|
|
Post by dvalkyrie74 on Jan 2, 2010 2:44:06 GMT
As a fellow gamer I wish to start off by saying that I wish I was chosen to be a candidate for play testing. I find the new Doctor Who System to be great and troubling at the same time. Being a gamer for almost 3 decades going back to 6th grade in 1986, which Doctor Who from FASA was my first game, coincidentally, the game mechanics for the new Doctor Who Adventures in Time and Space confuse me.
First I find that there is no experience system other than how I read it as whatever the GM wishes to do, the players must suffer. The GM book says to reward players with Story Points. This is cool, but if they get through an adventure using little to no Story points, they cannot be rewarded because there is a maximum story Point cap. My house rule is to eliminate this cap.
Secondly, the 2D6 + Attribute + Skill system seems to straightforward. This simple mechanic make the power of both attribute and skill seem parallel in value. To increase skill or attribute takes time, which is self-explanatory, but when you space out your adventures over time (IE the time between adventure 4 and adventure 5 is several weeks, what’s to say the character didn’t pick up a new hobby that could give them 1 pt in a skill). On the other side of the coin it is up to the GM if he wants the player to get a +1 to Medicine after a year of education in that field, especially if it is a Medicine Area of Expertise like Genetics 1. To me that seems like a big loophole that can give the GM a feeling of fairness, but to the players a lackluster experience in gaming those characters, or vice versa.
I know the game is new and the forums are here to offer alternate rules or speak of issues that are found in the game so I wish to offer my ideas. Be critical, I don’t bite. The ideas I have do not change much of what is published in the core rule books or other books coming out, and if they do make a change, it is very minor.
Game Mechanics = Roll Attribute score in D6’s and add Skill Score to the total.
IE to fire a gun, player A will roll Coordination 3D6 and add Marksman 2 to the score. On average, they will receive a 14. If you were to roll 2D6 and add Coordination 3 and Marksman 2 to that score, you would average a 12.
Experience System = Give the players 3-5 points per game (3 for a short episodic adventure, 5 for a longer feature length story). This of course is up to the GM too. When Players gain these experience points, they can spend them. To raise an attribute it will cost the new attribute score x 10 worth of experience points. To raise a skill will cost new skill score x 3, using my game mechanics system. This way it will take longer to raise attributes, but show some increase in skills.
Story Point Cap should definitely be removed. If you do not use the experience system or game mechanics above, let Story points be the Experience System. After all, Story Points are player’s best friend and will help give them the edge of being skilled against what they will be up against. If Player A has a knowledge skill of a 2 and can’t raise it to a 3 in a long period of time, then all that he experiences meeting Cybermen, Daleks, Silurians, Slitheen, 23rd century politics, 51st century piracy, whatever will mean nothing to the character, though that character’s world has changed drastically from the first adventure to when he has experienced several adventures.
These of course are my ideas. I have other ideas like making the difficulty system a little easier, having Skill specializations instead of skill scores giving an extra Die roll to the attribute rolls, Changing the damage system in combat and psychic attacks, etc. My gamers have been trying new ideas without changing the character sheet formats or and utilizing what is written from a different perspective.
I do not want to rewrite the rules, but I find the game mechanics to be a little lacking.
I still look forward to new supplements over the coming months.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Curufea on Jan 2, 2010 5:06:22 GMT
I think you may be missing the point of the cap to story points. It looks exactly like a way to encourage players to use them regularly and often - and not to hoard them up and waste them. Hoarding story points is pretty much going to encourage selfish spotlighting of players rather than teamwork.
As to fast skill or attribute gains - I'm firmly against the d&d concept that all pcs turn into demigods over time and are forced into retirement because they break the balance of the game.
The only exception I would make is if skills and abillities were also quicly reduced or lost.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenshock on Jan 2, 2010 8:07:49 GMT
First of all, thanks for posting your ideas. I hope you won't take disagreement with those ideas as in any way a slight to you; it is your game in the final analysis, so do what you want, whatever makes it fun for you.
The experience system is essentially "the GM should award increases in skills or, more rarely, attributes and traits, whenever she or he sees fit to do so". Among other things, this, along with the Story Point mechanic, means the players have to play well and heroically if they want to get those increases. Unlike other games, this one tries to avoid becoming an accounting exercise, given its target audience which includes kids and new gamers. Also, given that 6 is considered a high level of skill, alowing skill increases too quickly can cause characters to simply get too good too quickly. The awarding of Story Points is important (because they generally do not renew completely between adventures unless the GM thinks the characters did something very epic) but it is not the only award the characters should get...there just is no "X points raises a skill by 1 point" system in the game as published.
As a playtester, I saw the Story Point mechanic develop and have used it in the game for over a year now. I can assure you that removing the cap would not be helpful to your game. Players will hoard the things until they have a ridiculous amount and then run wild with them. The system as given works pretty good; characters will spend them and will do the things neccesary to get more (such as getting captured, and even occasionally intentionally failing die rolls) because they know that they can't accumulate them to an unlimited amount.
There is some discussion elsewhere on the board about the system of Development Points that were used in an earlier iteration of the game during playtesting; I'll see if I can dredge those up and post them here if its ok with the C7 folks.
Again however, it is your game so play it in whatever way makes it most enjoyable for you and your fellow players.
Allen
|
|
|
|
Post by Curufea on Jan 2, 2010 8:39:53 GMT
I agree with allenshock, it's your game. I would like to know how it goes when you try out these house rules. It may depend on your players and style as a GM - it may be something I could never pull off successfully. So I would like to know how these house rules work in practice if you try them out
|
|
|
|
Post by Alastair on Jan 2, 2010 9:04:01 GMT
One house rule I've been using with my nephews is an alternate to the printed chargen. Stats are generated by rolling 6D6 and assigning each die to a stat as desired. Skills and Traits are purchased via 4D6 (that's the points you have to spend). I've always gone more for "you play what you roll" rather than allowing point allocations.
I've been kicking around different approaches to an advancement system and a different skill/stat roll but haven't yet found one that suits my gaming style and my own view on "how things should be". So for the time being it's been "as written" until I can come up with a better way (for me and those who play with me).
I do agree on the removal of the SP cap, and it was one of the first things I implemented myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jan 2, 2010 15:04:07 GMT
I have to agree, the system needs a proper experience system rather than just ad hoc.
The only issue I can see is if companions do come and go thoughout a campaign. The Time Lord character gets better and better but the companions possibly won't.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 2, 2010 15:17:31 GMT
I have to agree, the system needs a proper experience system rather than just ad hoc. The only issue I can see is if companions do come and go thoughout a campaign. The Time Lord character gets better and better but the companions possibly won't. I wonder ... are you worried it's 'adhoc' or that it might be considered fairly arbitrary? I actually disagree here. Properly implemented this isn't 'adhoc' or arbitrary at all. Discussion between the GM and player over what skills and traits will improve, or be added/removed, and what might drive this process within the storylines/campaign, must surely be better than 'OK, I've done the math and you get 5xp' |
|
|
|
Post by allivingstone on Jan 2, 2010 20:08:41 GMT
There is some discussion elsewhere on the board about the system of Development Points that were used in an earlier iteration of the game during playtesting Improvement Points were discussed in the ' released from NDA' thread, and some other ideas were presented too. To summarise the idea behind Improvement Points: Story Points in excess of a character's normal maximum can be converted to Improvement Points (3SP:1IP). Improvement Points can then be spent in the same way as Character Points are during chargen. Currently, I'm thinking of using the Inexperienced and Experienced Traits as a way for modelling character development: a character gets more Experienced (or less Inexperienced) after some adventures. |
|
|
|
Post by Curufea on Jan 2, 2010 20:37:30 GMT
I have to agree, the system needs a proper experience system rather than just ad hoc. The only issue I can see is if companions do come and go thoughout a campaign. The Time Lord character gets better and better but the companions possibly won't. I wonder ... are you worried it's 'adhoc' or that it might be considered fairly arbitrary? I actually disagree here. Properly implemented this isn't 'adhoc' or arbitrary at all. Discussion between the GM and player over what skills and traits will improve, or be added/removed, and what might drive this process within the storylines/campaign, must surely be better than 'OK, I've done the math and you get 5xp' Have some karma for saying so well that roleplaying is a collaborative process of storytelling. If the players trust the GM to create the universe and everything in it for them to play in - why does the GM need to have rules that tell them how PCs need to change within it? The whole concept of the roleplaying game is communication and agreements between GM and players. This is just another. |
|
|
|
Post by allenshock on Jan 2, 2010 20:41:35 GMT
There is some discussion elsewhere on the board about the system of Development Points that were used in an earlier iteration of the game during playtesting Improvement Points were discussed in the ' released from NDA' thread, and some other ideas were presented too. To summarise the idea behind Improvement Points: Story Points in excess of a character's normal maximum can be converted to Improvement Points (3SP:1IP). Improvement Points can then be spent in the same way as Character Points are during chargen. Currently, I'm thinking of using the Inexperienced and Experienced Traits as a way for modelling character development: a character gets more Experienced (or less Inexperienced) after some adventures. I like that...say, a character with Inexperienced can "lose" that trait after 4 complete adventures (if the GM feels they have done enough to warrant it)...they gain 2 Skill Points and 2 Character Points and their maximum Story Points drop by 3. Then, say another 4 adventures down the line, they get 2 more Skill Points and 2 more Character Points and their max Story Points drop another 3. And so on. You could adjust the number of adventures to 6 or even, say, 13 (a whole series' worth). Allen |
|
|
|
Post by dvalkyrie74 on Jan 3, 2010 0:04:56 GMT
I thank you all for your responses to my inquiry and experience with the system so far. I have layed so many different games over the last two decades and have had likes and dislikes in all the systems I have used or played in.
The improvement points idea could be workable. I don't wish to make the game an accounting mess, but from my experience with past gamers and those attending game conventions, there are rules lawyers who want you to explain every level of a game like your were the one who wrote the manual. There have also been some GM;s who I have played with who are stingy on giving the players anything to reward them of their heroic deeds citing that they were not as heroic as he would have done or planned to have happen in his game.
I will playtest some ideas and bring them up in the future. Perhaps something could be discovered that would benefit the system for other players.
I have only played 4 scenarios so far with this game system and perhaps need more "playing" time to get a better feel of the system.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jan 3, 2010 11:11:11 GMT
I wonder ... are you worried it's 'adhoc' or that it might be considered fairly arbitrary? I actually disagree here. Properly implemented this isn't 'adhoc' or arbitrary at all. Discussion between the GM and player over what skills and traits will improve, or be added/removed, and what might drive this process within the storylines/campaign, must surely be better than 'OK, I've done the math and you get 5xp' It is arbitary even as a collaborative effort between the GM and the players. If it works for you then thats great. But for myself I found it lacking. Just because the system is designed to be a storytelling experience doesn't mean that every aspect of the system should be the same. But, at the end of the day, that is just my opinion. YMMV. |
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 3, 2010 12:29:33 GMT
It is arbitary even as a collaborative effort between the GM and the players. Every XP system I've seen short of just tallying up the XP value for the monster(s) you've killed has an element of arbitrariness to it on the GMs part. What's that? XP bonus for good role-playing? GM decides. XP for completing the major objectives in an adventure? GM decides if you've done that or not. Increasing skills IF you've used them? GM usually has veto power on if you've used them enough (e.g. 'No, you can't improve your computer hacking skills just because you guessed a password'). Actually, even just totting up the XP for the monsters you've killed could still have an arbitraty element to it as the GM could possibly get some leeway on whether or not your PC contributed to the kill or not ('It was the killing blow!' 'No, the barbarian getting it down to -500 HP and you nipping in to do the final 1hp damage doesn't count!') So ... any game where the GM has some discretion has an arbitrary XP system, really. I would think that arbitrary XP rewards would be lessened where the players had input into the process. |
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jan 3, 2010 12:37:47 GMT
It doesn't have to be a D&D style experience system. Something more like the Storytelling system from WW would be appropriate IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 3, 2010 12:56:34 GMT
It doesn't have to be a D&D style experience system. Something more like the Storytelling system from WW would be appropriate IMO. 1) I never said it had to be a D&D style XP system. 2) Given that I've never played any White Wolf that's not particularly helpful. Pray, elaborate ... |
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jan 3, 2010 13:14:40 GMT
1. You didn't but it came to mind as an experience system that requires math to ad up and work out.
2. Skills and stats are rated 1-5 usually. Experience is quite low and based upon roleplaying, success of story/plot and results in 0-3 roughly experience per story. Costs are something like 3 or 5x new level spent to increase anything. I don't have my books with me at present to give exact costs, but hopefully you get the idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 3, 2010 13:17:40 GMT
Experience is quite low and based upon roleplaying, success of story/plot and results in 0-3 roughly experience per story. Hmm. OK. Who gets to decide the reward for roleplaying? The reward for success of story/plot? Based upon what criteria? |
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jan 3, 2010 13:27:18 GMT
Experience is quite low and based upon roleplaying, success of story/plot and results in 0-3 roughly experience per story. Hmm. OK. Who gets to decide the reward for roleplaying? The reward for success of story/plot? Based upon what criteria? The ST (GM in that system) gets that decision on roleplaying. The criteria is based upon how well the characters do (or don't) based upon the scenario, the plans of the characters...etc. In that system it all comes down to the ST to determine the outcome and the rewards. |
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 3, 2010 14:12:39 GMT
Hmm. OK. Who gets to decide the reward for roleplaying? The reward for success of story/plot? Based upon what criteria? The ST (GM in that system) gets that decision on roleplaying. The criteria is based upon how well the characters do (or don't) based upon the scenario, the plans of the characters...etc. In that system it all comes down to the ST to determine the outcome and the rewards. All sounds very arbitrary to me  |
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jan 3, 2010 14:21:21 GMT
The ST (GM in that system) gets that decision on roleplaying. The criteria is based upon how well the characters do (or don't) based upon the scenario, the plans of the characters...etc. In that system it all comes down to the ST to determine the outcome and the rewards. All sounds very arbitrary to me Sounds like fighting talk to me!  Maybe but I find it works better than just deciding at some point. Maybe C7 should come up with some optional rules for it that don't rely on saving story points. |
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 3, 2010 14:39:17 GMT
All sounds very arbitrary to me Sounds like fighting talk to me! Dice at dawn? |
|
|
|
Post by xelkelvos on Jan 4, 2010 18:43:45 GMT
Something more like the Storytelling system from WW would be appropriate IMO. Finally someone mentions White Wolf games in this thread... This system has a very familiar feel to the White Wolf games. To draw comparison (World of Darkness is used for simplicity), Attributes and Skills are equivalent for both games though WW uses 1-5 (Average 2) to rate normal humans and DW uses 1-6 (Average 3), Traits are equivalent to Merits and Flaws and the rest of the advantages in some way, Story Points are equivalent to Willpower. Basic WoD has experience costs as: (Dot refers to level) Attributes - 5x New Dot Skills - 3x New Dot Skill Specialty - 3 Merit - 2x New Dot I do think some sort of standard of experience should be established for this system, at least as an alternative to the "arbitrary distribution" of stats. Possibly based on the gross number of Story points received. |
|
6
1st Incarnation
Posts: 4
|
Post by 6 on Jan 4, 2010 19:13:57 GMT
As gm I don't want to be the sole arbiter of character advancement. Also I want advancement to be an exciting part of the game, and tied to what the characters are doing, so I'm going to use what I'm calling my boxcars rule:
Anytime double sixes (boxcars) are rolled, without the use of a Storypoint, you earn a check for an attribute, skill or trait involved in that roll. Checks can be used to raise the skill by one immediately, or banked in the attribute or trait. It takes two checks to raise an attribute, or a trait that can be raised. If you have two banked checks, and roll box cars again, you can trade those three checks in for a new trait, with gm approval. The new trait becomes active either between adventures or at some dramatically important point agreed upon by all the players.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 4, 2010 21:27:59 GMT
As gm I don't want to be the sole arbiter of character advancement. With the rules as they are you're not, really. |
|
|
|
Post by kaemaril on Jan 4, 2010 21:31:10 GMT
Possibly based on the gross number of Story points received. So ... you get more 'experience' based upon the number of story points you get, even if you spend them? What about a player who doesn't earn, but doesn't spend, any story points ... and then uses all his/her story points at the end of the adventure to save the galaxy? No experience for him/her, I take it? |
|
|
|
Post by Eryx on Jan 5, 2010 11:31:45 GMT
Finally someone mentions White Wolf games in this thread... This system has a very familiar feel to the White Wolf games. To draw comparison (World of Darkness is used for simplicity), Attributes and Skills are equivalent for both games though WW uses 1-5 (Average 2) to rate normal humans and DW uses 1-6 (Average 3), Traits are equivalent to Merits and Flaws and the rest of the advantages in some way, Story Points are equivalent to Willpower. Basic WoD has experience costs as: (Dot refers to level) Attributes - 5x New Dot Skills - 3x New Dot Skill Specialty - 3 Merit - 2x New Dot I do think some sort of standard of experience should be established for this system, at least as an alternative to the "arbitrary distribution" of stats. Possibly based on the gross number of Story points received. The storytelling system has a lot more attributes and skills than Dr Who, so I would say this is a good way to go but the costs need to be higher. Either that or more skills need to be added (or split as the case may be). |
|
|
|
Post by Chrono Sapien on Apr 1, 2010 6:56:21 GMT
We handle "experience" rather simply in our games. They keep track of how many story points they have earned in an adventure through rp. For each story point earned, they get an equal number of growth points in a pool. They can spend their points on raising a skill one level at a time, the cost being 5 x Next Skill Level in exp. So raising subterfuge from 3 to 4 coats 5x4=20 growth points. Attributes cost 10 x Next Attribute level they are raising to, so raising Ingenuity From 1 to 2 costs 2x10=20 growth points. It may seem slow to raise but this isn't RIFTS or D&D and, barring some EXCELLENT RP, growth should take time.
|
|
