And other bad mechanics.
That's a good mechanic though
>>94708345Personally I use them all in my games, helps making some autistic gourmet shit with impredictable results that's on the player's choices.>KarmaGood to influence Charisma (or any other form of it) related checks, but also good for random events: high Karma will make normal citizens and Law-abiding entities be more prone to cooperate or even gift you and/or the party trinkets, while Unlawful or outright Nefarious entities try to end you; vice versa, you will have an easier time to intimidate and fraternize with scumbags, maybe even partake in raids and more obscure practices.Also, during a journey or some form of roll, it can influence the presence of bounty hunters and rivals>LuckWhen looting or scoring crits, the option to use a Luck throw instead of a normal one may result in greater effects, but can also backfire horribly.Also, having the option for Jinx would make interesting mixes.>FateUseful for when a character is mortally wounded or during character generation you want to give a player a sort of destiny, like a prophecy of sort.In the first case, it can be a sort of second chance or "you have × turns left before you die/unless you find ¤" (usually the latter part is optional with me, in case of grave wounding); the second can be a sort of vague warning and foretellinf over the quest the player can either ignore or hyperfocus.Personally, I see no problems in having them
>>94708345Off the top of my head:>Advantage/disadvantage, especially when benefits/maluses don't compound.>Any decision left up to whim, whether player whim or master whim.>Any decision whose conditions or intentions are vague.>Any dice that doesn't divide 100 evenly.>Dice pools.>Any mechanic whose function fails to represent the connotations of its name (examples: critical hits that can only deal 2 damage, opportunity attacks that can't be used against forced movement).>Anything that disrupts the structure of gameplay and has no effect on the progression of the game, its challenges, or its players' characters.>Impossible challenges.>Inconsistent abilities (example: an ability that allows multiple hits can't be used for extra reactions/attacks of opportunity).>Intentionally overpowered player options (abilities/gear/powers/races).>Intentionally sub-par player options.>Instant death, especially when it's up to a single die roll.>Pass-fail armor class.>Pass-fail skill checks.>Player options (abilities/gear/powers/races) that don't account for the world they exist in.>Player options (abilities/gear/powers/races) that require permission to utilize.>Skill checks, especially redundant ones.>Trivial challenges.
>>94708403I forgot to add>Redundant player options (abilities/gear/powers/races).
>>94708345Nah I dont think luck/fate is a bad mechanic depending on the system. It's a stat that cost a whole lot to raise beyond one and sometimes even starts at zero and unless you're a specialist in rerolling you're better off just leaving it at 1 in most instances
Armor as damage absorbion is an abortion.
>>94708508It's literally the correct way to model armor. Arguably the only correct one.
>>94708444Luck as a characteristic/stat/attribute is different than luck points as a metacurrency used to cheat on rolls.
>>94708508>absorbion
>>94708403>>94708410A lot of these come from D&D, I just realized.
>>94708508>>94708513Real world armor protects through a combination of deflection, absorption and ablation. So representing armor with some combination of hit probability reduction, damage reduction and bonus hit points isn't really wrong. The issue usually is more the mechanics around each one.
Fate Points/Bennies/etc. are only a shit mechanic when your players are unimaginative clowns ore powergamers obsessed with optimization.Literal fucking skill issue.
>>94708403>>94708410What do you play anon?
>>94708403The more I play tabletops, the more I have come to despise "Pass-Fail" in general
>>94708352This but unironically
>>94710108I make my own games, because I'm expected to rewrite what I don't like anyway.
>>94713579Based.
>>94710110I'm fine with pass-fail with the way I handle reactions; a contested roll, the reacting character's roll plus their reflex bonus must exceed the acting character's roll plus their reflex bonus to pass. If passing, the reaction happens first, and can potentially cancel the intended action, while on a fail the reaction still happens, but after the intended action, if still valid.I prefer it because even on a fail, something still happens.
>>94713579So nothing.
>>94710110Pass-Fail is the one true way. "Succeed at a cost", "Fail forward" and similar garbage are just mollycoddling players and demanding vague bullshit.
>>94713614What kind of reactions are we talking here? Combat? How does it apply to something like dodging a falling rock or persuading a whore to love you?
>>94715515>CombatYes.>dodging a falling rockThe difficulty check would then be based off a static value, as gravity is a static constant.>persuading a whore to love youNo relevance to a game about combat against monsters and wilderness/dungeon exploration.
>>94715509It really depends on the context. It really doesn't take alot of failed checks for players to feel stumped in a given situation, not everyone is some mastermind planner with 1000 contingencies.I think stuff like Succeeding At a Cost or Failing Forward are fine, and have, at least in personal experience, kept the pace and engagement of a session much higher than "welp you failed, gg" and the party sits there spinning their wheels, grinding the game to a halt.
>>94708345I combine Karma with "Bitching points". Each time a player bitches about a really simple ruling or derails a game too much I give them a bitching point. I know this sounds bad but I rarely give them out. My players know to be ridiculously evil some times and that usually derails the game. Sometimes I also fuck up and let them do stupid shit, not realizing what I will have to do to them after. So when ever I cant or wont make them face the possible consequences I just give them bad Karma. Every now and then I cash these points to lightly fuck with them for my amusement and pleasure. Stuff like fudging dice or stuff just going bad for them (the consequences of their actions catching up). Of course doing good deeds reduce bad karma and making me laugh or doing something cool also grants them these points. My favorite way to fucking with them is fudging dice when ever they meet a really cocky wizard or a nameless gigachad knight in full plate with a zweihander, so that they can kick their ass a bit and put fear of god back into them (They really hate wizards). They will learn to respect magic and Heavy Armour.
>>94710097Rogue trader does them decently. Every time you cheat death you burn some points and it really huts the payers, even if they don't normally use fate to reroll stuff. Also good way to avoid instakills. Other then that CoC Luck is a good mechanic in my humble opinion.
>>94715509In the context of trash like PbtA absolutely. But depending on the context it might be a good thing to implement every now and then is applicable. My personal problem is that GMs usually do it poorly and as a player sometimes it feels like you cant just have a normal win something constantly has to fuck you. At the oposite side of the spectrum if feels like its a scripted "you aren't meant to fail this roll" check. At that moment it kinda feels like it never really mattered anyways o that real failure isn't an option.
good mechanics*
>>94708403these are all good
>>94708508no
>>94715509swing and a miss.
>>94715509those aren't the only options, moron
>>94715960the force of gravity has nothing to do with the difficulty of dodging a falling rock
>>94721333>the rate at which a threat is approaching you has nothing to do with the difficulty of avoiding that threatFascinating.
>>94708345Those are fine provided the GM gets a similar resource to use against the players.
Dedicated crafting rules are repeatedly the most autistic things I've ever seen. At best they're just a way to make extra cash or save some money which doesn't make an especially engaging mechanic you're meant to pour features and skill ranks into. At worst I've seen them try to emulate video games and ask for specific items and never bothered to ask why that's really fucking stupid and tedious in a tabletop setting.
>>94708345How could anyone have an issue with narrative points in systems. It's such a braindead easy implementation that I've never seen fail in any game
>>94722767Because anon wants swingy single dice but also doesn't want people rerolling inevitable dogshit rolls because he thinks it's more mature or something.
>>94722767What OSR games let you spend luck to reroll?
>>94721331OK, what other options you got
>>94713579Post the games you make unless its the 500+ page backstory anime stuff.
>>94722955ntayrt I had fun with this while I was a kid, didn't think of it as revolutionary just made sense for super heroes. Haven't used it this century though. The initial idea behind and implementation of pbta's partial success worked well for making a rolling but increasingly complex violent drama, I don't think it applies as well to most other things its been used for but ymmv. There's a lot of imitations all basically using the most common outcome of a dice roll to be >sort of what you want >additional outcomes that create next gameplay element to varying sucess.
>>94723100>>94722955derp, this
>>94723046Why would I do that?Whenever I even hint at the mechanics I use, retards always cry about video games and math.So shove it up your ass.
>>94722748You do crafting poorly then.>make extra cash or save some moneyI don't know what you expect crafting to be really? My players will find crafting components, for potions for an example. Its low value loot. But if they know how to brew potions aka use their skills then it become high value loot. It opens up possibilities. Do they want to use that potion or sell it? This is the most basic example, usually there is dice rolling involved and a bit of experimentation with different special crafting components. For some context I run dungeon crawlers and the players are usually always short on mony and supplies. Not cuz Im stingy but because this whole adventuring business is kind of expensive is you are careless and all your equipment breaks.Ill never do autistic stuff like getting iron to make steel so you can craft a sword, no that is autistic.
>>94724101You have no game. Can't prove it otherwise unless you post it. So you're just a bitch.
>>94724871Yes, it's my fault that crafting is "make a skill check against a DC to save some money or make some money" in 99% of systems. It's not remotely engaging and your attempt to make it engaging is pure autism on your part.
>>94713579Oh you're that anon that got assblasted and accused all other TRPGs of being grifts and then had a massive sperg fit when another anon mentioned he liked to make small mechanical tweaks to games he played.
>>94725705This.
>>94726653>shit that didn't happen
>>94725705You can't prove otherwise that you won't cry about video games and math if I do post about it, cunt.
>>94727644Sure thing buddy>>94705629
>>94727744• That isn't a sperg fit, let alone a massive one.• The "small mechanical tweaks" were being used as a shield to ignore the fact that developers don't care about the quality of their product.I'm sorry that you don't know how to read and can't handle it when you're proven wrong, but don't take it out on others.
>>94729453nah
>>94708345If your players demand training wheels or plot armor for their snowflake characters, and you choose to accommodate their faggotry in a very much not cash money manner unbecoming of a true game master, then you might like to try something like this:>when assigning or rolling base stats & attributes, roll an extra one (even if character creation is point based lol) equal to 2d6-2 (generating scores between 0 & 10)>player records this number as DESTINY>player records another number as DOOM>DOOM starts at 0 but gains +1 for each +1 player chooses to add to any of their character's attributes or other stats lol>if a character were to die or suffer some other terrible fate, then that character's player may spend 1 DESTINY and gain 1 DOOM to somehow spare their character (or 2 DESTINY can be spent in total by any other player or players' character{s} to spare another player's character who has 0 DESTINY).>DESTINY is a finite and unrefillable reserve of "extra lives" (like a cat's proverbial nine lives).>DOOM goes up, and up... whenever a character is spared by DESTINY, that player rolls against their DOOM; if they lose the roll, that/those point{s} of DESTINY {is\are} lost, but another attempt may be made for more DESTINY (which also invokes another DOOM check).>player must not roll under DOOM to be spared by DESTINY>player rolls 4d6 versus poison and unfair railroad deathtraps>player rolls 3d6 versus lethal damage in mortal combat and falls from high places>player rolls 2d6 versus general nonspecific fatalities>player rolls 1d6 versus jumping into volcano>use ass-grab deus-ex-machina solutions, just as enemy weapon malfunctions, the cavalry suddenly showing up, saved by the bell communications, holy bible or relic kept close to the heart protecting the pious character from an otherwise deadly strike, cryptically inexplicable and nigh-miraculous intervention by a potentially important character to the plot, and so forth...>>DOOM & DESTINY<<
>>94729738
>>94727649NTAYRT. You made the assertion you have a better game. If you can't post it, you are in fact a bitch.
>>94715509One if our GMs earlier homebrew systems had it on a varying scale. The way he wrote it on his pdf was approximatelyDo I succeed? >Yes, and ....- you succeed, and then some>Yes- You succeed at what you were doing>Yes but... - You succeed, but either at a cost or you out yourself in a worse position in some way to do it>No- You fail and potentially get put in more danger depending on the trash- No and.....- You either failed horribly, or you succeed but not in the way you wantedto your detriment, whichever the GM thinks us appropriate
>>94729830There's a bunch of variations on >yes and no but oracles in the solo/gmless scene. I think some of the difficulty would be having one with specific enough outcomes that are still flexible so that it functions but doesn't feel too handwavy. Might be impossible to satisfy some with this.
>>94729869It really depends. It works for our group because we prefer more narrative systems. Our GMs current homebrew is a little more narrative than what i described above and we enjoy it. It also has a hard cap on how many dice you can roll for resolution, so it's easier to make really challenging without going overboard. For reference....>D6 system, stats and descriptors each have stars that contribute to how many dude you can roll(1 star=1 die)>when trying to resolve something, pick the most relevant stat, and as many descriptors that are relevant to the task >however there is a hard cap of 6 dice you can roll to resolve, so stacking more is pointless>DM decides the difficulty(90% of the time the roll target is 3-6, usually anything lower the GM considers trivial enough to not need a roll).>each die you roll that matches or beats the difficulty is a success>1 success means you do it, but the GM can decide to tack on a Threat(ie, something bad happens) if he thinks it's appropriate >2 or more means you succeed and he can't tack on a Threat>Any dice you roll that exactly match the difficulty means you can add an Advantage(something god happens). >It can be anything from putting an seen enemy on the back foot, finding a secret door, learning a secret, etc).>Advantages cannot be used to negate a Threat from happening, and vice versa. I'm being a little vague here, but our GM is trying to get his game published so I don't want to just dump everything here like that.
>>94729793I'm making the assertion that anyone can make a better game, because the people who buy TTRPGs are expected to change shit anyway.
>>94730888Post the game you made that's better. Anyone can do it so your should be great.
>>94708345This is not a place of honor.
>>94731236I'm still waiting for proof that you won't cry about video games or math.
>>94730841>1 success means you do it, but the GM can decide to tack on a Threat(ie, something bad happens) if he thinks it's appropriate Huh. I've been thinking about how to implement critical failures during combat into my mechanics, and couldn't figure out what to do (since crit-fails often feel extremely shitty) but you just gave me an idea. Now when my players have a hard failure on a weapon skill roll, they will generate threat/attract more attention from the enemies. This means that players rolling shitty face a consequence that isn't "lmao you hit your allies" or "your weapon broke glhf" and that also encourages players to try and stick together to compensate for each others vulnerabilities during combat. If this is a shitty idea I hope someone in this thread will tell me so, but for now I am writing it down.
>>94731580I won't. Can't say anything for anyone else though. Are you man enough to keep your word on the Internet with no consequences for lying?
>>94732746Yeah it's caused a number of interesting scenarios. Strictly speaking also, Threats and Advantages in the system don't strictly speaking have to be immediately relevant to what the roll was for. For example maybe you stab a guy, but he Threat is you made a lot of noise and either tripped an alarm or made more noise than you expected so now there's reinforcements incoming immediately, or you realize you're in some wild predator's territory who's attacking both groups now. Or you clobbered the guy into a wall and found a tunnel leading to a shortcut, or maybe once he's out, you check his pockets and find a lot of money or some useful resource in them like a healing potion(the system tends to be low powered so this ended up being a fairly popular choice to spend an Advantage on every once in a while).Also as mentioned, Threats and Advantages cannot be used to cancel each other out. If you roll against a Difficulty 4 check and roll a single 4 for a success+Advantage, if the GM tacks on a Threat, you have both, and cannot say "My Advantage is I don't get a Threat" and vice versa.Also as implied in the wording, if for whatever reason you don't think the situation narratively warrants adding a Threat, you don't HAVE to add one on.
>>94708403>>Any mechanic whose function fails to represent the connotations of its name (examples: critical hits that can only deal 2 damage, opportunity attacks that can't be used against forced movement).I mean, it's critical relative to what you could have dealt otherwise. And in the case of opportunity attacks I suppose that the forced movement is usually someone being hurled so fast nobody could react. >>94715509Ehhh FFG Star Wars kinda worked decently but there was indeed still failure. Or even failure and worse.
>>94731410Which means it's ok for regular people to poke around in.
