I want a new game and so do you!

[Yakumo]

Well, since none of us have ever tried it, but we are all familiar with d20. Pitch us (or at least me) True 20. What is it? What does it change from you every day d20? And is there a particular kind of game it caters to that makes it especially good?

What sort of game would you run with it if you were to run a short? Cause frankly, I wouldn't mind playing anything right now, and if it is simple enough I'm sure rules could be explained.

[TheUdjat]

Mar 1, 2009 10:21:41 GMT -5 Yakumo said:

And I think that Masks was working pretty well on a board and I think maybe you mistake distraction for difficulty, because it was quite hard for us to come to decisions in that game.

Maybe that's more accurate. In CofC, in a tabletop game, there tends to be a lot of deliberation around the table, and that's not really possible in pbp. And with lots of time in between major developments, it can be difficult to keep track of all the little pieces of the mystery--whereas with tabletop you can just review every session if necessary.

It's tricky. A more action-oriented CofC might be more likely to succeed, but how far can one go with that before it's not really CofC anymore? These are the sorts of things I ponder. Tabloid Truths ran for a while, and it ran well, so I know it's doable. Maybe the trick is small doses like that.

But I'm veering away from the topic, perhaps.

[Yakumo]

Yeah I feel like tabloid truths is the CoC equivalent of the Academy Shorts. I wish and hope that one day we can get it running again.

Udjat, can you answer my questions about True20? (See my previous post if you missed it)

[TheUdjat]

Mar 1, 2009 11:09:55 GMT -5 Yakumo said:

Well, since none of us have ever tried it, but we are all familiar with d20. Pitch us (or at least me) True 20. What is it? What does it change from you every day d20? And is there a particular kind of game it caters to that makes it especially good?

What sort of game would you run with it if you were to run a short? Cause frankly, I wouldn't mind playing anything right now, and if it is simple enough I'm sure rules could be explained.

Missed this post while replying to the other one!

I like True20 because it's great for any kind of game. It's extremely flexible. You can tweak the mechanics very slightly (and they tell you precisely how to do this), making it more heroic, more realistic, or altering its purpose from high fantasy to low fantasy to space adventure to modern. Whatever you want. They even throw in an alternate rules option for horror settings that nicely duplicates CofC's Sanity rules.

The system comes down to one core concept, and I believe you're all familiar with it. d20+ability+modifiers vs. Difficulty. Pretty much every roll in the system is resolved this way (or through 'opposed rolls', but we all know what those are, too. Like Spot vs. Hide). There are no other dice. At all. Everything is done with a d20--hence, True20.

The biggest change most people will note is a lack of hit points. This system is made by the folks at Green Ronin, the same gents that brought us the super-customizable Mutants & Masterminds--but unlike M&M, character creation here is a lot simpler. But it does retain the 'Toughness Save' in place of HP. Here is where the system becomes great for something low-power like Rina: Toughness Save does not increase. At least, not without deliberately tweaking the system (and they advise this if you want something more heroic, like D&D). This means that, effectively, your hit points are always the same. A character may get better armor, or may get better at avoiding damage, but in essence: a well-placed bullet can still kill anyone.

Toughness Save works like this. Say you get hit by a knife (+2 Damage) by a person with average strength (+0). You make a Toughness Save vs. 15+2=17. If you pass--no problem, you got nicked/grazed, you're good. If you fail, you're Hurt, and take a -1 penalty on all future Toughness Saves (and this stacks every time you're injured). Fail by 5 or more, and you're Wounded--same effect, but it takes longer to heal. Fail by 10 or more and you're Disabled, which longtime D&Ders will recognize (strenuous action and you're dying). Fail by 15 or more, and you're immediately Dying. Fail by 20 or more, and you're outright dead.

A bad roll on a Toughness Save can put someone out of the fight instantly, especially since an average person has a +0 Toughness Save. In fact, apart from raising Constitution, only certain feats can boost a Toughness Save. It doesn't increase otherwise. Even on the aforementioned knife stabbing some unfortunate soul could roll a 1 on their Save and instantly be Dying.

So, there's an element of realism there that I like. Combat has the potential to be lethal--as lethal as it is in Rina. But without the HP tangling things up unnecessarily.

But even apart from the Toughness rule, there are other reasons I like True20. The system it offers for the supernatural is clean and easy. No x time per day--you buy a power like you buy a feat, and you can use it indefinitely, though you might exhaust yourself into unconsciousness using it too much. For that matter, characters get a feat at every level up--almost exactly what you get with Vemu's Rina, though in that case he offers us a choice of 'feats', most of them homebrewed, based on what we accomplished (definitely cooler, but no problem to integrate into a system like this one).

Shoot, the tools are all there. There aren't even any inherent 'races' in the game. It has 'Backgrounds', which can easily duplicate a race, but could also mimic the way d20 Modern and CofC deal with 'occupations'. There are levels, a familiar thing to us, and they govern the basics--Attack/Defense bonus, skill ranks, Fort/Ref/Will saves, and what type of feats one has access to (there are general feats, but also role-specific ones). The system comes with three very basic classes (Warrior, Expert, Adept--more heroic than the NPC classes of the same name), but also provides rules for creating your own classes. Amazing flexibility.

And, better still, the system has Conviction. Vemu concocted the idea of Hero Points with Rina, which we later molded in light of the same idea in other systems. This is like that. You use Conviction points for removing fatigue, getting bonuses on a roll, etc. You get Conviction points back for acting out your Vice and Virtue--by playing your character. Or doing really cool things. Or whatever else the GM decides. And further, each class has certain things they can use Conviction points for, related to their specific role.

There's just so much to work with here, and the guidance is there to make it as heroic, as unheroic, or whatever as you want. Whatever time period, whatever setting, whatever vision a GM has.

For my part, if I were to dive into a Short right now, I would run it in a modern setting, ostensibly Earth, and throw in supernatural curve balls. Kind of a pulpy pseudo-horror, everyday folks encountering and dealing with things beyond normal human experience. If it were a book genre, I'd call it 'Urban Fantasy' or 'Supernatural Modern' or something. Give me four players that want to learn the system and I'll do it.

[Yakumo]

I would definitely learn the system. It sounds great because it can incorporate any of the elements I'd want without making it too difficult for people to grasp or too simple that they feel unproductive.

My major complaint with MM was that there was just too much, I couldn't wrap my head around all the leveling up and perks, that's why I had you help me with that. But I loved that there was a system in place for that setting.

If you have an idea for a short or something, count me in. Hopefully some of the other people here wouldn't mind test driving the system to see how it goes. I mean right here in this thread we have three core players who are definitely willing to play a game now. Myself anything, Rojito likes to try everything at least once, and vemu said he's kind of up for a low fantasy game. at is a consistent and really creative player too, I always like to see the different characters he comes up with. But if you opened this up I'm sure you'd be able to find at least one or two more people if he or any of us didn't want to play a game.

But frankly I think we all posted here because we want something, anything. And we have all been a part of a game you have run before and I don't think any of us have anything but praise for how you run a game.

[VemuKhaham]

At, good to see you potentially on board as well, that makes possibly 5 dedicated and creative posters combined already (Rojito, Yakumo, Udjat, At and Vemu). I'd say it would be enough for almost anything. Anyway, I guess we can conclude that if we don't stretch ourselves too thin, we can actually do something with what little we have.

As for True20, it sounds almost like I've been doing it without knowing it myself. I'd be interested in learning more about, though I must say I'm always a little hesitant about shorts - knowing things will end so quickly for some reason makes it harder for me to dedicate myself to it. But perhaps you're compromise of running a True20 short first, while meanwhile taking the time to come up with a longterm game, is actually very clever. I think we should go for that. I also think that it might be good though, to not only wish to learn the True20 system in that short, but also make it like an experiment in whatever we want to do next. Catch two flies in one game, so to speak.

Udjat, when you mentioned that Ars Magica game that you have proposed before, I realized that was actually a really good idea, and I'm a bit confused why it didn't receive enough impetus then to get something like it going. I'd have to read back up on the details of that idea, but the setting really sounds ideal to my tastes, and the thing is, as you pointed out, that Ars Magica has similarities with the civilization-building game we've been discussing.

It might just be a wild question coming out of nowhere, but is it possible to create something that blends your Ars Magica campaign with parts of the thing we're brewing on right now? What exactly was Ars Magica about again?

[Yakumo]

Yeah I wouldn't mind something with potential to evolve into something more, as I don't think I'll be continuing with Random Acts after this Module. I really enjoy the characters and Jacob was the first one that I've played in D&D here, but I think it has run its course for me.

Also, in between answer the next question udjat, post in Rena, I can't wait to see what happens next and you are holding it by not killing some villagers!

[VemuKhaham]

Disregard my last question about what Ars Magica is about, as you've already written a perfect summary on it here.

And yes, I do think a blend should be possible, actually the similarities are greater than I thought.
Compare the terms:
covenant vs. court/council
mage vs. king/ruler
companions vs. important PC villagers
grogs vs. common NPC villagers

Setting is also in a way interchangeable:
Mythic Europe vs. an unknown, fabulous world

And the concept of adventures/challenges is similar. In both games, the villagers or mages servants must deal with problems from outside, or try to change things on the inside. The plot is in both games player-driven mostly.

Of course, talk of multiple DMs is at this moment like talking of Paradise after the fall, but if reduced in complexity and size, it can be done even now. So what do you think?7.0

[TheUdjat]

I had to look through my old description of Ars Magica, too. That pretty aptly summarizes it, and as you pointed out, there are many similarities in the ideas. Some of the reasons Ars Magica in particular piques my interest:

• Smaller Scale. We're not talking about a kingdom, we're talking about a Covenant. It feels more intimate and vital, for some reason. There are minor characters, but not a whole kingdom of them.
  
• Magic! Always a plus. Not just magic, but a really good system for magic. Anything's possible.
  
• Most of the work is already done for us. Ars Magica is an established setting and system, which goes a long way towards easing play.

I think that's why I like it. But of course, there are also some problems. First and foremost, if we're operating under the mission objectives of this thread, using the Ars Magica system itself would be suicide. The damn thing is a bit too complicated when you get down to it. It'd not d20, it's got lots of weird rules for spells, and combat is anything but intuitive. However, all is not lost. I was thinking about this while driving in the car earlier, and it occurred to me that the basic roll of the Ars Magica system is not so different from the True20 system. At that point, a few careful adjustments could bring the two nicely in line. I think this is definitely doable.

The biggest problem is the magic system itself. Ars Magica's magic is very flexible, 'do anything you can imagine'. d20 and everything based around it really is not--it's 'pick a power' style. However, I think I have already figured out a solution to this, so it will probably be a non-issue. Now I'm getting all excited!

So, I think we're boiling down to one of two ideas here.

Idea 1: We give the True20 system a test drive with the aforementioned modern supernatural setting, sort of off-the-cuff. This could develop into a bigger campaign of the same, but at the very least it will expose everyone to the system and how it functions.

Idea 2: We run a short based on the world of Ars Magica, using a few hybrid rules I can concoct to integrate Ars Magica's system with True20. Should it prove successful and desirable, this short would then become a prequel adventure to an actual campaign, to be developed as it is progressing.

Idea 2 has more promise of functionality, but has a few dangers--namely, that we will not actually be using True20, but a hybrid with Ars Magica rules for magic integrated into it. Not a perfect test of the system. Idea 1 is still fine in my opinion, and gives a good no-strings-attached trial run of True20, but of a very different flavor from Idea 2. And it could still roll into something bigger.

I'm up for either one. Or alternative ideas, for that matter.

[Yakumo]

Personally I like the first Idea. I would rather get a little familiar with the system before jumping into a 2 new system/hybrid. And both have a continuance option. If everyone else agrees, I'd like to see some ideas/creations info since from what I can glean, it seems like you've had an idea of what you want to do for quite a bit of time.

[VemuKhaham]

To me it seems a bit like the two options aren't clearly defined enough. I'm still feeling strongly about a game based on creating an organic society through the actions of several influential PCs. Also, like Yakumo, I'm indeed not really sure if I want to learn such a complicated Ars Magica system, and a hybrid with True20 seems even more daunting!

So basically what I'd like to see is a blend that is a bit less Ars Magica and a bit more kingdom building. If that sounds stubborn, that's what it may be, and if I am by now alone in this preference, let me know and I'll shut up.

To me a good blend would be something like this: we take the hierarchy system of Ars Magica, with at the top someone whose really at the top, possibly a mage, perhaps even a sorcerer king to really make the blend. Perhaps at the beginning, he starts out as a tribal shaman who has had a vision of a great empire - I'm just improvising here (as I usually do , so nothing is absolute yet). This primary wizard lord character may be played by either DM or player; perhaps a combination where both a player and the DM together play this character to guide the game forward.

Then there are the more talented minions like in Ars Magica who are the PCs. Finally you have the lowly folk, they're NPC's and simply people that we can manipulate at times, and usually listen to us.

The setting could be that of Ars Magica, mythical Europe, so that we have a detailed and perfect world ready for use without much work. The challenge could be similar: dealing with outside threats, both mundane and supernatural, but with the added purpose of building a society besides just helping a great mage become greater. Meanwhile, there could be interaction/intrigue between characters on the level of the covenant/court/council or whatever we would name it. Finally, Ars Magica deals with time in generations like this idea would.

System: we can go for True20, you said it had rules for anything, including magic, so why do we actually need complex Ars Magica rules? Perhaps we can loan just a few minor things, but basically whatever is too complex for True20 to handle might best simply be placed into the domain of freeforming. Though if you really think you can integrate the excellent Ars Magica magic system into True20 without us even noticing that it's a blend, I'm willing to trust you on that.

We can then run a short to learn True20, based around, for example, how the mage person started having dreams of grandeur. It would be a simple short adventure, like any rp game, without yet much attention to building a society/something. This dimension of the game then would only start slowly in the possible follow-up campaign.

So that's what I'm exited about. But I sincerely hope that somehow we can find a compromise that all of us will be exited about.

[TheZebraShakes™]

It's gonna take me a day or two to read this thread in its entirety, so I'll have to weigh in later.

But in terms of stuff to keep people active, I'm always willing to run a short dungeon crawl. I try to make them as fun as possible for the players and I like to try to post updates on a daily basis. People tend to like the shorts I run.

[TheUdjat]

Let me back up a bit and clarify my take on the True20/Ars Magica relationship, and that of a hybrid. Ars Magica has a lot going for it--a great system for magic, an excellent premise (a group of mages trying to build a living for themselves in the medieval world), and a lot of mechanical incentive to keep the game going. What it doesn't have is simplicity, and I think this is largely by design.

Ars Magica doesn't just have rules for how to adventure, like most roleplaying games, it has rules for tinkering around in a lab or workshop, for crafting spells, securing sources of magical power, etc. These are all things with a mechanical impact on the game, and therefore things that the characters have lots of incentive to pursue. But most game systems, True20 included, simply don't have this. Powers in True20 work and the system doesn't tell you inherently to devise a reason why. The reason is one of simplicity. Why complicate matters?

I think you're struggling with two opposing premises, Vemu. On the one hand, you seem to want something easy to adapt to and learn, particularly for players. On the other hand, you have a grand picture of epic society-building, with everything that comes with that. A lot of the latter takes rules to incorporate. After all, if there's no in-game representation of something, why do it?

Or I don't know, maybe I'm complicating it too much. I like consistent, easily comprehensible rules.

So that brings me back to the hybrid. Why do I feel it's necessary? To incorporate the things that Ars Magica loses when the setting is turned into a True20 game: Spells, research, Vim sources, etc. The long-term stuff. I already think I know how to do all that, at least in theory, and it's not outrageously complex. However, I don't want to sit down and figure it all out if there's not enough support or enthusiasm behind the idea.

Backing away from the technical side, though, I don't know that I'm on board with kingdom-building anyway. I think that may be too big for my tastes. There's nothing wrong with a character that has ambitions of grandeur, but I don't favor basing an entire campaign around it. I like Ars Magica's premise because there are several powerful characters and they must compromise and work together, relying on one another--in essence doing everything a good party of characters has to do, but in a much longer-term format. Maybe one of them does want to be a king. Maybe one of them is even an heir to some throne, somewhere. Let that character run with it, but leave room for the others to pursue their ambitions, whatever they may be--creating life, unearthing texts of ultimate power, dealing with devils, finding the realm of Faerie. Magi have the options of doing so much beyond the ordinary, I wouldn't want to cull that.

On the other hand, one could go for a more low-magic version of Ars Magica. Or scrap the mythic europe setting entirely for the potential restraint it imposes and do a fully fantasy setting. Maybe something low-power in a Conan-esque sort of way. Hell, the 'group of people' idea can be reincarnated in so many ways, under so many settings, from fantasy to wild west to outer space to post-apocalyptic. So many.

I guess the idea of a king building a nation just seems... dull to me, maybe. I dunno. Or too... character-specific. Maybe I don't like the hierarchy.

Which leads me more to side with 'run a quick short to test the system' without a specific setting in mind, so we can keep hammering all this out, and puzzle over whether a hybrid is even necessary or desired. There are so many ways to go with this, after all.

[TheUdjat]

Mar 1, 2009 20:53:36 GMT -5 TheZebraShakes™ said:

But in terms of stuff to keep people active, I'm always willing to run a short dungeon crawl. I try to make them as fun as possible for the players and I like to try to post updates on a daily basis. People tend to like the shorts I run.

This is true. Shakes rocks. And don't you owe us a follow-up on that Orc slavers thing? Anaqualia's been hungry for some adventure!

[Yakumo]

Personally I want something to jump into asap. I think the kingdom or whatever is the case-building campaign idea is great, but is something that needs quite a bit of tinkering and could very well be viable in the future if the idea is developed enough. For now though I think it might fall flat if we were to throw it up. And a game that falls flat is more damaging than no game at all.

[VemuKhaham]

I get all your points, except that you're saying that kingdombuilding requires complex rules. From the onset, I've been trying to keep away from anything as complex as FKo was, with rules for everything a kingdom had to have to grow, in what ways and into what. That's simply undoable, as I have experienced.

What's absolutely not undoable is get it back to its core: have a bunch of characters act out roles in the context of kingdom building. The kingdom building is basically freeform, but based on the successes of characters fighting enemies, dealing with diplomacy with others, intriguing among each other, build castles, till farms and deal with the gods. There's not necessarily anything mechanical about that, as always the focus is on the PCs when things get technical, just like D&D or such.

But as for me, I'm afraid I still have to be picky. I was largely in this to revive the boards, but a game still has to be to my taste as I'm still have no more time than I initially had, so I want to use it to something that really excites me. A short just for the sake of learning a system does not, and I still don't see why Ars Magica has to exclude just the thing that attracts me in the idea. I'm not saying I'm bowing out, I'm saying I'm not yet sure about Ars Magica, so there will have to something really good to compensate the loss.

[TheUdjat]

Mar 2, 2009 6:51:19 GMT -5 VemuKhaham said:

and I still don't see why Ars Magica has to exclude just the thing that attracts me in the idea.

This is the part I'm not comprehending. From what I've read, you don't actually want Ars Magica, you want kingdom-building--which has some elements in common with Ars Magica, but which it is not. When you talked about it above, it seemed like you wanted to add something to Ars Magica to turn it into your vision of FKo Revived--which it also is not, and which I'm about as excited about as you are an unrelated Short. Frankly, if I wanted to play Civilization, I already have the game.

So, I'm going to leave it in the air. I've talked plenty, probably too much, about how I feel about things, and now the thread is getting unwieldy enough to scare off others. So I'll back off and hope others chime in. The offer of running something is still there, as is the offer to revive Dragonlance.

[VemuKhaham]

Yeah, I'm sorry if I'm talking too much too, it tends to happen when I get excited, but as I am not the one offering to DM, I shouldn't, and I appreciate others who do offer to run something. I think I'll hang back a little and see what everyone comes up with, then see if I will jump into it.

[Yakumo]

We can start a new thread for that specific game concept. I feel like that would be a longer game anyway and one that would warrant more time and discussion before hand.

Udjat, is there any chance you are still interested in testing out True20 and setting out the rules and guidelines in the Shorts handout section or putting out a call for players?

[TheUdjat]

Mar 2, 2009 13:24:49 GMT -5 Yakumo said:

Udjat, is there any chance you are still interested in testing out True20 and setting out the rules and guidelines in the Shorts handout section or putting out a call for players?

Yeah, I can still test it out. Trying to pick a suitably short plotline--I have lots of ideas, but most of them are meant for longterm campaigns. Trying to settle on something nice and concise.

I'll post something about it as soon as I know what I'm doing.