I...
I don't know which one I want

This is the hardest decision I've made in months

Well by that logic you can just get an R10 and spin it twice. And the R10 will have a nicer bigger display.

There will always be forum games so long as roleplaying games exist.

With DnD entering 5th ed and a few other franchises still going strong i dont think forumgames are going to die out.

Forum games on DRLFF is another matter though, we dont exactly generate new members frequently. That and Forum games are not the reason most come here (though the reason many of us are stuck here thats for sure).

when forum games die out, im sure many of us will find another outlet for our considerable creative skills.

PSYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

now send me the info for our secret co-op project

Psygnosis, now that you are back, will you do this game?

That'd be really interesting. I'd be in, for sure.

we're working on something different, but it will be based on a concrete tabletop ruleset

psygnosis will handle that because i'm awful at crunch and don't know how to provide steady gameplay rolls

Numba crunchin' is difficult, but creating a system FOR the purpose of numba crunchin' is even harder.
... and that's what I'm trying to do. It's not going incredibly well.

I have a basic idea. It revolves around 2 competing values that are pitted against each other.

For example, the Player's ability to hit an enemy vs. the Enemy's ability to dodge/block the attack.
Player Attack (which is essentially accuracy) is 20. Enemy's Defense (which is dodging/blocking skill) is 15.

Divide the attacking value by the defending value... 20 / 15 = 1.33

Divide the result by 2... 1.33 / 2 = 0.665 -> rounded to .67

So the attacker has a 67% chance to hit. From there, you roll a d100 (or 2d10 acting as a d100), and see if they roll 33 (100 - 67) or higher.
Rolling 33 or above = Success.
Rolling 32 or below = Failure.

(I still don't know if I should use the same system to come up with "shades" of failure/success, like regular RtD has. If I did, I'd probably have to divide that 33 into 3 to 6 sections that determine how bad your failure is. Same with Success. That would be overly complicated methinks.)


That's the gist of it so far. Thing is, this also means I need to come up with "ability" values for certain tasks, like stopping a giant rolling boulder, and I can't just come up with every task that could possibly happen in an RtD in my head, and assign fair values to them immediately.
God, this is turning into DnD.

RtDs with number-crunching mechanics get tiresome to roll after a while. See - RtD Experimental. Even with those mechanics rather simple, keeping track of over 6 units (gotta keep track of enemy statuses, mana, inventory) makes rolling feel more like a chore.

Would be awesome if I could get around to programming something that simplifies the process of rolling mechanics.



Also, speaking of new RtDs, I had an idea of making a survival-horror RtD a while ago. It would have more writing that sets the atmosphere and less combat, and the rolling system would be different.

First off, to perfectly complete actions, you'd have to roll a minimum success number, and that number changes. If your character is in standard condition (no positive or negative status effects), the number will automatically be 1 (meaning you will always succeed). This is to keep a perfectly healthy player from failing to, say, move a chair from one side of a room to another.

However, as the character gets tired or injured, the minimum roll number will increase based on your status effects. Though, just because you roll lower than the minimum number doesn't mean it's an automatic fail; it would be instead a varying "shades" of success depending on the difference between your roll and the minimum success number. Rolling 1 or 2 below the minimum number would cause the action to take longer or completely it partially, and would take a less lucky roll and a more serious status ailment to completely fail.


Though, I'm wondering about the prospect of creating a forum game that doesn't involve the dice at all.

I'm with Cave on this one. Sounds like you're making it unnecessarily complicated for a forum game.

At most you might want to switch to contested rolls with modifiers, rather than using a flat attack roll.

When I ran RtD Space, my ship to ship fighting system was surprisingly simple, yet versatile.

A player makes an action for an attack. They roll a number. If they meet the first check, then the attack succeeds. Then comes the second check. I matched the body groups of enemy ships to the dice, then roll that. This shows where the shot hit. That's the second check. The third check is the severity of damage, from one to six, with one being negligible and six being catastrophic.

This basically divided my rolls into sections, however, when it came to combat.

Here's an example in a science fiction setting.

[5]Bob runs to the gun turret, diving into the seat and locking onto an enemy target. He spins the turret round ninety degrees and fires at the alien vessel. [4] The alien vessel is hit in the hangar deck.[6] The shot causes an explosion inside the ships hangar, thanks to the abundance of munitions and fuel. The explosion has so much force that it fractures the ships hull, causing explosive decompression across the alien ship. Within seconds, the alien vessel is a derelict.

Here's one in a fantasy setting.

[5]James unsheathes his sword and sprints towards the orc. [5][5]The orc is stabbed directly in the chest, with the sword sticking out the orc's spine, dripping with blood. James twists his sword, then rips it out the chest of the orc, who falls to the ground with a loud thud.

In the former example, the second and third checks were separated, but in the latter example, I merged them to make the roll flow easier. This works great for humanoid enemies, since humans can be easily matched up to a six sided die. James up there rolled straight fives, but the system is flexible enough for whatever your players roll.

Here's a limb matchup list.
1. Left Leg.
2. Right Leg.
3. Left Arm
4. Right Arm.
5. Chest
6. Head

Spaceship ones are harder, and should be custom made for each ship, in my opinion.

I thought about rolling to see where you hit too, but then I realized that a headshot would pretty much be an instakill or a stun every time, and how often would you strike the enemy's head in battle anyway? Probably not 1/6 times.

The only reaaon I want to create a really rule-based system is because I feel like determining the fate of players by my own whim is unfair if I decide they should die, and difficult if I don't really want to kill them off.

I still want to retain a system that allows for fun randomness, but I want the roleplay to be serious, too. And for that, I need rules.

No, you don't. Excessive rules makes for rollplay, not roleplay. Ultimately it's down to encouraging the players properly, and making sure they understand what you expect out of them and the game. One of the concepts I plan(ned) to introduce in a second iteration of the system I used in Ulysses is similar to Exalted's Stunt System - making an attack is all well and good, but you get bonus points if you make your description of that attack more interesting. This would be an added bonus on top of the Luck system I was using, which also encouraged people to be more daring.

Alas, I seem to have misplaced my notes.

There are upsides to using a complicated system like this, though:
It means not everything is completely up to luck, as you can excel at certain things. It also means that two high-power entities facing off aren't going to be stuck in a stupid high-roll battle because the modifiers they have keep maxing their rolls. The stats can keep going up indefinitely with my d100 system.

Also, I have this idea that every action you make, whether it's lifting a giant weight or forcing down a bowl of horrible oatmeal is determined by stats. For the weight, it'd be Strength. For the oatmeal, it'd be Willpower.

So many cool, useful ideas, but making them work efficiently and in a fun way is so damn hard.

And what about the fluff?

It would be dissapointing if you created an epic system just for a generic RtD.
And if it's awesome, can I join?