2nd Edition of the Doctor Who RPG

[ryan]

Wibbly Wobbly Dicey Wicey should hopefully be interviewing Cubicle 7 immanently, so does anyone on here have any questions you would like to ask about the future of the game?

Please comment below...

[misterharry]

Timescales are an obvious question.

Other than that, any more hints as to the differences from the current rules?

Also, what new support material is planned, and will it contain dual sets of stats for 1st and 2nd editions?

[ryan]

WWDW Episode 16 - 2nd Edition (Regeneration) of the Doctor Who RPG w/Dave Chapman

The Second edition of the DOCTOR WHO RPG IS IMMANENT! We talk to Cubicle 7's OMEGA - Dave Chapman the creator of the Doctor Who RPG / the Vortex system.

Get all the details on how it differs, is it backwards compatible? What happens next in the Doctor WHO rpg line? What can we look forwards to in the future...

Check out Dave's other brand new project WILD RPG Facebook page

Cubicle 7 Official Announcement

David F.Chapman@autocratik (Writer of the Doctor Who RPG) Cubicle 7

Host: Ryan Blake

Subscribe and Review |Itunes|Spotify|RSS|Anchor|Breaker|Google|Overcast|Pocket Casts|Radio Public|

Contact |Email|Twitter|Blog|Facebook|

[ninjaconor]

Jul 14, 2021 12:48:08 GMT ryan said:

WWDW Episode 16 - 2nd Edition (Regeneration) of the Doctor Who RPG w/Dave Chapman

The Second edition of the DOCTOR WHO RPG IS IMMANENT! We talk to Cubicle 7's OMEGA - Dave Chapman the creator of the Doctor Who RPG / the Vortex system.

Get all the details on how it differs, is it backwards compatible? What happens next in the Doctor WHO rpg line? What can we look forwards to in the future...

Check out Dave's other brand new project WILD RPG Facebook page

Cubicle 7 Official Announcement

David F.Chapman@autocratik (Writer of the Doctor Who RPG) Cubicle 7

Host: Ryan Blake

Subscribe and Review |Itunes|Spotify|RSS|Anchor|Breaker|Google|Overcast|Pocket Casts|Radio Public|

Contact |Email|Twitter|Blog|Facebook|

Listening now. Can't say I'm sold on this "Distinction" system and the removal of traits. I can see the argument for it being lightweight, but I feel it takes out a lot of the emergent fun that comes from applying all these random trait rules.

Take something like Resourceful Pockets as an example. In first edition, a player with resourceful pockets check if they have something useful in their pockets to resolve the current dilemma and there's an impartial, written rule that determines if they do or not. This means that I, as the GM, don't know how the situation is going to play out, and allows an element of unpredictability.

In the second edition it sounds like the decision would be entirely up to me how to interpret the Resourceful Pockets, and so they will only have a useful item in their pocket if I decide that they do. I think that's less fun and makes the gameplay for more predictable.

I'd be very interested to see how the Time Lord distinction plays out and if things like the random regeneration tables will still factor in.

EDIT: I do love the sound of the new XP system though.

[Catsmate]

Jul 14, 2021 12:48:08 GMT ryan said:

WWDW Episode 16 - 2nd Edition (Regeneration) of the Doctor Who RPG w/Dave Chapman

The Second edition of the DOCTOR WHO RPG IS IMMANENT! We talk to Cubicle 7's OMEGA - Dave Chapman the creator of the Doctor Who RPG / the Vortex system.

Get all the details on how it differs, is it backwards compatible? What happens next in the Doctor WHO rpg line? What can we look forwards to in the future...

Check out Dave's other brand new project WILD RPG Facebook page

Cubicle 7 Official Announcement

David F.Chapman@autocratik (Writer of the Doctor Who RPG) Cubicle 7

Host: Ryan Blake

Subscribe and Review |Itunes|Spotify|RSS|Anchor|Breaker|Google|Overcast|Pocket Casts|Radio Public|

Contact |Email|Twitter|Blog|Facebook|

Nitpick: I think you mean imminent. Technically the Second Edition cannot be immanent until it actually exists and becomes part of the universe and even then the term is generally only used in a theological or philosophical context.

[Stormcrow]

Jul 14, 2021 13:17:50 GMT ninjaconor said:

Listening now. Can't say I'm sold on this "Distinction" system and the removal of traits. I can see the argument for it being lightweight, but I feel it takes out a lot of the emergent fun that comes from applying all these random trait rules.

Take something like Resourceful Pockets as an example. In first edition, a player with resourceful pockets check if they have something useful in their pockets to resolve the current dilemma and there's an impartial, written rule that determines if they do or not. This means that I, as the GM, don't know how the situation is going to play out, and allows an element of unpredictability.

In the second edition it sounds like the decision would be entirely up to me how to interpret the Resourceful Pockets, and so they will only have a useful item in their pocket if I decide that they do. I think that's less fun and makes the gameplay for more predictable.

It sounds like they're dividing traits into the more objective things you can do and the more subjective things that you are (which are Distinctions). Distinctions sound to me much like Traits in the One Ring game: instead of numerical bonuses, they provide narrative advantages when invoked. So someone who is Charming might try to persuade someone to do something and get a roll-three-dice-and-take-the-best-two roll, while someone who is not Charming trying the same thing will just roll the regular two dice. Or someone who has a Face in the Crowd can be assumed to automatically be unnoticed when they try to be unless someone is actively looking for them.

Meanwhile, things like Fast Healing or Hypnosis will remain objective "powers" that you have.

The stated reason for removing traits is that David Chapman doesn't like doing math. Most traits just involve added +2. That's hardly difficult math. I can see, on the other hand, the argument that most Doctor Who RPG players handle traits far more strictly than they were intended, as if they were meant to simulate the abilities of a character, when what they're really meant to do is invoke the sense of a character. (This is why it has never worried me that I don't have an updated or more complete list of traits — they just don't matter that much. Want an ability not in a trait? Make it a Special. The only real game-mechanical decision is how many character and/or story points it costs.) Maybe Chapman has seen this trend and decided to try to tamp down on it. But he doesn't seem to me to be the sort to want to try to control how others play.

EDIT: I do love the sound of the new XP system though.

Eh. One thing I appreciate about the current rules is that they don't have a mechanical experience system. The player and the game master can agree that some experience was enlightening or traumatizing and adjust the character accordingly. The described system of "Experiences" is new to me, and I'll have to see more before I can form an opinion.

[kirkkerman]

Jul 14, 2021 13:20:30 GMT Catsmate said:

Jul 14, 2021 12:48:08 GMT ryan said:

The Second edition of the DOCTOR WHO RPG IS IMMANENT!

Nitpick: I think you mean imminent. Technically the Second Edition cannot be immanent until it actually exists and becomes part of the universe and even then the term is generally only used in a theological or philosophical context.

How do you know that DWRPG 2E isn't God?

Anyways, as much as I really do like the old trait system, I do think it could be helpful as a GM not to always have to worry about whether I'm missing an important trait for every single monster or NPC.

[Stormcrow]

Jul 15, 2021 21:58:55 GMT kirkkerman said:

Anyways, as much as I really do like the old trait system, I do think it could be helpful as a GM not to always have to worry about whether I'm missing an important trait for every single monster or NPC.

Another reason to use fewer traits! Just have the monster or NPC do what you want them to. Never mind what you write in your notes; what matters is what they do in the game. If you only write down the ones that really matter, they'll stand out better when you look.

I mean, do you REALLY need to write "Alien" in the list of traits for an alien character? Of course not. Do you REALLY need to write Obsession (Eating Cookies) to role-play a cookie monster NPC? Not at all. You already know all that. Only write the stuff you need a prompt to remember, and your list of traits will be purely a list of things to remember.

[Catsmate]

Jul 15, 2021 21:58:55 GMT kirkkerman said:

Jul 14, 2021 13:20:30 GMT Catsmate said:

Nitpick: I think you mean imminent. Technically the Second Edition cannot be immanent until it actually exists and becomes part of the universe and even then the term is generally only used in a theological or philosophical context.

How do you know that DWRPG 2E isn't God?

I thought that was D&D 5e.........?

[ninjaconor]

Jul 16, 2021 3:27:11 GMT Stormcrow said:

I mean, do you REALLY need to write "Alien" in the list of traits for an alien character? Of course not. Do you REALLY need to write Obsession (Eating Cookies) to role-play a cookie monster NPC? Not at all. You already know all that. Only write the stuff you need a prompt to remember, and your list of traits will be purely a list of things to remember.

The Alien trait serves a mechanical purpose for balance. Yeah, for an NPC I'm probably not going to write it down, but for a player who's looking to take alien abilities I think it makes sense to have a cost associated with it. I imagine that will probably remain the same with the new Distinctions though.

For the Obsession trait, if it's something as harmless as really liking cookies, that isn't going to factor into the game, then I wouldn't bother with that, but if a character has a more serious obsession, that is going to force them into difficult situations in the game (like having to choose between their obsession and their friends), then I think it's fair enough to have a defined rule that they get a certain amount of extra points for taking that on.

I think the most important thing about a trait like "Obsession" or "Adversary" though is that they encourage the players to flesh out their characters more during creation. For example, I had a player who wanted to play as an Ood. Left to his own devices, he probably would have come up with a pretty good character, but going through the trait list and actually having to take on good/bad traits to balance with his stats fleshed out the concept immeasurably. Psychic was expensive, so to balance it out he had to take on Adversary. Not something he would have thought of before, but suddenly we have a minor recurring villain in our campaign, which became on of the most fun parts.

Then there's the traits that actually add really cool gameplay mechanics. I mentioned Resourceful Pockets above, which has allowed my party to take many an unexpected path through my adventures. Then there's other cool ones like Faulty Heart from TTC. It's a cool idea to have a character with a weak heart, but it gives far too much power to me, as the GM, if it's entirely up to me how it effects the adventure. It would be far too hard to actually decide to have it seriously incapacitate (or even kill) a player. I mean, aside from the fact that I like these people and don't want to kill their character, on some level I'm always going to want the adventure to stay on-script. But having an impartial rule, where the role of the dice determines the outcome, means that pretty much anything can happen. It injects a fun level of randomness that makes the game more fun and surprising for me, and more fair for my players.

[Stormcrow]

Jul 16, 2021 11:43:11 GMT ninjaconor said:

The Alien trait serves a mechanical purpose for balance. Yeah, for an NPC I'm probably not going to write it down, but for a player who's looking to take alien abilities

I believe I was very clear in specifying that I was talking about monsters and NPCs. Of course players have to write it down, but when something is written on a player-character sheet, the GM doesn't have to worry about missing it, which is the problem I was responding to.

[tampahawke]

jsut asking, but how DOES the 2nd edtion experince system work??(I dont have the book/pdf for it yet)??

[ninjaconor]

Jul 30, 2021 0:35:21 GMT tampahawke said:

jsut asking, but how DOES the 2nd edtion experince system work??(I dont have the book/pdf for it yet)??

Basically, if one of the players does something really cool during the course of the game, they (or another player) make note of it as an Experience. At the end of every session, the group discusses all of the accumulated Experiences and each player picks one to add to someone's character sheet (generally their own, but if I'm reading it right, you can choose somebody else's Experience and add it to their character sheet and so they might gain more than one Experience per game).

Once an Experience is on your character sheet, if you encounter a similar situation in the future, you get an extra dice on your roll to deal with it. To use the example from the book, if you have an Experience where you downloaded your smartphone into a Cyberman, and on a later adventure you're trying to upload a virus onto a spaceship, you can call on that previous similar Experience to boost your roll.

There's also an XP system tied to it, where each Experience you have on your character sheet is worth 1XP. Every time you use that Experience, its value increases by 1 additional XP. Then, either between games or in certain in-game situations, you can cash in your Experiences (remove them from your character sheet) and use the XP to buy a permanent increase in one of your stats.