@ThatGuyThere said in Interest/Volunteer Check: Major Multisphere Chronicles of Darkness:
I do like the ideas TJ outlines above if only I could stomach the system I would check it out.
I know I will regret asking, but what's wrong with GMC/CoD/2E nWoD's system?
@Seamus said in RL Anger:
Sure. Then he gets to be secure in the knowledge he can do whatever he wants with little to no consequence. He didn't lose the vast majority of his power, he just got a little * by his name.
You can prosecute a former President.
And he won't be able to pardon anyone.
I hope you see where I'm going with this.
@ThatGuyThere said in Interest/Volunteer Check: Major Multisphere Chronicles of Darkness:
My issue with condition is that lets say I am in a scene. My PC gets intimidated,
Old way: I modify actions and ST imposes mechanical sanction if necessary and scene rolls on.
New Way: I get told I have Intimidated or Shaken or whatever they call the condition. I then have to dig out the book either physical copy or digital one look up the effect of that condition, then make a note of said condition, put in the req for the beat for receiving a condition then get back to the scene.
I have been playing 2E for a long time, and I have never, ever, ever had to hold up a scene to make note of any condition. And I've been the subject of many conditions. There's no reason you can't do all of that administrative work after the scene is over, yeah?
And there's nothing saying I can't just go with the old way if I get intimidated.
Maybe your experiences are simply different than mine, in which case you have my sympathy.
FUCK YOU, SHORESY.
"Fuck you both. Your lives are so fucking pathetic, I ran a charity 15K to raise awareness for it, you fucking losers."
@Arkandel said in The Descent MUX:
... you are right, but you are applying a very specific use case then claim there is no overall imbalance. I don't mean that you are comparing apples to oranges (although in a sense you are) but let me offer an example.
My example is meant to reinforce my point ... which is that Mages are squishy. Very squishy. This is a glaring weakness in Mages, as it has been ever since D&D arbitrarily decided to give them d4 hit dice.
I didn't talk about losing to equal-powered combat-oriented opponents. At all. I said that Mages were squishy, and this is a serious consideration when you're playing any RPG. You can overcome it with careful preparation and strategy, but you are clearly compensating for that weakness. And that's a weakness that, in my opinion, balances the games out.
You could make a damn-fine Werewolf with a huge skill-set, and make a Vampire that can survive well in all situations. I'm not so sure I could do the same with a Mage, but you can make a Mage that is really good at one or two things.
They still remain squishy, and this is a huge issue when you have to contend with Seers and mortal institutions that could make your existence very difficult.
That movie was the beginning of a glorious era of self-aware action comedies starring Dwayne Johnson and we should all be profusely thankful.
I concur.
@surreality said in Mostly Mage, Partially Descent Mux:
Also disagree re: "kill the witnesses" being the perfect answer, because what a lovely followup to having already driven those players out of the scene.
I'm not really suggesting this is a good idea for a MU*, but it is a perfectly acceptable strategy for a pack of werewolves to avoid witnesses blabbing.
As with most things, I didn’t find preparation particularly difficult. Stressful, sure; difficult, no. Mind, I was pretty privileged having a quiet place of my own and the ability to buy old exams.
I advise 3Ls to get as many exams as possible, and undergo daily drills. Hammer out 100 questions a day at least. Do it and you can find the patterns in how the questions are asked.
Key in the answers based on your outlines. And so on.
Also, be advised that I have a reputation as being a robot for a reason, and not just because of my diesel physique.
@Arkandel said in Mostly Mage, Partially Descent Mux:
Yes, if your system is caked into the overall game so that people are enticed to use all of its aspects then they will.
It would be more apt to say that the game forced you to use all its aspects.
@Lotherio said in Good Political Game Design:
TL;DR: Any actual intent of a PvP political game will end with OOC Drama and butt hurtedness. The remaining 'players' of high level don't care who is leaving if they are winning. Just is what it is. This is the main reason my preference is PvE these days. If someone is playing to win, they will play to win, even on an OOC level, despite what anyone thinks.
Simply, not true. Not at all.
What's been said before: politics is, at its hard, based on resources -- necessary, essential resources. Food; water; shelter. These are important things, and while I don't suggest that a MU* gets into such minutiae, it forms an important basis to design your own system.
What will be essential? What is the goal? How do you curb unlimited growth? Etc.
There are many systems. I think Sparks' DICE system has a good beginning for the political game, limiting everything by time. Building takes time; reaping takes time; questing takes time; maintaining things takes time.
@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.
Mine is a very basic system reminiscent of Blood Bowl and FFG's system for Star Wars. Please forgive some of the formatting issues; I composed everything with tables in Word, so some of it might get garbled here. ( @Thenomain, I've been meaning to get this version out to you, but have failed; sorry.)
2.0 Skills
Skills are used to determine whether a character successfully performs an action, especially outside of an Encounter. Determining success requires a Skill check, which uses a pool of eight-sided dice determined by an appropriate baseline.
2.1 Skill Dice
The value of each Skill die, once rolled, provides a different outcome, as below:
Roll Result
1 Failure.
2 Failure, BUT the aggressor gains a Drama Point.
3 Failure, BUT the aggressor gains an Insight.
4 Failure, UNLESS the aggressor is proficient.
5 Success, UNLESS the defender is proficient, if contested.
6 Success, BUT there’s a Complication.
7 Success, BUT the defender gains a Drama Point.
8 Success.
2.2 Skill Checks
There are two types of Skill checks: simple and contested. Simple checks occur where a character is attempting a task that is unopposed; contested checks occur where a character is opposed by another character, actively or passively.
Step 1: Determine Difficulty and Baselines
For a simple check, the GM determines the applicable Skill, baseline for the aggressor (the rolling party), and the difficulty of the check. In doing so, the GM should consult the following chart:
Difficulty / Description
2 Simple
3 Professional
4 Difficult
5 Extremely Difficulty
6 “Impossible”
For a complex check, the GM determines the applicable Skill and baseline for the aggressor and the defender (the non-rolling party). For the purposes of determining proficiency, the GM may determine that the applicable Skill is different for each party.
Step 2: Determine Dice Pool
The GM then determines how many Skill dice shall be rolled by the aggressor’s player. To do so, the GM determines the aggressor’s score from his baseline and applicable modifiers; then, the GM determines the difficulty or defender’s score – from her baseline and applicable modifiers. Next, the GM consults the following chart to determine the Skill die pool and which party gets to select the result.
Step / Scores / Pool
-3 to -5 / Only through modifiers. / Roll four to six Skill dice; D or GM chooses.
-2 / D’s Score or Diff. > (A’s Score)*2 / Roll three Skill dice; D or GM chooses.
-1 / D’s Score or Diff. > A’s Score / Roll two Skill dice; D or GM chooses.
0 / A’s Score = D’s Score or Diff. / Roll one Skill die.
1 / A’s Score > D’s Score or Diff. / Roll two Skill dice; A chooses.
2 / A’s Score > (D’s Score or Diff.)*2 / Roll three Skill dice; A chooses.
3 to 5 / Only through modifiers. / Roll four to six Skill dice; A chooses.
Step 3: Shifting the Odds
Some Talents allow you to adjust a Skill check by raising or lowering its Step. This means that, rather than using the pool indicated by the scores, you use a better or worse pool, depending on whether the scenario is raised or lowered. For example, a Talent that raises a Step may turn an even-scored scenario, where only one Skill die is rolled (Step 0), to the greater-than scenario, where two Skill dice are rolled, and the best outcome chosen by the aggressor (Step 1).
Alternately, a player may spend a Drama Point (DP) to raise a pool by one step per point. Only the aggressor may spend DP this way, and he can spend as many DP as desired.
Step 4: Determine Outcome
Now that the aggressor knows how many dice to roll, he does so. Once the outcome is determined, the parties involved should role-play the results, with the GM moderating.
Example: Mordin is attempting to hack into a console. The GM decides that this will require a simple Hacking check at difficulty 3, using Mordin’s Mind Baseline Score (MND). Mordin has a MND of 5, so his player rolls 2 dice, which have the following outcomes: failure; and success. Mordin’s player chooses “success.”
Example: Mordin is at the top of the Shroud Tower, which is coming down around him. He’s injured, and the task of recalibrating the system to accept the genophage cure is exceedingly difficult. The GM decides that this will require a Code check at difficulty 5, using Mordin’s MND. Mordin’s injuries, though, shifts the Step of his roll down to -1. Mordin’s player decides that Mordin will burn all remaining Drama Points – 3 – to boost the Step to 2 for this very-critical roll. He rolls 3 dice, one of which is a “success.”
Example: Something Wrex said ticked Tali off, so she takes a swing at him. Tali’s Fitness Baseline Score (FIT) is low (2) and Wrex’s is much higher (5). On a contested Melee check using FIT, Tali would be at Step -2; however, her player decides that she really wants to show her stuff – and burns 4 Drama Points to bump her roll to Step 2. Tali’s player rolls 3 dice, and gets a 1, 5, and 6. She chooses 6 – Success, but there’s a Complication. Tali therefore manages to hit Wrex right in the face … which causes a bone in her hand to break, the GM decides.
Use and abuse what you want. Comments are welcome, here or by PM. There's more to it than this, but this is the bare bones around which the rest of the system is created.
Katy is a fucking badass.
I find her to be just the worst actress, but whatevs. It's like they were looking for a female character to play the foil of Wayne and found the hottest most unfunny person ever.
Whatevs. She's a sniper.
@Tempest said in Game Stagnancy and Activity:
Who is going to be taking the time out to do this? You're lucky if a game has 1 or 2 people willing to run stuff regularly. Nevermind handle all this stuff after running those scenes.
@DownWithOPP runs stuff. I think someone else does. @faraday does. So, that covers "people willing to run stuff regularly." Regarding the Scuttlebutt @DownWithOPP mentioned: whoever ran the scene writes something quick up. Logs are almost always posted; someone in the group is logging at all times, which is not a novel or difficult thing to do.
If you have 10 players, you can probably manage it. 20, 30, 40? You're not going to (reliably) have the time for the jobs and the writing, and you're going to get tired of doing it even if you do.
I think BSG:U has 20-25 active players. If people get tired, they get tired. @faraday hasn't gotten tired yet, and she's the only staff on the game.
I fully believe some of you could do it for a couple months, sure. Then you'd shut your game down or turn it over to other people to staff.
That's not going to happen on BSG:U, given that it's @faraday's baby and testing ground. Maybe she shouldn't be testing things on her baby, but I ain't one to judge.
I mean if we're talking dreamland fantasies, I'm sure a MU with STs who'd run daily adventures for random individual/small group players they don't know would be super succesful and popular.
Sure. And BSG:U seems to be doing just fine, activity-wise. In the battleground of ideas, there's always room for optimism and pessimism, just as there's room for facts. You can probably come up with a million reasons to not do something, but it's the one reason that makes you act that means the most.
@silverfox said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
"Well what are you doing for yourself? How are you managing your stress? What else can you be doing for "self care?" Because it's a bullshit question.
It's your peeve. I concur with you on all of your points as it relates to work. That said, "self-care" is an issue for professionals because some, if not most, are notoriously bad at it.
Like my partner, for example. She's a physician's assistant. She's a former lawyer. She's a SCL graduate from one of the best schools in Ohio. But for all of those brains, she also neglects to set appointments to check her electrolyte levels periodically, and that neglect has put her into the hospital at least twice in the past two years. It is a point of constant frustration for me because bitch you a medical professional and don't check yo own damn levels, but lecture people on how they need to take better care of themselves?
I mean, ahem, physician heal thyself or some other pusillanimous shit.
Purportedly us lawyers suffer from heavy compassion fatigue. We have a high suicide rate and rate of substance abuse and/or compulsive behavior. My self-care for stress may be more damaging than the stress itself.
But, you're right. Self-care isn't always the solution, unless self-care includes firebombing government agencies, politicians, and other folks that seem bent on fucking the education system as hard as possible.
@ZombieGenesis said in Poll: Changing Breeds Game System:
I personally like oWoD but nWoD is very close. I felt the W20 changing breeds were rushed and kind of bland.
How are W20 Fera different than the oWoD Fera? They seem awfully similar to me.
@Auspice said in Separating Art From Artist:
I know Mark Hamill tweeted something in support of Forester also before he got more details and apologized for his actions.
I can understand that because Hamill is an American actor, rather than a British author. But, also, Hamill is human, but a capable one because he can apologize and lampoon Trump as no other can.
