Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

[thetwo]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Hrm... I like the more complete templates, actually. In-setting, it's fairly easy to say that the military only trains specific types of people who all have the same basic load specific to their job, and they have a little personal choice for other things that will help them do their job, from a given list.

Personally I wouldn't go about injecting random magic in an otherwise non-magical universe. I'm more accepting of it if either we're way back in swords-and-sorcery or if magic is a basic fact of life in the universe. I can also accept a sufficiently advanced alien race, but that's very difficult to do well due to its very nature. Still, I don't mind it too much, I'm just unlikely to make such a character myself.

Anyway, color me interested. I said this a little to early with Keylo's latest game and at some point decided I didn't care for the setting, but I think I'll like this one.

 

[Mamono Assault Force]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

The custom class idea near the bottom seemed much more appealing, if the characters were going to be in a similar setting, as the classes themselves, I believe, in order to actually have character customization, should just have the basic blueprints of the class, such as only having level 1 in the skills within the respective area.

For example, with most of the points in character creation spent, if you had two Marines, they wouldn't differ by a large enough margin, for you to actually call them different people. One might be a little better than the other, or take a few more hits, but other than that, it kind of puts off the illusion that these people were born in tubes, and all raised based on a child military enrichment program.

A customizable class could look like this;

Basic Infantry Marine:

Physical 6, Mental 2, Spiritual 4

Toughness --- 1 point, +10 Health

Focus --- 1 point, +10 Energy

Assault Rifle Training: +5 To damage with an Assault Rifle

+2 to Athletics, +2 to Resistance

And a character based off of it could look like this,

Name: Dexter Fisher

Description or Picture: Blue eyes, brown hair, and a very youthful looking face. A man of average build, and height.

Background: Dexter was in high school, nearing the days of college, when he eventually found that his parents could no longer support him financially, and that all of the scholarships he applied for rejected him. Thus, rendering him unable to pay for college at all. Dexter's dreams of becoming a psychological counselor, and helping people who had emotional problems live a happier life, were crushed. However, he thought they were, until he saw a military program, that promised to pay for his college education, and even give credits to classes that were unimportant to his Master's degree.

After signing up, and going through very rigorous training at a Space Marine boot camp, Dexter was eventually caught stealing power from a generator at night, in order to power a radio headset, claiming he couldn't sleep. They took away his security clearance because of this, to prevent him from having access to such facilities.

Then, one day, him, and select others, were called his squad, and were told they were to go and answer a distress signal on a local mining station on Mars... Little did Dexter know, he'd be fighting for his life, and the lives of his comrades, very soon...

Attributes:
Physical: 8
Mental: 7
Spiritual: 5

Derived Attributes:
Health: 95 / 95
Energy: 60 / 60
Arousal Threshold: 100 / 100

Combat Attributes:
Combat Value: 6
Defense Value: 6

Traits:
Smart(2): +4 to intelligence checks
Fast Metabolism(1): Regain 10 extra health between scenes
Quick Reflexes --- Pick up or draw a weapon and attack on the same turn

Skills:
+2 to Athletics
+2 to Resistance

Flaws:
Clumsy --- –2 penalty to Agility based checks
Rash --- –4 penalty to Wits based checks
Nervous --- –4 penalty against Fear effects

Training:
Assault Rifle Training(2): +10 To damage with an Assault Rifle
Toughness --- 3 point, +30 Health

Also... Just my thoughts on using character points to buy equipment, I think it is quite strange for someone to be less of an individual than someone else, just because they happen to have a car... Or a cell phone, or even a gun... Now that I see it being used again, is it really necessary to charge character development points when creating a character? I just think it's a little odd that someone would be less of a person, because one has nothing in their pockets, and the other has a house, a car, a gun, money, and a cell phone...

 

[Host]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

I don't know what that is

A link to Slave Hunt.

I was wondering if any of you had an opinion on mid-game system changes?

Sometimes it’s good, others it’s not. If someone made a character around one attack or skill which you later decided needed to be nerfed in such a way that anyone who was dependant on it became very weak, then that player wouldn’t be happy. Still, this is something that applies more to MMO’s than smaller things, where it’s almost always a good thing, especially if it’s being played for RP purposes. Of course, then there’s the need to explain the sudden (in)effectiveness of certain characters… Eh, personally, overall, I don’t mind it.

Templates are a good start, but you really either need to give people either the ability to choose like 3 different ones or allow a significant amount of customization within templates, to allow for enough variety. I mean, some things wouldn't have a serious impact on play - like, choosing which gun you wanted to use with a particular template, or which utility skill (assuming they were all equally useful).

This is all good. Especially things like, “Class A has to have X points of weapon skill, but as to which weapon the skill is for, you can choose from these weapons: A, B, C…”

you'll be making a character that suits you, similar to the way Shiva suits me, and you'll be forced to pick from a list of templates, which, in all likelihood, won't suit the character you want at all.

I call bullshit. Just because you can’t pick from every possible combination of stats does not mean that a character concept won’t be usable. No one but the biggest and most unrelenting prude would be unable to fit his or her character into a template. Saying that they would is like assuming that a net can’t catch fish because it has holes in it. Attempt to make any character using templates, they will work almost all of the time – and the times when they don’t are almost always for one of three reasons – either the character is too OP and wouldn’t have been allowed anyway, the character is too weak and wouldn’t have been allowed anyway, or the character is trying to use stats and skills that the game just doesn’t cover, in which case, again, it wouldn’t have been allowed anyway.

…That assumes, of course, that the templates are done well. Thankfully doing them well isn’t hard – there should be a template for each general character option that isn’t OP or under powered, as well as some left over stat points to customise. An example of general character options being, to use the Sci-Fi example, a marine (normal combat), special ops (stealth), heavy weapons guy (tank), engineer (skills guy), psyker (mage), and anything else you can think of that would make a plausibly playable character in the system.

That's definitely another option that I'll think about; I'd like to have more equipment that is actually useful beyond just lots of weapons.

I agree. Utility items, when done well, are awesome.

was thinking that possibly each template would give you some special discount. A fighter template would have 10 free points still, but might be able to buy combat training at a discount, a skill type character template would get extra skill points or something like that and so on.

Discounts I actually disagree on, mainly because I believe it would make for better roleplaying if the characters don’t feel pressured to put all their stats in the same areas as the template. That way someone who was sent to the army as punishment for blowing up their parent’s car with homemade explosives could take explosive knowledge without feeling as pressured to just take combat skills.

But that does lead to a more narrow field of exactly what kind of character you want, which would help, again, if the character templates came with the characters themselves... Background and all...

Templates should not come with full background. Partial background, however, can be there and in a sense already is, as the templates are based around a ‘theme’ of character – like a fighter, rouge, wizard etc. In other words, if you choose the one labelled ‘fighter’, it would be pretty difficult to give the character a background that had nothing to do with fighting.

So, the way I'm thinking you'd decide "Yeah, I'd like to be a high-damage tough guy/girl," and then look at the Marine templates and pick one of them based on what kind of Marine character that you like. Each one has 10 extra points for customization.

This is it exactly, and exactly how it should be.

Also, The more complete templates are better, in my opinion.

For example, with most of the points in character creation spent, if you had two Marines, they wouldn't differ by a large enough margin, for you to actually call them different people. One might be a little better than the other, or take a few more hits, but other than that, it kind of puts off the illusion that these people were born in tubes, and all raised based on a child military enrichment program.

Except they both would have different personalities and background, making them entirely different people, regardless of what their stats say. Stats are not the sole identifier for a character’s identity – they aren’t even the main part. A character’s identity comes from their alignment and background, which the templates don’t do anything about.

Your assertion that two characters of the same class would be nearly exactly alike in stats isn’t even valid in this example, as all the marines would have gone through identical training, would have been given identical weapons, and would all have needed to be above a certain minimum level before being allowed to actually fight.

Dexter was eventually caught stealing power from a generator at night, in order to power a radio headset, claiming he couldn't sleep. They took away his security clearance because of this, to prevent him from having access to such facilities.

Security level one is very likely ‘you’re allowed to go into the military base’, meaning he wouldn’t be in the military without it. Which is fitting, because kicking him out is likely what they’d do to someone trying to tamper with their equipment.

Also... Just my thoughts on using character points to buy equipment, I think it is quite strange for someone to be less of an individual than someone else, just because they happen to have a car... Or a cell phone, or even a gun... Now that I see it being used again, is it really necessary to charge character development points when creating a character? I just think it's a little odd that someone would be less of a person, because one has nothing in their pockets, and the other has a house, a car, a gun, money, and a cell phone...

I’m pretty sure humans don’t have their abilities decided for them by people writing on a sheet, or that everyone would have the exact same amount of stat points. This is what willing suspension of disbelief exists for.

 

[Janna]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Also... Just my thoughts on using character points to buy equipment, I think it is quite strange for someone to be less of an individual than someone else, just because they happen to have a car... Or a cell phone, or even a gun... Now that I see it being used again, is it really necessary to charge character development points when creating a character? I just think it's a little odd that someone would be less of a person, because one has nothing in their pockets, and the other has a house, a car, a gun, money, and a cell phone...

I'll probably have a longer response later today, depending on how busy I end up being today but I did want to address this since it's one of the things I've been really unhappy with in both Fear of the Dark and Unnnamed Nightmares and I'm committed to improving.

In a point based system, if you want an in-game statistical advantage, you need to spend points on it. If you're getting a bonus to skill checks or a bonus to damage or whatever it needs to be accounted for in some way otherwise you may as well dispense with the idea of having any kind of game system and just freeform everything.

That said, here's a list of things that people spent character points to buy:

Cottage (4 points)
Laptop (2 points)
Flashlight (1 point)
Cell Phone (1 point)
Motorcycle (2 points)
Car (3 pt)
Mountain Bike (1 point)
Single Dorm Room (1 point)
Mp3 Player(1 point)
Running shoes (1 point)

Blah. What total garbage. The various dwellings, in Fear of the Dark at least, were going to provide a mostly safe place to rest, but that isn't so vital or poweful that it should cost points. The laptops could potentially provide skill bonuses with internet research... if anybody decided to research something in Unnamed Nightmares and there wasn't some mysterious communications blackout. Some of it though... I don't even know what I was thinking.

Again, I mentioned that I lifted big chunks of this system from an existing game and it wanted to charge people 'minor personal gear' but yuck. I won't be doing that in the future.

Things that will still cost points will be stuff like weapons, armor, skill kits (that will probably do more than just provide a bonus since the cost of improving a skill is already fairly low) and non-combat stuff that does something actually useful and cool. Take the goggles from my suggested Marine Scout template; if I know, as GM, that there is, for really really sure, going to be a situation that comes up more than once in my game where that ability will be extremely useful and people without that ability will be functioning at a penalty (not a game ending one) then I feel good about charging point for it (and allowing other characters to pick it up from a list because they like to be prepared).

On the other hand, if someone wanted to by a holographic video album that displayed 3d represenations of their family or their dog or whatever, I wouldn't want to charge for that. Even if there was an outside possibility that later on they might be able to make a Technical skill check to hook it into the colony computer system and project a decoy somewhere; I'm not sure that would come up or be useful and so feel free to write it into your background or your equipment list.

Same with the really mundane stuff; flashlights, wallets, keychains or a spare pair of socks. That seems like something reasonable that anybody might have so feel free.

 

[Mamono Assault Force]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

I call bullshit. Just because you can’t pick from every possible combination of stats does not mean that a character concept won’t be usable. No one but the biggest and most unrelenting prude would be unable to fit his or her character into a template. Saying that they would is like assuming that a net can’t catch fish because it has holes in it. Attempt to make any character using templates, they will work almost all of the time – and the times when they don’t are almost always for one of three reasons – either the character is too OP and wouldn’t have been allowed anyway, the character is too weak and wouldn’t have been allowed anyway, or the character is trying to use stats and skills that the game just doesn’t cover, in which case, again, it wouldn’t have been allowed anyway.

I'm afraid I call ignorance on this one. I wasn't against the idea of a template at all, as I understood the purpose of it, given the nature of the PbP. However, the first idea thrown out, I did not like, as I already knew 10 points was hardly enough to give your character all the drawbacks and traits he/she needed, while still possibly changing other stats to actually make them seem like they're smarter than someone else, or maybe a little faster. And there's always at least one guy in a group that's just a better shot than everyone else. Your idea just suggests, "They act different, so that's all the difference they need, even though most of the people who took the same template have the same mental capacity, physical prowess, and spiritual connections." This idea, is bullshit. The main point of playing in a roleplay, is to have freedom of choice in the various happenings of the game, as well as a unique character that you can immerse yourself with. I'm fine with only half your points being spent into the class template, but I can't help but think you're more leaning towards most of our points being spent, rather than just the idea of a template itself, which does not warrant for in depth character customization.

If your only argument is that the character personalities is all the difference there needs to be, and that the character itself wouldn't have been allowed anyway, then it sounds like your mostly defending your idea of a template, and how a game should be run, rather than thinking of the players enjoyment. Which, as I'm sure you've forgotten, is an important part of a game. And I'm sure you've also forgotten, that a template is meant to be served, as a base for something else, not the near finite decision of what the finished thing is supposed to be.

Having so many points spent into a template, while still leaving lots of room for character customization, if only for the sake of making your character different than everyone else of the same class, is something I'm perfectly fine with. Such as having a character that just was never quite a good shot as everyone else, or was fat before they joined the military. They're going to have limitations, that will leave them a little behind everyone else, no matter what the situation is. Not every human being is going to follow the same suite, and become nearly identical in muscle mass, intelligence, and spiritual beliefs, unlike those Hollywood movies we all love, where all the dudes with huge muscles charge in, and defeat the bad guys. Doesn't work that way in real life, I'm afraid.

This is it exactly, and exactly how it should be.

Also, The more complete templates are better, in my opinion.

Maybe for slavehunt, but not for an in-depth roleplay. The more room to make a character unique, the better. And all the GM has to do, is say no to the people who make retarded character sheets. Which I'm sure even you could do.

Your assertion that two characters of the same class would be nearly exactly alike in stats isn’t even valid in this example, as all the marines would have gone through identical training, would have been given identical weapons, and would all have needed to be above a certain minimum level before being allowed to actually fight.

Which I believe the 20 point template covers, are those minimum levels. Not the whole characters themselves. Does going through boot camp, and running through the course, "Camp Victory" truly make everyone have a similar intellect? Or can only the people who play with the gadgets in the team actually not be a retard?

What about the Marines? Would they all have the same exact, superstitous belief in the supernatural? Which is what their stats suggest? That perhaps, if they kept a bunny leg on a keychain on their person, they'd get good luck? What about the guy that just never believed in that, and trusts solely in his skill, and will to survive?

While you prefer to force these decisions on characters, I'd suggest having both options available. One complete character class, all points spent, to meet the needs of host here, and a partially complete class, for the people that actually enjoy having a character that is different in skills, mind, and physical ability.

Thank you for reading this, and I look forward to your next attack on my words and ideas.

Moving on,

Things that will still cost points will be stuff like weapons, armor, skill kits (that will probably do more than just provide a bonus since the cost of improving a skill is already fairly low) and non-combat stuff that does something actually useful and cool. Take the goggles from my suggested Marine Scout template; if I know, as GM, that there is, for really really sure, going to be a situation that comes up more than once in my game where that ability will be extremely useful and people without that ability will be functioning at a penalty (not a game ending one) then I feel good about charging point for it (and allowing other characters to pick it up from a list because they like to be prepared).

I understand that bit... But isn't all that, based on the setting, what the characters would all get anyway? As part of the Marine Uniform? I mean, it would make sense if the particular classes got those things anyway, but only just the mandatory things they are obviously going to take with them, like pistols, rifles, and armor. Some of the extra stuff though, like the goggles and the threat detection hud, sound like something someone would have to kiss some ass for, rather than focus on their own personal development. I understand that for game reasons as well... But what if, if the characters don't necessarily buy the weapons, they still get them, but don't get any bonuses from actually buying the weapon from character creation? Essentially, a shitty weapon. Because one way or another, it'd be silly for someone to hop into the air lift that would take them to their ship, and depart for the distress signal, in just their clothing.

 

[DeMatt]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Hm. Well, I can spare another two pennies, I suppose.

A lot of this debate over "templates" and "equipment point costs" is really going to depend on the background to the roleplay in question. There's really two ways to describe this background:

1) You're a group deliberately formed to go deal with a situation.
2) You're a group which gets formed by being involved in a situation.

In option #1, you're a team - possibly created out of whatever joe blows happen to be standing around, but much more likely all drawn from a few sources. The template methodology works much better in this instance - you're all Marines, or cops, or what-have-you.

In option #2, you're a collection of survivors - you banded together because the situation forced you to, not so that you could go in and investigate it. Templates are not as good an idea for this background - your characters ought to be much more varied, as they might come from any walk of life.

Similarly, equipment costs should be determined based on the background. I agree that it's silly for a Marine to be doing an assault landing in plainclothes, and therefore his "basic" equipment would form part of the template. But is it so silly for him to only be in plainclothes, if he's on leave and visiting a bar when the story starts?

I think you should be at least tentatively deciding on a background and story setting before you determine whether to make templates and set equipment costs.

 

[thetwo]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

DeMatt does bring up a good point. In the context you've begun setting up for us, I suppose...

1.) We've all been drafted into the marines due to some sort of crisis, and thrown where-ever we approximately fit. Stats may vary wildly and equipment will be whatever we can get our hands on.

2.) We're the product of a space-age military that has had hundreds of years of practice churning out marines. We're the best of the best and have had intensive job-specific training, so we all have pretty much fixed stats within a single roll. One person may be a little stronger or quicker, but at this peak level there really isn't much difference. A standard lode of perfectly identical weapons is given to each person in a given roll, though a variety of rolls will be present on any given mission. There will be some small room for personal choice, but not terribly much because our standard lode takes up most of the weight we can efficiently carry.

Number one produces far more customization, number two far less. Of the two... well, number one allows for a greater variety of unique 'builds' and personalities, while number two is easier to balance and probably provides a smoother game all around. Number two also sounds more like the background you intend. And personally I don't mind. The personality may be a little more difficult - Jenn from AWMBI wouldn't ever join the military unless we were in situation one and even then there might be some doubt, as she'd resent being forced - but I'm sure I can manage.

Also, the real reason I wrote this post was to ask how this is coming along.

 

[Mamono Assault Force]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Janna says the ideas are all ready, although she's currently debating on how to implement them, I believe.

 

[Incubus]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Number 2 also lets you play space marines. And everyone loves space marines.

 

[Mamono Assault Force]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Number 2 also lets you play space marines. And everyone loves space marines.

 

[Host]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Bloody hell, I've run out of time to work on this. It should be good to go as is...

The traits are where I think I will almost certainly be doing some cutting; the three traits per attribute that give a +2 bonus to specific uses can probably be culled down a little. The idea with those traits originally was to give people ways to specialize their characters at a lower cost than actually increasing their Physical/Mental/Spiritual attributes. Those were the ones I noticed being less useful; I'm thinking that the more feat-style traits like "Fast Metabolism" and "Surprise Attack" seem like better way to model that kind of thing (and again, tweak the available traits based on the game that I'd want to run).

In a template system, you should probably keep these traits to allow people to further individualise their characters with relative ease.

I'm afraid I call ignorance on this one. I wasn't against the idea of a template at all, as I understood the purpose of it, given the nature of the PbP.

This would be a relevant statement if I thought you were against the idea of a template, or if that had anything to do with my argument. Unfortunately for your statement’s relevance, I don’t care whether you are or aren’t against the idea of a template, making this completely irrelevant. Of course, that doesn’t preclude me from pointing something out; you argued this,

I wasn't against the idea of a template at all, as I understood the purpose of it, given the nature of the PbP. However, the first idea thrown out, I did not like, as I already knew 10 points was hardly enough

Despite the fact that your first post against templates, the one that the section you quoted was replying to, was posted before Janna posted anything about the number of points that would be available.

However, the first idea thrown out, I did not like, as I already knew 10 points was hardly enough to give your character all the drawbacks and traits he/she needed, while still possibly changing other stats to actually make them seem like they're smarter than someone else, or maybe a little faster.

I ‘know’ just as much as you do about whether or not 10 points is enough to give a decent amount of customisation. Until a number of characters have been created using this formula, your ‘knowledge’ is nothing more than gut instinct.

Your idea just suggests, "They act different, so that's all the difference they need, even though most of the people who took the same template have the same mental capacity, physical prowess, and spiritual connections." This idea, is bullshit.

Are we looking at the same game system here? Because the one I’m looking at has only three stats that the player can do anything about; the first one of which refers to the character’s physical ability – not any particular point, their physical ability as a whole. So a character with a high physical ability could mean anything – a good runner, a hard hitter, an indestructible block – but doesn’t necessarily mean all of them. Sure, some characters may have identical physical stat levels, but that doesn’t mean they’re identical, not when the stat they’re based off is so vague in its meaning; for role playing purposes, a character with good physical could be considered to be any combination of the above, whatever their player wanted them to be – the possible characters are definitely not equal despite their stats, and before personality even gets added. The stats other than physical are similarly vague. Thanks to this magical thing called imagination, which you don’t seem to be familiar with, a player can have their character do things via a different form of prowess to others despite having the same stats.

I'm fine with only half your points being spent into the class template, but I can't help but think you're more leaning towards most of our points being spent, rather than just the idea of a template itself,

You wouldn’t happen to be getting this feeling from the part where I said,

Also, The more complete templates are better, in my opinion.

Would you? Surely that doesn’t make you think I want the option with the greater amount of points used up… Because yes, I do think that the 30-10 templates are the better ones and the 20-20 ones won’t stop characters from being OP.
I’m fine with 30 points being pre-spent, but I can’t help but think you’re leaning towards having more points available, instead of adhering to the whole point of a template – to remove the option of creating OP or weak characters.

which does not warrant for in depth character customization.

You forgot the IMO.

If your only argument is that the character personalities is all the difference there needs to be, and that the character itself wouldn't have been allowed anyway, then it sounds like your mostly defending your idea of a template, and how a game should be run, rather than thinking of the players enjoyment. Which, as I'm sure you've forgotten, is an important part of a game.

I’m thinking of the players’ enjoyment. I’m thinking of how much they enjoy making a character and then have the GM tell them, that despite their character being allowed by the rules, they won’t allow it, just because. I’m thinking of how much players enjoy making characters and then be overshadowed and useless because they didn’t have the stats they need – and had no way of knowing that while making the character. I’m thinking of how much they enjoy going through pages of things to do, formulas to calculate and a mountain of points to carefully dole out to areas they want, especially when they don’t have much of an idea about the character they’re going to use. I’m thinking of how much more they’d like not doing any of that. Templates can give them that enjoyment easily, where point buy has ridiculously greater trouble.

And I'm sure you've also forgotten, that a template is meant to be served, as a base for something else, not the near finite decision of what the finished thing is supposed to be.

I haven’t forgotten this, either. A template is meant to serve as a base for an actual character, which not only templates but stats in general have little to do with.

Maybe for slavehunt, but not for an in-depth roleplay.

Slave hunt is designed to be used for pretty much anything; just because it hasn’t been used for an in depth role-play yet doesn’t mean that it can’t. Well, you’ll have to wait for my SH RP to determine that for yourself.

And all the GM has to do, is say no to the people who make retarded character sheets. Which I'm sure even you could do.

Saying no to character sheets that are perfectly viable does not make for an enjoyable experience for the players. In fact, seeing it happen at all is enough to annoy some of us. When it is possible to use templates and bypass this problem, the option should be taken.

Does going through boot camp, and running through the course, "Camp Victory" truly make everyone have a similar intellect? Or can only the people who play with the gadgets in the team actually not be a retard?

Humans fit into a bell curve in terms of just about everything. Strength, intelligence, superstition, everything has its norm and that is where most people lie. There are a few highly intelligent people, a few retards, and everyone else sits in the middle. The intelligence of a soldier is the same as for everybody else; the majority are going to be around the same intelligence in the ‘average’ section. Anything lower would signify actual mental damage (which should be a disadvantage players can pick). Similarly for the other stats – they are where they would be for an average character of that type - having greater levels is excessive and would be for someone above the average in that area, while having lower levels would require someone to be damaged.

While you prefer to force these decisions on characters, I'd suggest having both options available.

I believe that would remove most of the point of having the template in the first place. We’re trying to stop people from making OP characters, and I think half of the points being allocated by the user will be too many to do that. Testing must be done.



You seem to think that stats define a character – strength means they are muscular, intelligence means they are a studious intellectual. They don’t, not if they’re being done well. When used properly, stats define what a character can do; a strong character is one who can move heavy objects and hit things hard, an intelligent character is one who can solve problems and notice things.

I’ll go off on a tangent for a moment; the deciding factor behind what games templates work best with is not, in my opinion, strict background vs. loose background, as DeMatt proposed. I find it’s games with many stats, which have very specific meanings each, and where a change of one in stat level means little, that cause templates to do horribly.

The first part is obvious; attempting to provide all good character combinations as templates becomes exponentially more difficult the more stats you add. Templates can work with all different kinds of characters easily, so long as the stats of the template have reasonably fuzzy meanings. High strength, for instance, may not mean ‘you have a muscle mass of this much’, it can just be used to mean you’re stronger than the people with low strength. The way in which you have high strength is never stated – maybe you’re muscle-y, yeah, but maybe you’ve got cybernetic limbs or you’ve got a super dense body or you’ve got the blessing of a god or you take power from the earth or... On the other hand, if the meaning of the stat is very distinct – in DnD for instance, the strength stat pretty much means muscle-mass, as those other things would be counted as bonuses, but not part of the stat itself – then templates don’t work as well, because then the character is stuck with being muscular if they pick that template. Last thing is how important a difference in numbers is – in a game where a difference in number means a very small change in ability level, templates do worse, because then two people with the same template really would be identical in ability.

I don’t know what system you think we’re using, but the stats for this game are perfect for templates. There are only three stats, the meanings of which are indistinct; 4 physical doesn’t mean ‘you can release exactly this much force’, doesn’t mean ‘you have exactly this much muscle mass’. On top of that, in the system currently being used… well, someone else said it better than me.

Mostly it's a game about small numbers. The difference between a Physical Stat of 4 and of 5 feels significant and the difference between a 4 and an 8 is extreme.

That was Janna, by the way. She didn’t say ‘the difference between 4 and 5 is very small’, she said ‘the difference between 4 and 5 feels significant’. It’s easily noticeable. People in the same category of strength are not exactly equal in strength, people with the same number of points in the mental stat are not exactly equal in intelligence, so on and so forth. Templates will work well with a spare 10 points of 40.

 

[Mamono Assault Force]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

This would be a relevant statement if I thought you were against the idea of a template, or if that had anything to do with my argument. Unfortunately for your statement’s relevance, I don’t care whether you are or aren’t against the idea of a template, making this completely irrelevant.

This was an unexpected thing I didn't think you would bring up, as my statement about my thoughts on a template in general were not directed at you, much rather, a statement of a fact. One that I should have made earlier, before I shook my head at the first suggestion of a template from Janna. That was merely a follow up for the actual argument, which was my dislike for the lack of customization room available in the first suggestion about templates. And unfortunately for the amount of time you took to write that part of your post up, your calling of irrelevance, is irrelevant, as you seem to think my opinion would only reach to you.

Despite the fact that your first post against templates, the one that the section you quoted was replying to, was posted before Janna posted anything about the number of points that would be available.

Let's look at my first complaints, shall we?

Templates, I think are better if the characters and their respective backgrounds themselves are part of the template, else, you'll be making a character that suits you, similar to the way Shiva suits me, and you'll be forced to pick from a list of templates, which, in all likelihood, won't suit the character you want at all. If I was going to join a game with templates laid out, made to prevent min-maxing, then I'd much rather have the character story, and background laid out as well. Else, I'd find that by not being able to make the character I want, skills, habits, pros-cons, and traits included, very difficult to actually think of a character description, and background that was at least semi-interesting, or added depth to the character in one case or another.

This is still what I stand by. Templates, "do" prevent pure customization, and if the certain RP, Janna's idea being the case, calls for it, it's a fate that cannot be avoided. And even though I don't like it, I'm not against it. You can mix and match these meanings however you wish to help your argument, but if you look more closely, which I'm sure you must have, given the length of time it took you to respond to this, you would have seen, was that I clearly show disliked for the idea, and still do. However, that doesn't mean I won't join Janna's RP when it comes out, which would be what someone who was, "against" templates would do. Much like Wallpaper, who was "against" animal sex, and quit AWMBI. There's a difference between the meanings, that I think you should clear up.

I ‘know’ just as much as you do about whether or not 10 points is enough to give a decent amount of customisation. Until a number of characters have been created using this formula, your ‘knowledge’ is nothing more than gut instinct.

I'm always happy to teach, and I'd like to introduce you to the system that Janna made, and even showed to us once in the thread,

Oh and just so this isn't an impenetrable wall of obscure and pointless stuff, here's a link to the most recently used version of the game system.

From Nightmares Unnamed

Having played in Icelus' game, using Janna's system, and having seen Janna spinning out examples of templates using that very same system, 10 points of character development already has a clear definition. At least, to those who pay attention.

Are we looking at the same game system here? Because the one I’m looking at has only three stats that the player can do anything about; the first one of which refers to the character’s physical ability – not any particular point, their physical ability as a whole. So a character with a high physical ability could mean anything – a good runner, a hard hitter, an indestructible block – but doesn’t necessarily mean all of them. Sure, some characters may have identical physical stat levels, but that doesn’t mean they’re identical, not when the stat they’re based off is so vague in its meaning; for role playing purposes, a character with good physical could be considered to be any combination of the above, whatever their player wanted them to be – the possible characters are definitely not equal despite their stats, and before personality even gets added. The stats other than physical are similarly vague. Thanks to this magical thing called imagination, which you don’t seem to be familiar with, a player can have their character do things via a different form of prowess to others despite having the same stats.

Are you suggesting, that because your idea hardly makes for any real difference between character's abilities, that we should, "pretend," they're different? Are you sure you're using your brain correctly? Because whether or not, say, the rolls would favor someone, for another, is hardly an argument over exactly how much ability they have in that area. And in case that was too hard to understand, given your confusion about if we're talking about the same game system, let me throw this example at you.

Both Juli and Eric are marines, they did not change their Physical stat, in favor of training stats, and equipment.

Juli and Eric are presented with an obstacle, a sliding metal door has been jammed shut, and is only open in a small gap, hardly enough to slip anything but their fingers through. Juli tells Eric to stand back, as she places her fingers between the crack, and pulls with all her might.

Jammed door DC: 18

Juli's roll: 5 + 8 Physics + 2 Athletics = 15 Resulting in failure.

Juli pulls with all her might, but cannot find the strength to pull the doors apart, which Eric laughs at, and quickly pushes her aside.

Eric's roll: 10 + 8 Physics + 2 Athletics = 20

Eric, with a little strain, pulls the doors apart enough for them to walk though. And after walking for some time though the complex, they eventually find their objective, a heavy research crate that was left behind in the evacuation, due to the chemical radiation, which Eric and Juli's suits protect them from. Upon inspection, the crate is very heavy. "It's filled with some kinda water..." Eric says, and bends down to lift it.

DC: 16

Eric's roll: 5 + 8 Physics + 2 Athletics = 15

Eric strains his back, and is unable to lift the box, as Juli laughs at him, and moves to carry it herself, rather than having Eric help her,

Juli's roll: 8 + 8 Physics + 2 Athletics = 18

Juli lifts the box, and laughs at Eric, "You're fuckin' useless, I gotta do everything around 'ere" she mocks, as Eric stands on guard, and escorts her safely back outside, to their ship...

Now... Eric didn't have much trouble with that door, did he? But how did Juli lift that box, when he couldn't? It's easy, when you pretend it makes sense, even though it doesn't. And even though you're fine with lying to yourself, I'm not, and see it as it is. Even my imagination can't hide the smell of bullshit, although I envy your imagination for having the ability to do that very thing.

You wouldn’t happen to be getting this feeling from the part where I said,

Quote:
Also, The more complete templates are better, in my opinion.

Would you? Surely that doesn’t make you think I want the option with the greater amount of points used up… Because yes, I do think that the 30-10 templates are the better ones and the 20-20 ones won’t stop characters from being OP.
I’m fine with 30 points being pre-spent, but I can’t help but think you’re leaning towards having more points available, instead of adhering to the whole point of a template – to remove the option of creating OP or weak characters.

Let me ask you something, are you lazy? Because you've used this argument before, and I think you're just running out of material.

either the character is too OP and wouldn’t have been allowed anyway, the character is too weak and wouldn’t have been allowed anyway, or the character is trying to use stats and skills that the game just doesn’t cover, in which case, again, it wouldn’t have been allowed anyway.

Which, I'll respond with,

And all the GM has to do, is say no to the people who make retarded character sheets. Which I'm sure even you could do.

As well as add to it, people who try to make OP character sheets, are normally bad role players, and shouldn't be role playing in the first place. And Incubus him/herself has stated that should he make an RP/PbP, he/she would outright exclude certain people from the game. While personally, and I realize now, based on your argument, that this is hard for you, that you find it hard, just to say NO to people who attempt OP character sheets. It's not hard, even a nice guy like you could do it, you just have to do it politely, and tell them to revise it, or not participate in the game altogether.

Template's shouldn't have the responsibility of preventing OP or weak characters, that's the GM's job, making your point about the purpose of templates, irrelevant, as what the GM says, goes, and he/she damn sure wouldn't need a template to help enforce that rule.

Once again, hard to understand, I apologize, so here's an example,

In OOC chat:

Heya, Janna, my character haz 12 Physical, 7 Mental, and 6 Spiritual,

Is dat okie?

Janna: No, it's not. Revise your character, I won't allow an OP character like that.

See how hard that was? I know it must be torture for you, and I wouldn't dare ask you to be a GM, and make those kinds of decisions. I'm not that malicious.

You forgot the IMO.

So did you, fellow partner in crime.

I’m thinking of the players’ enjoyment. I’m thinking of how much they enjoy making a character and then have the GM tell them, that despite their character being allowed by the rules, they won’t allow it, just because. I’m thinking of how much players enjoy making characters and then be overshadowed and useless because they didn’t have the stats they need – and had no way of knowing that while making the character. I’m thinking of how much they enjoy going through pages of things to do, formulas to calculate and a mountain of points to carefully dole out to areas they want, especially when they don’t have much of an idea about the character they’re going to use. I’m thinking of how much more they’d like not doing any of that. Templates can give them that enjoyment easily, where point buy has ridiculously greater trouble.

If someone is not willing to go through that, then they wouldn't be willing to write very detailed, and enthusiastic material for a role play. There's no excuse for being lazy, and absolutely no excuse for making far-fetched characters.

I haven’t forgotten this, either. A template is meant to serve as a base for an actual character, which not only templates but stats in general have little to do with.

Little do to with? Now I'm certain you must have hit your noggin. The character's choices, which are ultimately the player's choices, have little to do with the character sheet, or any template, this much is certain. However, how strong a character looks (Stength), how well it can interact with others (Charisma), and just how smart it is (Intellect), despite what you think, have a lot to do with the character As I couldn't make Dexter Fisher, who managed to hijack power from a military generator make quite a lot of sense, if I only gave him 2 Mentality, and no other traits to support that he could figure out how to do that.

Slave hunt is designed to be used for pretty much anything; just because it hasn’t been used for an in depth role-play yet doesn’t mean that it can’t. Well, you’ll have to wait for my SH RP to determine that for yourself.

I will, and I'd like for you to tell me when you've made it, just to see how versatile you could make it. But let me say this, if it's anything like what I saw, then the most depth you'll see is a good five sentences, from a really talented role player.

Saying no to character sheets that are perfectly viable does not make for an enjoyable experience for the players. In fact, seeing it happen at all is enough to annoy some of us. When it is possible to use templates and bypass this problem, the option should be taken.

Nor does having a character that you made up off the top of your head, just to make a background to fit the template, and end up making dull, and uninteresting posts, and do you know why? Because it's not their character, that they made, it's mostly yours. And there's no connection to be made, when it's not your own creation.

I believe that would remove most of the point of having the template in the first place. We’re trying to stop people from making OP characters, and I think half of the points being allocated by the user will be too many to do that. Testing must be done.

I believe that Janna's mention of her reason for the templates is due to her story, and not because you have a problem with people making OP characters. The world does not revolve around you, I'm afraid.

You seem to think that stats define a character – strength means they are muscular, intelligence means they are a studious intellectual. They don’t, not if they’re being done well. When used properly, stats define what a character can do; a strong character is one who can move heavy objects and hit things hard, an intelligent character is one who can solve problems and notice things.

Except that they do, at least, more than what you're giving them credit for. You seem to think, that no matter what the combination of stats, and no matter what kind of traits he/she has, you can make whatever character personality you wish. You can't. My character, for this example, is a professional football player, who has a muscle mass that would make people's jaws drop at the sight of it. He managed to get his high school degree by participating in his high school football program, since he was having troubles with his grades, and went on to be very famous. However, his career was ended when he hurt his foot. And although he recovered, and could walk, and even run on it just fine, except for the pain, mind, the doctors would not allow him to participate in football anymore.

Now, given this background, should I make him a scout? How about a medic? No? Why not, Host? Pray do tell, why not? "Because he's not smart enough to have possibly been either of those?" So, one way or another, I shouldn't make his Mentality stat, "10," right? Or could I? And still have it make sense?

Okay, we'll go with your logic, I'll pretend I made this character, strong, and powerful, yet not smart at all in class. But, oh no! Janna, in her role play, decided to involve a puzzle! And once he makes his roll, given how many points I put into his Mentality, and Smart stats and traits respectively, he beats the puzzle with ease, and could do it, over, and over, and over again with little trouble.

Does that make sense? Because your argument seems to suggest that it does. I mean, it has a loose meaning, after all, right? So who cares? Even though he's acting more intelligent, and logical than most around him, I'll still pretend he's a dumbass, with an IQ below 80.

I’ll go off on a tangent for a moment; the deciding factor behind what games templates work best with is not, in my opinion, strict background vs. loose background, as DeMatt proposed. I find it’s games with many stats, which have very specific meanings each, and where a change of one in stat level means little, that cause templates to do horribly.

The first part is obvious; attempting to provide all good character combinations as templates becomes exponentially more difficult the more stats you add. Templates can work with all different kinds of characters easily, so long as the stats of the template have reasonably fuzzy meanings. High strength, for instance, may not mean ‘you have a muscle mass of this much’, it can just be used to mean you’re stronger than the people with low strength. The way in which you have high strength is never stated – maybe you’re muscle-y, yeah, but maybe you’ve got cybernetic limbs or you’ve got a super dense body or you’ve got the blessing of a god or you take power from the earth or... On the other hand, if the meaning of the stat is very distinct – in DnD for instance, the strength stat pretty much means muscle-mass, as those other things would be counted as bonuses, but not part of the stat itself – then templates don’t work as well, because then the character is stuck with being muscular if they pick that template. Last thing is how important a difference in numbers is – in a game where a difference in number means a very small change in ability level, templates do worse, because then two people with the same template really would be identical in ability.

Fuzzy meanings or not, they are equal, provided you still have literally no points to spend, using your 10 point example. And you can refer to my little story about Eric and Juli for this as well. It just doesn't make sense.

And hell, now that I've thought about it, why are you actually supporting 10 points at all? I'm surprised, based on your argument, not to mention your very obvious love for Slave Hunt, and RK's method for character development, you actually said you're leaning towards the 10 points, rather than what you said before,

Also, The more complete templates are better, in my opinion.

Thus, having no customization for what you want, and being forced to pick from a drop down list of what the GM deems worthy. I may do that in a console game, but not in a role play.

I don’t know what system you think we’re using, but the stats for this game are perfect for templates. There are only three stats, the meanings of which are indistinct; 4 physical doesn’t mean ‘you can release exactly this much force’, doesn’t mean ‘you have exactly this much muscle mass’.

Indeed, but between two marines, one who kept his 8, and the other who decided to buy Brawn 3 times, I'm gonna bet that the one who got brawn is going to win in an arm wrestling contest. However, and be truthful, Host, how would I, based on a complete template, all points used, be able to tell the difference? Sure, they're not exactly the same, but one has to be better than the other. How would I know that? Would it just be some constant battle, going back and forth? Wouldn't that suggest that they really are the same? Making your argument void? They may not be the same, but other than how they act, it'd be hard not to call them, "Generic foot solders," or "clones", because there's no way to be able to tell them apart, based on their skills, and abilities.



Well, that was fun! And once again, I look forward to your next attack. Do try to make it before Thursday, though, I might have some internet downtime, and will be unable to grace you with a reply after that time.

 

[Janna]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Gentlemen, there's no fighting in the war room.

I understand that bit... But isn't all that, based on the setting, what the characters would all get anyway? As part of the Marine Uniform? I mean, it would make sense if the particular classes got those things anyway, but only just the mandatory things they are obviously going to take with them, like pistols, rifles, and armor. Some of the extra stuff though, like the goggles and the threat detection hud, sound like something someone would have to kiss some ass for, rather than focus on their own personal development.

First, let me just say, the goggles are essentially the Scout's primary equipment. It allows them to fulfill their job in the unit and leaving it out would make about the same sense as saying "Yes, I'd like to play a specialist medic but don't you dare tell me that I've got to carry any first aid supplies. I want my 2 CP."

Secondly, it seems like you're taking the attitude that somehow every point spent on a template is some kind of penalty against the character. That's just not true, at least, it shouldn't be. One of the biggest reasons that I opened this thread in the first place was in an attempt to find out what works, mechanically, and what doesn't.

I'm substantially less interested in theory and debate over esoteric stuff like "How does a template affect my RP?" because, in my opinion, it doesn't and shouldn't. Roleplay is something that takes place outside of the mechanical system that underlies a game; the game rules should get out of the way when it comes to character interaction and personality development.

To put it another way, if you think that saying you have a Physical stat of 7 means you can't play a tough guy then I don't think you'll ever be happy with the kind of game that I'm planning to run.

A lot of this debate over "templates" and "equipment point costs" is really going to depend on the background to the roleplay in question. There's really two ways to describe this background:

1) You're a group deliberately formed to go deal with a situation.

You're right, and option 1 is going to be the default for all the starting characters at the beginning of the game (that I'm planning). They are a team put together to go out and do something, although what they need to do won't be neccesarily known at the start which is why there will be a spread of different characters going.

2.) We're the product of a space-age military that has had hundreds of years of practice churning out marines. We're the best of the best and have had intensive job-specific training, so we all have pretty much fixed stats within a single roll. One person may be a little stronger or quicker, but at this peak level there really isn't much difference. A standard lode of perfectly identical weapons is given to each person in a given roll, though a variety of rolls will be present on any given mission. There will be some small room for personal choice, but not terribly much because our standard lode takes up most of the weight we can efficiently carry.

No drafting, definitely. As a GM, I'm not particularly interested in coralling people who would be doing the "I hate this job and I'm going to sneak out and escape as soon as I have the chance." I'm not RaptorJesus and I just don't have the patience or the will do deal with page after page of:

If a player wants to play and adversarial/confrontational/disruptive character, I'd just rather that they didn't play.

Anyway, not everybody in the game is neccesarily going to be playing as a marine (although that's one of the possibilities, I suppose. That would be a very combat effective group). I just posted a few quick thoughts on Marine templates since of the character types I'm planning (Marines, Officers, Specialists, Psionics), they're the easiest and most straightforward.

In a template system, you should probably keep these traits to allow people to further individualise their characters with relative ease.

We'll see. Like I said, I wasn't entirely happy with them and their costing. I'll have to poke at them a little more to see if they're going to be actually meaningful.

I haven’t forgotten this, either. A template is meant to serve as a base for an actual character, which not only templates but stats in general have little to do with.

This is absolutely correct.

Saying no to character sheets that are perfectly viable does not make for an enjoyable experience for the players.

On the other hand, saying yes to a character sheet that is drastically out of line with everything else in the game doesn't make for an enjoyable experience for anyone. I'd like to do as much as possible to close up the holes in the system but I'm not a professional game designer and even they don't get it right all the time. Regardless of what sort of templates I decide to use, there's still going to need to be GM approval and, unfortunately, probably GM rejection.

Take the listed Heavy Weapons Marine template. Assuming no other changes to the system, you could spend your 10 bonus points adding +50 damage with the Heavy Machine gun. I would take one look at that and send back the character sheet with a big red "See me after class" scrawled all over it.

The intelligence of a soldier is the same as for everybody else; the majority are going to be around the same intelligence in the ‘average’ section.

For whatever it's worth, the "average" stat in the game (i.e. "normal humans have stats of...") is 4. Because of the points available, you don't see very many characters with stats of 4. But anyway 4 + 2 (skill training) + 7 (average 2d6 roll) = Succeeds on Average difficulty tasks more than half the time.

Now... Eric didn't have much trouble with that door, did he? But how did Juli lift that box, when he couldn't? It's easy, when you pretend it makes sense, even though it doesn't. And even though you're fine with lying to yourself, I'm not, and see it as it is. Even my imagination can't hide the smell of bullshit, although I envy your imagination for having the ability to do that very thing.

This kind of thing happens in every single game out there; if all characters have a chance, no matter how small, to accomplish a given task, sooner or later results are going to come up where someone with a lower chance succeeds where someone with a higher chance fails.

It's like in sports; a less talented team can often win over a much more gifted opponent. Even in things like Olympic Powerlifting, it's not just a matter of measuring someone's maximum lifting potential and awarding the medals. The attempt makes a difference and all kinds of factors can change the way a given try turns out.

I believe that Janna's mention of her reason for the templates is due to her story, and not because you have a problem with people making OP characters. The world does not revolve around you, I'm afraid.

It can do two things. Seriously, though, it's intended more to enforce a minimum level of competence than to hold back a maximum. I don't want people to feel like their characters can't accomplish anything because I know how demotivating that can be.

They do fit the story, quite a bit, but I think it would be nice if I could say "Okay, here's the backstory and setting, give me characters that fit in." and expect to get them. Unfortunately, both because of system complexity and everybody's variant ideas about what fits, I think based on past experience that it would be wishful thinking.

My character...

Yes. If you build a character that is intended to drive a wedge between the gameplay and the rules and obtusely insist on being a jerkass about it, then by God you can make the game no fun. Congratulations, I crown you the World's Greatest Dad.

This is specifically the kind of thing that makes me hate roleplaying games and gamers.

 

[Keylo]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Pft, fighting in the war room is fine. In fact, it makes things more entertaining for those watching.

I'm substantially less interested in theory and debate over esoteric stuff like "How does a template affect my RP?" because, in my opinion, it doesn't and shouldn't. Roleplay is something that takes place outside of the mechanical system that underlies a game; the game rules should get out of the way when it comes to character interaction and personality development.

To put it another way, if you think that saying you have a Physical stat of 7 means you can't play a tough guy then I don't think you'll ever be happy with the kind of game that I'm planning to run.

I haven’t forgotten this, either. A template is meant to serve as a base for an actual character, which not only templates but stats in general have little to do with.

On the contrary, a play by post game can NOT have the roleplay completely separated from the mechanics. Should the roleplay not reflect upon the stats, the stats will become useless and the game would be better off as a general roleplay than a PbP game, as it will lack what is unique to one. RJ provided a lovely example with the 'strong but dumb' stat wise character solving a puzzle despite the stats saying otherwise.

Yes. If you build a character that is intended to drive a wedge between the gameplay and the rules and obtusely insist on being a jerkass about it, then by God you can make the game no fun. Congratulations, I crown you the World's Greatest Dad.

This is specifically the kind of thing that makes me hate roleplaying games and gamers.

Before you retort with this, let me state that you open yourself to what you hate by allowing for free-form roleplay completely unrestrained by the stats. If you allow for people to play their characters without having any sort of 'chain' to prevent certain distasteful actions, you have no grounds upon which to base complaints as you failed to take any preventive measures in the first place. Rambling on how you hate such behavior from certain gamers when you were the one who did nothing to stop the said behavior is nothing more than the immature whinings of a child.

No drafting, definitely. As a GM, I'm not particularly interested in coralling people who would be doing the "I hate this job and I'm going to sneak out and escape as soon as I have the chance." I'm not RaptorJesus and I just don't have the patience or the will do deal with page after page of:



If a player wants to play and adversarial/confrontational/disruptive character, I'd just rather that they didn't play.

While this is really up to GM preference, allow me to state that the outright banning/discouraging of adversarial/confrontational/disruptional characters holds the potential to decrease the believability of the storyline, in addition to making it seem unrealistic. In reality, you will always have internal conflict and schisms within the group, including those with extremely varying and radical trains of thought. Removing such completely simply because of your dislike, screams for the classic cheesy "random band of adventurers going off on a quest to save the world". Of course, this may be because of my personal hate of: "A group of random people getting together, liking/accepting each other off the bat, and then all working for the purpose of the greater good.", but to each their own.

 

[thetwo]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

On the contrary, a play by post game can NOT have the roleplay completely separated from the mechanics. Should the roleplay not reflect upon the stats, the stats will become useless and the game would be better off as a general roleplay than a PbP game, as it will lack what is unique to one. RJ provided a lovely example with the 'strong but dumb' stat wise character solving a puzzle despite the stats saying otherwise.

What he provided an example of was not picking the right character-template match. Either pick the template that matches your character or (even better) challenge yourself and come up with a character to fit the job you've been given. It's a different style that some people may like less and others may like more.

If you allow for people to play their characters without having any sort of 'chain' to prevent certain distasteful actions, you have no grounds upon which to base complaints as you failed to take any preventive measures in the first place. Rambling on how you hate such behavior from certain gamers when you were the one who did nothing to stop the said behavior is nothing more than the immature whinings of a child.

First off, this seems unnecessarily confrontational. Second, while it's hardly the most elegant solution, a GM simply disallowing an action is sometimes required, as not every situation can be foreseen and some of the unforeseen things can make the game un-fun for everyone involved.

While this is really up to GM preference, allow me to state that the outright banning/discouraging of adversarial/confrontational/disruptional characters holds the potential to decrease the believability of the storyline, in addition to making it seem unrealistic. In reality, you will always have internal conflict and schisms within the group, including those with extremely varying and radical trains of thought. Removing such completely simply because of your dislike, screams for the classic cheesy "random band of adventurers going off on a quest to save the world". Of course, this may be because of my personal hate of: "A group of random people getting together, liking/accepting each other off the bat, and then all working for the purpose of the greater good.", but to each their own.

While this is a valid criticism in general, it isn't valid in the specific setting of a military expedition from an advanced country. Only a certain subset of the population willingly enrolls in the military, and even among those (more and more often) groups are being chosen to discourage discord. There will still be disagreements but you're not going to have someone who lives to build discord, or who's fundamental worldview is incompatible with the military existing - they wouldn't last long in the military, where that kind of thing is looked down upon.

(Edit: that last paragraph is poorly worded, but I've expended all the effort on it that I'm willing to, at least for the moment)

 

[Janna]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

On the contrary, a play by post game can NOT have the roleplay completely separated from the mechanics.

To put it another way, if you think that saying you have a Physical stat of 7 means you can't play a tough guy then I don't think you'll ever be happy with the kind of game that I'm planning to run.

Before you retort with this, let me state that you open yourself to what you hate by allowing for free-form roleplay completely unrestrained by the stats. If you allow for people to play their characters without having any sort of 'chain' to prevent certain distasteful actions, you have no grounds upon which to base complaints as you failed to take any preventive measures in the first place. Rambling on how you hate such behavior from certain gamers when you were the one who did nothing to stop the said behavior is nothing more than the immature whinings of a child.

I'm not interested in formatting a proper casus belli or anything I think the social dynamic can take care of unwanted behavior better than fidgeting around with all kinds of extra rules about the rules; when I RP offline we never have any problems with this kind of thing. I don't care about 'proper grounds' -- this isn't a lease; if, as GM, I'm not liking what I'm seeing I'll just tell you so and we can either work together to get thing in order or you could play in a different game.

While this is really up to GM preference, allow me to state that the outright banning/discouraging of adversarial/confrontational/disruptional characters holds the potential to decrease the believability of the storyline, in addition to making it seem unrealistic.

I'm not concerned with that, either. You played AWMBI. I'm not going to even make the attempt to deal with a player like Kayi because, like RJ's "character" example above, they're operating from a position of bad faith in an effort to "win". I'm doing this for fun and since most of the work is on my side, I'm going to do my best to make sure that I'm having fun and giving other people who share my view the chance to have fun, too.

If someone thinks what I'm doing isn't their idea of fun, there are lots of other good RPs out there for them to play. I thought we covered this all the way back on page 1 with Loli's post

 

[BurntToast]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Having a character like Aya in a PBP game shouldn't be allowed, I guess. A character who is good in most area's with little weaknesses does make too easier for players. In my oppinion, if players trys to make a character that is too good, can't think of a better way t work it, the GM's should say something to them, and if the player refuses to make any changes then he/she should just not be allowed to play. Being able to shoot anything with ease then light anything that catchs you on fire does make it too easy, I guess.

 

[Mamono Assault Force]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Janna, your post following mine made me very angry, angry at how ignorant, and insulting it was, especially to a person you asked to post his opinions.

like RJ's "character" example above, they're operating from a position of bad faith in an effort to "win".

When did any of my characters act of "bad faith"? I don't recall that, nor any attempt to, "win" at anything. If you're referring to

Secondly, it seems like you're taking the attitude that somehow every point spent on a template is some kind of penalty against the character. That's just not true, at least, it shouldn't be. One of the biggest reasons that I opened this thread in the first place was in an attempt to find out what works, mechanically, and what doesn't.

Again, when did I say this? And let me ask you, are you sure I'm taking that attitude, after I posted that I would have been perfectly fine with 20 points? Hell, 10 points would be something I would possibly work with, if I was in the mood. But, it seems like you're taking the attitude that somehow everything I say is to discredit your game, which is not true.

To put it another way, if you think that saying you have a Physical stat of 7 means you can't play a tough guy then I don't think you'll ever be happy with the kind of game that I'm planning to run.

To put it another way, you think that saying you have a Physical stat of 2 means you can play a tough guy, based on this,

Roleplay is something that takes place outside of the mechanical system that underlies a game; the game rules should get out of the way when it comes to character interaction and personality development.

Given that roleplay in and of itself exists outside the realm of those numbers, what I read says, "Yes, even though you only have 2 physical, you may certainly claim in your post that you have big muscles, and are very much, a macho man."

"Just a role play" exists in a different place than, "A role playing PbP," as you're playing as the characters you've created. If you don't act like those characters, and instead just choose to do whatever you wish, then what does your character mean? Are you actually playing two characters? One for interaction, and development, and the other just to perform actions in the game?

If a player wants to play and adversarial/confrontational/disruptive character, I'd just rather that they didn't play.

... Are you serious? You mean to say, I can't make a character that's an asshole? That's naturally, thinking he's a badass, is confrontational? For god's sakes, why didn't you say that was the case? I would have immediately sided with host! Now I really feel like an idiot, my apologies. I thought I'd have more options for characters than that, and it was ignorant of me.

Yes. If you build a character that is intended to drive a wedge between the gameplay and the rules and obtusely insist on being a jerkass about it, then by God you can make the game no fun. Congratulations, I crown you the World's Greatest Dad.

Rather than acting a child, and making a paragraph devoid of any meaning beyond the purpose of being an asshole, I believe you could have made better use of that time.

And as far as you go, Host, you've won the debate, congratulations.

 

[Host]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

And as far as you go, Host, you've won the debate, congratulations.

Understood. If, for any reason, you want to argue anything in relation to our debate at a future point, RJ, I would ask that you do so through PMs, to not clutter the thread with a debate that is finished (and is thusly no longer on topic). Alright, now, I feel that I should state this, or someone’s definitely going to call me a hypocrite. Debates, arguments, whatever you want to call them, are about one point of view against another. Thusly, while I may have ‘won’ the debate through RJ surrendering, which is something I’m happy about, it’s not the important thing. As much as I enjoy winning, it’s the informing people about things part that I really debate for – and currently, RJ’s point of view is the last one on the board; even if he isn’t arguing anymore, as far as an observer would be concerned, his posts are the ones that haven’t been refuted – the ones that look right. (Yes, some of RJ’s points have been refuted, but not all of them, and not all in the same way that I would.)

Now, since I consider RJ’s points to be wrong, this basically means that my purpose in being in the debate – to determine what is correct and tell that to any who may be listening – is currently unfulfilled. (If I didn’t think the other side’s posts were wrong, why would I be debating? I mean, you can do it for fun, but I don’t have the time to do it if I’m not serious.) It is for this reason that I am going to go over RJ’s final posts, despite him no longer trying to go against my points.

RJ, first post.

This was an unexpected thing I didn't think you would bring up, as my statement about my thoughts on a template in general were not directed at you, much rather, a statement of a fact. One that I should have made earlier, before I shook my head at the first suggestion of a template from Janna. That was merely a follow up for the actual argument, which was my dislike for the lack of customization room available in the first suggestion about templates. And unfortunately for the amount of time you took to write that part of your post up, your calling of irrelevance, is irrelevant, as you seem to think my opinion would only reach to you.

I understood this while I was reading the post, the thing was, you added your mention of how you ‘didn’t mind templates’, in the middle of a paragraph made to refute my first point - entirely the wrong place for such, and so, I decided to play it for all it was worth, by assuming it to be part of your argument. It was a rather tricky play by me, and you did well to refute it last time, but now you’re in a corner; there’s not much you can say to justify putting it in the middle of a paragraph about my stuff when you’ve already said that it had nothing to do with me.

Let's look at my first complaints, shall we?

Templates, I think are better if the characters and their respective backgrounds themselves are part of the template, else, you'll be making a character that suits you, similar to the way Shiva suits me, and you'll be forced to pick from a list of templates, which, in all likelihood, won't suit the character you want at all. If I was going to join a game with templates laid out, made to prevent min-maxing, then I'd much rather have the character story, and background laid out as well. Else, I'd find that by not being able to make the character I want, skills, habits, pros-cons, and traits included, very difficult to actually think of a character description, and background that was at least semi-interesting, or added depth to the character in one case or another.

This is still what I stand by. Templates, "do" prevent pure customization, and if the certain RP, Janna's idea being the case, calls for it, it's a fate that cannot be avoided. And even though I don't like it, I'm not against it. You can mix and match these meanings however you wish to help your argument, but if you look more closely, which I'm sure you must have, given the length of time it took you to respond to this, you would have seen, was that I clearly show disliked for the idea, and still do. However, that doesn't mean I won't join Janna's RP when it comes out, which would be what someone who was, "against" templates would do. Much like Wallpaper, who was "against" animal sex, and quit AWMBI. There's a difference between the meanings, that I think you should clear up.

Points:

1. You’re correct that there’s a meaning I need to clear up, but it’s for you, and it’s the meaning of the word against. Despite what you apparently think, ‘against’ doesn't necessarily mean 'hate to the point of boycotting'. Someone can be against having something they prefer less for dinner than something they prefer more. Doesn't mean they won't eat the less preferred food when given to them. That is to say, ‘I don’t like it’ and ‘I am against it’ DO have the same meaning. Further more, this means that the idea 'I am not against templates at all' has the same meaning as 'I don't have any dislike for templates'. I'm willing to believe that you simply didn't understand what you were saying, and not just lying outright.

2. Did I just hear 'Templates, "do" prevent pure customization'? RJ, could you be learning?

Having played in Icelus' game, using Janna's system, and having seen Janna spinning out examples of templates using that very same system, 10 points of character development already has a clear definition.

Now, when did I say that the value of 10 points wasn't defined? I said you didn't have any knowledge. Granted, to be technical I should have said 'you don't have any practical knowledge', because, like me, you've only read the rules (and created one sheet, which wasn't relevant to the current setup). As I said before, tests need to be run to prove definitely whether 20-20 is better or 30-10 is better (and more to the point, what they’re better at). Now, I hardly have the time, but if someone else were willing, that would be most helpful...

Are you suggesting, that because your idea hardly makes for any real difference between character's abilities, that we should, "pretend," they're different?

My god! He IS learning!

(Example with Eric and Juli)

...Alright, maybe not. You remember that part where I told you that imagination would solve this? I'm going to assume that Eric is supposed to be a strongman character, while Juli is supposed to be agile. Watch, as I use my mystical powers of imagination to do what a competent GM would do...

"Juli tries to open the door." (fails)

"Juli manages to get it a little way but can't get it far enough open to walk through, or lock into place."

"Eric tries to open the door." (succeeds)

"Eric pulls the doors open."

Then with the ‘crate’, that I’ve made a tank, as that makes more sense:

"Eric tries to pick up the tank." (fails) (Now, watch this next part, where the GM knows that Eric is supposed to be strong and gives him a reason for failing.)

"Eric can't get a grip on the tank properly and can't pick it up."

"Juli tries to pick up the tank." (succeeds) (And watch again as the GM continues to RP properly.)

"Juli's lither fingers find handholds on the tank and hoists it with some effort."

And how, exactly, is this occurrence with templates any different from the same occurrence with two characters with equal stat points in some other Roleplay? Like, say, Luna and Iris from AWMBI, who both have equal strength stats – yet Luna is still thought of as more powerful than Iris, and not because of anything that’s happened to do with stats; hell, Iris beat Luna early on… in fact, little has happened with Luna and stats at all, she just ignores them to a degree and acts baddass, and then when it gets to fighting, she only does reasonably, not spectacular like one would expect.

Let me ask you something, are you lazy? Because you've used this argument before, and I think you're just running out of material.

You misunderstand, I wasn't making an argument. I was taking a jab at one of the multiple times you said something redundant. The mid-part was me saying that yes, I was arguing what I said I was arguing, and the last line was the exact same thing you wrote – only switched to my viewpoint.

As well as add to it, people who try to make OP character sheets, are normally bad role players, and shouldn't be role playing in the first place.

Except that a lot of the time, that’s wrong. I, myself, tend to make OP characters - in fact my SBS character was rejected for being too OP, something I'm working on fixing – because it's the characters with interesting backgrounds and stories that people RP as BEST. Someone will do substantially better RPing a favorite character than they will in any other role (– and favorite characters are almost always OP, because OP characters are interesting and what people wish they were –) and this includes people who are good at RPing. If I were to tell you to join an RP, you'd want to use Shiva or someone similar, right? And so you'd stat up your character and find that you had enough points to make her the way you wanted, and then sent her to the GM... Only to get back, 'too OP, make another', which wouldn't put you off playing at all. (Sarcasm, by the way.)

While personally, and I realize now, based on your argument, that this is hard for you, that you find it hard, just to say NO to people who attempt OP character sheets. It's not hard, even a nice guy like you could do it, you just have to do it politely, and tell them to revise it, or not participate in the game altogether.

You're right, it is hard for me to do that... and you're also right that it isn't hard at all. More than that, it's actually tempting to just say 'No, you can't use that character.' - after all, you're the GM and you don't want your game messed up. It's also tempting to let the players beat the monster, just because that's what the players should do; loosing would be wrong, despite what the rules say - and you're GM, I can change things to be the way they should be. It's certainly tempting to just ignore the rules completely sometimes, and go with what you feel is right - after all, you're the GM, all powerful and all knowing. And man, I'd really have to be lying through my teeth to say that rigging the rolls of players you don't like isn't tempting - and you are, after all, God, whom all shall bow before!

There are many words for people that don't follow their own rules; hypocrite and corrupt, for instance. But, as I will admit that the above stuff is sensationalist, the most relevant thing to call someone that doesn't follow their own rules is untrustworthy. People don’t like an untrustworthy GM in general; but since almost all GMs are corrupt in this manner, and also since it’s not easy to find an RP that’s good, people go with the best GM they can get in the circumstances. Rather like politicians, really. (Oh damn, I didn’t see that last bit coming… That parallel came from completely out of nowhere!)

Template's shouldn't have the responsibility of preventing OP or weak characters, that's the GM's job, making your point about the purpose of templates, irrelevant,

It is the job of the system to prevent OP or weak characters. It is the job of the GM to enforce the rules.

what the GM says, goes, and he/she damn sure wouldn't need a template to help enforce that rule.

UN... LIMITED... POWERRR!! Or, alternately,
I AM BECOME DEATH, DESTROYER OF WORLDS!

So did you, fellow partner in crime.

*High fives* I'd really have to worry if you hadn't refuted that one.

If someone is not willing to go through that, then they wouldn't be willing to write very detailed, and enthusiastic material for a role play.

Now that's funny... I thought we were talking about how to make players enjoy their experience, not how much annoyance they could take before quitting. Sure, people can go through that, it doesn't mean they'll enjoy doing it. It’s far better if they don’t have to do that. Seems to me you're not thinking of the players’ enjoyment, RJ. =/

And, because I have a feeling I know what your argument would have been; there is no reason to assume that, just because the hazing ritual that is character creation is removed, all the people who can’t RP worth a damn will start pouring in. Hell, AWMBI is a good indicator that character creation doesn’t stop them in the least (zing!). If anything, character stat-ing wears people out, takes them out of thinking about their character and into thinking about their stats, and generally makes them less likely to RP well.

I will, and I'd like for you to tell me when you've made it, just to see how versatile you could make it. But let me say this, if it's anything like what I saw, then the most depth you'll see is a good five sentences, from a really talented role player.

I'm pretty sure it won't be anything like what’s come before. No one has actually tried adding proper plotlines to the system before, and plus, I'm using a modified version. Although I am keeping the templates.

Nor does having a character that you made up off the top of your head, just to make a background to fit the template, and end up making dull, and uninteresting posts, and do you know why? Because it's not their character, that they made, it's mostly yours. And there's no connection to be made, when it's not your own creation.

Again there are multiple points:

1. All, or, at least, almost all preexisting characters that are not OP or weak will be able to fit into templates. If they can't the templates are being done horribly, horribly wrong. I'm not even going to bother trying to go into detail on this one, it should really be obvious.

2. The poor RPing caused by making a new character fit a template is the exact same as the poor RPing caused by making a new character for a point buy system. In both cases, the poor RPing comes from needing a character that isn't OP or weak and also fits with the plot; the character means little to the person and they wouldn’t want to use much effort with it.

I believe that Janna's mention of her reason for the templates is due to her story, and not because you have a problem with people making OP characters. The world does not revolve around you, I'm afraid.

That's an unusual argument to make. How can I be doing this for anything close to a personal reason when I don't even plan on playing the game, templates or no? (I just don't have the time, and there are a good three other games already in my lineup to join, you see. Maybe when I'm done with those.) Not to mention, I think allowing OP and weak characters is interesting and have nothing inherently against it; it allows for the possibility of some very enjoyable events, like one weak character killing an OP one through the blessing of the dice gods, or the skillful playing of the player. Thing is, Janna asked for help on getting rid of OP characters, and so that's what I'm arguing for.

Okay, we'll go with your logic, I'll pretend I made this character, strong, and powerful, yet not smart at all in class. But, oh no! Janna, in her role play, decided to involve a puzzle! And once he makes his roll, given how many points I put into his Mentality, and Smart stats and traits respectively, he beats the puzzle with ease, and could do it, over, and over, and over again with little trouble.

Does that make sense?

...You've never heard of idiot savants, have you? ...Or, for that matter, luck. Lets say you did put your footballer in a techie class. He is a strong person, not smart, and average of spirit. Lets say you don't even want to be rational about it, and give him no justification even though you could. (For instance: He was a good footballer, did serious damage to his spine and cracked his head in a game, and then suddenly found himself able to solve problems really easily - an unusual form of helpful brain damage, but not impossible, and certainly amusing enough that it would probably be allowed anyway.) But his stats say Weak, Smart, Average. (Obviously I'll be ignoring the last one because it actually matches.) He enters the game, and the GM, being smart and capable, has him step on a mirror and shatter it. Now when he fails so much at trying physical things, the GM has an excuse; bad luck. As for why he's so smart? Turns out, like I wrote in that first sentence way up there, that his mind, while not all that good personality wise, is able to decipher a problem just by looking at it.

And hell, now that I've thought about it, why are you actually supporting 10 points at all? I'm surprised, based on your argument, not to mention your very obvious love for Slave Hunt, and RK's method for character development, you actually said you're leaning towards the 10 points, rather than what you said before,

Also, The more complete templates are better, in my opinion.

Points:

1. There is a lot of customization in SH, it's just not in character points. It's number of races x number of classes x number of possible combinations of traits, disadvantages and backgrounds, which I'm not even going to begin trying to determine, especially since RK keeps changing the number of races and things (really doesn't make it easy). Remember, the backgrounds and traits/penalties are part of customization too. SH may actually have about the same amount of customization as the 30-10 option of this system looks like it will.

2. Wow, RJ, that was a sweet play. Take my quote out of it's initial context and it really looks like I was trying to go for utterly no customization, instead of just choosing the more complete of the two offered to me. Pretty much all the rest of my 'praise' in this post will likely be the sarcastic kind, but when I say I bow for you now, I mean it truthfully. *bows* ...Of course, I am forced to refute this; characters really should have at least some customization. It may be possible to play with everyone having the same stats... that doesn't mean it's easy on the GM. (...Although, I suppose, since there couldn't possibly be OP or weak characters, that it would be easier in that regard... still, that's going beyond the scope of what I'll suggest.)

Sure, (two characters with equal amounts of the same stat may) not (be) exactly the same, but one has to be better than the other. How would I know that? Would it just be some constant battle, going back and forth? Wouldn't that suggest that they really are the same? Making your argument void?

1.

Sure, they're not exactly the same, but one has to be better than the other. How would I know that?

Player 1: Hay GM, I'm making a marine who's muscular.
Player 2: Hay GM, I'm making a marine who's athletic.
GM: OHHH GOOD NOOOOO HOW AM I SUPOSED TO TELL WHICH ONE HAS THE GREATER PHYSICAL STRENGTH?!? WEEP! WAIL!

2. How would you know that Luna is better than Iris, or any other character with equal points in one stat to another? Again, this is not something only applicable to templates. But to answer your actual question, a back and forth battle would imply that they're close in ability, but by no means equal - you can have a back and forth battle between two people who're one point apart, and I don't see you calling them clones of each other. They may not even be close in the same manner of the stat; to use arm wrestling, they may be pushing the others' arm, locking their own in place to stop from being moved, or, hell, getting lucky and having their opponent's arm slip off the table (because there really isn’t many ways for dexterity to factor into arm wrestling).

other than how they act, it'd be hard not to call them, "Generic foot solders," or "clones", because there's no way to be able to tell them apart, based on their skills, and abilities.

Unusual that you would argue for me, but I agree - if characters didn't have distinct personalities, there'd be almost no way to tell them apart, with little regard to what their stats are. Good thing characters have personalities, then.

Well, that was fun! And once again, I look forward to your next attack. Do try to make it before Thursday, though, I might have some internet downtime, and will be unable to grace you with a reply after that time.

Host always works at his own pace, and chronically ignores deadlines.

I've had to split this into two posts. O_O

 

[Host]

Re: Build a Better Mousetrap - Janna's PbP Design Thread

Janna, first post.

For pretty much everything up to the first quote, hear hear!

As a GM, I'm not particularly interested in corralling people who would be doing the "I hate this job and I'm going to sneak out and escape as soon as I have the chance." I'm not RaptorJesus and I just don't have the patience or the will do deal with page after page offaceplam)

If a player wants to play and adversarial/confrontational/disruptive character, I'd just rather that they didn't play.

Now, there's a very fine line to be treading here, and there's a better way to phrase the argument. All games of this sort have at least some form of distinct plot laid out, where the characters go from point a to... one of the other points, but basically, they stay on the path that the game is going. What you want to remove are the people who burn a hole through the side of the station, using the decompression to jettison the players into deep space to die. The characters that don't want to be there but will still go along with things, maybe out of some sense of honor or duty, or are looking for their long lost brother, or, well fuck knows - as long as they stay on the track of the game, they're the ones that you don't want to remove.

On the other hand, saying yes to a character sheet that is drastically out of line with everything else in the game doesn't make for an enjoyable experience for anyone.

Agreed. The need is to find a perfect system, which unfortunately, hasn't been created yet. (Or if it has, by all that is Evil, give it to me already!)

I'd like to do as much as possible to close up the holes in the system but I'm not a professional game designer and even they don't get it right all the time. Regardless of what sort of templates I decide to use, there's still going to need to be GM approval and, unfortunately, probably GM rejection.

Understandable, and I something I can easily accept. The point is in the fact that you're trying to remove the annoyances, and at the very least, should be successfully minimizing them here.

Take the listed Heavy Weapons Marine template. Assuming no other changes to the system, you could spend your 10 bonus points adding +50 damage with the Heavy Machine gun. I would take one look at that and send back the character sheet with a big red "See me after class" scrawled all over it.

Capping. Like templates, it lacks the freeness you feel from point-buy, but will deal with that problem deftly... and more to the point, managing to get +50 damage from training with a gun is fairly ludicrous, so capping is actually reasonably intuitive in this instance. I would imagine that in a futuristic setting with ranged weaponry, you can only be accurate to a certain extent, and the main point of ass-kicking advancement would be in finding weapons with greater destructive potential (or at least, less shoddy versions of the ones the players have).

...Actually, consider this a proposal (if it were not already implemented): quality modifiers. Damaged weapons (which, depending on how advanced the military in the game is going to be, could be the starting level for all players) are worse then their normal counterparts, who are in turn overshadowed by pristine versions... as many levels as you want, of course, three is just for the example. Psionically boosted versions, perhaps?

Now... Eric didn't have much trouble with that door, did he? But how did Juli lift that box, when he couldn't? It's easy, when you pretend it makes sense, even though it doesn't. And even though you're fine with lying to yourself, I'm not, and see it as it is. Even my imagination can't hide the smell of bullshit, although I envy your imagination for having the ability to do that very thing.

This kind of thing happens in every single game out there; if all characters have a chance, no matter how small, to accomplish a given task, sooner or later results are going to come up where someone with a lower chance succeeds where someone with a higher chance fails.

It's like in sports; a less talented team can often win over a much more gifted opponent. Even in things like Olympic Powerlifting, it's not just a matter of measuring someone's maximum lifting potential and awarding the medals. The attempt makes a difference and all kinds of factors can change the way a given try turns out.

Indeed. As I like to think of it, 'the die represent both chance and fate.' If a character that shouldn't be able to do something does because they get a massive roll, then it should be RP'd as either utter fluke chance, or destiny itself.

I believe that Janna's mention of her reason for the templates is due to her story, and not because you have a problem with people making OP characters. The world does not revolve around you, I'm afraid.

It can do two things.

...Only two? p)

Yes. If you build a character that is intended to drive a wedge between the gameplay and the rules and obtusely insist on being a jerkass about it, then by God you can make the game no fun.

If, on the other hand, you build a character that has entirely different stats to their personality and aren’t a, 'jerkass', about it, it can actually be rather funny, when done right.

Congratulations, I crown you the World's Greatest Dad.

This is specifically the kind of thing that makes me hate roleplaying games and gamers.

Er? Sorry? You've completely thrown me for a loop, and I don't have the slightest clue what you mean. (And in case it's something really obvious and this could be taken as a joke, it's not; I seriously don't know what you're talking about.)



Keylo's first post. (I don't actually remember if you made more and won't be bothered to change this when I'm done.)

Pft, fighting in the war room is fine. In fact, it makes things more entertaining for those watching.

Agreed, and it isn’t just fun for the watchers either. It’s like a workout for the mind, you wouldn’t really say it ‘feels good’, but if you have the right mindset it’s actually rather enjoyable.

On the contrary, a play by post game can NOT have the roleplay completely separated from the mechanics. Should the roleplay not reflect upon the stats, the stats will become useless and the game would be better off as a general roleplay than a PbP game, as it will lack what is unique to one.

Of course, hence why I said 'little to do with', instead of 'nothing to do with'. They still have to have impact on the character, they just don't define them.

Before you retort with this, let me state that you open yourself to what you hate by allowing for free-form roleplay completely unrestrained by the stats.If you allow for people to play their characters without having any sort of 'chain' to prevent certain distasteful actions, you have no grounds upon which to base complaints as you failed to take any preventive measures in the first place.

The post you're replying to, after all the difficult words have been translated (and I do mean that seriously, I was looking at that sentence for about ten minutes before I got it), basically means 'if you make a character that doesn't fit their template when a better template's available, I won't allow that character.' ...which, to put things even more simply, means 'I'm not going to allow you to do whatever, this isn't a freeform RP.'

The quote you were replying to was her chain - she's taking a preventative measure against the characters from existing in the first place. ...Or did you already realize that, because you did say 'before you retort with this'... though I don't really see what the point of posting it in the first place would be if you already knew what the retort was.

the outright banning/discouraging of adversarial/confrontational/disruptional characters holds the potential to decrease the believability of the storyline, in addition to making it seem unrealistic.

You forgot 'less fun' and 'less interesting', but other than that, yes - in most situations and to a reasonable extent at least. Assumedly the party would have been with each other for some time, or at least in the military for some time, so anyone that would have wanted to escape or go batshit should have already done so (or had their spirit crushed); the remaining dissidents would all be the 'bitter but we'll do it anyway' type.


Thetwo's first post:

What he provided an example of was not picking the right character-template match. Either pick the template that matches your character or (even better) challenge yourself and come up with a character to fit the job you've been given. It's a different style that some people may like less and others may like more.

QUOTED. FOR. MOTHER. RAPING. TRUTH. Thetwo, if ever I need someone to explain some of my over-eloquent

You must be registered to see the links

, I know who to ask.

RJ's second post:

Janna, your post following mine made me very angry, angry at how ignorant, and insulting it was, especially to a person you asked to post his opinions.

Now now, RJ. All but the smallest part of Janna's post was perfectly civil and understandable, and the remaining part wasn't directed at you. The world doesn't revolve around you, you know. (I'm really enjoying throwing your words back at you. It's one of the best parts of an argument, IMO.) But joke aside, Janna's post is civil and not aimed at you; all of your problems are coming from a misinterpretation of Janna's meaning. There may also, possibly, be some dislike coming from the fact that she spoke on the against side of your argument, and I do seriously suggest that you take a moment to determine why you're angry... the post, or because it hurt your argument. I have found myself angry at people for doing something that I took offence to, when really I would normally be fine with what they were doing and it was my mind playing tricks on me from just not being happy with them in general. Now, as for your actual argument...

When did any of my characters act of "bad faith"? I don't recall that, nor any attempt to, "win" at anything.

That wasn't an insult directed at you, RJ. Janna was saying that the character you made wouldn't have been allowed because the character was designed to have nothing to do with its stats. Basically, that in real life, if someone made that character, the player who made it would be acting in bad faith. And as for the win part, I believe Janna means that they are considering 'making trouble for the actual players' to be 'winning' - which is why the quotation marks are there, because it's not actual winning as defined by the game.

Secondly, it seems like you're taking the attitude that somehow every point spent on a template is some kind of penalty against the character. That's just not true, at least, it shouldn't be. One of the biggest reasons that I opened this thread in the first place was in an attempt to find out what works, mechanically, and what doesn't.

Again, when did I say this?

Actually, that first part is probably the only point I didn't agree with. I think Janna was attempting to understand your dislike of templates in general, and the conclusion that she came to from your posts was that you thought the templates would be done poorly and the points spent, wasted... personally I thought that you were only against it because it limited the range of customizability, and out of a strange belief that a person's pre-existing characters won't be able to use a template if they don't get exactly a certain amount of points in each stat.

And that’s me done, I believe. Also, look at the first line of the sig, that’s what it’s there for after all (so I don’t have to state it in every post) – assume good humor whenever possible. And when not, remember that I’m a bastard.