Posts made by Coin

@D-bone said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

@Ganymede said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

@D-bone said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

That doesn't make sense... there is nothing prohibiting a witcher from abandoning their calling and doing something else. Only in the north does this super anti-witcher thing happen. Even my cursory amount of knowledge and experience with the subject tell me this.

My cursory amount of knowledge and experience comes from The Witcher III: the Wild Hunt. I haven't read the novels all the way through, English or Polish versions. If witchers are praised or lauded beyond Temeria, so be it; my eyes are stuck on that setting and time, and in that setting and time I cannot recall any witchers in the story being particularly affluent.

Lambert's Quest in the Witcher 3- Super affluent Cat School Ex-witcher who you kill
Witcher 2- Geralt is a bodyguard for King Foltest
Witcher 3 ending spoilers Geralt Retires.

This argument though is pointless- Please kindly stop trying to shoehorn your wants and desires into a basic premise question.

No one is shoehorning anything. We're telling you what interests us and what we'd like to see, which you asked. You just don't like the answer, which is tough for you, especially since this isn't a thread just for your idea.

If you want a thread where people constructively tell you what they like or don't like or what interests them or doesn't about your specific game and where you can shut shit down, go make a specific thread for your idea, and I wish you the best of luck wrangling the MSB regulars.

In short, please stop trying to shoehorn in your question into our basic preferences for a game like the one you suggested.

@Ganymede said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

@Coin said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

It'd be easy to model Merit groups for each different type of Witcher ability. Or you could even gravitate towards using Werewolf Gifts as models for different types of Witcher powers.

With the dark fantasy game I was working on, I basically took The Hurt Locker and other Fighting Merits, and grouped into categories. Each House (in the game) had its own soldiers which had access to a handful of categories, but not all of them.

As for magic, there's Mage.

Although for magic I would make it more limited than actual mage. Probably something along the lines of not being able to do creative thaumaturgy (at least, not as easily as with Mage) and making everything a lot more Rote-focused.

@Ganymede said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

@D-bone said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

Again though, because of this how does one represent a witcher in game without it being totally unfair to Bob who apps a regular human soldier dude because he doesn't want to play a witcher? This is an insurmountable problem of player agency.

For all their power, witchers have no real influence. They have to peddle their services for money. They have to work for people like Djikstra or assist people like Crach, who are human. So, the fix is simple: make an entire section of the game inaccessible or stupid difficult for non-humans.

A political or economy system would do wonders.

Yeah, basically this.

@D-bone said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

Again though, because of this how does one represent a witcher in game without it being totally unfair to Bob who apps a regular human soldier dude because he doesn't want to play a witcher? This is an insurmountable problem of player agency.

A good quote: In a Star Wars game- everyone plays a jedi or no one is a jedi. Everyone plays a witcher or sorcererss or NO one plays a witcher or sorcereress

I don't actually see a problem here, unless you were planning on having a limited number of Witchers/Sorceresses, and everyone else is screwed. If anyone can play a Witcher/Sorceress, then it shouldn't be an issue. People who play normal people or soldiers or whatever are just people who prefer lower-tier characters, which is actually a thing.

@Ganymede said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

I'd use COD, and modify its Merits and Mage system tremendously in order to create Witcher and Sorceress templates.

Yup, this. It'd be easy to model Merit groups for each different type of Witcher ability. Or you could even gravitate towards using Werewolf Gifts as models for different types of Witcher powers.

@D-bone said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

Witcheresque styled game (without witchers, but definitely focused on the murderous shitsack world and monsters)

I would also be totally okay with it having actual witchers, especially if you could also play some of the more sentient supernaturals, too.

@golgoth said in Which canon property/setting would be good for a MU* ?:

@The-Sands The Strange and Numenera are pretty interesting. The Cypher system overall, I guess.

Another system I have been looking at is Degenesis. Not a whole lot has been put out since 2015, but what they do have is pretty nifty.

The Cypher System would be a great system to have fully coded stuff for (except Cyphers themselves, which are too varied). Unfortunately, the game would have to be extra clandestine, as the company is super strict about MUs using their rules.

@Misadventure said in Cinematic Unisystem - Dexterity Issue(?):

Additional maybe approach: Sort of in the vein of the one attack roll is then applied at -0, -2, -4 etc until it misses, just make a defense roll, and say it applies with penalties until it fails, then ask the person to use up another defense. You can also make feats/advantages/fighting styles/powers that reduce the penalties to multiples defenses (and multiple attacks, though I think multiple attacks should always be harder than a single one).

This isn't a bad idea, because the Unisystem uses Combat Scores. You would essentially be resetting your own Combat Score each round (while NPCs would have a consistently static one). You can also then use Drama Points for variations. Basically, you could have everyone roll twice for an Attack Score and a Defense Score and then just apply the modifiers as needed. It's not terribly exciting, but it would probably work great when it comes to keeping things moving.

@Rook said in Cinematic Unisystem - Dexterity Issue(?):

The problem with defense rolls taking up actions is that - what happens when you run out of actions and are attacked? Are you able to defend? Do you do so at a disadvantage?

I prefer to imagine a system where every attack is innately defended against automatically. Martial artists defend as part of the the normal flow of the round. Weapons have armor that innately defends. The mind innately resists effects against it. The brain is wired to dodge things, move out of the way, or just brace for impact.

I don't think defenses should take up action UNLESS you are DEDICATING your actions at the beginning of the rounds to defend yourself physically, therefore you get a bonus to your Armor/Dodge/Whatever because you're foregoing offensive attacks. You're waiting for it.

I agree, personally.

@HelloProject said in RL Anger:

I have no idea where else to put this.

LIFEHACK: Don't open the lid of a trashcan during a heatwave in your tiny room if you're 99% sure a mouse died in it.

Or maybe just immediately throw away bags you suspect contain corpses of dead rodents. Just saying.

@Rook said in Cinematic Unisystem - Dexterity Issue(?):

I like this idea and am going to steal it from @Coin without Coin knowing.

Which? I gave you two.

P.S. I know. I always know.

@Ganymede said in RL Anger:

@Catsmeow said in RL Anger:

So not to be all weird but I have a question. If you have restraining order against the police; who enforces it?

The courts.

I'm pretty sure @Catsmeow was referring to who physically enforces it. Because the Courts should have authority over the cops, but if it's the cops themselves you have a restraining order against, it's not really very reassuring to have the Courts say, 'yes, the police will leave you alone because if not they'll be reprimanded'. By whom? Who do you call to come defend you if cops are harrassing you?

Basically, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

One rule I like is based on the ticks system from Scion.

Basically, it determines Extra Actions based on your Initiative, not your Dexterity. Sure, Initiative is based partially on Dexterity, but it's a lot more fluctuating because it also involves a die roll.

Basically, you get 1 action every 5 points of Initiative, until you hit 0. Once everyone hits 0, you roll Initiative again (and since this is a system that uses Initiative every round, that should be fine).

So let's say everyone rolls for Initiative and X gets 17, Y gets 8, and Z gets 9.

X acts first, at 17. then she acts again, at 12 (because it's still higher than the next highest Init).

Then Z acts, at 9.

Then Y at 8.

Then X again at 7 (12 - 5).

Then Z at 4.

Then Y at 3.

Then X at 2.

At this point, if you subtract 5 from anyone, they hit 0 (or negative numbers) and can't act. X's last action was the last action of the round. Roll Initiative again.

Etc, etc.

I also typically allow people to defend reflexively, but if you want them to have to spend actions defending, just allow them to do it sacrificing their next one (if they have one).

Keep in mind all this still comes with the cumulative -2 penalty per action until the round refreshes.

Another good alternative rule is that you take a penalty equal to the amount of actions you take, which is fixed.

X wants to take 3 actions this turn. Her player states as much, and now every action is penalized by -3, including the first. Spreading thin affects everything you're doing--you need to keep a little in reserve at the beginning of your assault for the rest of the actions.

This makes it so that people who do less during a round are more effective, while people who try to do a lot might just get sucky results across the board.

This last one really necessitates reflexive defense.

I love talking about mechanics and shit so I'm gonna talk a little about a thing I am working on for this game. It's crunchy, and not everyone will like it, but tough titties.

One of the things I am working on for this game is the confluence of supernatural items (Fetishes, Tokens, Azothic Objects, the variety of Mage items, etc.), Familiars (or any sort of companion that characters can acquire which may use Ephemeral rules), as well as some other stuff.

At the moment, I'm putting a lot of effort into the supernatural items. One of my pet peeves is that supernatural items may be thematic when it comes to the gamelines they exist in, but when crossing over in play, they get wildly imbalanced. In particular, any of the Mage items are hilariously overpowered when compared to many Fetishes, and Azothic Objects are only ahead of the game when compared to the vampire's supernatural item, which is--oh right, they don't have one.

On the other hand, point-by-point creation of items (such as is found in first edition's Reliquary leads to so much min-maxing and abuse that it has seriously annoyed me and many others).

On the other other hand, @tragedyjones expressed concern because a unified system might remove the unique feel each item has regarding their gamelines.

I've been working on a solution that takes all this into account, more or less. The first point is addressed by creating a simple system of item creation that applies to everything. Each gameline (including Vampire) will have its own (single) Merit. (e.g. Imbued Items, Artifacts, and Enhanced Items for Mage will all be represented by just "Artifact"). Each type of item will have its own Merit, but they will all use the same system.

The second point will be handled by not making it a point-balance-cost system. You can't "stack drawbacks" to get more benefits or a lower coast. There are universal Drawbacks that apply to all items, and then each type of item has its own drawbacks. You also can't stack certain things beyond some very reasonable points. Also, any item that is a weapon costs an extra dot just because it's a weapon. Bonuses are also limited to "Equipment Bonuses", so you can't have an amulet that gives you +3 Weaponry. You can have a sword with a higher Damage or Initiative rating, but it's just that sword, not a universal bonus with any sword or any weapon. Some other limitations apply.

The last point is handled by making each type of item (so far we have Azothic Object, Artifact, Fetish, and Relic--this last for vampires) have certain effects that are exclusive to them (e.g. only Fetishes can house Numina/Influence, only Artifacts house Rotes, etc.). In addition to this, while all items have universal drawbacks, each type of item will also have specific drawbacks thematic to the game they are tied to (e.g. the destruction of a Fetish releases a pretty fucking pissed off spirit, either because it was trapped in there, or because the owner was irresponsible enough to allow the Fetish to be detroyed). Hopefully, these consequences will not just tie each item thematically to the gameline it belongs to, but also prove to be plot fodder should the item be lost or destroyed.

In addition to all this, we'll place a lot of importance on the history of the item, how it came to be, etc. We want each supernatural item to feel unique and be special to the character who owns it, and it'll be the first thing anyone wanting one will have to figure out.

I know a lot of people don't care so much about mechanics and would rather concentrate on fluff and setting and stuff, but this is one of the things I love to do with game design so I kind of gravitate towards it.

@Skew and I have been working on what the Mage Consilium and society will look like in Vegas and we've come up with something we think is pretty cool, so maybe we'll share that soon.

@mietze said in MSB MU*?:

Honestly, the people who shit talk others in mu*dom expecting it will never get back to them are idiots. Even if you shittalk only to someone you think doesn't even know who you're talking about or that other person, it always gets back.

Double idiocy if you share logs showing how "wrong" they are and end up showing your own ass instead. LOL.

Mushers are insatiable gossips and there's a very small degree of separation even between genres. How is it that people still don't know this?

That's why whenever I talk shit about someone it's always someone I don't mind talking shit about to their face. Like @Thenomain.

@Thenomain said in MSB MU*?:

@Coin said in MSB MU*?:

@Thenomain said in MSB MU*?:

@Coin said in MSB MU*?:

[cough]CoverExperienceCoverSheets[cough].

In the middle of working out how to unspend stats properly so that the convoluted experience gain system didn't get fubar'd was not the time for that. Jesus freakin' freak!

How about the other two dozen times I brought it up, including those six months prior to opening when I was like 'dude, Demon's going to need Cover XP, and also different sheets for different Covers...'?

I'm working on it!

Kay, well, when you're done let me know so I can--oh wait, game's closed.

[snickers]

@Thenomain said in MSB MU*?:

@Coin said in MSB MU*?:

[cough]CoverExperienceCoverSheets[cough].

In the middle of working out how to unspend stats properly so that the convoluted experience gain system didn't get fubar'd was not the time for that. Jesus freakin' freak!

How about the other two dozen times I brought it up, including those six months prior to opening when I was like 'dude, Demon's going to need Cover XP, and also different sheets for different Covers...'?

amg.

@Thenomain said in MSB MU*?:

@Coin said in MSB MU*?:

You've never told me to go fuck myself in voice chat, though I'm sure you've thought it.

I cannot in good conscience or even in bad conscience tell someone to fuck themselves on voice chat or in text except for in two conditions:

1. This person is not even trying
2. I'm so far gone in caring that I am on the verge of hurting myself or others

Maybe when I'm joking. (Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure I've told you that under this condition, but you've forgotten because it was camaraderie.)

Now for those in the studio audience, Coin and I have yelled at each other in voice chat, but one of those usual cases where each person thinks the other person isn't listening so things get louder. Or he was drunk. Or his mom. Always his mom.

I have definitely yelled at you drunk, but I've also yelled at you because you are fucking infuriating when you code with blinders on and refuse to acknowledge immediate needs over things that can be postponed.

[cough]CoverExperienceCoverSheets[cough].

@Thenomain said in MSB MU*?:

@Coin said in MSB MU*?:

@Faceless Some of the best conversations have come from us just talking smack about people without really meaning to. >.> I mean yeah, we're horrible people, but at least we have fun and don't take it further than that? XD XD XD

Like that time I said you could go fuck yourself?

Ahhhh, good times.

--

(I still feel kind of bad about that.)

No, because you did that on the MU, not in voice chat.

You've never told me to go fuck myself in voice chat, though I'm sure you've thought it.

@Faceless said in MSB MU*?:

@Coin those were good times. Though I didn't really do any planning. I was still learning Mage and the Silver Ladder at the time. My fondest memories were just listening to everyone talk mage shop and learning the system that way. I asked questions when necessary, but overall I just sat back and listened. After two or three months I had a firm grasp on the mechanics of Mage and was working up combined castings in a matter of minutes. It was fun, learning something new without a great deal of concerted effort.

Now, this sentimental stuff's out of the way. We going to fuck or what?

Snort.

I learned Mage that way, too. @Fortunae was crazy good at explaining it, if you gave him time. Man does like to talk.