This reminds me of Burning Wheel. They split out their game into subsystems for Magic (runs throughout the rest), Duel of Wits (Social Encounters), Fight! (Prolonged Melee), Bloody Versus (Quick Melee, one roll per participant), Range and Cover (Ranged Combat) and the character interaction (Beliefs, Instincts and Traits). I think that Burning Wheel is clunky mechanically, but the influence on my groups' roleplaying has been extensive. Beliefs, Instincts and Traits are part of character creation for D&D 5e now, for example. Races were extremely different from one another. Each non-human race had an emotional attribute which would eventually lead to that character's destruction, assuming they didn't die from something else. Heavily influenced by Tolkien, Elves had "Grief", Dwarves had "Greed" and Orcs either had "Hatred" or "Void"(for their spellcasters). These emotional attributes came into play for a variety of checks, but if I were to design a system, I would probably make it so that every character had access to them, because they bring so much to the roleplaying experience.
That is a great reference, Otter. I didn’t think about Burning Wheel at all when doing this (mainly because I’ve only read the rules and never been in a campaign). I will definitely have to go back and read up on the Beliefs, Instincts, and Traits section. That sounds really interesting. I would be most interest in seeing if they actually handled it mechanically different from combat. (Meaning its a d20 system for one thing, but maybe a 3d6 or % system for other stuff, etc). Thanks for the info! I’ve got research to do now!
Rewatching the video, there was also a subsystem for Downtime and Recovery. Since Burning Wheel opted for "gritty" combat, an injury could take weeks or months to recover from. During this time, non-injured characters could develop social relationships, learn new skills, craft, etc. It was lightly recommended to create alternate characters if severe injury occurred. Similar to major consequences in FATE, you could lose permanent access to a body part, skill (brain damage) in a way that completely changed a character's arc. I'm not sure how much you want your game to be a power fantasy/wish fulfillment game, but obviously a recovery system like that would justify long periods of downtime.
@@jfacegames7354 The core "Intent and Task" roll remains the same. What you do with those results are where the major differences arise in each subsystem. A failed melee combat roll, a failed Bloody Versus roll and a failed Magic roll resolve differently. The first misses, the second means your opponent "gets what they want" and the third means a random mishap will occur. This could be a fizzle, a different spell or summoning a god who will probably be angry with you. It's a little all over the place and I would say learning it is something of a player investment. This helps simulate the feeling of being completely out of one's depth, though. In a Duel of Wits, the player and character of an Orc Warrior are both clueless. Very few players will learn the ins-and-outs of a system where their character does not excel, which is an interesting meta-mechanical effect.
I haven’t really gotten to the brainstorming for Downtime activity yet. So I’m not sure how that would look. I want it to be flexible enough that it’s just a week of time for the characters, or it can be robust enough for a large time jump (which i always like). I definitely always loved the FATE system’s stress & consequences system. I already was working that into my current game, so I think its a good call to think about how long a time those consequences require to resolve, and how much the Downtime activities tie into that idea. I’m not sure how stringent the rules are going to be on certain things like that, because I don’t want to deter players with way too much nitty gritty, but I think its important to at least give examples for GMs to think about for sure
Sounds interesting, also logical that the same mechanics doesn't need to be the same in all parts of a rpg. Currently I am using Cortex Primes dice pool for resolution and a separate D6 pool (5,6 are successes) for the "result". Five systems could be fun :-)
Interesting, so you have resolution vs results. One dice pool is like Eldritch Horror the board game with successes on 5s or 6s, and the other is to give more the story concept? Does it end up being clunky, or is it now second nature? I have never played Cortex Prime, just read the rules. Loved it, but would really want to see it in action for sure
@@jfacegames7354 The first premise of my game was that it should use almost all dices, not mostly a D20 or D100. So I just use the "base pool" mechanics of Cortex Prime, add a couple of d4-d12:s in the pool - roll and pick the two highest. This gives a nice span that max out at 24 with 2d12 selected (and at max). They are added from attributes, skills, "feats", items etc. The nice thing is that it's easy to just add dices and not have to count several different bonuses and add up and then add them to a dice roll. Another important thing is the "diminishing return" which makes it less worrying to add many dices together. The roll must then beat a target number I have set. That number could be Offensive Bonus (players rolls to defend), Defensive Bonus (players rolls to hit) or a non-combat skill check. Thus I don't have to roll if I don't want to in this part. Now as for result I always wanted a "low" number off successes for narrative purposes in skill checks and for dealing less points of damage and thus being able to have something like Ogres with 18 hp's instead of 142 Hp's. So for now players add their skill in D6:s and also weapons add a few dice depending on "weapon size". My main "problem" is I really want armor to mitigate/block damage and this is so-so, a.t.m. armor removes dices from the dice pool as "mitigation". I have been looking at IronClaw but it seems a tad to "clunky". So for this armor-damage reduction bit I am still looking for a solution. So far the players have thought it's pretty easy, same "rhythm" as D&D Roll to hit - roll damage. Will see what this all lands in if I find some other armor-damage reduction system. The game is traditional simulation (it's not a story game) , also I like to call it mid-fantasy, the characters are not DD5e powerful but more toned down.
Cool, so the large dice pool is a representation of the weapon, feats, skills, training, attributes, etc? That is cool. I’d like to see a write up or video of this to see your whole system! For a quick and easy Armor Class thing you can use what I’m using in my game for monster Resistance. Pretty much you can say certain numbers “dont count”. Like Skeletons are Resistant to piercing, so I’ve just made it that odd numbers don’t hit. It doesnt change anything else about the mechanics thought. Maybe you can implement a similar concept?
@@jfacegames7354 The large dice pool is typically Attribute + Skill + Profiency as the three base dices, then probably a dice for skill specialization. Then spells, feats, abilities, environment can add further dices. As for now weapons/armor don't add dice to the resolution pool but only to the result(damage) pool, like a large weapon adding 4d6. I am about to try modifying the d6:s, normally 5,6 is a success but the idea was that certain enchantments, spells, etc could make only 6 count (for defensive purposes) and 4,5,6 count (for offensive purposes), like a "Holy Mace" that "counts 2 dices at 4" versus undead, which makes two of the D6:s successful on 4,5,6. I was thinking about not letting all dice go this way but only a certain amount. I will test this with the players to see if it gets to clunky. Your take to make it on all dice is easier to read. I will try and get the judgement from the players :-)
I agree with you that the game mechanisms should carry the theme of the game, that is why I think most generic RPG systems fall flat, since they do not really add any flavour to the particular game world. However I think having a single main system is not bad, if it revolves around the central aspect of the game. Like if you have a game around espionage then it is is only important to have a robust core mechanism that deals with that and you can frame then everything else (like combat) to also feel like an extension of the espionage theme. At least that is what I did with my design, for me drama and narrative aspects had been the important part, and thus my core game mechanism serves only that purpose, so much so that I have not really any need for task resolution mechanisms. Having five different mechanisms is pulling the game apart, since then you also have not a single central theme and try too much. It is like watching a film that tries to be every genre, but in the end it becomes only a hot mess since it doesn't excels at anything.
This is big for me. The reason my current video has been delayed because i feel like my first game design should probably be setting specific more than neutral. I’ve been reading a lot of games recently and they are all so flavorful because they are setting/theme specific
I like an RPG that has body to hit locations linked with Armor and weapons with monster reaction rolls. This is done well in D100 Dungeon by Martin Knight.
There is often a core randomizer mechanic and it might be tied into a majority of the other systems and decision points but it functions in a specific way inside of that. It’s primarily for ease of play, as you stated, but often in d20 system the rules packages are what influences play style and changes the way you play the game. I’m not saying you should, or it’s not a good idea to, build a variety of mechanics to facilitate different parts of the game, see burning wheel as a prime example of this. It’s a fun thought experiment though to take a look at a game which has different modes of play for different types of play. I mean look at a forged in the dark game for an exceptional example of how to implement downtime mechanics in a procedural way that influences story going forward. It feels very much like a board game where you have a few resources to get some stuff done and then some randomizers to push events forward in the story. Similar to how Arkham Horror or Dead of Winter push their game forward and keep tension on the game. Totally dug the video and if you’re looking for people to talk about this stuff with check out Misdirected Mark Productions. I’m Chris from the Misdirected Mark Podcast. Always looking for people to talk about design with.
Nice to meet you Christ! I’ll have to check out the MisDirected Mark Podcast! Would love to talk sometime. Really appreciate the comment! I really like the term “core randomized mechanic”. That’s a nice way of putting it. I’ve come a good bit from this video, and think that I’ve finally settled on mine. Call it the Pressure System, and I talk about it later. I still want to explore the concept of different mechanics though. Played a Forged in the Dark campaign recently and that definitely sold me more on that concept, so I agree with your sentiment on it. Especially how Band of Blades does downtime. Here are my current rules if you want to check it out. publish.obsidian.md/pressure-system. We have a Discord going that I link in more recent videos, and its been a blast to bounce ideas and collaborate with people. So if you want to join us, we can all talk shop together!
For my game that I'm designing, Dice Tales, I have the same core mechanic but it is applied very differently to different areas so it feels different every way you use it. As an example, for casting magic spells the results are very specific and each spell has its own description and effect, clerics use the same mechanic but have no spells. Their results are expressed a very different way.
@@jfacegames7354 I am a pretty big fan of Donald Duck, and have watched Duck Tails, so yes sort of...🤔. In the rules you have primary attributes which are a dice type not a number. Your strength might be a d8 and a d6, or 2d6. You roll these along with dice appropriate to your skill level, low skill is d6, a godlike magic user might be d20. You typically roll the attribute dice along with five skill dice. On a d6, five and six count as a success, on a d10, 7 through 10 is a success. I use both the total scores for some things and the number of successes for others. This gives a pretty good statistical median type range most of the time but you would be surprised how many extreme results you get, which makes for some incredibly memorable moments. Some of the success numbers "explode", allowing you to very occasionally, succeed wildly. Ask me about the half elf stealing a relic out of a tent while there were three people guarding it.... But then she's always been an incredibly lucky character 😅.
Some good sounding stuff in there. I think our system has some differences and yet some nice similarities. Look forward to seeing how yours pans out. Hopefully you check out more of how the game here is rounding out!
Have you checked out aces and eights. It has mini and macro games embedded in it. There is the cattle drive macro mechanic that kind of moves the story along and the trial mini game mechanic where you try and sway the jury. Worth a look, even if you are nearing the end of the research phase.
Research phase NEVER ends, haha. Aces & Eights, i have never heard of this game. Gonna check it out pronto! Currently for Macro I’ve looked mainly at Blades in the Dark faction system, and the Colville Kingdom’s & Warfare Intrigue system. But I’m going to look at a few more games, and a few boards games to get some other ideas. So far I haven’t found the vibe and feel i want for it.
@@jfacegames7354 true, research never ends, but I don’t want you to have analysis paralysis like me. You can always do a second edition, informed by the problems with the first.
In my own rpg project, I'm running with nine mechanics. There is one for each of the attributes (think str, int, cha). I have not given much consideration to the systems ease of learning. Hopefully because but the mechanics are all on the surface level there will be fewer nuances elsewhere. However, for those attributes I'm searching for those immersive that mechanics you mentioned. I found the constant use of 3d6 or d20 for each skill, no matter their flavor differences, rather boring. I really like how you distributed your five mechanics. Each section is clean and covers it's own area. I like the inclusion of a rp mechanics, as well. In some ways, I feel that many ttrps add roleplaying as afterthought. Best regards!
@@jfacegames7354 The videos stopped showing up in my feed to I had to come back and hit the bell icon. So everyone here please hit the bell icon to stay up to speed.
This is an interesting and useful video. I decided to go (for now), with a statless system for my ttrpg and base my design on two principles: 1. Integration 2. Cohesiveness so i have to look for ways that the abilities and spell can help out on the type of tasks and challenges my adventures will have. almost all actions, including abilities, use one type of roll with a Yes/And/But/No outcome, raising the player's dice type per rank. i would love to hear your opinion on these bits of my system. thanks for the video
Can you elaborate on what you mean my Intregration and Cohesiveness as your two principles? Also, is this a general system, or a specific setting you are building for? Love the idea of a Yes/And/But/No outcome. That makes me feel like this is a more narrative system? Sounds awesome. Cant wait to hear more!
@@jfacegames7354 it's definitly a more narrative driven system, examples of what i mean with integration is that mechanics can be used in more than one way or combined rather than serve one sole purpose, cohesiveness is to not build a robust fighting system if the game is all about social encounters, stuff like that. i am making both a system and a setting (though focusing more on the system), will probably playtest homebrew stories from within that universe at first. thanks for the respone, i subscribed and will be taking a good look at your channel as i keep updating my rulebook.
I know! Must of just been that the title was in someway "clicky"? haha. Appreciate you getting through the backlog! Any thoughts or comments keep them coming
There's a reason games that HAD multiple different mechanics for different purposes evolved into games with a single mechanic. I personally think having multiple mechanics is literally just overcomplicating for the sake of overcomplicating, at this point.
I agree, and disagree. I think that 5 mechanics are probably too many, but there are some games lately coming out that use 2 or more mechanics and it adds to the flavor. EZD6 technically has a different way to solve magic vs combat, Viking Death Squad does combat vs skill checks different, Forged in the Dark has “combat” vs “campaign/downtime” mode different. I am really digging these games that have at least 2 different ways of doing stuff. So the trick is to just make none of the mechanics “too complex” but having them intuitively feel like the RP/situation you are going for
Not in my opinion, and you could argue that D&D and pf both have different subsystems over how combat works. Escalating DC every level is broken. I played palladium and it was funtionally fine. Skills and attack rolls use different mechanics. Also for better randomness roll low saves meant a 1 wasn't always bad.
Plus modern game design has tons of meta currency which itself goes against the single system of modern gaming they proclaim. Personally I prefer a few subsystems over gamey meta currencies that break my emersion far more
I agree that some of the Indy games are doing much more interesting ideas than the big players. That is probably why I settled on this concept. See it done better in the Indy seen, but usually each game focuses on just one. I’d like to make each relevant, or make it so you can spot like any of the ones you want to focus on in your own game
That’s Notion. One of the best free applications that is no-code ever. I recommend for everyone I use obsidian more now, but Notion is lower bar of entry
This reminds me of Burning Wheel. They split out their game into subsystems for Magic (runs throughout the rest), Duel of Wits (Social Encounters), Fight! (Prolonged Melee), Bloody Versus (Quick Melee, one roll per participant), Range and Cover (Ranged Combat) and the character interaction (Beliefs, Instincts and Traits). I think that Burning Wheel is clunky mechanically, but the influence on my groups' roleplaying has been extensive. Beliefs, Instincts and Traits are part of character creation for D&D 5e now, for example.
Races were extremely different from one another. Each non-human race had an emotional attribute which would eventually lead to that character's destruction, assuming they didn't die from something else. Heavily influenced by Tolkien, Elves had "Grief", Dwarves had "Greed" and Orcs either had "Hatred" or "Void"(for their spellcasters). These emotional attributes came into play for a variety of checks, but if I were to design a system, I would probably make it so that every character had access to them, because they bring so much to the roleplaying experience.
That is a great reference, Otter. I didn’t think about Burning Wheel at all when doing this (mainly because I’ve only read the rules and never been in a campaign). I will definitely have to go back and read up on the Beliefs, Instincts, and Traits section. That sounds really interesting. I would be most interest in seeing if they actually handled it mechanically different from combat. (Meaning its a d20 system for one thing, but maybe a 3d6 or % system for other stuff, etc). Thanks for the info! I’ve got research to do now!
Rewatching the video, there was also a subsystem for Downtime and Recovery. Since Burning Wheel opted for "gritty" combat, an injury could take weeks or months to recover from. During this time, non-injured characters could develop social relationships, learn new skills, craft, etc.
It was lightly recommended to create alternate characters if severe injury occurred. Similar to major consequences in FATE, you could lose permanent access to a body part, skill (brain damage) in a way that completely changed a character's arc. I'm not sure how much you want your game to be a power fantasy/wish fulfillment game, but obviously a recovery system like that would justify long periods of downtime.
@@jfacegames7354 The core "Intent and Task" roll remains the same. What you do with those results are where the major differences arise in each subsystem. A failed melee combat roll, a failed Bloody Versus roll and a failed Magic roll resolve differently. The first misses, the second means your opponent "gets what they want" and the third means a random mishap will occur. This could be a fizzle, a different spell or summoning a god who will probably be angry with you.
It's a little all over the place and I would say learning it is something of a player investment. This helps simulate the feeling of being completely out of one's depth, though. In a Duel of Wits, the player and character of an Orc Warrior are both clueless. Very few players will learn the ins-and-outs of a system where their character does not excel, which is an interesting meta-mechanical effect.
I haven’t really gotten to the brainstorming for Downtime activity yet. So I’m not sure how that would look. I want it to be flexible enough that it’s just a week of time for the characters, or it can be robust enough for a large time jump (which i always like).
I definitely always loved the FATE system’s stress & consequences system. I already was working that into my current game, so I think its a good call to think about how long a time those consequences require to resolve, and how much the Downtime activities tie into that idea.
I’m not sure how stringent the rules are going to be on certain things like that, because I don’t want to deter players with way too much nitty gritty, but I think its important to at least give examples for GMs to think about for sure
Sounds interesting, also logical that the same mechanics doesn't need to be the same in all parts of a rpg. Currently I am using Cortex Primes dice pool for resolution and a separate D6 pool (5,6 are successes) for the "result". Five systems could be fun :-)
Interesting, so you have resolution vs results. One dice pool is like Eldritch Horror the board game with successes on 5s or 6s, and the other is to give more the story concept? Does it end up being clunky, or is it now second nature? I have never played Cortex Prime, just read the rules. Loved it, but would really want to see it in action for sure
@@jfacegames7354 The first premise of my game was that it should use almost all dices, not mostly a D20 or D100. So I just use the "base pool" mechanics of Cortex Prime, add a couple of d4-d12:s in the pool - roll and pick the two highest. This gives a nice span that max out at 24 with 2d12 selected (and at max). They are added from attributes, skills, "feats", items etc. The nice thing is that it's easy to just add dices and not have to count several different bonuses and add up and then add them to a dice roll. Another important thing is the "diminishing return" which makes it less worrying to add many dices together. The roll must then beat a target number I have set. That number could be Offensive Bonus (players rolls to defend), Defensive Bonus (players rolls to hit) or a non-combat skill check. Thus I don't have to roll if I don't want to in this part.
Now as for result I always wanted a "low" number off successes for narrative purposes in skill checks and for dealing less points of damage and thus being able to have something like Ogres with 18 hp's instead of 142 Hp's. So for now players add their skill in D6:s and also weapons add a few dice depending on "weapon size". My main "problem" is I really want armor to mitigate/block damage and this is so-so, a.t.m. armor removes dices from the dice pool as "mitigation". I have been looking at IronClaw but it seems a tad to "clunky". So for this armor-damage reduction bit I am still looking for a solution.
So far the players have thought it's pretty easy, same "rhythm" as D&D Roll to hit - roll damage. Will see what this all lands in if I find some other armor-damage reduction system.
The game is traditional simulation (it's not a story game) , also I like to call it mid-fantasy, the characters are not DD5e powerful but more toned down.
Cool, so the large dice pool is a representation of the weapon, feats, skills, training, attributes, etc? That is cool. I’d like to see a write up or video of this to see your whole system!
For a quick and easy Armor Class thing you can use what I’m using in my game for monster Resistance. Pretty much you can say certain numbers “dont count”. Like Skeletons are Resistant to piercing, so I’ve just made it that odd numbers don’t hit. It doesnt change anything else about the mechanics thought. Maybe you can implement a similar concept?
@@jfacegames7354 The large dice pool is typically Attribute + Skill + Profiency as the three base dices, then probably a dice for skill specialization. Then spells, feats, abilities, environment can add further dices. As for now weapons/armor don't add dice to the resolution pool but only to the result(damage) pool, like a large weapon adding 4d6. I am about to try modifying the d6:s, normally 5,6 is a success but the idea was that certain enchantments, spells, etc could make only 6 count (for defensive purposes) and 4,5,6 count (for offensive purposes), like a "Holy Mace" that "counts 2 dices at 4" versus undead, which makes two of the D6:s successful on 4,5,6. I was thinking about not letting all dice go this way but only a certain amount. I will test this with the players to see if it gets to clunky. Your take to make it on all dice is easier to read. I will try and get the judgement from the players :-)
I agree with you that the game mechanisms should carry the theme of the game, that is why I think most generic RPG systems fall flat, since they do not really add any flavour to the particular game world. However I think having a single main system is not bad, if it revolves around the central aspect of the game. Like if you have a game around espionage then it is is only important to have a robust core mechanism that deals with that and you can frame then everything else (like combat) to also feel like an extension of the espionage theme. At least that is what I did with my design, for me drama and narrative aspects had been the important part, and thus my core game mechanism serves only that purpose, so much so that I have not really any need for task resolution mechanisms. Having five different mechanisms is pulling the game apart, since then you also have not a single central theme and try too much. It is like watching a film that tries to be every genre, but in the end it becomes only a hot mess since it doesn't excels at anything.
This is big for me. The reason my current video has been delayed because i feel like my first game design should probably be setting specific more than neutral. I’ve been reading a lot of games recently and they are all so flavorful because they are setting/theme specific
I like an RPG that has body to hit locations linked with Armor and weapons with monster reaction rolls. This is done well in D100 Dungeon by Martin Knight.
That’s always intense when you have hit regions. I think I’d reserve it for boss fights if I added it to my game
There is often a core randomizer mechanic and it might be tied into a majority of the other systems and decision points but it functions in a specific way inside of that. It’s primarily for ease of play, as you stated, but often in d20 system the rules packages are what influences play style and changes the way you play the game. I’m not saying you should, or it’s not a good idea to, build a variety of mechanics to facilitate different parts of the game, see burning wheel as a prime example of this.
It’s a fun thought experiment though to take a look at a game which has different modes of play for different types of play. I mean look at a forged in the dark game for an exceptional example of how to implement downtime mechanics in a procedural way that influences story going forward. It feels very much like a board game where you have a few resources to get some stuff done and then some randomizers to push events forward in the story. Similar to how Arkham Horror or Dead of Winter push their game forward and keep tension on the game.
Totally dug the video and if you’re looking for people to talk about this stuff with check out Misdirected Mark Productions. I’m Chris from the Misdirected Mark Podcast. Always looking for people to talk about design with.
Nice to meet you Christ! I’ll have to check out the MisDirected Mark Podcast! Would love to talk sometime.
Really appreciate the comment! I really like the term “core randomized mechanic”. That’s a nice way of putting it. I’ve come a good bit from this video, and think that I’ve finally settled on mine. Call it the Pressure System, and I talk about it later. I still want to explore the concept of different mechanics though. Played a Forged in the Dark campaign recently and that definitely sold me more on that concept, so I agree with your sentiment on it. Especially how Band of Blades does downtime.
Here are my current rules if you want to check it out. publish.obsidian.md/pressure-system. We have a Discord going that I link in more recent videos, and its been a blast to bounce ideas and collaborate with people. So if you want to join us, we can all talk shop together!
For my game that I'm designing, Dice Tales, I have the same core mechanic but it is applied very differently to different areas so it feels different every way you use it. As an example, for casting magic spells the results are very specific and each spell has its own description and effect, clerics use the same mechanic but have no spells. Their results are expressed a very different way.
Would love to hear more about the specific mechanics. Also, is the name a play off of Duck Tales? Do you always sing “Dice Tales, Whoohoo!”? :)
@@jfacegames7354 I am a pretty big fan of Donald Duck, and have watched Duck Tails, so yes sort of...🤔. In the rules you have primary attributes which are a dice type not a number. Your strength might be a d8 and a d6, or 2d6. You roll these along with dice appropriate to your skill level, low skill is d6, a godlike magic user might be d20. You typically roll the attribute dice along with five skill dice. On a d6, five and six count as a success, on a d10, 7 through 10 is a success. I use both the total scores for some things and the number of successes for others. This gives a pretty good statistical median type range most of the time but you would be surprised how many extreme results you get, which makes for some incredibly memorable moments. Some of the success numbers "explode", allowing you to very occasionally, succeed wildly. Ask me about the half elf stealing a relic out of a tent while there were three people guarding it.... But then she's always been an incredibly lucky character 😅.
Some good sounding stuff in there. I think our system has some differences and yet some nice similarities. Look forward to seeing how yours pans out. Hopefully you check out more of how the game here is rounding out!
@@jfacegames7354 thank you. Watching your stuff is encouraging to continue. Thanks for posting it.
Have you checked out aces and eights. It has mini and macro games embedded in it. There is the cattle drive macro mechanic that kind of moves the story along and the trial mini game mechanic where you try and sway the jury. Worth a look, even if you are nearing the end of the research phase.
Also song of fire and ice for social combat. It really changes my ideas of social interaction as a type of combat/conflict.
Research phase NEVER ends, haha. Aces & Eights, i have never heard of this game. Gonna check it out pronto! Currently for Macro I’ve looked mainly at Blades in the Dark faction system, and the Colville Kingdom’s & Warfare Intrigue system. But I’m going to look at a few more games, and a few boards games to get some other ideas. So far I haven’t found the vibe and feel i want for it.
@@jfacegames7354 true, research never ends, but I don’t want you to have analysis paralysis like me. You can always do a second edition, informed by the problems with the first.
In my own rpg project, I'm running with nine mechanics. There is one for each of the attributes (think str, int, cha). I have not given much consideration to the systems ease of learning. Hopefully because but the mechanics are all on the surface level there will be fewer nuances elsewhere. However, for those attributes I'm searching for those immersive that mechanics you mentioned. I found the constant use of 3d6 or d20 for each skill, no matter their flavor differences, rather boring.
I really like how you distributed your five mechanics. Each section is clean and covers it's own area. I like the inclusion of a rp mechanics, as well. In some ways, I feel that many ttrps add roleplaying as afterthought.
Best regards!
Thanks so much! I’m glad you came to watch. I’d be really interested in hearing more about your system some time!
Love what you're doing here. Keep it going.
Blast from the past! Good to hear from you again
@@jfacegames7354 The videos stopped showing up in my feed to I had to come back and hit the bell icon. So everyone here please hit the bell icon to stay up to speed.
This is an interesting and useful video. I decided to go (for now), with a statless system for my ttrpg and base my design on two principles: 1. Integration 2. Cohesiveness so i have to look for ways that the abilities and spell can help out on the type of tasks and challenges my adventures will have. almost all actions, including abilities, use one type of roll with a Yes/And/But/No outcome, raising the player's dice type per rank. i would love to hear your opinion on these bits of my system. thanks for the video
Can you elaborate on what you mean my Intregration and Cohesiveness as your two principles? Also, is this a general system, or a specific setting you are building for? Love the idea of a Yes/And/But/No outcome. That makes me feel like this is a more narrative system? Sounds awesome. Cant wait to hear more!
@@jfacegames7354 it's definitly a more narrative driven system, examples of what i mean with integration is that mechanics can be used in more than one way or combined rather than serve one sole purpose, cohesiveness is to not build a robust fighting system if the game is all about social encounters, stuff like that. i am making both a system and a setting (though focusing more on the system), will probably playtest homebrew stories from within that universe at first. thanks for the respone, i subscribed and will be taking a good look at your channel as i keep updating my rulebook.
Woah! What's up with the views on this one! Anyway - good video as always, man! Working my way through the backlog here.
I know! Must of just been that the title was in someway "clicky"? haha. Appreciate you getting through the backlog! Any thoughts or comments keep them coming
There's a reason games that HAD multiple different mechanics for different purposes evolved into games with a single mechanic. I personally think having multiple mechanics is literally just overcomplicating for the sake of overcomplicating, at this point.
I agree, and disagree. I think that 5 mechanics are probably too many, but there are some games lately coming out that use 2 or more mechanics and it adds to the flavor. EZD6 technically has a different way to solve magic vs combat, Viking Death Squad does combat vs skill checks different, Forged in the Dark has “combat” vs “campaign/downtime” mode different. I am really digging these games that have at least 2 different ways of doing stuff.
So the trick is to just make none of the mechanics “too complex” but having them intuitively feel like the RP/situation you are going for
Not in my opinion, and you could argue that D&D and pf both have different subsystems over how combat works. Escalating DC every level is broken. I played palladium and it was funtionally fine. Skills and attack rolls use different mechanics. Also for better randomness roll low saves meant a 1 wasn't always bad.
Plus modern game design has tons of meta currency which itself goes against the single system of modern gaming they proclaim. Personally I prefer a few subsystems over gamey meta currencies that break my emersion far more
Lots of games use these, normally osr or indy. It's sad that they dont have a larger spotlight
I agree that some of the Indy games are doing much more interesting ideas than the big players. That is probably why I settled on this concept. See it done better in the Indy seen, but usually each game focuses on just one. I’d like to make each relevant, or make it so you can spot like any of the ones you want to focus on in your own game
What program are you using to write?
That’s Notion. One of the best free applications that is no-code ever. I recommend for everyone
I use obsidian more now, but Notion is lower bar of entry
@@jfacegames7354 Thank you :)