Making my own TTRPG based on Hokuto no Ken

[citard]

I am writing a system based on Fist of the North Star. The reason I am doing this is because there are only a few systems that try to emulate the vibe, and all of them are storygamer BS that's not written as a system. I aim to write my system to be fully complete. I feel like RPGHQ people would like it. Right now, I have finished the Introduction chapter and the Rules section, including the rules for social interaction. I will post progress reports as time goes on.

[citard]

I didn't know whether to put it in the Foundry part of the forum or here. This seemed more appropriate. Assuming there are interested people, I will be posting about my progress.

[Element]

The actual system of the game is (for now) quite simple

I am a monumental ****** when it comes to probability in mathematics

Well, if it's simple you can outline the system here

[citard]

The actual system of the game is (for now) quite simple

I am a monumental ****** when it comes to probability in mathematics

Well, if it's simple you can outline the system here

Finally, I remembered the password to my account here. Basically, it works like your average d20 system except there's 5 stats: Strength, Speed, Style (used for martial arts), Sense (used for mental skills, as in "common sense") and Suave. There's also several values in the system that are calculated based off of the 5 stats.

Special moves work like this, you start with 3 ki and every round you recover 6. Using special moves spends your ki. You have to spend experience to learn moves.

[Element]

The actual system of the game is (for now) quite simple

I am a monumental ****** when it comes to probability in mathematics

Well, if it's simple you can outline the system here

Finally, I remembered the password to my account here. Basically, it works like your average d20 system except there's 5 stats: Strength, Speed, Style (used for martial arts), Sense (used for mental skills, as in "common sense") and Suave. There's also several values in the system that are calculated based off of the 5 stats.

Special moves work like this, you start with 3 ki and every round you recover 6. Using special moves spends your ki. You have to spend experience to learn moves.

What probabilities do you need, then? Give some examples and we'll calculate.

[citard]

What probabilities do you need, then? Give some examples and we'll calculate.

Three things.

• Damage numbers are tricky for techniques. Health is equal to 2x your Strength, and there's 3 tiers to Techniques: novice, master and ultimate.

• Damages for poisons. I have them separated by 5 tiers and the higher tiers should deal more damage. Each tier has 4 different poisons in them.

• Current way of rolling things is 1d20+Stat, and I'm thinking of reworking that because it might not be swingy enough.

Basically, I'm at this point in the development process where I'm very much stuck.

I should probably attach the current document, because otherwise it won't make much sense.

[Element]

What probabilities do you need, then? Give some examples and we'll calculate.

Three things.

• Damage numbers are tricky for techniques. Health is equal to 2x your Strength, and there's 3 tiers to Techniques: novice, master and ultimate.

• Damages for poisons. I have them separated by 5 tiers and the higher tiers should deal more damage. Each tier has 4 different poisons in them.

• Current way of rolling things is 1d20+Stat, and I'm thinking of reworking that because it might not be swingy enough.

Basically, I'm at this point in the development process where I'm very much stuck.

I should probably attach the current document, because otherwise it won't make much sense.

yeah, do

[citard]

What probabilities do you need, then? Give some examples and we'll calculate.

Three things.

• Damage numbers are tricky for techniques. Health is equal to 2x your Strength, and there's 3 tiers to Techniques: novice, master and ultimate.

• Damages for poisons. I have them separated by 5 tiers and the higher tiers should deal more damage. Each tier has 4 different poisons in them.

• Current way of rolling things is 1d20+Stat, and I'm thinking of reworking that because it might not be swingy enough.

Basically, I'm at this point in the development process where I'm very much stuck.

I should probably attach the current document, because otherwise it won't make much sense.

yeah, do

https://docs.google.com/document/d/12EJ ... sp=sharing

You should have commenter permissions

[WhiteShark]

Current way of rolling things is 1d20+Stat, and I'm thinking of reworking that because it might not be swingy enough.

Might not be swingy... enough? Unless the stat modifier is very small, that's about as swingy as you can get before using a d100.

[Element]

Seems that Str, Speed and Style would be very heavily favoured. Since the bonuses/penalties are just the underlying stat's deviation from 10, minmaxing can be pretty devastating.
In the example scenario you gave, you don't even need to roll for the hit, since the +7 from style is equal to the defence and you're rolling at least 1 on top of that. Then you get a 1d12 damage roll from style.

[citard]

Current way of rolling things is 1d20+Stat, and I'm thinking of reworking that because it might not be swingy enough.

Might not be swingy... enough? Unless the stat modifier is very small, that's about as swingy as you can get before using a d100.

I forgot, the stat modifier is the stat itself. Sorry!

[citard]

Seems that Str, Speed and Style would be very heavily favoured. Since the bonuses/penalties are just the underlying stat's deviation from 10, minmaxing can be pretty devastating.
In the example scenario you gave, you don't even need to roll for the hit, since the +7 from style is equal to the defence and you're rolling at least 1 on top of that. Then you get a 1d12 damage roll from style.

Correct. However, NPCs all either have 10 health and die in 1 hit or they're built like player characters. Everyone is OP.

[Element]

Even when built like the player character, I think the advantage to first move with such numbers is too significant. Ill have another look soon.

[citard]

I am going to have to rewrite the whole system from scratch, because I accidentally made Shadow of the Demon Lord but martial arts.

[Finarfin]

Less system related but for your artworks, you could use Adobe Firefly to fix certain small weirdnesses.

Wish I could help you with the system but I once tried to do a Dragon Age Origins tabletop (Yes, there is a official one but I heard it wasn't good)
Besides I need to work on my book series again or start from scratch rather.

[J-12]

Always warms my heart when someone remembers that golden classic of the genre, good luck with that.

[Finarfin]

THIS THREAD'S THEME:

[citard]

So, there was also another ttrpg called Lone Wolf Fists that does something similar to my system, but the author is a massive gigafaggot of a lolbert and banned me for a meme

[WhiteShark]

So, there was also another ttrpg called Lone Wolf Fists that does something similar to my system, but the author is a massive gigafaggot of a lolbert and banned me for a meme

Do you need a copy of it? It can be found on Soulseek via Nicotione+ if you do.

[citard]

Do you need a copy of it? It can be found on Soulseek via Nicotine+ if you do.

Oh no, I have it, no worries. I used to be friends with the author, which is how I know he's a **** designer and a complete lolbert. I regret helping him write a hex crawling supplement.

[citard]

Man, writing is difficult when you have no idea where to start. I can't find people on discord who are tolerant of the fact that I will be including rules for slavery into my game, and project management is needed.

[rusty_shackleford]

Man, writing is difficult when you have no idea where to start. I can't find people on discord who are tolerant of the fact that I will be including rules for slavery into my game, and project management is needed.

have you tried not using discord?

[rusty_shackleford]

What are you looking for, specifically?

I can't find people on discord who are tolerant of the fact that I will be including rules for slavery into my game

I'm going to guess you'll be able to find people who are tolerant of RPGs having slavery here. So that might be a good place to start your search?

[citard]

Man, writing is difficult when you have no idea where to start. I can't find people on discord who are tolerant of the fact that I will be including rules for slavery into my game, and project management is needed.

have you tried not using discord?

duh that's why i'm here

[citard]

What are you looking for, specifically?

I can't find people on discord who are tolerant of the fact that I will be including rules for slavery into my game

I'm going to guess you'll be able to find people who are tolerant of RPGs having slavery here. So that might be a good place to start your search?

Right now I'm fully reworking the system, and since I've never designed a game before, what are the absolutely needed things I should put into the system?

[rusty_shackleford]

What are you looking for, specifically?

I can't find people on discord who are tolerant of the fact that I will be including rules for slavery into my game

I'm going to guess you'll be able to find people who are tolerant of RPGs having slavery here. So that might be a good place to start your search?

Right now I'm fully reworking the system, and since I've never designed a game before, what are the absolutely needed things I should put into the system?

I've never designed my own tabletop RPG, so I couldn't really say. Perhaps find some games that have both official rules and an SRD(many games under the OGL license do this), then contrast between them to see what they consider to be essential to playing the game versus the extra content that is included as less important/fluff?

[WhiteShark]

Right now I'm fully reworking the system, and since I've never designed a game before, what are the absolutely needed things I should put into the system?

The first things you need are action resolution mechanism(s) and situational modifiers. Both GMs and players need to know how to handle taking X action in Y situation, and if the rules don't explicitly cover X or Y, they need to at least give a foundation such that everyone involved can make reasonable judgements about X and Y.

For example, let's say character A wants to craft a suit of armor. If the rules are to provide an adequate mechanism for resolving this action, they must answer the following:

• What materials does he need?
• How long does it take?
• What are his odds of success?
  • Is there a crafting skill?
  • If there isn't, is there an attribute that covers it?
  • Does it require a 'feat', or can he do it untrained?

Assuming the rules answer the above, we now have an idea of what it will take for A to craft a suit of armor. However, that's just the foundation. We must then address the common circumstances that might affect this action:

• What if he takes extra time to do a good job?
• What if he's pressed for time and needs to finish in a hurry?
• What if he has assistance, or is working under the instruction of a master?
• What if there are distractions about, or he's received bad advice?
• What if his tools and/or materials are very high quality?
• What if his tools and/or materials are very low quality?
• What if he's using unfamiliar tools?

Having answered those, the picture is now much clearer: we know what it will take for A to craft a suit of armor, and we know how the circumstances will benefit or hinder the action.

The next question is, do the rules offer sufficient granularity? Let's say A succeeds in crafting his armor. It took him some time and resources, but he's now the proud owner of a suit of wasteland mail. A puts on his new armor and his player goes to check the rules on equipment so he can note the change in A's statistics. To his surprise, he finds that the rules treat all types of armor equally: a character is either armored (+1 defense) or unarmored. In other words, his efforts were completely pointless; A's stop-sign breastplate was just as mechanically effective as what he's wearing now.

A is probably disappointed, but that's only the tip of the iceberg. The first underlying problem is that the game world now makes no sense. Characters in tactical body armor are no more protected than those wearing leather jackets. Maybe if it were a very high level game―in other words, an abstracted operational or strategic game in which each player controls whole companies or armies at once―the distinction wouldn't be so important. However, at the subtactical level at which RPGs normally take place, it's simply absurd. Thus, the rules need to have sufficient granularity in order to match the level―or 'resolution'―at which RPGs are played.

Now, I'll give a caveat: if your game does not care about normal human conflicts at all, you may not even need rules for something like armor. Maybe everyone is so high powered that it's meaningless. That's up to you. But, in most games, normal people are quite common, and the mechanics need to address them.

I'll offer two more examples of insufficient granularity.

D&D 5e introduced the 'advantage' mechanic. Various circumstances confer advantage, and when a character acts with advantage, he rolls 2d20 and takes the higher of the two. Here's the problem: it doesn't stack even when it logically should. If your target is affected by Faerie Fire, you get advantage on attacks against him because he's so clearly visible. If you're flanking your target, you get advantage on attacks against him because he's distracted by the opponent on his other side. There's no reason for these to not both confer a benefit, but the advantage rule doesn't allow it.

Second example. There are a plethora of indie systems that use dice systems with a very small range and that tie results to specific numbers on the dice. For example, in Apocalypse World, every action is resolved by rolling 2d6, adding modifiers, and checking the result: 1-6 is a 'miss', 7-9 is a 'weak hit', and 10+ is a 'strong hit'. Apocalypse World doesn't offer situational modifiers except as an optional rule:

Here’s a custom threat move. People new to the game occasionally ask me for this one. It’s general, it modifies nearly every other move:

"Things are tough. Whenever a players’ character makes a move, the MC judges it normal, difficult, or seriously difficult. If it’s difficult, the player takes -1 to the roll. If it’s seriously difficult, the player takes -2 to the roll."

Several groups in playtest wanted this move or one like it. All of them abandoned it after only one session. It didn’t add anything fun to the game, but did add a little hassle to every single move.

I have an alternate explanation for why groups don't like this rule. Take a look at the probability of rolling at least a 7 on 2d6, 2d6-1, and 2d6-2. For 2d6, it's ~58%; for 2d6-1, ~42%; and for 2d6-2, ~28%. Wow! That's a massive difference. The dice system doesn't offer enough granularity for small bonuses and penalties, and so they can't be represented.

This leads us to the second underlying problem of insufficent granularity: tactical and clever play goes unrewarded. Why would a player bother maneuvering his PC into a flanking position if his target is already under the effects of Faerie Fire? Why would a would-be smith seek out an instructor if instruction offers no mechanical benefit? Conversely, why would a commander seek out a battlefield with terrain that hinders his opponent's forces if the rules can't even represent it? Subjects that would normally entail a great deal of consideration are thrown completely out the window. If you want players to be intellectually engaged, the mechanics need sufficient granularity to reward their maneuverings.

The next thing I think every RPG needs, and was mostly a solved problem until everyone apparently forgot about it, is a system for NPC reactions. There should be a mechanism for determining the attitude of NPCs toward the party. In modern games this is typically handled by GM fiat, but in older and more traditional systems the GM usually rolls on a table and adjusts the result based on situational modifiers such as the predisposition of the creature and the reputation of the party. I think this is indispensable for two reasons: it keeps the game fresh and interesting for everyone, including the GM; and it neatly avoids the problem of every monster being automatically hostile.

Finally, unless you're writing a pure toolbox, every system needs a setting. RPGs and their settings are inseparable. The setting must inform the rules at every turn because the rules are essentially the natural laws of the setting. Any rift between rules and setting will make the players scratch their heads and diminish the shared reality of the game world. If you want your setting to have a certain feature, it should be represented―or at least representable―in the rules, and if you want the rules to work a certain way, the logical consequences of those rules need to be accounted for in the setting.

Hope some of that helps. Writing an RPG is a lot of work. You will probably have to spend a lot of time playtesting before your system reaches a desirable level of comprehensiveness, but that's ok. Making rulings on grey areas in play is the historical basis for a great number of RPG rules. On that note, I'll leave you with this quote from Arbiter of Worlds by Alexander Macris, author of ACKS:

RULES-LIGHT GAMES ARE JUST GAMES THAT HAVEN’T BEEN PLAYED A LOT YET

It’s common to call games like Basic Fantasy, which heavily depend on the GM’s judgment calls, rules-light games, in contrast to rules-heavy games like Pathfinder, which provide exhaustive mechanics. But with our deeper understanding of common law and civil law, we can see that a gamemaster’s ruling is functionally a law, just like a game designer’s rule is a law. Every rules-light game will over time become heavier with rules as its judge makes decisions about how things work. Rules-light and rules-heavy are only descriptive of the starting state of the game.

This being the case, when you are running a long-term campaign, you should remember that every time you issue a ruling, you have added to the “common law” of the game design. You should write down your rulings, and apply them again to similar situations in the future - or distinguish them from prior rulings to explain why they aren’t being applied. The very best gamemasters do this so consistently that over time their long-running campaigns begin to develop an entire body of house rules covering the many special situations that have arisen in their campaign. Sometimes an entirely new RPG develops.

tl;dr

• action resolution mechanism(s)
• situational modifiers
• sufficient granularity
• NPC reactions
• setting

[citard]

The game is being written, and the project has not been abandoned. ****, I now understand why tech companies put so much emphasis on things like "project management".

[citard]

Project update:

I am rewriting the game from scratch. Inspiration has struck once more. I've chosen a different system for the game to use.