Posts made by Ganymede

@tat said in Mass Effect MU*?:

Yes, specific skills like 'carnage' and 'marksman', but also like 'overload' and 'nova' and 'throw' and 'cryo blast'. For me, these sorts of wildly fun combat things are a big part of what gets me into ME - and it's some of the most fun I've had playing it. It is a game that allows for so many players to be so snowflakey badass in so many unique ways that really makes storytelling fun (in my opinion).

I get that. The homebrew system I made allowed you to do some fun ability-combos, like shifting where others acted in initiative, and so on. It was built from a combination of Blood Bowl, WH40K, and Pokémon. Don't ask me how I came up with that combo.

But FS3's combat engine seems to be a simultaneous-action-resolver, right? It doesn't lend to sequential events well.

That said, I mean, there's time. And planning. A sit-down and chat regarding what can be changed in the combat system would probably go a long way. It's probably of no surprise that I always pick a Soldier concept, and generally can't be bothered to play with Tech or Biotic characters.

@sunny said in Mass Effect MU*?:

I'll come ST for you once you get to that point iffen you'd like. I won't really be down for administration or whatnot, but I'll run scenes and plots and combats and things. I've got itches to run some spacey sciencey stuff.

All the STing! But if you want sci-fi, try BSG:U? It's sci-fi-y.

@roz said in Mass Effect MU*?:

I will say that this thread got a bunch of old A&O players reminiscing, and one of the common threads was how badass people got to feel on that game. So I wouldn't actually discount the idea that exploring creative combat in an exciting way is something to drop by the wayside too quickly.

I don't mean to. Frankly, I like the FS3 combat engine. A lot. It's pretty badass. But until I crack it open and figure out what it all means, I don't think I can promise everything. For all I know, I could end up being a wiz at it, and devil-hack a bunch of special abilities.

I'm going to glaze over a lot of the engine-specific ideas, because @faraday's got it covered and I wouldn't know what I could add to the conversation except --

-- yeah, damn right! Uh -- yeah.

@tat said in Mass Effect MU*?:

Are you envisioning 'biotic' as the skill and specific attacks/abilities as weapons?

Two questions here. I see "Biotic" as an Action Skill, just like Melee and Firearms. When you talk of specific attacks/abilities, I presume you mean things like "Carnage" and "Marksman." Unfortunately, I don't see a place for those specific powers on the game, but FS3's combat has things like "aim" and taking aggressive combat stances that serve as a substitute. With my custom system, I had those abilities in there, but I'm willing to sacrifice it for the wondrous combat engine.

That said, if there were a way to code it easily? I'm all for it.

I think there's a thin line between simplifying the gameplay and losing a lot of the flavor of what makes ME fun for a lot of people.

I'd like to think that what makes ME fun is one of two things: (1) the fast, FPS action; and (2) the interesting setting. I don't think a MUSH is going to be able to compete with the real game for (1), but it can get a bit deeper for (2) due to its nature.

If I weren't on board building a different game, I'd be all over it. I'm pretty sure people will hit me over the head if I take on two, though.

Depending on the timeline, maybe you could come on board when it's all done. There's a lot to be said about planning, and I'm a planner.

@godot said in Mass Effect MU*?:

Particularly interested in the kind of incentive @Ganymede 's planned resource system would give players.

So, I think @Sparks had this concept, but I was working on something similar and I don't mind stealing good ideas (as long as credit is given).

For the games I've enjoyed, one of the things staff did with code, participation, or stories is get you, the player, to feel like you're affecting the environment. As a casual gamer, it can be difficult sometimes to find 2 hours to play through a good scene or get involved in a PRP. It's a sucky feeling being on an awesome game, but never being able to really sink into it because you don't have the time, or the popular times for the playerbase are outside of your available times.

But there are games out there where, if you even have 20 minutes on a day, you can have some involvement. On Arx, you can learn secrets and pass them on for a price. On Requiem for Kingsmouth, you could assist territory-holders in defending their borders or taking over other territories. You just needed to be present for a roll, or to plug in a command. And that's it: you've made a meaningful contribution without having to spend hours on end.

A group resource management engine can do this. It manages not only commodities and currency, but also time.

In the case of this game, the Company (I'm going to capitalize it because it's special) is the focus. PCs go on missions (PRPs) for resources or credits. PCs can individually devote time (as the only renewable resource in the system) to obtain resources and credits. Resources and credits are used to fund projects, to which PCs can devote time to accomplish, or to purchase other resources and necessities. Or to craft them. Finishing assignments from NPC Company Heads may increase a PC's status. Or time can be used to train and gain XP.

It's really just a commodity tracking system. I'm not sure where to begin to code it, but I don't think it would be as complicated as a combat system.

Why is this important? Well, suppose you played a doctor for the company. You'd probably be sucky at combat, and only brought along to do some occasional healing. But that doctor could also use her time to research, develop, or improve the company's medi-gel efficiency, which might increase how much a medic-type can heal with the 'combat/treat' command in the combat engine (it would require staff to tweak the command a bit, but so be it). All of a sudden, your doctor concept becomes very important to the team because you're the one keeping them in the fight. Or maybe your technician innovates and improves a weapon.

And so on, and so on.

@shelbeast said in Mass Effect MU*?:

So, i've never seen/played with FS3. I hear about it a lot. It seems like it's really ONLY good for firearm combat. I've heard that it doesn't do melee well. It doesn't do magic. It doesn't do this or that.

That's what Faraday says. She built it for standard pew-pew games. But it still has armor and melee weapons, as well as firearms and grenades. A number of us disagree with Faraday's assessment as to her combat engine, but I'd be the first person to say that her engine would need tweaking to handle non-modern combat simulation.

Still, even were I to magically get mad code skills, I'd still call the system "FS3" in honor of its creator.

@tat said in Mass Effect MU*?:

But then you get into the idea of shields and barriers, and the fact that some characters and skills are largely built around dealing with these. FS3 has no way to deal with shields and barriers, and you'd probably have to cut those abilities from your canon if you want to use it.

I thought about this, but I think you could modify the existing code for combat. For example, combat/treat is used to heal injuries in combat and revive people for a period of time. That command could be cloned and slightly altered to augment a PC's armor. I don't know if it can be done, but if Faraday's code is easy to modify -- I have no reason to believe it can't be -- I don't see why it isn't possible. Maybe not now, but maybe a bit later.

I don't think combos are going to work, or would be too complex to make the time investment worthwhile.

On A&O, we used the ME3 multiplayer skill list because it was varied, but also small enough to wrap our head around, and we didn't have a combat system so it didn't matter whether things worked there or not. We saw a really varied display of types of players. Everyone got three powers, like in MP, and no two characters were the same. It was actually super interesting watching people play with their strengths and learn how to build via teamwork.

It's going to work a bit different on this game.

The centerpiece is going to be the company's resource management engine, something that keeps track of the PCs' contribution to the team. It will be the driving factor that motivates players to put their PCs into combat and take risks. At least, that will be the goal.

As far as skills go, I envision Action Skills being similar to BSG:U, with a few things swapped in and out. There'd probably be a "Biotic" skill, along with a few "harvesting" and "crafting" skills relevant to the resource management system. But it won't have the "special skills" that you see in ME games.

I mean, this is going to require some work, yes. But Faraday's supportive of efforts to use her new system, and I'm hoping we can build on that. If you and @Three-Eyed-Crow, and anyone else, are on board to help out, then I think we can start considering a schedule.

@derp said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

Yeah, but in Indiana it can qualify you for sudden heat, so voluntary manslaughter is possible.

Still not self-defense, even given the unbelievably broad scope we gave to self defense doctrine.

Over where I'm at, felony murder disqualifies you from a voluntary manslaughter charge unless the prosecutor is unable to get you for the felony during which you are accused of killing another. The reason for this rule is that it eliminates the "impassioned killing" argument, which undercuts the purpose of felony murder's harsh consequences.

@alzie said in Alternative Formats to MU:

TLDR (For the rest of you): Ya'll need to embrace chrons/events/timers.

If I didn't sometimes get what I do not ask for, I'd probably not be happily with my partner, with children.

There's a lot that can and should be automated, but there are some things that don't. For me, creating a World of Darkness PC is something that doesn't need to be automated, and I personally think should be done with active staff cooperation. I'm in the minority, I'm sure.

RfK placed a lot of optional work on players, like filling out those background worksheets and whatnot. That was fun and enjoyable because it was optional. I also really liked the Beat Sheet weekly XP system, which I thought was exactly fitting for the setting and game.

Those things get tossed when it comes to BSG:U, and I couldn't be happier.

@sunny said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

I am not sure why it makes me so happy to see lawyers talking lawyer things and helping each other like this, but it does. Warm fuzzies and everything.

Hell, I'll help opposing counsel when it comes to figuring out how to get around procedural problems that affect us both.

One thing you learn in the law fast, if you're good at it: you can't know everything. Be humble, be nice, play well with others, and you'll get a good, steady reputation as being trustworthy and dependable. That will take you much farther than being a dickbag.

@three-eyed-crow said in Mass Effect MU*?:

It would work for some things without much tweaking. On X-Factor, I played a pyrotechnic whose fire powers were approximated with a custom weapon @tat made up for me in about 20 minutes after chargen. That's directly comparable to a tech power like incinerate, and I think you could manage an OK approximation of the effects of damage-causing powers like Warp and Slam.

I think that biotic powers would work like one-shot weapons, with a "reload" as a resting time. I envision two types of attacks: an area attack, which does decent damage to multiple targets; and a single-target attack, which has high penetration and damage.

Not sure what I'd do about tech powers, which always seem to be the red-headed step-children in ME. In my custom system, I boiled those powers down to hacking abilities via an Omni-tool; Incinerate became Overheat, for example. So, I can also see a sort of "hacking" attack that could shock/damage a target or cause them to lose a turn (from getting stunned or fried from an electric jolt through their shielding system).

Anyhow, my real sticking point is the resource management engine.

I'll spend some time tonight thinking of a reasonable time-table.

@rook said in Alternative Formats to MU:

But, aren't WoD games basically just a bunch of Spheres cobbled into a single setting, several separate groups of characters who generally avoid each other for everything but TS, all playing in their own hidden sanctuary locations?

Not the really good ones, no.

@saosmash said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

It's a little hazier when we're in dependency law. It's a civil case that they are appointed counsel to protect their constitutional rights to parent. I think TECHNICALLY I can override him re telephonic testimony but it's a little hard to manage a case for a client who won't stop screaming about his confrontation rights and how everything is illegal and unjustified literally every time you call him.

Peeve: People who think the Confrontation Clause applies to non-criminal adjudications.

Bless you for handling this shit, though. I'd be bad at it.

@glitch said in Mass Effect MU*?:

Biotics is pretty much just magic with a sci-fi flare, which we've done some work on. We're on hold for code changes while seeing how the big updates @faraday is in the midsts of pans out. I like where she's heading on all of it, but it does put things in a rather large state of flux.

I think @Seraphim73 or @Three-Eyed-Crow bandied about treating Biotics like weapons. Clumsy, yes, but sensible in the FS3 combat engine. Is that what you've developed?

@roz said in Mass Effect MU*?:

I do think that you're starting off right by limiting your setting and faction. For A&O, we were on Omega (which is a GREAT setting for a MU, perfect size) and all our PCs were in one merc company. So similar type of deal in terms of focusing.

Not going to lie, that idea was sort of lifted when I was thinking about what would work for a setting. I just decided not to set it on Omega, which is ground-based, because I saw how fun it is on BSG:U to go from planet to planet.

@roz said in Mass Effect MU*?:

Our playerbase on Alpha & Omega was very much not nWoD players, but WORA sneered at us because we were running a limited consent game on MOO without sheets or statted combat.

Right, but folks that like limited consent and non-statted actions would probably feel comfortable with FS3. It's a pretty simple system that doesn't require giant tomes to achieve awesomeness.

@roz said in Mass Effect MU*?:

I'm not VOLUNTEERING them, but @Tat and @Glitch might also be able to talk a bit about some of the custom stuff they've been doing for Ares. (Also Tat and I and others staffed on a Mass Effect game for a couple years!)

I'm reading that you're not volunteering them, but I'm understanding that you're TOTALLY VOLUNTEERING THEM THANK YOU!!!!!

Your experiences are greatly appreciated. I don't know what the playerbase for Mass Effect might be like. I can generally predict nWoD players, but I'm not familiar with that part of the MUSHverse. So, I may need your help. A lot.

Also, the lessons you've learned regarding such players and what they want to see.

The tipping point for me is FS3's combat engine. It is damn-near-perfect for a Mass Effect game: it can handle multiple enemies and PCs and grind out a 20-round combat in a couple of hours (if people are posing quickly and paying attention). I think that, with some tweaks, aspects like treating wounds, healing, penetration values, and so on can be modified to represent the ME world's tech-set.

At least, that's my hope.

Arise, chicken.

I've run my homebrew system backwards and forwards, and there's nothing to it that can't be done more efficiently with FS3.

So, I'm scrapping the homebrew and proposing a Mass Effect game using FS3.

I'll probably talk with Kraken @ The 8th Sea and the legendary Faraday to see if I can look and decipher the coding, in anticipation of doing some tweaks to the FS3 combat engine. But the one thing I will probably have to have coded from scratch is an engine/code-set that will help me track the IC population's assets and resources.

Let me explain.

The story begins on a planet in the Terminus System, where all of the PCs belong to a small shipping company. Times are lean, so the company occasionally takes black missions to help mercenary groups, the Alliance, or whoever will pay them to move stuff. But then, things go to shit when the Reapers start appearing. And within a few cycles, chaos reigns. What will the company do?

Plots will center around survival and exploitation in the far reaches of civilized space while the home worlds are in shambles. Sink or swim, the company has to fend against other companies and pirates, while taking advantage of opportunities that arise. Completing plots will result in obtaining resources and credits that can be crafted or traded into assets.

Players individually can contribute to the success of the company outside of plots. Every cycle brings delivers Action Points that can be spent to do things that benefit the company. Those Action Points can also be used to gain XP to improve your PC, although it still takes considerable time to do so (under FS3's system). The Action Points system is intended to be a mini-game that ties into the success of the company, and thus the PC-base.

The key is resource management for the company. That's what I need to have coded, and I don't know how well it would work. This is a bit of an experiment as well because, if successful, I can see how the "community" engine/code-bit could be used for other games.

Any volunteers? Thenomain, I'm looking at you.

@thenomain said in Alternative Formats to MU:

I know more than a few games who have at most 3 people on staff. I don't think this is something that WoD games can do anymore.

Legacies had, basically, that many active staffers at any time. Eternal Night, known for its crazy-shit staff, basically had me filling in every sheet.

The more spheres you have, the more people you'll have applying -- I know this, I get it.

There's also other options, as I mentioned, though, like using published templates and adding points to them here and there.

But nWoD is its own beast, and, frankly, I just --

Look, just tell me when you're ready to work with Ares. I have a concept that's leaking out of my head, and I want to crow about it, but I can't because I don't want to bug poor Faraday with my wacky ideas, and you're an obvious target for my insanity, Buckeye-boy.

@arkandel said in Alternative Formats to MU:

Easier for whom? It depends on your goals. If you are aiming to reduce work for staff then it wouldn't be, for example.

This presumes that your CGen is straight-forward.

I've noticed in the nWoD world that CGen still requires significant staff assistance in the setting of bits and pieces. It's not much, sure, but there's still some time investment there. And then, there's answering those 'how do I set this in CGen?' questions you have to field. And then, there's the 'can I have this?' questions.

I remember, long ago, that I set people by hand. I could set up a sheet in about 10 minutes with the commands on Legacies and Eternal Night, for example. All someone had to do was tell me what they wanted. Seeing what someone wanted meant I could talk to them about their concept and what skills and attributes they wanted, and more, often than not, I could catch problems with point distribution, especially with new players.

I can understand the desire to be hands-off. I love automation for XP spends, for example. But I think we need to consider the relationship players have with staff, and part of that is communication and conversation. When I hand-set stats, I always felt that I had a relationship with the player. And I think that's what helped me cultivate good relationships with my players.

I miss that.

So, call me an old fuddy-duddy, but I like hand-setting stats, and I like helping people set up their PCs to make them fit within the system and do what they want them to do.

@alzie said in Alternative Formats to MU:

The problem there would be having a CG template that could understand advanced command definitions and that's a different sort of problem. Maybe have it read columns from the table?

Wouldn't it be easier to have a CG template that creates a message sent to staff, who can then construct the sheet for the applicant?

@saosmash said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

That's a really helpful idea I had not even thought of. Thanks!!

You're welcome. ^.^