Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2014 21:55:20 GMT
i don't think the FATE thing required anymore than the quick paragraph I initially posted >.> It's actually less complicated than the one you went with, I thought, and one familiar to a lot of MMO players for just such a reason.
|
|
|
Post by Core on Feb 11, 2014 23:36:23 GMT
ooookays... right I think there has been some miss understand here and it's probably been from my end of stuff.. I've never played FATE or any of it's variations, my main knowledge of D6 systems comes from Westend games Starwars so assume I know absolutely nothing about it, which actually works as we want rules anyone can understand here... you've posted a couple of times what I took to be half the rules which would ether need to be modified before use, which lead to discussions of speed vs engine output and whether stealth needs to be a skill etc and quiet rightly got put down for getting way to complex, or what I was assuming were just basic stats which would need to be paired with a long list of skills or something.
SO lets start over and one of you post me a complete FATE thing for us to use in STO, I don't mean the rules book pdf or anything like that just the rules we would need in the simplest way possible, preferable summed up in a couple of paragraphs or less and I'll kick it back to the other officers to see what they think but if we shoot it down a second time we need to move on from discussing FATE endlessly
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2014 10:00:28 GMT
The quickest, easiest way is you get 10 skills - if you use the d6 rules each rank is worth the stated number of dice 1 Superb Skill (5 dice) 2 Great Skill (4 dice) 3 Good Skill (3 dice) 4 Fair Skill (2 dice)
everything else is 1 die. Roll all your dice. Add the number. Thats your result.
Roll over a 5 for simple tasks 10 - Challenging tasks 15 - Difficult Tasks
|
|
|
Post by Core on Feb 12, 2014 19:51:24 GMT
Ok not trying to be funny or obstinate here but again we are back to picking 10 different skills and assigning arbitrary amounts of d6 to them, I'm not necessarily against this but what are these skills gonna be? how do we decided whats to general and too focused, if you are only picking 3 things like we were suggesting, then being too general isn't really a problem as boiling the best areas of your character down into so few things means generalities like, medicine or engineering are expected and encouraged and just fine for what we need this for.
Iron's suggestion of the sneaky, quick etc is ok and I do kinda like it BUT I don't see it working on it's own as presented cos it still leaves us with the issue this was meant to fix, namely two character focusing on smarts like say Kacye and Lezori would technically be indistinguishable, with both of them having 5d6 to throw at intelligence related problem and there's no way Lezori should be able to preform brain surgery and Kacye shouldn't be able to use technobable technobable beams to upset the technobable and thus stop the technobable from happening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2014 20:08:52 GMT
1: its not "arbitrary". its fairly specific. 2: Every pnp game uses almost the same skills. we dont need to come up with a huge list. there ws the ones specifically from the star trek pnp game tess listed. which are fairly similar (just occasionally named differently) on the white wolf sheet i showed. or the list of FATE skills that also were already posted and are fairly similar to the other two examples.
|
|
|
Post by Core on Feb 12, 2014 21:27:27 GMT
ok first off not getting into debates on my use of words, I might of misused 'arbitrary' my point is we are assigning set numbers of D6 to things why? why do we need d6 and difficulty numbers at all? a percentage chance that something will work or not and a simple D100 roll seems far more basic and easily understood by people to me, sorry if I'm stuck up on the idea of a d100 roll vs small pile of d6, if people really prefer the d6 then I'll go with the d6 I'm perfectly familiar with that sort of system too and it's not that hard to roll 4d6 on the rolling page we were using I'm just not sold on the fact we really need to.
secondly the more skills characters have the longer it will take to make up a 'character stats' the more scope there is for bickering over if something is too general and the more of a choir it's going to be for people that don't really want to mess around with this sort of thing. Plus under the system I suggested if someone didn't want to be bothered with all this they can just be considered to be average at everything with no bonus or minus meaning they can just make a flat 100 roll at anything that doesn't require specific knowledge to see if they succeed, if I'm understanding fate right under that they would be stuck with 1d6 or maybe 2d6 in everything and thus a fairly high chance of failure at a lot of things, as the average of 2 d6 is 6 and the standard difficulty I'd probably be asking for if someone is worth rolling would be 10.
that said I could be worrying about nothing I'll sit down with the skill lists posted earlier and have a stab and making a character up and see how long it takes me, I'm not hating on FATE or getting at anyone's taste in systems my reasons for bringing these things up and asking these questions is so we can all debate them and we don't end up hitting problems down the line... I think what we really need at the moment is someone in the guild with 0 knowledge or interest in pen and paper and get them to offer there insights on this.
|
|
|
Post by ironwolf on Feb 13, 2014 4:26:30 GMT
Two options for you Core: Well, here's a quick rundown of FAE, ultralight edition: - There are six approaches: Careful, Clever, Flashy, Forceful, Quick, Sneaky. A description of them can be found here.
- You rank your approaches based on how much they exemplify your character, with 1 skill at Good, 2 at fair, 2 at average, and 1 at mediocre.
- You roleplay as normal, but when you get to a part where you need to roll, you say how your character uses one of their approaches to solve the problem, with GM approval.
- What your character can apply their approaches to depends on your background: a Tactical might be able to Cleverly fix a phaser rifle, but will be lost when it comes to the warpcore (probably). This is where the godmoding rule comes into play.
- When you roll, you roll four fudge dice (an online roller is here). A plus sign adds, a minus sign takes away, and a blank adds nothing.
- Add the result to the relevant skill you are rolling. Good skills add +3 to the roll, Fair +2, Average +1, and Mediocre +0. If you beat the difficulty value of the roll to GM set (or the GM's own roll) you succeed.
You can build ships this way too, just using Core's different skill sets for ships. Example of a character sheet: Name: Malexa Background
Approaches Good (+3): Careful Fair (+2): Clever, Forceful Average (+1): Sneaky, Flashy Mediocre (+0): Quick Name: Captain James T. Kirk Background
Approaches Good (+3): Flashy Fair (+2): Forceful, Sneaky Average (+1): Clever, Quick Mediocre (+0): Careful Name: Jean-Luc Picard BackgroundApproaches Good (+3): Careful Fair (+2): Flashy, Forceful Average (+1): Clever, Sneaky Mediocre (+0): Quick Name: Kira Nerys BackgroundGood (+3): Forceful Fair (+2): Careful, Quick Average (+1): Sneaky, Clever Mediocre (+0): Flashy I think the benefit of this system versus a skill is it also gives you a chance to put some thought into your character's personality, and so it can be used as a roleplaying tool for both character work and solving issues in the game. It also lets you get a feel for characters: Malexa's set seems to suggest she's the type to try and carefully evaluate a situation, and then either bring it to a conclusion that doesn't involve her having to run a lot, which is roughly how I pictured her. Also, don't feel constrained by this or like you have to roleplay a certain way now: two people could have the exact same skill tree and yet wildly different characters. There is a world of difference between say, the roguish Flashy of Han Solo and the dramatic speech Flashy of Captain Picard. Data, Bashir, and Jadzia might all have Clever as their top skill but they are all clever in different ways -- that's where the nuance of roleplay comes in. You can also have a character who thinks they are really good at being Forceful when they have it a Average for some needed levity. At the risk of straining your patience Core I can also come up with a version of this using actual, defined skills if you want to see that.
|
|
|
Post by Core on Feb 13, 2014 6:45:40 GMT
don't worry I have a lot of patience, however so far I remain unconvinced on FATE, SO lets try another approach what exactly is it that is wrong with the other system that the officers already agreed on? so far the only feed back on it that's been given is... it's more complex than FATE we should just use FATE, there were after all reasons we didn't just use FATE in the first place and the system I came up with is based to a very large degree on feed back from people in the guild and I'm really not seeing how it is 'more complex', so just what is wrong with it exactly as honestly I'm more inclined to tweak or fix that than modify FATE at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by ironwolf on Feb 24, 2014 0:42:19 GMT
don't worry I have a lot of patience, however so far I remain unconvinced on FATE, SO lets try another approach what exactly is it that is wrong with the other system that the officers already agreed on? so far the only feed back on it that's been given is... it's more complex than FATE we should just use FATE, there were after all reasons we didn't just use FATE in the first place and the system I came up with is based to a very large degree on feed back from people in the guild and I'm really not seeing how it is 'more complex', so just what is wrong with it exactly as honestly I'm more inclined to tweak or fix that than modify FATE at the moment. Eh, if you're unimpressed with FATE I'll use your system. I was just presenting you with options and if you found them lacking that's no problem. It certainly does solve the problem that the roller in STO is 1d100 for some reason. I'm just curious, will there be a set skill list or will we make up our own?
|
|
|
Post by Core on Feb 24, 2014 3:09:27 GMT
just makeing up our own really, I'm not thinking in terms of 'skills' so much as just a record what your character is good at, that way if your character happens to be especially good at something or has a talent for something outside what you'd normally expect them to be able to do it's clearly written down for everyone to see and no one can complain if for example someones diplomat is also a crack shot or a tactical officer also happens to be a great field mechanic too.
the main thing I'm pondering at the moment is whether 1 great 2 good and 2 bad is the right max, it's what was suggested back at the start but part of me things it's perhaps a little too strict maybe 1 great, 3 good and only 1 bad would be better. Opinions are welcome
|
|