder for everyone. There are two options to help. You can help, which lets you pick the method (skill) and approach (attribute). Successfully helping lets the target make their check at +modifier (based on your result). You can also do a group check. A group check requires you to use the same method, but you can vary the approach. For a group check, you designate a lead and everyone rolls. The best result is used to determine the result. Any failures reduce it by −2, but the leader can gain stress to prevent that. Also, not having diverse skills limits the methods you can use to solve problems. If you want to manipulate someone into doing something, that’s Manipulation. If you want that outcome and have a terrible (or no) Manipulation, then you need to figure out some other method or find help. There’s just not a lot of flexibility in how skills are used. Where the flexibility comes is with your approach (attribute). You can use any attribute as long as it makes sense. Wisdom in particular lets you call on past experiences (which are noted on your sheet). For example, if you are trying to lure a bulette, and you can relate it back to your experience in the wilderness, then you can add +Wisdom instead of a different attribute. I want there to be some progression, but it needs to not break the math. Rolling 2d10 mostly worked with static difficulties, but my players would occasionally forget which dice to roll. Using 2d6 pervasively makes it hard to roll the wrong dice, but now I have to make sure the math is calibrated right. I think factors will be a compromise that’s okay because it’s framed as an objective property rather than as a product of the referee’s discretion. The thing I dislike is calibrating difficulties to progression. Your numbers go up, but so do those with the challenges you’re attempting. They might be “bigger” or described more superlatively, but moment-to-moment play is basically the same. The only time this feels good is when you’re dealing with the higher opposition early. For example, in Blades in the Dark when you have to be careful dealing with higher tier factions early but eventually rise to the point where you can bully them instead. That’s cool. Just picking fancier locks is not. What high level play will look like in my homebrew system is still TBD. In theory, you know that things are out there that are nasty. The world is meant to be a “living world” type of setting (with various mechanics to support it). The players in my campaign want to loot the fallen capital. That’s their campaign goal. It’s still too scary at the moment though. They’re only 5th level. The max is 15th level, though I expect players will be able to continue spending EXP (as described above). Monsters are not capped and can be much nastier. You’ll need to bring resources to bear to deal with them. Are the skill points tied to the skills and abilities used, or can you spend them freely? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Your Harebrained Ideas?
Top