What's new

Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)


Tassadar

Panda King
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
16,468
Reputation score
430
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

I think it's more in need of tweeks than outright game mechanics changes. Like maybe rolling a D40 or D30 instead of a D50, since 50 is the max any stat can be to start with, so stats play into it more than luck.

I like the idea of all mental stats just going to intelligence, since it makes the game much simpler to run. Also, just curious, how do you pick the random encounters and room layouts? Do you go Dice Man, just make it up as we go, or do you have a randomization program that has a list and just spits back a random value?
 
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

For the encounters I have a specific dice layout I created to help there so it doesn't become a simple matter of whatever your GM feels like tossing at you for an enemy situation. For the rooms, since I couldn't think of any kind of dice rolling system that wouldn't take days or weeks to work up, I went with randomly generating a room layout in my mind, then wrote down as much detail as I could do.

For the items I'm also using a rolling system for, which so far actually seems to be working fairly well.


Pheonix, I apologize on the messed up passing out part. I have it written in my notepad file that they only release you if your giving birth or pass out with another target in the room, whereas I have it in the main thread differently. Since I'm referring to my notebook and not the signup thread for that information, it is a mistake that should not have been made. That's what I get for trying to just type everything out instead of copy/pasting it.

It probably should get changed to being set up that way that if you pass out they release you regardless, so I have made that note in my books for changes to be made in version 2.

Also, in my notepad I have it written down that pleasure/grapple rolls are opposing dex + D50 rolls, not your dex+D50 Vs. enemy dex+str+D50. I have no idea why I wrote that in the signup thread like that since that is a completely retarded setup. I assure you all pleasure and grapple rolls HAVE been dex+D50 vs. dex+D50.

It's also a good suggestion to make normal enemies and bosses have to take a single turn to grapple, dealing some pleasure in that, and then trying to penetrate on their next turn. This has been noted down for a change in Version 2 as well.

The way I have my enemy stats set up is that at levels 1-3 they have the same stats. Levels 4-7 have a +5 of what a level 1-3's stats are, going on so forth in three sections.

Additionally on the stats, it has been mostly very bad rolls on the players side, and in a few cases the enemy side as well. I believe one such instance was during an orgasm roll where the PC had an Int of 45 and rolled a 2 for a total of 47, while the enemy after their dice roll added in had a 48, causing an orgasm. This has actually occurred on several grapple rolls where the enemy has only won by 5 points or less, as well as the penetration rolls. I've actually seen a lot of LOW number rolls on the dice since starting this, and not just on the PC side of things. The suggestion to lower the dice roll to a D40 or D30 is something I will consider for version 2, but it is by no means a definite that it will happen just yet. I need to see more rolls, specifically my stat layout for bosses vs. PC's first before making a change like that something I heavily consider.

As with all version 1's and first time run throughs of an rp like this, I DO anticipate that something I thought might work well may simply just not turn out the way I had envisioned or turn out to be flawed, broken etc.


A suggestion that has been made to me that I WILL be implementing from this point on is to list the enemys total roll vs. your characters base stat+roll and total. This I think would help to give an idea as to just if the stat system I have set is actually broken, or if it's more likely it is just exceptionally bad rolls. In several cases, namely rolling a 2 as a PC, that's about as fucked over a roll as you can get.


I will also admit Pheonix that as far as incorporating D&D rules for rolling here go, I know dick all about D&D, so that isn't likely to happen. I'm trying to juggle having a simplistic system for rolling that will also HOPEFULLY turn out to be fair in the end at the same time. Invariably, I may make some mistakes there. I'm going to propose a change here for right now since I can't go back to edit every single time a character has passed out and adjust for the enemy dismounting.

There are three options I can do to make it more fair now, while still allowing to go further in the test running.

Option 1: Make it so stamina regen is at minimum 74% of max, with a +d25 roll to determine if you can fully restore your stamina or not.

Option 2: Induct a new rule that you can only suffer stamina loss equal to one fifth (rounded up to the nearest whole number if needed) of the total amount of pleasure you gain. You would still gain the total amount of pleasure taken in KP, but you'd stand a much better chance of not passing out from a single attack.

Option 3: Combine BOTH options into a new super rule, giving both a higher regen rate AND a better chance of not passing out on a single attack.


I'm going to wait for some input from the players here before posting ANY new updates in character threads for these options. As soon as one option reaches 4 votes for, in this case the current majority, then it will be considered passed and I will immediately induct it.

For now the stats as they have been will continue to play out as I have, since I need to see if when the rolls start getting better how much that affects where enemy stats are vs. PC stats before declaring the system a partial or full failure. Does this sound fair for now to everyone?
 

Tassadar

Panda King
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
16,468
Reputation score
430
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

That's fair. The listing idea is good, it lets the players know it's not just that the creatures are overpowered, but that they are getting craptastic rolls. Might also make for entertaining dialogue. I personally think the system is wonderfully simple, it just boils down to finding a way to balance out chance vs stats so people don't get destroyed by piddly enemies, then take out a boss like it's nothing.

Your system is simple, and simple is good. For example, making a character in this game took me 5 minutes, most of which was the debate on whether I wanted max dexterity or intelligence. FYI, making a D&D character usually takes close to an hour. Simplicity in a game like this is wonderful.

I vote option 3, if we make a larger change we can see if that balances it properly, if it still doesn't maybe we can triangulate what needs fixing.
 

Pheonix Alugere

New member
Former Moderator
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
7,746
Reputation score
81
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

First off: I'll vote for option two, currently the stamina damage seems rather large, although that might not be an issue in version two.

Second: The only D&D statement I'm throwing out is where the rules suggest have an average encounter drain about a fourth of the parties resources (Spells, hp, etc), basically I just think a level one should be able to move less than half the time, although if that's just the dice rolls, then maybe its fine in that sense.

Third: Sense this is a trail run, I've basically decided to adopt the stance that it's best to point out every little thing that seems odd in this play through so that there'll be time to fix it or play around with it before why try version two. I'm not actually trying to criticize you, I'm just trying to give as thorough feedback as possible. (I basically consider this the alpha test which is basically the test run that is so buggy that the developers generally try to keep it to themselves rather than scare off potential customers. The next version will probably be significantly more balanced.)

Last: don't be afraid to fudge rolls if you need to. (A.K.A. even if Tassadar's rolls dictate his character should die in the first encounter, fudge them so that this isn't the case. Dead characters can't help you test things)
 

Tomoe

Lurker
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
563
Reputation score
1
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Roll 5 d10s. That should even the rolls out a bit more.
 
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Ok a note to all:

I have not been scared off as has been suggested, I simply have not been home since early Thursday morning. I AM still running this, taking notes, making slight changes, working on a V2 for someday, etc etc. That said, a few things.


1. I've noticed that despite the fact the options have been up for nearly TWO days now, only two people have actually voted on it, despite the fact I know at least three people have also read it and been logged on. Since this is the case, and I'm sure we all want to move along and further this, and make it better in the end, I am going to alter some things on my own and close down the voting for it. Those changes will now be listed as the next following numbers.

2. I have decided in this case with the lack of voting to pursue option 3, making it a 74+D25 on Stamina regeneration rolls AND a 1/5th of pleasure/KP taken = Stamina loss. So lets say you gain 5 pleasure/KP. You only would lose 1 stamina point. This makes it highly unlikely a single enemy attack, even if your not resisting, can take all of your stamina away.

3. I've decided that I will change the passing out system slightly. If you are being raped by a trap and pass out, you will wake up with the trap STILL raping you. Since they technically are not alive and can't really move themselves beyond simplistic movements IE: Grabbing you in vines, they will not release you because you have passed out. HOWEVER, from now on if you are being raped by enemies they WILL dismount you after you pass out. Additionally enemies will wait until you make a move after waking up before trying to attack you. This way if you suffered an orgasm and passed out, your not auto grappled upon waking up again simply because you can't move that turn.

4. I'm changing the grappling + penetration system slightly. From here on out, any further enemy encounters will see the following setup.

Enemy Encounter: Enemy uses one turn to grapple you, dealing pleasure and KP of their total win amount. You can also orgasm from this.
Enemy uses it's NEXT turn to attempt penetration. If you have suffered an orgasm from the previous attempt or from the initial grapple, then penetration will automatically succeed. Otherwise the penetration rolls will come into play. Regardless of if this succeeds or not, pleasure rolls will be done to determine how much more pleasure/KP you take. This seems fair, and probably should have been implemented in the beginning, but unfortunately was not. I can only hope that making this change now will help balance things out a little more.

In the regards for traps, since the entire purpose of the triggering trap system is that you DON'T see it coming until after you have triggered it, the ruling is if you trip it, your auto grappled AND penetrated. However with traps, if your roll is higher than it's roll on an escape attempt, you will COMPLETELY escape the traps clutches. Again, these changes have been noted in my notepad file, and will be updated and sent to Rule 34 so he has the updated rule sheets.


With that said, I'm going to start the RP up again and start the update process. Enjoy, and I hope these changes will patch things up well enough for now to test the rest of the system so we can determine how much more work, if any is needed.


One final note to ToxicShock: I have NOT included a give in portion to this setup. This is mostly because I couldn't figure out any true way of determining what would be fair for doing so, since giving in would sort of construe as gaining a fuck ton of corruption for letting yourself be raped. If someone can utilize this system and come up with a workable method of using a give in option without making it so OP that the enemy would corrupt you in a matter of a few turns doing that, then I'll look into the idea of including it in V 2.


EDIT: Forgot to include this here. On the subject of purposely fudging rolls to test the system:

NOT HAPPENING.

As a GM and a player, I don't believe in purposely messing with the rolls to achieve a desired result. Whatever the rolls are is how they should stand in my book. It boils down to having a trust worthy GM, which if you have a GM who has done that before to get what they want, how can you trust them? Also by doing that you totally defeat the purpose of trying to see if your entire rolling and stats system needs work on. By fudging the rolls, you essentially admit your current system isn't working the way it should be, or that your willing to cheat in order to see a particular result. At least for me, it's not an option I would ever consider.
 
Last edited:

Tassadar

Panda King
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
16,468
Reputation score
430
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Fair enough.
 
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Ok since this just came up here and I had to make a fast decision, and it needs to be addressed for a V 2....

In the event of a TIE on dice rolls, specifically for escaping penetration in this case here, how best to work around that?

Use a tie breaker roll or simply leave it as your character didn't roll higher, so the roll is a fail?
 

DeMatt

Lurker
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
2,385
Reputation score
47
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Ok since this just came up here and I had to make a fast decision, and it needs to be addressed for a V 2....

In the event of a TIE on dice rolls, specifically for escaping penetration in this case here, how best to work around that?

Use a tie breaker roll or simply leave it as your character didn't roll higher, so the roll is a fail?
I suggest, in my inimitably nosy fashion, that tie rolls result in no change in the situation. So, yes, a tied "escape penetration" roll would be a failure. A tied "grapple" roll would likewise be a failure - the PC would remain free.
 

Pheonix Alugere

New member
Former Moderator
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
7,746
Reputation score
81
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Ok since this just came up here and I had to make a fast decision, and it needs to be addressed for a V 2....

In the event of a TIE on dice rolls, specifically for escaping penetration in this case here, how best to work around that?

Use a tie breaker roll or simply leave it as your character didn't roll higher, so the roll is a fail?
I'd say, go with the person who has the higher bonus. (E.g. having a 45 of the relevant stat adds 45.45 to the roll with the decimal only coming in to resolve ties)

Edit: I've also fixed my post.
 

Tassadar

Panda King
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
16,468
Reputation score
430
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

I always reroll ties, but Phoenix suggestion is good.
 
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

It's a good suggestion, but unfortunately it falls through if the enemy has the same base stat you did in order to get the tie. I need something that would break it regardless of base stats, and either a reroll or an add on roll seems the best, unless I just leave it as a no change.
 

wallpaper

Lurker
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
2,523
Reputation score
17
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

*shifty eyes* Hey Siphon, is this still open to signups? XD It looks interesting. I haven't yet played as a non-GM in this sort of game and I'd like to give it a shot!
 
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Yeah I'm leaving it open for now. I'm able to keep up so far here so until I get to the point where I can't handle anymore people I am leaving this open.
 

wallpaper

Lurker
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
2,523
Reputation score
17
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Thanks, Siphon! I'll toss up a sheet once I'm done reading the rules and sign-up info, then. :D
 
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Aight.
 

wallpaper

Lurker
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
2,523
Reputation score
17
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Oh, decisions decisions. I haven't gotten a chance to try this character out yet!

Lumi


Stats: 0/500 XP, 0/500 KP

Strength: 40
Dexterity: 30
Vitality: 35
Energy: 20
Intelligence: 25

HP: 105/105
Stamina: 75/75

I hope I did this properly, please let me know if anything is off. ^_^ *glee*
 
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Looks good here. I'll set you up after I update Pheonix's thread.
 

miachan

Lurker
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
295
Reputation score
27
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Is it too late to jump on? How about a time-displacement character? Hehe.



Name: Christie Latele
Strength: 20
Dexterity: 50
Vitality: 30
Energy: 25
Intelligence: 25

HP: 90
Stamina: 80
EXP: 0/500 KP 0/500
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
SiphonTalvesh

SiphonTalvesh

Lurker
RP Moderator
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
8,896
Reputation score
236
Re: Citadel Of Corruption (SIGN-UPS)

Looks good to me, save the stamina needed to be changed from 105 to 80 which I already did for you.

25x2=50+30=80, not 105. Otherwise very nicely done. Making a thread for you soon.



A note to everyone:

I keep my account to register as always logged in so I can just load my firefox and be on the forums instead of logging in first. So IF for some reason after I close my firefox and it shows me as being online, but I'm not posting and it's been more than say an hour, chances are I'm actually not there at my computer, or I'm actually doing that elusive thing called sleep for once.
 
Top