HinterWelt Fora

Hey,
To me Karma gives the player a little bit of a way to control their destiny... like a fate point from WHFRP and things. A way to cheat death... or to get something cool to happen.

On to your questions bill:
1) hmmm as far as skills go it does seem that the ranking system does "cap" or create a ceiling on spending xp. But I would say if the system is frugal with xp awards... then the cap isn't that big of a deal as it would take a long time for the player to actually hit the cap. Also if the players have plenty to "purchase" with xp it isn't a problem as well (ie. new skills or abilities/talents). I know in my system adjustment most of characters have had a "career/path" and skill building is pretty much done. But an old-dog can learn new tricks... so the xp awards will be limited to keep the spending kinda slow.

2) Targeting / weapon skills seems ok... no ideas there.

3) Not sure about spell lists... I have not played one of the IR systems with spells... so I have know ideas there. I tend to like spells free-form. Kinda how Iron Heros goes about it.

- back to work

-d

_________________
the artist formally known as dwalton97060

See part of the problem with skills is that the cost is the same. Maybe we keep advancement the same and up it ridiculously after rank 5. For instance, make it cost of the rank doubled. So, to go from 4 to 5 would be 5 xp and then to advance in to "expert" ranks it would become 12 to go from 5 to 6 and 14 to go from 6 to 7. Just a thought, not too pleased with that either.

As for spells, I probably will just provide a legacy section explaining how to convert.

I think I might want to increase the exp cost for raising a stat also. I should also include advice on lowering stats to GMs.

So, Mike and Mike (ad Don if you have had a chance to read it) what do you not like about Iridium Lite that we should look to fix in IS v2?

Bill

_________________
HinterWelt Enterprises
Bill Corrie
815-557-7365

Always the kind of stuff I was looking for in a design forum

I just want to make sure it's OK if I comment. I'm a newbie to SA! and Iridium, so I don't know if what I'm thinking means anything.

This conversation already answered one of my questions (why Aptitudes that are in SA! aren't in the ISCR) so thanks!

So my first questions is based on this statement:



I know you listed some things in the first post, but I'm wondering what makes Iridium, Iridium? Knowing that would then provide a basis for what can be changed and what can't.

Lastly - truly sorry if I'm interrupting. Just let me know and I'll back out and watch you guys go to work

All comments are welcome James.

Things I feel are distinctive of Iridium:

1. Hit locations

2. High probability of success with skills without being assured of success.

3. Flexibility of character development: If you are a thief to start out with you can still grow to a fighter. i.e. loose class definition

4. Varied and flexible magic system.

Those are the ones off the top of my head. I will think on it more today and add if I come up with something.

Bill

_________________
HinterWelt Enterprises
Bill Corrie
815-557-7365

Bill,

I'm reminded of a conversation we had in your kitchen one Friday night after gaming (well, actually more like Saturday morning). I remember the conversation focusing on a "core" concept of TOG (at the time nothing else was in development, just concept...so you know how long ago that was). That concept was simple but realistic.

I know we often battled with this, often having to convert the "real" into a more "simple" version, but I've always felt the balance we achieved was what made TOG, SOE, and NEB so special. I'd hate to lose that.

_________________
Go Microsoft! (Hi, Bill!)

I quite agree Mike. I should have made that the top of the list. I know you guys heard it enough from me.

Simple but realistic.

That is often touted by other systems but I think, just as commonly, missed. Going to far to either side costs the system a lot in terms of playability.

I do think the Iridium Lite is a step in the right direction. I thought you did not like it much though, right Mike?

I will say this. The first thing I am thinking of is stripping or heavily simplyfying modifiers. Right now, you have a bunch of tables with a number of different curves of progression that the bonuses increase on. Some thoughts to simplify:

1. Make them linear;i.e. +1/+5% for every point above 15.

2. Make the progreassion regular between stats; i.e. +1 for 15, +2 for 16, +4 for 17....

3. Make it fit the bonus' function but regular where we can. So, for strength damage, we can be more generous. For almost all other bonuses, we could make it just the +1 per point over 15 schema.

4. Modify any of the above with a steeper curve after 20 so that you start doubling after you reach 20.


Sound better Mike? We can take small steps and keep "Simple but Realistic" in mind always.

Bill

_________________
HinterWelt Enterprises
Bill Corrie
815-557-7365

Lite has grown on me *some*

I have always feared diluting a system that took years to develop. I know you'd been developing the system since college. We spent, what, 3 years from the point where I joined your group refining and testing. Change for improvement is good. Change for the sake of change is not. A lot of research and time went into the games, I'd hate to see it altered hastily...what can I say, I became attached to what you developed

That being said, it would be beneficial for a structure that is easier to understand, if it adheres to the theory of the system. Progression levels of stats may make sense (not skill progression though, the scale there has basis).

*I know D20 is a big market, but you know how much I love my dice...*

_________________
Go Microsoft! (Hi, Bill!)

I want to second what's been said about changing the system. I'm in the discussion for two purely selfish reasons.

First, I get to see y'all really discuss game design - trading this for that to obtain the desired goal, etc. Far better than, well, let's just say other theory discussions.

Second, it helps me get a good idea of the way Iridium is intended to work. For someone coming to the game anew, it's a huge benefit.

So to get a handle on things, I tried to follow Hinter's example to get a very rough outline of the mechanics. Here's what I came up with, please let me know if I'm on the right track:

Skills

Skills are roll under percentage.
Each rank in a skill provides a specific percentage in a non-linear progression.
Objective difficulty is handled through GM modifiers to skill checks.

Classes

Classes provide an initial skill selection.
The number of starting weapon proficiencies is determined by Class.
In-class skill progression differs from out-of-class skill progression.

Experience

Experience provides a judge of relative power. All characters with 15 experience points are roughly the same “level” of capability.
Experience serves as the currency by which new skills are “purchased” and existing skills are improved.

Statistics

Strength, Agility, Constitution, Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, Appearance, Charisma, Piety, Luck, Will
Statistic checks are roll under d20

Combat

Combat is divided into rounds of one minute.
Attack

Attacks are d20 roll over against the targets defense.
Multiple attacks can occur in a single round.
Attacks can result in Critical Hits or Fumbles.
Defense

Defense is the average of Strength, Agility, and Constitution.
A character can use Parry against a successful attack to nullify its effects.
Multiple parries can be used in a single round, but not against the same attack.
Damage

Damage is targeted. This serves two purposes:

It provides some realism
It decreases lethality as it multiplies damage points (across areas).
Armor is used as damage reduction (as opposed to defense)

How'd I do?

You did pretty good James. A few points just to be clear.

Damage - A character's Fortitude is determined by averaging STR, WIL, and CON then adding 1/2 CON. This create Base fortitude that is then distributed to the areas of the body in relation to how vital they are;i.e. head and chest are weakest (1/2 base Fortitude), Stomach and Groin next (full Base FP) and extremities least vulnerable (double base FP).

Open Ended Rolling - All stat checks and skill checks are open ended. So, if you a doing a skill check and roll a 96 or higher then you roll and add again. This allows for character to have above 100% in a skill and still have a chance for failure. Likewise, if you roll 04 or under, you roll again and subtract.

Armor - Just to be clear, it is DR but it also takes damage. So, if you have 30 point chain on, you take 20 points from an arrow, you have 10 points remaining in that area. If you then take another 20 in that area, your armor take 10 and your body takes the remaining 10. Arguments have been made for Arrows doing separate damage from other weapons since it does not make a lot of sense that an arrow is going to open an area up for a sword but we felt it over complicated things to track separate damage.


That was more of a clarifying statement. You seem to have a good grasp of the system. For some reason, I am always surprised when folk can decipher my scribblings and actually understand the system.

Thanks for making my night.

Bill

_________________
HinterWelt Enterprises
Bill Corrie
815-557-7365

Oh, Mike, to be sure. Right now, we are just talking like those late night sessions. I want to see if they is something we can do, after having a lot of feedback from you and others, to make the system better. If you have an opportunity to improve, you should.

The biggest point I have seen is people get thrown off because you must reference the stat tables to get the modifiers. They are not intuitive. Heck, I still need to. So, should we do something about that?

I think we should. What, that is the question.

Bill

_________________
HinterWelt Enterprises
Bill Corrie
815-557-7365

Duly noted and I will add to my document.


Consider it the prood that part of your goal is achieved - Simple.


I thought we weren't going to talk about how I "made your night." We were just experimenting. And our wives were never to know...

OK, more serious questions:


My assumption is that since skill checks are percentage, but stat checks are d20, the latter would allow roll-again on 1 or 20. Is this correct?

On a side note, this is where I think going to a unified mechanic, in this case probably percentages across the board, might simplify the mechanics without disturbing the flow of the game - but y'all know far more in that respect than I.


The description seems to imply that once the DR of the armor is used up, it's no longer figured in. In other words, it's only DR as long as it still has points left. Once beyond that, the DR goes away - the armor there has now failed and no longer offers protection.

I ask because I seem to recall other systems where DR is constant - every time damage is taken, the DR of the armor is subtracted. I like your version as it represent the armor taking a pounding.

Is it safe to say that the effect is to add a kind of FP boost to every target area that has armor?

Jim

Yes. Roll and add is for the dice type rolled and only applies to skills and stats.

Actually, in the history of Iridium, I have had it all percentage at one time, mostly for Nebuleon our Sci-Fi game. It worked fine and we used it for years. When we decided to publish Tales of Gaea, we made the decision to split the stats and skills based on play using that form with Tales. The biggest complaint, at the time, was that Nebuleon was "too much math" since when doing stat checks it would mean saying "Take a -25 for difficulty to a DEX check" and the player, due to level adjustments, would reply "Aw, but I have a 78%.Where's my calculator". It happened so often that I started doing the math for them, "Yeah, it's 53."

That is why, today, Iridium is split. Now, I have tried to compress to a d20 range with Iridium Lite but I feel it crowds the ranges a bit. This could just be my habitual use of % where I think it will be most useful but it bears mentioning. I am sorely tempted by an all % system.

Yes. You have it correct. People have likened it to BattleTech armor system and I can see the comparison. Essentially, you have an increased amount of armor to one area. That is dependent on what you were. For instance, you can mix armor and cover some areas more heavily than others. So, you will want a plate helm, a plate breast plate, but less armor on less vital areas. You can wear up to five areas of armor before you must take the Armor Modifier to your Defense. Armor Modifier is a negative mod to your Defense that makes you easier to hit. So, where plate all over and you have a -6, wear leather and you have a -0. If you have a Defense of 18, you would have a defense of 12 and 18 respectively. Strength offsets this some so a high STR will make it easier to wear heavy armors.

Edit: The approach to armor was in response to "immortal" armor that never was damaged. This way, armor gets damaged and you either want access to repair facilities or a Mend spell.

That sounds like a lot but that is about the entire range. You can decrease the Armor Mod with taking specializations in the Armor Use Skill. I think that is everything.

And you should know, I kiss and tell.

Bill

_________________
HinterWelt Enterprises
Bill Corrie
815-557-7365

Can you provide some insight into this passage? It seems as if it says your percentage changes by 3% for "in-class" skills and 2% for others, based on level. However, the skill tables show specific percentages for each skill level.

Now it's my impression that the idea behind XP and skills and classes and levels was to find a way to allows far less restrictive classes and levels that provided indications of relative strength without either overpowering the game, per se.

So are skills related to level, or does that passage mean something else, or I am I just way off base.

Again, I know these seem like rules questions, but I'm asking in the hope of drawing out the reasons you made certain decisions in the hopes that it will serve the version discussion.

Thanks,
Jim

Sure thing Jim and a good process for all of us to review our goals and the current mechanisms.

This is one of the points that I think is somewhat innovative about Iridium and thus not intuitive. First, you have class levels and skill ranks. Say I am a third level bandit, then I would add 9% to my Pick Pockets right at the top. If I had a rank 3 Pick Pockets skill, then it would be 70% + 9 for my class level = 79%.

Now, XP is spent but also tracked. So, If I award 10 XP you are a 2nd level Bandit. You track that. Then you buy 2 new skills and spend 8 point with two remaining. I later award another 4 and you now have 6 Reserve XP which you spend on raising 3 skills from rank 1 to rank 2. You reserve is now 0 but you total xp is 14.

It is one of the tougher ideas to get across about the system. You have two pools of XP you track, Reserve and Total. Reserve gets spent, Total indicates class level. In Iridium Lite we dropped classes, levels and the need for Total XP tracking.

Clear?

Bill

_________________
HinterWelt Enterprises
Bill Corrie
815-557-7365