Talk:Creating A GameSystem

From NexusCrossing

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Talk Pages TOC

[edit] Signatures

When you need to sign a section, the easiest way is to type out four tildes at the end of the post (~~~~). :-)



[edit] Degree of Success

"When initially suggesting this method, I referred to it as Rational Comparison because it uses ratio to compare two opposing values. What I was not aware of at the time, was that this method has been implemented in numerous computer games in both random and deterministic systems. A shortcoming I've observed in the system is that it does not solidly establish a degree of success, only a condition of success. Establishing degree of success in other implementations of this task resolution system continues to depend upon external mechanics, such as damage rolls or firepower checks... This got me to thinking, how one might measure degrees of success? Another idea has come to mind, but it is still contingent on an external value. The mechanic here would go as follows: 

Chance = random integer between 1 and (Skill+Difficulty) or 1d(S+D) for short.
Success = Chance/Difficulty

Chance is the percentile by which the random roll compares to the difficulty of the task. 50% would mean that the check thrown was half the difficulty of the task. Anything below 100% would be a failed check. 200% would mean that the check thrown doubled the difficulty and was more successful, 300% would mean the check thrown tripled the difficulty. 100% would always be possible, but 101% might not always be possible, and 200% won't be possible until the skill is equal to or greater than the difficulty of the task at hand. The greater extent to which the Skill exceeds the difficulty of the task the greater the possible degree of success, how consequential said degrees of success are could be set differently for each task. I call this method Rational Analysis, because it uses ratio to compare two opposing values and analyze the outcome of the check. The best part of this is, the probabilities will evaluate identically to that of rational comparison."

--Zachron

The degree of success is easily measured by looking at how many points they succeed by. If they have a 45% chance of success, and roll a 44 or 45, then they basically just barely succeeded. Also, a 46 or 47 means they just barely failed.
I know that this does not leave much room for spectacular successes in highly difficult tasks, but if the task is well outside of their league then they are more inclined towards a spectacular failure.
We could also say that a roll of a 1 is automatically spectacular, as is a roll of 100. 1 would be very good, 100 would be very bad. Emry 06:38, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Can you please put this Barney style for me. I'm not quite grasping how this is going to work exactlyFazanatox 07:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Basically, the chance to succeed is a percentile role (1d100). For percentile roles, you want to role low.  :) If for instance, you have a 50% chance of success, you want to roll a 50 or lower. A roll of a 1 is an automatic success. A roll of a 100 is an automatic failure. If your chance of success is 50, and you roll a 25, then it is possible that you got a spectacular success (critical hit type thing or similar). A roll of a 1 is pretty much a guaranteed crit.  :P That better? Emry 07:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


Moved this from the front page.
With this as the core mechanic, I don't think a skill cap is really needed, if still wanted, I think it should be higher than 255. This is due to the fact that setting a skill cap using stats will be easier if there isn't a total cap of 255. Also, if the game is going to expand to the point of a PC getting a castle and town built, people are going to need the ability to get a hefty leadership score and the sort. Fazanatox 07:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A Matter of Scale

Ok... I have stated what I like as the formula for determining the chance of success for a skill.

One of the reasons I like this formula is that it allows for an infinite amount of skill growth, while not effectively maxing out skills too quickly.

What I mean by this, is that it is easy to say you can have infinite strength, but if you get to a point where you ALWAYS succeed at any strength related task, then you have pretty much hit a wall.

HOWEVER, in order for this to work we need to decide on a scale for skills, and for tasks.

I think that it would be ok for skills and attributes to start out in the single digits, and then grow from there. As long as there are low level tasks that those skills can still achieve, things should be ok.

Also, how should skills and ability scores interact? Should they just be added together, in which case we may want to see that one or the other grows more slowly, or should ability scores provide a modifier of some sort for skills?

If they are added straight together, then realistically ability scores should be the ones to grow more slowly. Also there is the matter of deciding how fast scores change either way. It will all effect the feel of the game. Emry 06:22, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It could work with a multiplier type of thing. I haven't given it much thought, and it is very early/late for me. I will think more on this and put up a rational argument, other than just a random thought. Fazanatox


[edit] Special attacks and the such

Someone always wants to use two swords, or shoot three arrows at the same time. My question is how are we going to put these things in there. Obviously, it is impossible to try and think of all the cool little things we can try and do, so do we make a list, or should it just be a skill based chance?

For table top, there is a LOT more room for flexability. The GM can throw stuff together on the fly. For a computer version, there has to be code for everything that is possible. We want to make a starting list at least of all the obvious things.  :) Emry 02:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Preview

I had the great idea to start putting together what a character's page might just happen to possibly in the future have a chance of thinking it might almost seem similar to. This is just to put give an example of what has started to come about. This is in NO WAY finished nor is it even close to being a rough draft, it is just something that might help visualize what is put out so far.

character sheet???

[edit] Uncategorized stuff

Anyplace where I have things listed as "Uncategorized", that by default means the list is not done.  :P Those are things that have been thrown up in no particular order and are not yet sorted. Feel free to sort! Emry 02:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A Table

When we were discussing task resolution, Fazanatox brought up the point that a lot of players don't want to bring a calculator to the table. Here is an example chart that could be used to make things easier in a table top setting.

Image:Chance_Table.png

A number of game systems use charts of one sort or another. The problem often comes from the system using too many charts.  :P Anyone remember AD&D, or Role Master for that matter. ^.^ Emry 05:01, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Note

Thanks to the advent of 4e, players often times DO bring calculators to the game table now. :P BUT I still like the idea of having a chart around so they do not have too. :) Emry 06:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.nexuscrossing.org/index.php/Talk:Creating_A_GameSystem"
Personal tools