game: Project: Deep Blue -- Alpha

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

reference: http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=1299

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Among the changes we're considering making to the system is a "maintenance" cost to high traits, and possible roleplaying penalties for traits.

I'm also open to ideas for how to make a trait important even if you don't have a power based on it.

Naturally, a final release would have flavor text.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

and layout and art

[Spriggan]

And Monkeys

[Fellfrosch]

E already knows this, but I really like this system--I think it has a lot of potential. It definitely needs some kind of use for (or penalty for) the low traits, though, or it's just too easy to min/max.

[Bill_Snyder]

Does anybody remember that old RPG where you just got drunk and killed people? I loved that one. I'm not sure what it was called. That was really the way I played all of them.

[Entsuropi]

Does anybody remember that old RPG where you just got drunk and killed people? I loved that one. I'm not sure what it was called. That was really the way I played all of them.

D&D. Any race, any class.

[Bill_Snyder]

Come to think of it, that's pretty much the way I approach real life, too.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

hi Bill

Welcome....
Please read our FAQ http://www.timewastersguide.com/boards/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=news;action=display;num=1080380396

[Lieutenant Kije]

I'm all for democracy, but I think the level of group decision making described in P:DB--A would make the game go pretty slow.  It's as if you had the group debate on the DC of any skill check in d20.  In my current group, that would take all night.  I like the DM/GM/referee as authority.  I like me some structure.  It helps facilitate story progression.  Not to mention the fact that any time you have a group debate within a roleplaying group (unless you're all happy on soma) the opportunities for strife are plentiful.

But as mentioned before I also like the dual-characteristics.  That's pretty cool.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

well, I think maybe I do have too much on there about debate. I think, basically, what I really want is to say that the player trying to use the power should put forward some justification: Here's the complexity I'm trying to do, here's why I should be able to do it.

[Spriggan]

This is why I don't care for diceless RPGs, it makes judgeing what you can and can't do too hard.

[Entsuropi]

This is why I don't care for diceless RPGs, it makes judgeing what you can and can't do too hard.

I find the opposite. Too often in games with dice, the strong barbarian constantly rolls fumbles on strength checks, while the nimble thief criticals on the same strength checks. Diceless games it's locked down.

[42]

So in other words you prefer the predictability and order of diceless games rather than the entropy of games with dice, right Ent?

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

I too have issues with the Nerf factor.

Its why Jared Sorenson wrote Octane. He got fed up with characters not being what they were supposed to be because of dice.

Ninja killer who keeps missing, Ninja Accountant with no skills who killed a horde of bad guys.

But saying diceless games make judging what you can and cant do too hard isnt true. Just because its diceless it doesnt mean it doesnt have a system. For instance Castle Falkenstein requires players to use cards instead of dice.

I think what you meant to say is that games without some sort of randomization tool, be it dice or cards or a twister style wheel (which would be fun wouldnt it) or even a coin are hard for you.

either that or the crux of the argument is really about narrative play.

All of that is neither here nor there though. Using the diceless system we have here, (because we dont plan on having dice) what would make the system better. Or if it isnt working for you, what would make it work,... besides dice.