It has been indeed a while. Great to see you again! That newer new system sounds very gamey, especially the health management you mention. My concern would be i that creates a ludo-narrative dissonance, in which players start to play the mechanisms and lose touch to the narrative. That stuff about motivation and flaws is interesting, that is what I am also thinking about. But not just as positive change arc, in which the characters learn to overcome their flaws, but also as tragic arcs in which they cannot. Regarding Sanderson and Harmon, both are not necessarily bad, but personally I eel like both create rather superficial narratives with their approaches. Wish probably might be more then enough for most games, but you know me, I needed something more intricate than that. But your background madlib sounds interesting, that is something I have not, not sure if that could even work in my system, but I will think about that. I am glad that you still work on your system!
@jfacegames7354
6 ай бұрын
So good to hear from you Dru! Yep, I’m still at it. Had some small breaks, but mostly just been writing. I totally agree that some of it might feel gamey, but I just want to know if it gets the emotions I want from the players. We’ll see in playtests. As far as the Sanderson/Harmon stuff…I’m totally cool with Players feeling like they are creating tropes for stories. I have enough players who create “no” stories at this point that it’ll be a step up, hahaha
@jfacegames7354
6 ай бұрын
Can’t wait to talk more about your system!!
@LeFlamel
4 ай бұрын
Stopped seeing your substack articles in my inbox, will catch up.
@M31415
6 ай бұрын
I think you’re going to end up having trouble with those modules. Especially ones like risk and resource management. Those are types of gameplay that will affect design decisions down to the core of the game. You may find a way, but making fundamental changes like that through modules is not going to be easy
@jfacegames7354
6 ай бұрын
That is totally fair! I’ll document the failures along the way 🤪
@kevoreilly6557
5 ай бұрын
5e was never really modular - at least through the play test So try and do modules - focus on core game design (ie the design space you want to be in)
@eoris12
2 ай бұрын
Hi, jface. It seems interesting, but, isn't it the focus to tell a story? Seems like you're playing games within games, depriving from the focus.
@jfacegames7354
2 ай бұрын
Love this comment! Haha, you are very correct in that the goal should be to tell a good story. I think I like Brennan Lee Mulligans answer to why he likes D&D as his system of choice. It’s a game with so many rules for combat, but he says something to the effect of “I know how to create social drama and story tell. I don’t know how to create a fight scene” l. He’s an improv actor, so he doesn’t need a game that is heavy rules for social drama. Now, does that answer you question. No. To be honest these rules I had in this video were WAY too much. It’s adapted a lot. But I agree with Brennan in that I lean into combat rules often because that’s the part that is a bit foreign to me. I also try to add in a lot of background/character guidance because I usually play at tables where the players aren’t that solid at developing the identities of their characters. My eventual goal would be to create a very modular game if I could. Similar to Cortex Prime. But that’s project 2 most likely! Thanks for the comment. Not sure if I danced around it a ton, haha
@neillio
6 ай бұрын
I agree about HP. They don't feel organic and they tend to scale up way too fast
@jfacegames7354
6 ай бұрын
Neill! Good to hear from you, buddy!
@jfacegames7354
6 ай бұрын
Granted…my current solution is very “mini-game” in nature, and doesnt feel “natural”. BUT, I like the concept of those circles getting more and more filled and you feeling potential tension. Also, when a monster hits you for like 15 and you have to potentially fill in 7 small bubbles….it’ll feel crazy
@neillio
6 ай бұрын
@@jfacegames7354 It sounds like a fun way to get the players invested in it. I'm working on a WWII setting right now and im focusing more on having a set amount of "dodges" or other hit negations so it's more about how many hits you avoid than the hits you take. Successful hits will have a follow up "severity" roll which can always be potentially lethal (trying to keep that WWII intensity)
@jfacegames7354
6 ай бұрын
@neillio is it a detailed Dodge mechanic? Or a simple roll under style skill check? Is it like Dragonbane where you take your whole action to dodge, and so it becomes an initiative order/team tactics game? Or is the Dodge like a Reaction action like 5E?
@neillio
6 ай бұрын
@@jfacegames7354 more like a "dodge count" based on speed and armor. Attacks are a skill check on a d100. There are many circumstantial modifiers but generally it's pretty easy to shoot someone who isn't taking cover. Characters can ignore an amount of "hits" equal to their dodge count. Once they are out, hits start dealing damage. Attacking players role a damage die and a modifying severity die. Role high on both and you'll kill just about anyone. Even a high level character built to take damage could take maybe two high roll hits before dying.
Пікірлер: 19