Not a member yet? Why not Sign up today
Create an account  

 
The "How the #@%$ Is THAT Going To Work?" Thread

#1
So, uh, we've come to the realization that we sort of can't do much if we haven't established the exact system for the game yet. So, have a thread dedicated to the engine!

Right off the top of my head, we can get started with this:

Battles
The way I envisioned dungeons was "DMs are like a combination of ASBN refs and tabletop game masters." As such, I was thinking that while players could definitely roleplay, actual Pokémon battles would be akin to ASBN matches, complete with similar format. (The old quest threads -- like the ones where you went up against shadow Latias and Latios -- could serve as examples of NPC matches. If you need a refresher, I could dig them up.) But thoughts on that?

Everything Else
No, seriously. Skills. HOW DO THEY WORK.

As in, to start things off, how tabletop is this going to be? Are we going to be a freeform RPG outside of the battle system -- as in, if you went up to punch something, you wouldn't have to roll for it? Should we implement skills for specific things (and DMs can determine what should and shouldn't get rolls) and then maybe use dice and rolls? (Maybe even see if there's a plugin for MyBB that lets you roll and show your score?) Is the latter too complicated for players? What should be considered a skill?

And from there, we can probably work out exactly what dungeon threads would look like -- as in, how they're formatted, what the rules for them would be like, and so forth.
Holmes: Punch me in the face.
Watson: Punch you?
Holmes: Yes! Punch me! In the face! Didn't you hear me?
Watson: I always hear "punch me in the face" when you're speaking, but it's usually subtext.
- Sherlock, "The Scandal in Belgravia"

The girl responsible for this atrocity to mankind. And this one. And these
Reply

#2
- Battles. First up, I think Pokemon battles should be shorter. Like, unless this is a boss fight, these should not be taking one hundred turns. Either by making attacks hit harder or making HP/Energy default lower, but if you're going through a dungeon, a long battle is going to slow everything down to a crawl.

(Normal matches, of course, could have normal everything because they'd be matches and not rp!)

Pokemon battles can stick to ASBN format imo! As for player actions, stats should definitely play a role in how successful a player is at accomplishing certain tasks, but I don't want to be dice checking for every action my character takes.

Finally, re skills - I talked about an alternate idea for skills in the other thread (oops), but in the event that we go with a 'level up this skill when you use it' type deal...

Well, this kind of thing worries me because it reminds me of this old forum I use to rp on. Your character needed to have very specific skills with a score of 1-100, and without those skills your character wasn't allowed to even have an idea of what they were doing. Additionally, you weren't allowed to 'know' something unless you had a specific 'lore' approved by the mods. You started with two lores and fifty skill points!

I recall one time where my character was shopping, saw a flute, picked it up and blew on it to hear the sound/play a nonsense tune for the fun of it, and I actually got stopped by a mod and told he wasn't allowed to have any idea what the flute is because he lacked a lore for what a flute was and no skill points for playing one. Basically, they fully expected me to play my character like a special child who had never seen an instrument before in his life despite growing up in a large, bustling city.

Anyway, point is that if we are going to have skill building, can we please keep it simple and not create skills for chewing food, so to speak? Each skill should be unique and distinct from the others and serve a purpose.

/words
Catfish
Reply

#3
Quote:The way I envisioned dungeons was "DMs are like a combination of ASBN refs and tabletop game masters." As such, I was thinking that while players could definitely roleplay, actual Pokémon battles would be akin to ASBN matches, complete with similar format. (The old quest threads -- like the ones where you went up against shadow Latias and Latios -- could serve as examples of NPC matches. If you need a refresher, I could dig them up.) But thoughts on that?
Agreed. Bar the odd flub here and there the ASB system worked well. Deenaa has a point too that we probably don't want battles to drag out for too long (compared to how they did in the past). Thus there's two solutions for that as mentioned before:
- I change the code (e.g. attacks do 2x what they currently do)
- People start from less health (as in, in the past it was 100% - could go with 50%, etc. Or it's adjustable by the DM so they can vary how long the challenge goes for!)
I think the latter is both the easier and better. Also could vary how much health any opponent starts with too, allowing more freedom for the DM.

Quote:As in, to start things off, how tabletop is this going to be? Are we going to be a freeform RPG outside of the battle system -- as in, if you went up to punch something, you wouldn't have to roll for it? Should we implement skills for specific things (and DMs can determine what should and shouldn't get rolls) and then maybe use dice and rolls? (Maybe even see if there's a plugin for MyBB that lets you roll and show your score?) Is the latter too complicated for players? What should be considered a skill?
The first one (no rolls for simpler skills, punching something, etc).
[Image: suisdbsf.png]
By TwilightBlade of PC. =D
Reply

#4
I think the ASB battle system, with the calculator and all, is quite fine for battles. We could add a human template to it, maybe, to account for the trainers taking part in the battles, but it probably at least shouldn't happen very often that trainers are fighting Pokémon, so it's not that big of a deal.

As for character stats. I do agree that we should keep it reasonably simple. It's easier to keep track of, and it'll also play faster. So, I propose that instead of skill points, we should simply have stats that affect your success. For instance:

Strength - affects how much damage you do when punching, how much you can lift/push/drag, how far you can throw things, etc.
Endurance - affects how well you take blows, how long you can keep running, how well you resist poison/freezing/burns/etc.
Speed - affects your turn in the battle (á la initiative in D&D, speed score in ASB), how fast you can run/walk/climb/swim, how well you can accomplish tasks requiring extreme quickness (stealing the key from the Team Rocket Grunt without them noticing), etc.
Charisma - mainly affects your actions with npc's; for instance, affects how well you could persuade a wild Pokémon that you're not a threat, or an NPC to follow you, and how well you can tell if an NPC is up to no good, and so on. (maybe even affecting Pokémon catching?)
Insight/Perception - affects your ability to notice details around you, your ability to make conclusions about them, and, for example, your ability to tell apart different Joys and Jennifers (i.e. the Sherlock Holmes stat).

In the beginning, when you create your character, you'd get X amount of points to distribute in your stats. That way, people have very thorough control over what type of a character they get, and the DM has some grasp of who's good at what - plus we can almost completely eliminate the chance of having tons of Sue characters running around. The stats could obviously be different than what I suggested, and maybe we don't quite need five, but the point is, of course, to discuss that.

As for leveling up, I'd say you get experience in a similar manner to Pokémon (opposing trainer's level = amount of experience gained, experience needed = level +1), except for roleplaying situations like tough NPC encounters, dungeon puzzles, catching Pokémon, and so on, which would be up to the DM's discretion in terms of experience gain. When you gain a level, you'd get a number of points to distribute in your stats as you please.
EDIT: ORRRR we could do what Deenaa suggested and go with "doing an action that requires Stat X will make Stat X grow", because that would make an awful lot of sense.

Maybe we could do a D&D-esque bonus system, as well, where you get bonuses for trying out things if your stat exceeds 10, and minuses if it's, say, lower than 5. Strategy!
[Image: sentretsig_zps54cdacf8.png]








- The Sentret Moderator -
- Reads, writes and draws -
- The resident fan of Sentret -
- Also in charge of some stuff -




Reply

#5
I am very pro: asb system for battles. I really need a mod to be involved in battles and telling me how the wild/npc pokemon reacts, because if I'm left to do things by myself I feel like I'm cheating, and also like I'm just talking to myself and it isn't much rp going on... (I know that's pretty much just me who feels that way, but w/e I thought I'd mention it...) It's really only fun for me when a mod is directly involved. :\

As for length of battle, I think that should depend largely on the plot. If the wild/npc pokemon is not related to plot at all, it can be a very short battle (if it makes sense level-wise). If it's related to plot, it can be short of long if the plot deems it necessary.

Re: stats... I think stats only make much sense if this rp is set in some sort of au. For example, a medieval au, where trainers come as knights, princes, etc., idk. (I suck at history sorry haha 9_9) Maybe I'm thinking of this too literally...?

I hope I can add questions to this discussion?

I'm wondering about two things. One, the amount of realism in this rp. For example - if a sandlash uses slash on a marill, will there be serious bloody wounds? If it uses slash on a drifloon will it cut off one of those tendril-things? If the attack hits, and all. (I ask not because I'm planning but because I need to know how far characters can go, both in their heads, their past and in their actions.)

Second, I'm interested in how much each character's individual plot will affect the entire forum's plot. Let's say one person decides to steal all the starter pokemon (and manages) - does that enter the existing plot for the forum?

Other smaller things about battling/pokemon. Are pokemon limited to four attacks like in the games, or is it more asb-like where they know all their moves? What about abilities? How is exp gained, how are pokemon caught (can one be caught after it's knocked out?), uhm... I think that's it haha.

Sorry if these were answered elsewhere! :[ And I can give my own opinion on these questions, if wanted!
Reply

#6
Why would stats only apply in a medieval setting? You need as much dexterity to use a bow as to use a gun (which, admittedly, might not make it into the game), and climbing walls or kicking in a door is still going to require strength. There are a lot of tabletop systems set in the modern world that use statistics as well. And, after all, the exact statistics are entirely customizable, so you can easily have a Pokemon Empathy skill or a Capturing skill.

Additionally, I feel like you guys might be getting tunneled in by the fact that you have a working ASB formula. Pathos, most roleplaying systems will have a DM anyway, so it doesn't have to be the old ASB system for you to avoid writing in entire battles of your own. Also I must at this point note that I kinda enjoyed it more when the numbers were up to the refs to decide and so many more factors could be taken into consideration, rather than just checking a spreadsheet and knowing what to expect. One of the most fun parts of being a ref/DM for me was explaining the rationale behind my decisions to the participants, and feeling good that I had narrated a unique event rather than embellishing a bunch of formulas. But that's me personally. Honestly speaking I know this is probably way too ambitious and unlikely to come to pass, but I'd be happy to see a new system, or even an adaptation of some of the other tabletop systems. I admired the way Paranoia worked, and Nobilis has an awesome, if impractical system. nWoD and DnD (3, 3.5, 4, Next) are the systems I have a bit more experience with, but of course I think if you guys wanted any of those systems you could've just started a Play by Post forum instead. What I mean is that I think the ASB format is a bit restrictive for the kind of system I see you guys envisioning, and I'd hate for any stray ideas to be discarded just because they're impractical in ASB terms.
Reply

#7
(6th Oct 2012, 07:01 PM)pathos Wrote: I am very pro: asb system for battles. I really need a mod to be involved in battles and telling me how the wild/npc pokemon reacts, because if I'm left to do things by myself I feel like I'm cheating, and also like I'm just talking to myself and it isn't much rp going on... (I know that's pretty much just me who feels that way, but w/e I thought I'd mention it...) It's really only fun for me when a mod is directly involved. :\

Y'know, I can definitely see this, especially when it comes to keeping battles fair and whatnot.

So l'awesome! We're all in agreement that ASB-style matches are A-OK, and bobandbill's work doesn't have to go to waste. :D

As for the comments on the length, also taking that into consideration, especially since battles tended to be godawfully long in our version of the ASBN. (Remember that time you and I had a battle where we weren't allowed to directly damage each other, Deenaa? Yeah, that was fun. And by that, I mean I'm pretty sure we went for ten rounds with the same Pokémon.) On a personal level, I like bobandbill's suggestion of changing the calculator so that attacks do 2x damage as they did previously. It'd work for our hypothetical future ASB system too, right?

I also like pathos's idea of having it be up to a case-by-case basis and/or adjustable by the DM. That and leaving that up to the DM allows crazy things like "whoops having your Charmander walk through the rain affects its health" to happen.

Buuut I'm also definitely up for anything too. You guys are coming up with pretty sweet suggestions, so feel free to keep voicing your opinions on that or on each others' ideas.

Quote:I'm wondering about two things. One, the amount of realism in this rp. For example - if a sandlash uses slash on a marill, will there be serious bloody wounds? If it uses slash on a drifloon will it cut off one of those tendril-things? If the attack hits, and all. (I ask not because I'm planning but because I need to know how far characters can go, both in their heads, their past and in their actions.)

This would probably be best left to the DM, I'd imagine. Like, for me, this would get a "hells yes" because I love writing stuff like this, but I also know that other writers on this forum (or in general) aren't too comfy with that. Because each dungeon is separate, we can have each plot -- and therefore everything that happens to the characters in them -- be unique and separated from every other plot. As in, if you don't want your character's arm to be cut off in the next story thread, you totally can "reset" damages and go into the next dungeon as if nothing happened. Of course, you can also permanently add bits that come as a result of plots from other dungeons to your characters, so if you decide you really liked playing your character with only one arm, you can make that be a part of your character and include that tidbit to their backstory.

Or at least that's one way to do it. I'm definitely thinking it'd be a good idea to avoid making a hard-and-fast rule concerning how bloody a dungeon has to be. Realistic, sure, I agree we should totally include words about how to make battles seem logical and realistic, but we should definitely let the DM decide whether they're comfortable with letting a dungeon get violent or if they're going to assume Pokémon go easy on each other (or impose dungeon rules that force Pokémon to go easy on each other) in order to avoid gore.

Dunno. Does that make much sense there?

And will totally answer those other questions when I get back! Or others can have at it for their two cents!
Holmes: Punch me in the face.
Watson: Punch you?
Holmes: Yes! Punch me! In the face! Didn't you hear me?
Watson: I always hear "punch me in the face" when you're speaking, but it's usually subtext.
- Sherlock, "The Scandal in Belgravia"

The girl responsible for this atrocity to mankind. And this one. And these
Reply

#8
(6th Oct 2012, 08:39 PM)Sentrovasi Wrote: Why would stats only apply in a medieval setting? You need as much dexterity to use a bow as to use a gun (which, admittedly, might not make it into the game), and climbing walls or kicking in a door is still going to require strength. There are a lot of tabletop systems set in the modern world that use statistics as well. And, after all, the exact statistics are entirely customizable, so you can easily have a Pokemon Empathy skill or a Capturing skill.

I did specify an au, not just medieval au! I feel like having stats for people in a world like we live in is sort of strange because people don't really have stats. Thinking along these lines, I'm not used to rping (or asbing, either) with stats - the only one that really has any use is speed, really... Well, in rp I'm sure the stats have more use, but you can't really tell what a pokemon's stats are in the rp? It's just a meta-thing, calculating damage and such.

I don't know, I think I just prefer to have that sort of stuff in the character's personality, i.e. not very good with empathy or something?

Quote:Additionally, I feel like you guys might be getting tunneled in by the fact that you have a working ASB formula. Pathos, most roleplaying systems will have a DM anyway, so it doesn't have to be the old ASB system for you to avoid writing in entire battles of your own. Also I must at this point note that I kinda enjoyed it more when the numbers were up to the refs to decide and so many more factors could be taken into consideration, rather than just checking a spreadsheet and knowing what to expect. One of the most fun parts of being a ref/DM for me was explaining the rationale behind my decisions to the participants, and feeling good that I had narrated a unique event rather than embellishing a bunch of formulas. But that's me personally. Honestly speaking I know this is probably way too ambitious and unlikely to come to pass, but I'd be happy to see a new system, or even an adaptation of some of the other tabletop systems. I admired the way Paranoia worked, and Nobilis has an awesome, if impractical system. nWoD and DnD (3, 3.5, 4, Next) are the systems I have a bit more experience with, but of course I think if you guys wanted any of those systems you could've just started a Play by Post forum instead. What I mean is that I think the ASB format is a bit restrictive for the kind of system I see you guys envisioning, and I'd hate for any stray ideas to be discarded just because they're impractical in ASB terms.

I don't know, most rp's I've checked had the player deciding whether their pokemon got hit or not, how much it did, etc. >_> That didn't seem any fun to me at all. I mean, I don't think the damage calculation has to be exactly like asb, I'm fine with dm's playing around with it the way they see fit as long as it makes sense, you know? I just... prefer if there is a dm... telling me what's going on in the battle haha...

(6th Oct 2012, 08:53 PM)Jax Wrote: This would probably be best left to the DM, I'd imagine. Like, for me, this would get a "hells yes" because I love writing stuff like this, but I also know that other writers on this forum (or in general) aren't too comfy with that. Because each dungeon is separate, we can have each plot -- and therefore everything that happens to the characters in them -- be unique and separated from every other plot. As in, if you don't want your character's arm to be cut off in the next story thread, you totally can "reset" damages and go into the next dungeon as if nothing happened. Of course, you can also permanently add bits that come as a result of plots from other dungeons to your characters, so if you decide you really liked playing your character with only one arm, you can make that be a part of your character and include that tidbit to their backstory.

Or at least that's one way to do it. I'm definitely thinking it'd be a good idea to avoid making a hard-and-fast rule concerning how bloody a dungeon has to be. Realistic, sure, I agree we should totally include words about how to make battles seem logical and realistic, but we should definitely let the DM decide whether they're comfortable with letting a dungeon get violent or if they're going to assume Pokémon go easy on each other (or impose dungeon rules that force Pokémon to go easy on each other) in order to avoid gore.

Hm. I'm good with level of gore being left to dm. I have a personal preference for characters with a continuous plot arc, and all characters' plots affecting each other; I feel like being able to reset things makes it less fun and realistic and also makes your decisions less, er, dangerous I guess haha. But also, if your decisions don't impact others, I sort of feel like you're in a bubble with yourself and it's sad. 9_9 weh. Oh well, maybe I'm alone in that...
Reply

#9
(6th Oct 2012, 09:29 PM)pathos Wrote: I did specify an au, not just medieval au! I feel like having stats for people in a world like we live in is sort of strange because people don't really have stats. Thinking along these lines, I'm not used to rping (or asbing, either) with stats - the only one that really has any use is speed, really... Well, in rp I'm sure the stats have more use, but you can't really tell what a pokemon's stats are in the rp? It's just a meta-thing, calculating damage and such.

I don't know, I think I just prefer to have that sort of stuff in the character's personality, i.e. not very good with empathy or something?

Whaddya mean people don't have stats? Sure, we don't usually talk about it, but in a world where people are judged arbitrarily with grades and certificates, I'd say stats play a pretty big part. A character who isn't very empathetic would basically have a lower charisma or chutzpah than one who was. Think about those situations where people say "on a scale of one to ten...": we think about stats all the time. Furthermore, making an AU doesn't seem to add anything to the situation; people are no more complex in medieval times as they are now, fundamentally speaking. When I go to school to study, it's an intelligence check. When I try to complete an obstacle course, it's a dexterity/strength check. When I say no to drugs, it's a wisdom check. They don't replace your traits, they merely put a value to them: if you're not comfortable with arbitrary values, then consider it a relative scale to the "average person". Because it is.

Quote:I don't know, most rp's I've checked had the player deciding whether their pokemon got hit or not, how much it did, etc. >_> That didn't seem any fun to me at all. I mean, I don't think the damage calculation has to be exactly like asb, I'm fine with dm's playing around with it the way they see fit as long as it makes sense, you know? I just... prefer if there is a dm... telling me what's going on in the battle haha...

:( This right after I mentioned so many good RP systems which don't do that? It's like you didn't check them out at all.

Quote:Hm. I'm good with level of gore being left to dm. I have a personal preference for characters with a continuous plot arc, and all characters' plots affecting each other; I feel like being able to reset things makes it less fun and realistic and also makes your decisions less, er, dangerous I guess haha. But also, if your decisions don't impact others, I sort of feel like you're in a bubble with yourself and it's sad. 9_9 weh. Oh well, maybe I'm alone in that...

I agree with that, and think that the amount of gore should be detailed by the players, really: in an RP where serious injury is a possibility, I think the onus should be on trainers to keep that in mind, and give their orders/make gentlemans' agreements accordingly. At the same time, if lasting injury is to be sustained, it might be good to ensure that both players give the okay ahead of time. Alternatively, in the world of Pokemon, Pokemon Centers really are all that.
Reply

#10
Hmm. I think one thing that is clear is that I ought to make a thread about the ASB calculator I have made and what it actually involves! =p That will also be a feedback thread of sorts so if you guys notice anything wrong with it when playing around or want to make suggestions that'll be the place for it. Also could be a location to sort out how battles go exactly. Because atm there's obvious (and understandable) confusion of what the system does atm, and also a reference to spreadsheets (that's been replaced with a flash version of the calc rather than an openoffice/excel dealy). But yeah, hang tight for a bit and I'll have it up! After some assignment progress


I feel the DM controlling the level of gore, etc in their dungeon makes sense there but we probably want to define how much we want that to extend. (Maybe use ratings ala fic ratings for that or something along those lines?) As for linking events together, maybe stuff would carry over in multiple dungeons by the same DM? (E.g. the 'next part' of the story and all, for instance). I suppose that solves the problem in not having much link over, although it does rely on the fact a DM would be doing that in the first place.

Think character stats/aspects/whatever are better as separate from the pokemon stats and all.
[Image: suisdbsf.png]
By TwilightBlade of PC. =D
Reply

#11
(7th Oct 2012, 02:01 AM)Sentrovasi Wrote: Whaddya mean people don't have stats? Sure, we don't usually talk about it, but in a world where people are judged arbitrarily with grades and certificates, I'd say stats play a pretty big part. A character who isn't very empathetic would basically have a lower charisma or chutzpah than one who was. Think about those situations where people say "on a scale of one to ten...": we think about stats all the time. Furthermore, making an AU doesn't seem to add anything to the situation; people are no more complex in medieval times as they are now, fundamentally speaking. When I go to school to study, it's an intelligence check. When I try to complete an obstacle course, it's a dexterity/strength check. When I say no to drugs, it's a wisdom check. They don't replace your traits, they merely put a value to them: if you're not comfortable with arbitrary values, then consider it a relative scale to the "average person". Because it is.

Technically, things like grades are not direct stats of a person, they are arbitrary values a teacher gives you. I don't want to get into long moral debates on stuff that aren't relevant though (basically I don't really believe in intelligence at all, but that's really only one element?), so I'll just shorten it to my point, which was that people and pokemon may have stats, but you can't really 'check' them. You don't know them. So it's really an arbitrary thing imo...

Quote::( This right after I mentioned so many good RP systems which don't do that? It's like you didn't check them out at all.

?_? I wasn't talking about rp systems, I was talking about rp's. Places you rp.
Reply

#12
(7th Oct 2012, 03:15 AM)pathos Wrote: Technically, things like grades are not direct stats of a person, they are arbitrary values a teacher gives you. I don't want to get into long moral debates on stuff that aren't relevant though (basically I don't really believe in intelligence at all, but that's really only one element?), so I'll just shorten it to my point, which was that people and pokemon may have stats, but you can't really 'check' them. You don't know them. So it's really an arbitrary thing imo...

The idea here is to use stats as a concrete way to determine what a trainer can and can't accomplish. For instance, some people can't run three miles. Others couldn't solve a multi-variable formula in math. Yet others can't play a guitar, or make a cake, or build a gatling gun out of toothpicks and a banana. All those traits can be reflected, to a degree, with stats. That way you don't have a trainer who's the best at everything ever: they'll be good at some things and not so good at others, which is much more realistic.
Δ
Reply

#13
(7th Oct 2012, 04:43 AM)Latios Wrote: The idea here is to use stats as a concrete way to determine what a trainer can and can't accomplish. For instance, some people can't run three miles. Others couldn't solve a multi-variable formula in math. Yet others can't play a guitar, or make a cake, or build a gatling gun out of toothpicks and a banana. All those traits can be reflected, to a degree, with stats. That way you don't have a trainer who's the best at everything ever: they'll be good at some things and not so good at others, which is much more realistic.

If I'm the only one who isn't totally sold on stats, I'll back down on it. I do have a remaining question though: what things would there be stats for? There've been a lot of things mentioned and they're all relatively important to characters, so... Would it be a character-by-character basis? Whatever's strongest and weakest on that character is mentioned? Otherwise stat lists could be overwhelmingly long. Or I guess there could be a simplified stat list, and more detailed stats if the rper wants to go into that. For example it would be required to mention the character's skill level in stamina, strength, charisma, etc.; and a player could add to that things like skills with swords, guns, etc. under strength, ability at long-distance running or carrying heavy items under endurance, skill at lying and manipulation under charisma. (I'm just making stuff up here...) ???
Reply

#14
(7th Oct 2012, 03:13 AM)bobandbill Wrote: Hmm. I think one thing that is clear is that I ought to make a thread about the ASB calculator I have made and what it actually involves! =p That will also be a feedback thread of sorts so if you guys notice anything wrong with it when playing around or want to make suggestions that'll be the place for it. Also could be a location to sort out how battles go exactly. Because atm there's obvious (and understandable) confusion of what the system does atm, and also a reference to spreadsheets (that's been replaced with a flash version of the calc rather than an openoffice/excel dealy). But yeah, hang tight for a bit and I'll have it up! After some assignment progress

Sorry, that would be me :( I lost a lot of interest in the ASB when people started basically using formulas for everything, and it was incredibly easy to meta, essentially, the outcome of any particular round where both players are aiming to do the most damage or are attempting to set up for later rounds. Also I think I used to ref a lot more damage than was instituted in that system, because I thought going to energy stall should be a unique situation rather than a normal one. Because of that I wasn't around to see if there were any improvements to the system, haha.

Quote:?_? I wasn't talking about rp systems, I was talking about rp's. Places you rp.

Check out Myth-Weavers; it's awesome. And technically all places you RP rely on an RP system of some kind; it's just some places are lazy, isn't it :P

(7th Oct 2012, 03:15 AM)pathos Wrote: Technically, things like grades are not direct stats of a person, they are arbitrary values a teacher gives you. I don't want to get into long moral debates on stuff that aren't relevant though (basically I don't really believe in intelligence at all, but that's really only one element?), so I'll just shorten it to my point, which was that people and pokemon may have stats, but you can't really 'check' them. You don't know them. So it's really an arbitrary thing imo...

In no RP system are stats referred to in-character. Nobody's going to look at somebody else and say "Oh, he's got an 18 Strength. Damn, I'd better not fight him," or "Dude, sick Agility stat." They tend to take the form of "Oh, that guy's pretty buff. *avoid eye contact" and "Dude, did you just dodge that bullet?" Of course you can't actually know the stats of an actual person, but hypothetically if you create a test involving every possible physical and mental feat related to a particular attribute, and make every person in the world take it, you can create a relative scale where the most average people are perhaps a 10, and everyone else goes up or down from there. As you've mentioned, it's an RP, and not real life, and since not having stats means we lack a way of determining what each character can or cannot do, there are really three options:

1) Everyone can do anything they want.
2) Everyone can do what they want up to a point, so everyone has essentially the same strength, speed, and force of personality.
3) Everyone's actions may arbitrarily be stopped by DM fiat, based on their own judgment of your character's capabilities.

All of which, I think, are less immersive or otherwise more arbitrary than a stat system. And I'm sure I speak for everyone who plays tabletop RPGs that we do roleplay our stats out fairly well. Characters with high Intelligence but low Wisdom and Charisma are especially fun to play imo. I also enjoy playing the party face quite a bit. In Paranoia, we had skills which were actually randomly given to us, but we'd play to those skills, although admittedly most of the time in Paranoia was spent being a total yes-man while passing the DM messages under the table. Stats may seem a crutch, but IMO they are an important part of a system where people can't determine the percentage of muscle mass you have, nor peer into your brain to see how quickly your neurons fire.

I will note that I may be tunneling myself here, so if you do have a valid RP system for determining key actions that doesn't involve statistics, please bring it up >_<
Reply

#15
Character stat/attribute discussion can be found here. Currently we're leaning in the direction of less is more, but do pop by and throw in your five cents. There's been no real consensus so far, so anything's possible still. But, if you would, you could continue the conversation there, since it's one of those issues that has its own thread.

On a completely unrelated note:
Quote:Nobody's going to look at somebody else and say "Oh, he's got an 18 Strength. Damn, I'd better not fight him," or "Dude, sick Agility stat." They tend to take the form of "Oh, that guy's pretty buff. *avoid eye contact" and "Dude, did you just dodge that bullet?"

Mannnn I want to give the characters the ability to metagame now... Because that would be hilarious.

On the subject of realism with battles: I feel like this should be something that's up to the thread. Namely, the DM, when creating the dungeon, introduces some kind of limit or guideline to that particular adventure, that players would then follow. That way, it's more or less up to both the players and the DM to keep it at a level everyone's comfortable with. For instance, I am personally not comfortable with gore at all, and getting some thrown at me suddenly in a thread where I didn't expect it would be bad. Meanwhile, if I know it's going to be there, I can either avoid the thread or mentally brace myself for it.

However, I also think we should probably leave the worst stuff like dismemberment out of the picture, because, y'know, Pokémon basically can't die and it would be really weird to have super realistic injuries and then... fainting. But then that could be just me because like I said already, I'm uncomfortable with gore.

On the subject of ASB system in battles: I think we should definitely use the calculator with 2x damage to regulate fairness. (I don't think enegry should necessarily be spent twice as fast - thoughts on that?) I definitely don't enjoy systems where damage/hitting/effects of attacks aren't regulated in at least some impartial way, so I think we should have the calc as a base. However, I also find that there needs to be room for the DM to make things interesting. So, as long as we have a space for RP variables in the calc, to use for things like distance, position, weather, some other effect of the location (like cover, difficulty of maneuvering, what have you), trainer rp effects, and other effects like that. So, effectively, there's a fair base system to reference, but there's also all kinds of things that effect your success that are up to the DM to decide. It should be both fair and fun enough for everyone, I hope. I personally would enjoy it the most like that.

On the subject of continuity: Being able to "reset" your character after each adventure/dungeon might be a bit much, but I like Sentrovasi's thing about Pokémon Centers being "all that". In that case, you don't have to keep scars and such (and I really hope we wouldn't go into the realm of missing limbs, but if you all really want to, then I'll definitely yield), but you can keep them, and there will always be a greater sense of continuity.

Because I feel like we should keep some sense of continuity despite the separate, standalone threads for dungeoning and adventuring. That sort of attachment to your character, their accomplishments, relationships, and history, is what keeps people going at it (well, that and having fun). Personally, why I had some trouble maintaining interest in the ASB was because all events in it were so completely separate and there wasn't ever a sense of one game or one league or anything like that. It was just... random battles every here and there. So, I feel like we should definitely at least try to create some manner of continuity, even if there is no general plot.

Speaking of that, on the subject of forum-wide plot: basically, as far as we've been discussing that so far, we're not going to have one. The point is that almost everyone (with the permission) can create dungeons, and we'll have a wide variety of different adventures available. It's probably going to be fairly casual.

However, we could think about making sort of more "official", more epic adventures... if there's interest. (I would love running something like that!)
[Image: sentretsig_zps54cdacf8.png]








- The Sentret Moderator -
- Reads, writes and draws -
- The resident fan of Sentret -
- Also in charge of some stuff -




Reply

#16
(7th Oct 2012, 08:48 AM)Sentrovasi Wrote: In no RP system are stats referred to in-character. Nobody's going to look at somebody else and say "Oh, he's got an 18 Strength. Damn, I'd better not fight him," or "Dude, sick Agility stat." They tend to take the form of "Oh, that guy's pretty buff. *avoid eye contact" and "Dude, did you just dodge that bullet?" Of course you can't actually know the stats of an actual person, but hypothetically if you create a test involving every possible physical and mental feat related to a particular attribute, and make every person in the world take it, you can create a relative scale where the most average people are perhaps a 10, and everyone else goes up or down from there. As you've mentioned, it's an RP, and not real life, and since not having stats means we lack a way of determining what each character can or cannot do, there are really three options:

1) Everyone can do anything they want.
2) Everyone can do what they want up to a point, so everyone has essentially the same strength, speed, and force of personality.
3) Everyone's actions may arbitrarily be stopped by DM fiat, based on their own judgment of your character's capabilities.

All of which, I think, are less immersive or otherwise more arbitrary than a stat system. And I'm sure I speak for everyone who plays tabletop RPGs that we do roleplay our stats out fairly well. Characters with high Intelligence but low Wisdom and Charisma are especially fun to play imo. I also enjoy playing the party face quite a bit. In Paranoia, we had skills which were actually randomly given to us, but we'd play to those skills, although admittedly most of the time in Paranoia was spent being a total yes-man while passing the DM messages under the table. Stats may seem a crutch, but IMO they are an important part of a system where people can't determine the percentage of muscle mass you have, nor peer into your brain to see how quickly your neurons fire.

I will note that I may be tunneling myself here, so if you do have a valid RP system for determining key actions that doesn't involve statistics, please bring it up >_<

But that's exactly it, that no one in the rp can see each other and their stats, haha. I just think writing the character's personality/history/appearance/etc. with what they're good and bad at is... where the 'stats' go. 9_9

(7th Oct 2012, 04:02 PM)An-chan Wrote: However, I also think we should probably leave the worst stuff like dismemberment out of the picture, because, y'know, Pokémon basically can't die and it would be really weird to have super realistic injuries and then... fainting. But then that could be just me because like I said already, I'm uncomfortable with gore.

Well, as someone who is quite a fan of gore, I do think pokemon can die (people often eat them so... they must be dead haha) and dismemberment should be an option. I mean, if you don't want gore in your journey - then you don't need gore, but I do want some and yeah. >_> I'm cool with pokemon centers being 'all that', haha.

Quote:On the subject of ASB system in battles: I think we should definitely use the calculator with 2x damage to regulate fairness. (I don't think enegry should necessarily be spent twice as fast - thoughts on that?) I definitely don't enjoy systems where damage/hitting/effects of attacks aren't regulated in at least some impartial way, so I think we should have the calc as a base. However, I also find that there needs to be room for the DM to make things interesting. So, as long as we have a space for RP variables in the calc, to use for things like distance, position, weather, some other effect of the location (like cover, difficulty of maneuvering, what have you), trainer rp effects, and other effects like that. So, effectively, there's a fair base system to reference, but there's also all kinds of things that effect your success that are up to the DM to decide. It should be both fair and fun enough for everyone, I hope. I personally would enjoy it the most like that.

I do think there should be quite a bit of leniency for dm's, though. If it's all entirely calced, it gets a bit routine, imo, which is what rp shouldn't be. If the dm decides like, this water gun does more because the squirtle was up close, that's cool with me; or the charmander's attacks are weaker because he's tired, cool.

Quote:Speaking of that, on the subject of forum-wide plot: basically, as far as we've been discussing that so far, we're not going to have one. The point is that almost everyone (with the permission) can create dungeons, and we'll have a wide variety of different adventures available. It's probably going to be fairly casual.

However, we could think about making sort of more "official", more epic adventures... if there's interest. (I would love running something like that!)

I think I should clarify - I didn't mean a specific forum-wide plot, but that each character's plots would affect each other. I'm very cool with no forum-wide plot, but I think to make up for that, the plot that the characters set should become the forum plot?

I am thinking in terms of each character running through long, epic adventures. :p At least, the one(s) I rp, haha.
Reply

#17
I know number of characters is being discussed in its own thread, but let me just bring up that I think that's one reason a few alts or "minor characters" wouldn't go amiss—you could have your main character who's out on some epic adventure through all the "official" dungeons and any others that you decide you want to tie in to your given situation, but then there are other characters that can potentially be separated from all the srs bsns epic continuity threads for when you just think the system is cool and want to goof around with someone who can have their arm lopped off and then get it magicked back on between dungeon jaunts. :p

I don't really mind there being stats, if only to serve as an easily-skimmable reference for the DM when they're deciding things (and I sort of like a system in place for being able to buff them); that said, though, I don't think "not having concrete numbers" necessarily means that everyone will either be identical or a Mary Sue. People can simply describe their characters as having greater physical strength and poor perception skills, and if need be we can remind people to mention specific skills/areas in their descriptions when they sign up with a new character; there's nothing wrong with being average in all/almost all areas if that's how the player chooses to write it up, and if people start describing themselves as ungodly strong and ungodly charismatic and ungodly perceptive and blah blah blah then just call them out for godmodding or whatever the way you would in any other more freeform RP. Overall I guess I'd at least like to try stats out, but I don't think skipping them would necessarily be a total bust for this kind of game.

(or idk I might be misunderstanding parts of the arguments people have been making...? I know that lack of a concrete ceiling for starting players' "stats" was only part of the reason for preferring numeric values, but I still don't think it'd be the end of the world if they weren't there so I can live with either. Eh.)
Altered Origin
fanart, fanfics, fan rambles and assorted random crap

The Phoenixdex
so many fakemans aaaaaaa halp
Reply

#18
Guyyyyys I have some new ideas let me chuck them right at you RIGHT FRIGGIN NOW

Okay so. We could have these 'static' dungeons, where there would be a single thread, possibly a sticky, where you roleplay getting in to the dungeon/place/adventure, either alone or with a unified group, and then a new thread is created for your specific experience there. For instance, we could have, say, a hounted house (because I reeeeeally want to DM one), where the initial description and such is in a single thread, and then everyone gets to venture in on their own and have a private adventure within the building. ALSO, this would make it possible to have a gym system with player-run Gyms (see my character class suggestion post), where other players walk in to challenge the gym leader and then have a private thread for the gym puzzles and then the battle, possibly with the addition of a referee for that.

Also, we could have an Elite 4 and a Champion, initially run by the staff as NPC's, but eventually replaced by players who challenge them.

Then I also feel like we should have some permanent areas for simple character mingling, like a park or somesuch, where nobody really has adventures or plots besides character and Pokémon interactions. These threads wouldn't have a DM at all, but rather they'd just be freeform places where everyone could gather to chit-chat, throw about battle challenges, trade Pokémon or items, and so on and so forth.

Also, maybe in-game shops run by Scientist characters? Or officially run Poké Marts? Or both?

I had some other grand idea as well but I can't remember it right now. I'll be back, though >:3
[Image: sentretsig_zps54cdacf8.png]








- The Sentret Moderator -
- Reads, writes and draws -
- The resident fan of Sentret -
- Also in charge of some stuff -




Reply

#19
I feel like it might be nice to start with a blank map with a few static areas like a park, town and suchlike in the middle to start, and then let DMs place their dungeons on specific coordinates on the map and get a working persistent world that way. Honestly I'm not sure why you'd need the sticky if everyone's just going to make their own thread afterwards, although it would be cool to have all the persistent locations in one post and possibly detail any past adventures that have already gone down there.
Reply

#20
Can I just ask if we're going to have a solid rating on this game? Like, are we going to limit to PG13 because Pokemon or shift it up somewhat?

I don't mind more adult content, but I think even a basic policy around respecting people's limits and that should be written down. That way we can all avoid accidentally overstepping someone's personal boundaries.

This would be pretty simple - don't write anything questionable in an inappropriate place, and label it with the correct warnings! If a dungeon is going to have themes that could be problematic, just make it clear to your potential players and get feedback! So on and so forth!

Nextly, I just want to say that the idea of starting a basic sort of world and letting the game be player driven (in both character and dungeon orientated ways) can be a really awesome idea and I like it a lot, but it will fail without lots of player participation!

However, if we're willing to put in the time and effort, it could really come off amazingly. Imagine two separate dungeons with ties to the other, and those two threads leading to the characters moving into a new dungeon together attempting to link together a larger story plotted together by several DMs working together. And that story shaping the lore of the existing world! That's a pretty amazing thought, isn't it? And the possibilities are endless.

... Basically, I like the idea a lot. It'll just need work!

Perhaps as a base world, we could be moving into a new region that's just being established! There's a couple of towns, all the basics set up (Pokemon Center etc), but there's lots of unexplored world for fun plotting and development? :D
Catfish
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)