Right now, I've changed my game idea yet again to be more of a single-player wargame/RPG. Mostly because I was writing this as a gift for a friend, and then thought... you know, maybe he won't actually have anyone he can play this RPG with?

So, for people who see my extremely spasmodic posts. I was writing a TF RPG. Concept being a starter box. I couldn't get behind the character designs I was doing and the gameplay always felt crap, so moved it to a WW2 fanfic setting I came up with 25 years ago. Earlier this year, figured if I wanted to release it, I should file off the Hasbro edges, and now I have alien robots that can change shape having crashed here and woken up in WW2... not TF at alllll.

I'm much happier with the characters and concept now, and the way the game I think will fit together, but now I have the problem that it just looks like 5 Parsecs with giant robots. Not sure if that's a good thing or not.

>>96699230
I am working on a d20-roll-under homebrew that can run Arcanum, Fallout, Dark Souls, and D&D. It has action points, dodge rolls, and enemies who act depending on what you roll at the beginning of the round on d6, so they can telegraph the moves, and stuff. I call it One Hack.

Today I've started my draft from the scratch again (for the third time), since I am not satisfied with the core mechanics.

I am not sure if I need to have different attributes for every fork, or just make a set of common attributes.
I am not sure if I need to make some analog of Weapon Scaling.

I also thought about making a Resistance system hack for VtM.

>>96699455
P.S. I would appreciate hearing your opinion on attributes.

>>96699455
>>96699457
This is a strange project. Don't want to dissuade you, but you want to create a universal system for wildly different settings. Dodge-roll combat is not Fallouts flavor, not in the style of the original games (which was already based on actual TTRPG systems). You can technically take GURPS for everything, but the point of having a specific system for specific games and settings is that such a system can suit the flavor, tone and atmosphere better than something generic. A mechanics are the basis for flavor. It's not just all fluff and equipment lists.

File: 1752326819591050.png (57 KB, 896x317)

57 KB PNG

An idea for a less bloated damage/health system, while keeping the good part of rolling several dice with a dice pool system.

Since I hated how Daggerheart makes you roll a lot of dice, only to end up dealing just 1 to 3 damage, which isn't the problem itself, but the whole time-consuming process is, I thought of the following proposal. Not for Daggerheart, but a generic attack rule.

I would take the attack rule from Nimble, where you roll the damage dice directly, and the leftmost die is the main die. If you roll a 1 on it, you miss, any other value means you hit. However, instead of summing all the dice to inflict damage, you will just count how many dice did not result in a 1. So, for example, if you rolled a dice pool and got the results [6, 1, 8, 7], you would hit the attack because the main die is not a 1, and you would deal a total of 3 damage, since one of the dice resulted in a 1 and therefore doesn't count.

For crit, I thought about keeping it almost the same as Nimble's exploding die mechanic with the main die. So here, a maximum result on a rolled die, for example, a 6 on a d6, would already count as +1 to the total damage, and you would roll that same die again to check if it explodes again. So for each maximum result, you get +1 and roll again until your luck runs out.

From this point on, I haven't fleshed out how much health each PC and NPC would have, I would also borrow Nimble's creation table for that adjusted to be less bloated. For armor, I'm still seriously considering if damage mitigation would be a good idea, since for NPCs it would mean calculating how much damage is reduced from every attack. And for PCs, it would be less repetitive because the defend action can only be used once outside of their turn.

>>96699939
Well, my opinion on the subject is that...

These games are CRPGs, so adapting them into TTRPGs will already create a lot of synergy. Many mechanics from video games simply don’t work in a tabletop format due to “vidya crunch” and technical limitations. While replacing these parts, you can rework them however you prefer as a GM. For example, in my games, items are usually divided into a few tiers by cost and availability, giving a clear and simple economic model that makes it easy to evaluate what players can buy and what the actual worth of imaginary money is.

Second, these games already have a lot of balance and option issues. There’s no point in recreating them exactly as they are, because it’s not fun for a player to discover that in this particular game, a certain skill or ability is a trap option. Again, it’s a tabletop game, not a solo video game where you make new PCs for yourself.

Fantasy adventure games are very similar at their core. For example, you mentioned that dodge-roll combat isn’t part of Fallout’s flavor, but in the first Fallouts, saving APs increases your AC, which isn’t fundamentally different from keeping your APs (Stamina) to evade an enemy attack through a reaction.

d20, YZE, GURPS, Borgs, PbtA, Savage Worlds, and BitD are all used for very different settings. So I believe, a ruleset becomes “universal” not because it has that word in its name, but because of the number of splats and adaptations built for it.

And most importantly, what should actually be the “mechanics that define the flavor” are usually present in the original computer game only in a rudimentary form. In a TTRPG, you can do much more with things like the conflict between magic and technology, or hollowing, simply with the help of a few tables, improvisation, and role-playing. These mechanics can just be optional rules on top of the core ruleset. Much more engaging than just having the same list of skills, for example.

>>96701123
You may be missing the point.
You want a universal system for that. There is no universal traits shared among all of these systems. You are better off creating a system for each game. Or make a universal system that handles anything.

>>96701123
Also, hollowing should absolutely be a game mechanic, something that doesn't fit anything in Fallout.

>>96701227
It can be an optional game mechanic for the setting, and it is very obvious that in Fallout it is relevant if you are playing as a ghoul.

Good to see another one of these, OP.

I’m writing a “science fantasy action adventure game”. The core mechanic uses a d6 dice pool with two to six dice. Rolls of 4 to 6 succeed, and falling short of or exceeding the target number results in varying degrees of success.
Sixes explode, offering bonus rolls, but ones defuse any rolls that would explode. Attributes determine the sizes of dice pools during checks, and skill levels grant modifiers that players can use to improve failed rolls, get rid of ones or create sixes.

I have character and monster creation tools pretty much finished, but I’m still working on “techniques,” anything that costs MP to use. I’m getting my players together on Sunday to test it out.

>>96699230
making a dungeon for my players that i hope they enjoy in daggerheart and i'm finding the game doesn't really have a great weapon and armor loot pool desu. so i'm going to add some classic magic item effects like flame brand so a weapon can go from physical damge to magic damage when lit adding 2d6 damage, blinding shield that gives a disadvantage to attackers and a 2nd disadvantage to enemies in a burst when they owner loses a tick of armor but i don't know if its too strong or weak. Also weapons that can do an ability (use a card) once a scene would this be to strong?

File: 20241205_214138.jpg (96 KB, 636x900)

96 KB JPG

>no job
>hours of time
>no motivation

>job
>no time
>no energy

I WILL break the cycle

File: gatesmith (1).png (1.79 MB, 1132x1568)

1.79 MB PNG

I've tentatively moved away from skeuomorphism toward a more "miniature stat block" style of information display
people keep saying I shouldn't put information overlaid over the illustration, but I think it looks neat!

what do you think, anons?

>>96701123
Problem is while Fallout and Arcanum can work on the same ruleset with a little finagling, slapping D&D and Dark Souls on the same one will just break it. Unless you specifically limit Fallout and Arcanum to like half the progression range if not less.

Dark Souls is at least D&D 3.5 level of bullshit. And in D&D 3.5 you have shit like characters breaking steel with their bare hands at like level 6.

>>96699230
I have accidentally invented adding and substracting numbers from scratch
Had I been born an ooga booga caveman, I would be a genius

>>96706619
Problem is on each illustration the place where you want to put the stats so that they look okay would be different. You could try using left or right border for the stats.

Just a quick question:
How would you represent the difference between solid cover and visual cover ("concealment"), in a gunfight system? Or, maybe, is there no need to represent the difference at all?
If needed, my system is
>Dice pool
>Roll to attack
>Passive defence (like distance, low visibility...) decrease the attack dice pool
>Dynamic use of cover allows the target to roll to defend

>>96708512
Add ability to "Spray'n'Pray" that specifically can counter defenses from dodge and concealment, but can't do anything against hard cover?

File: perimeter officer.png (1.69 MB, 1130x1570)

1.69 MB PNG

>>96708489
I don't consider it so much of a problem, if the illustrations for minion cards are divided into thirds, so the character depicted in them occupies the leftmost third

I'm making a Magical Girls/Power Rangers themed system and am having a bit of a stumble over combat. d6 dice pool system, but no one rolls over 10 dice at once in order to keep things manageable. 5's and 6's count as successes, and 1's are Fumbles that build up and let the GM do special things. Should all rolls in combat be opposed tests, or or should the big bad roll first in order to set the number of successes needed by all parties?

File: assault beast alt.png (308 KB, 750x1050)

308 KB PNG

>>96706619
>>96708762
I think the design really works.
I find that aspect really challenging.

>>96709107
appreciated, anon

>>96699230
Is there any rhyme or reason to these skateboarding maid images? I'm not against them, but they just seem to have appeared out of nowhere. Is there like an anime or something?

File: 16075_19.jpg (341 KB, 640x803)

341 KB JPG

>>96709320
apparently they come from a Japanese illustrator named Suzushiro
they are rad

>>96708883

Just out of curiosity, is there a reason why the big bad doesn't have a static target number and is instead some form of opposed roll? Is it purely to differentiate between combat and non-combat rolls or is there a specific feel you're trying to capture in the combat, especially since your second option is static value with more steps.

>>96709399
At the moment it's because the two enemy types, Minions and Enemies, are represented by dice pools. In a typical combat situation, the GM rolls their dice pools to see how well they do on things like attacking the players, causing mayhem, etc.

>>96710262

Got it. That sounds like to me then that opponents should probably just roll first to set a target number in that case, to sort of keep the flow going and that you do not appear to be going for something super tactical. Is it a safe guess that the dice pools are also doubling as hitpoints for the enemies?

>>96708304
I guess it is just really pisses me off that there are no good games for such beloved franchises that I can just pick up for the next campaign (not to say good enough for my personal likings as a GM). But I can't make 4-5 games, I barely can handle one homebrew. I am not even sure if it supposes to be a d20 game.

>>96710803
Yes, dice pools are the enemy's health and abilities.

File: file.png (4.98 MB, 1200x1677)

4.98 MB PNG

>>96706619
Looks very bad. Place the stats and keywords at the bottom under rules text and lore.

File: e3493360da0524b2569bc7005(...).png (361 KB, 512x512)

361 KB PNG

>>96705659
Lady luck smiles upon you and your noble quest.

File: Demo5.png (1.22 MB, 2977x1753)

1.22 MB PNG

Still working on my 50's Capitalism TCG
Had a couple more playtest sessions and there was some hiccups but some very fun moments as well

File: Screenshot 2025-10-08 180121.png (95 KB, 1951x1097)

95 KB PNG

While additional work on Winning the Peace has kind of stalled out because it turns out it's very difficult to organize playtests of TTRPGs with strangers in my area. However, it is much easier to get boardgame playtesters, so I've started working on a boardgame concept while trying to get Winning the Peace public playtesting organized.

Anyways, pic related for the boardgame idea. It is essentially Wingspan with direct conflict elements, wrapped up in a spy comedy aesthetic. The basic premise is that each player is a criminal mastermind, and while all working together they captured the Austin Powers expy, only one can claim credit for actually killing him so they are competing to build the best deathtrap to claim victory over their peers.

My basic idea is that players build deathtraps by creating a row of cards with various elements, (e.g. Traps, Animals, Goons, with different tags like Occult or Superscience) that either serve to increase their own score, modify other cards to trigger score multipliers, or fuck with their opponents. Scoring is done from left to right per row (so player 1 scores their whole row first, then player 2, etc), and whenever a card is scored, all of the cards that affect it also trigger which can modify scoring in the moment or further down the line. Players will also have access to action cards (Plots) that can be used to modify the layout of cards on the table or other actions, like add 2 cards to their deathtrap in a single round.

While the player who has the highest score at the end gets first place, there is a catch in that there is a minimum score needed to win, and as the game goes on, an additional deck is drawn from to represent the Austin Powers expy getting closer to escaping, with some of those cards preventing some deathtrap cards from scoring. So the goal is to make sure that you're at the top, but to not knock down your opponents too hard in case everyone loses because the spy escapes and they all get arrested.

>>96712308

Anyways, is this basic idea sound or am I just missing something obvious here that will make the whole thing not work?

>>96708572
This is... not bad at all, actually. I do have a mechanism for suppression fire which could help represent that very well

bump

>>96711356
I disagree

>>96717620
And I disagree with you. The art on the Star Trek card that >>96711356 posted is too cramped, but overlapping the stats over it is even worse.
There has to be a better in between.

File: 2431dec0-cbea-49ea-8715-2(...).gif (240 KB, 400x270)

240 KB GIF

>>96717798
>There has to be a better in between

>>96717962
You are a better man than I am, as I will never defend anyone's right to overlap the art with needless cut-ins and stats. That isn't a right, it's just bad taste.

File: file.png (90 KB, 881x801)

90 KB PNG

>>96699230
>What are you working on right now?
> Lacking inspiration? Smashing your head against a creative wall? Or just having a hard time getting all these pages done? Tell us about your projects and progress.
Smashing my head against the wall checking my point valuations on hundreds of character abilities, many / most of which are tagged, for my weird-ass point-buy + no-exp d20 game.

It's like, "what if 3e but colony sim instead of tomb raiding simulator." Currently /combat/ (which has not been my focus) is mostly 3.0 combat with PF1 Wound Thresholds. Eventually I want to adjust it to go faster though.

But right now? Right now I'm working on my massive pool of character options and the character creation process. It's more than half done, but there's still lots to revise and polish.

File: grim mortician.png (1.82 MB, 1127x1568)

1.82 MB PNG

>>96711356
>>96717798
>>96718035
so... something more like pic?

>>96722032
Do you really need to write the stats fully?
First letter, color or shape all should be sufficient to show which stat is which.
Just rename Skill to Expertise so that you have no doubling and you can do:
S1 / E2 / A2 / T3
and similar stuff

>>96722102
well, I could do that, yes...
I'd much prefer to change the names to STR, TGH, and AGL
I'll try to avoid using symbols if I can use text instead

but I must say that I strongly dislike >>96722032
we have very different sensibilities, I guess
to each their own

>>96699230
I am working on my skirmish mecha game. Me and my friend group got a few good games in -- mostly I consider these games to be a pre-alpha. Things don't work as intended, or as designed, you clip through the walls (metaphorically speaking), and so on. That said, these have been very much needed rounds of review as I move towards the final shape of the game. One of the things I am contending with right now is customization. Right now, the game is very free-form: you buy the parts you like, you bolt them on the robots you like, and that's one machine in your warband. But I would like the game to have a strong narrative angle, and this naturally implies creating factions which impose some limitations on how your warband is built. One of the things I considered is creating a pool of "bonuses" your warband gets if you respect some build restrictions, on the other hand, players have very much emphasized how much they enjoy mixing and matching components. I am afraid that this extra layer of complexity might be hard to balance or make some builds irrelevant/strictly worse off. I see the trade-off, but I wonder if there's other options I am not considering.

File: nito-dark-souls.gif (193 KB, 220x124)

193 KB GIF

>>96699455
I wanna see your dodgeroll mechanics. My group is running and tweaking a dark souls homebrew but it is mostly just a d20 system game (and we don't even have a dodge roll, to my dismay) and I want to move us more towards something more tactical.

I'm getting a bit annoyed with one of the members who really doesn’t understand match. One of the spells takes a full round to cast and grants a +1 to a single attack...

>>96722796
>>96699455
Whatever the fuck you do. Have a grid. And using dodge should always entail moving to another position.
If you can't move, then you can't dodge.
i-frames-rolling is dumb video games shit and should be ignored, regardless of how much you try to emulate the actual games

>>96722399
Faction bonuses should cost points just like parts AND come with parts restrictions. This s the only way to make them fluffly and balanced vs "any parts, no factions" armies.

Basically, you need to treat the faction as an invisible part. Consider it a pilot bonus, if you will.

>>96706619
>>96708762
>rules 1.0.25
>https://drive.google.com/file/d/1N3EF_LQWbjCLJuIJ_1Y4p0IpXfbcqazn/view?usp=sharing

updating mechanics such as cost payment for actions and support-type cards
cards now can be paid either with advantage (the temporary leverage that a player has on the field, represented by the domains they control) or maintained using their minions' Skill stat (minions enter the field deployed or, in more common words, "tapped" maintaining those cards)
Support cards remain in play for as long as they can be maintained, making the minions maintaining them vulnerable to disruption, but not the support card itself (which can be an abstract concept, like schemes, or more concrete things like items and non-combating allies)
similarly, Actions require one or more minions to perform them, so, if an effect or ability destroys or removes any of those minions from the game before the action card resolves their effects, that card does not resolve and it's discarded instead
this allows for abilities such as Overwatch X, which allows minions to "ping" the next opposing minion when it enters the field

>>96722796
(1/2)
The game has action points (stamina). However, no stat governs stamina directly; it can only be reduced by overencumbrance and pumped up by magic and stuff. The problem is that I’ve playtested it with friends using lower numbers than I want to use for d20. So I can’t provide you with exact numbers that work well in real life (for now). Anyway.
The game uses command initiative. In most cases, players go first in any order they like. At the beginning of the round, every PC gets a fixed number of stamina points they can use to act. Enemies—don’t, they act depending on d6s “telegraph/AI” rolls.
Let’s say you get 12 stamina per round. You spend a point to move one hex, you spend 6 to swing one-handed, 9 to swing a two-handed weapon, etc. But you can keep stamina partly or fully, and spend it during the enemy turn to perform dodge rolls, shield blocks, parries, counter-spells, etc.
When the enemy attacks you, you don’t have AC like in D&D; you just take less or more damage depending on your defense. So the dodge roll is the only legit option to evade the damage completely.
You spend 3 points and roll a Dex check (it is a d20 roll under system with no DCs). If you succeed, you can move to the adjusted hex to evade the melee attack. It is like you just move out of turn before the attack lands. That’s it, that simple.
Then, if you still have stamina at the end of the round, it is carried over to the next round, but you can’t have more than 18 at a time.

File: photo_2025-10-10_20-05-04.jpg (184 KB, 960x1280)

184 KB JPG

>>96722399
>>96724859
(2/2)
Blocking with a shield during the enemy’s turn can only protect against melee attacks. If the shield was raised beforehand, during the hero’s turn, it can also block ranged attacks. Small shields block 1 damage per stamina point, standard—2, great ones—3.
When a hero attempts to block an enemy’s strike with a shield and spends more stamina points than they have available, they automatically spend them all, and not only take the remaining damage but also have their action points reduced into the negative. So it is like a guard break in the video game.
My group use pic related cubes to track health, mana, and stamina. It helps with the system like that.

>>96722858
Yes, I do use a hexagonal grid, and dodge roll always entail moving to the adjusted hexagon.

>>96724859
> command initiative
*team initiative

gonna be honest boys, i don't know how to improve on Kill Team's combat system.
>attacker has stats for # of attacks, success target, and normal/crit damage
>melee: defender has stats for # of attacks, success target, and normal/crit damage
starting with the attacker, each player chooses one of their dice to either strike or block with; strike deals the damage stat, block removes a success die from the other player. only crits can block crits.

>shooting: defender has stats for # of defense die and success target
each successful defense die blocks a successful hit die. only crits can block crits.

this is so good. it feels great and combat is pretty fast and engaging. can I just lift it wholesale?

>>96724944
I'm pretty sure I've seen something similar in other games. Well you can also use something like:
Unit A has 3d6
Unit B has 2d6

They both decide how many dice they roll for attack or defense. If there are multiple dice you take the highest. If there are multiple 6 you add +1 to the result for each one after the first. If attack roll beats the defense one you deal damage modified by MoS or roll MoS wound rolls, whatever you like more.
Example
A chooses to roll 1 defence and 2 attack dice, B chooses to roll 1 defence and 1 attack.
-A rolls 5 defense and 3,3 (highest 3) on attack
-B rolls 2 defense and 6 attack
As a result both combatants hit each other with MoS 1

>>96722879
It feels to me that any parts, no factions already have a huge advantage. Do you have any insight why the faction bonuses should be paid for? >>96724869
I am not sure I understand your feedback.

>>96708512
solid cover negates hits unless they are armor piercing
visual cover gives a scaling bonus to passive defense, just how good does the cover hide you?

>>96726852
> I am not sure I understand your feedback.
I explain that dodge roll mechanics in my game are based on action points, and you simply preserve action points to perform a dodge roll as a reaction on the enemy's turn while being attacked.

>>96722399
maybe just dont be too restrictive with combinations
like 2 or 3 components from the same faction gives a bonus despite being common parts.
like you get the blaster and the power source from faction A so now you can shoot one more shot because the construction is more streamlined.
or you can pair the blaster with a powersource from faction B which at base give higher damage to blasters.
another example is pairing a body and a shield to increase defense.

or maybe have the faction parts work as like a set armor bonus from ARPGs, if one faction focuses on speed, having more of their parts makes you faster, then try and balance the bonus from that restriction with the value of mixing different parts.

>>96699230
i'm making a shitty derivative game right now and NONE of you can stop me. It's a ripoff of small dice games like Ganz Schon Clever and Doom Machine but even easier and far shittier. You have been warned

File: 66005943_p0_master1200.jpg (296 KB, 1200x1200)

296 KB JPG

>What are you working on right now?
a d6 OSR inspired ttrpg where each player has a dicepool they can use both on and off turn for offensive and defensive actions.
also heavily inspired by dragon ruins 2 and fantasy anime from the 80s and 90s.
>Any issues? Lacking inspiration? Smashing your head against a creative wall? Or just having a hard time getting all these pages done? Tell us about your projects and progress.
slogging through putting numbers to everything and writing down rules, descriptions, items, etc.
and of course trying to come up with a compelling world to run it in, but while im set on a noblebright outlook in a world with a shadow hanging over it, my instinct more often than not is to make things just a little too nice.
Miura was such a madlad dude holy shit.

>>96726989
But... How does that relate to my game? I am not sure if this is feedback or you just made a mistake responding to me.
>>96727106
I will consider that, this might be work!

File: nasa___o_r_u_by_blazenmon(...).jpg (313 KB, 1280x1098)

313 KB JPG

>>96727450
>this might be work!
cool, good luck on your robot game

>>96727450
It was a mistake.

File: 2d2b299a7467fd2ccaffe4c2b(...).jpg (18 KB, 236x334)

18 KB JPG

>>96727450
He replied to the wrong post.
>>96726852
Faction bonuses should be paid for because anything that makes a mech stronger should be paid for. Restrictions in parts (soft or hard) should not be considered towards the "power level" but are there for fluff.

For example if the faction is "mecha knights" the bonus could be "rerolls the first melee attack but has half range on all range weapons" then a player could just make a mech without any ranged weapons and ignore the downside.

In older editions of 40k, for example, you had to pay for detachment bonuses too, whoch was a way to balance detachments that were just plain stronger than one another.

Immagine of there was a faction bonus called "ultimate champions of legend" and it doubled the HP and damage of all your mechs. That would be nuts and OP, but if it also doubled the points cost of all your mecha it would probably be fine. Restrictions like "no mass-production parts" are mostly for fluff and players can likely build around them.

I disagree with >>96727106
You should avoid "free set bonuses" like "if you use 4 desert raider parts you get +2 speed" because then that always becomes the optimal way to build that, unless you nerf the desert raider parts to compensate for that bonus but then theose parts become useless when you are not using the bonus.

Basically, free faction bonuses narrow your meta.

If you want the "desert raider jackal mech" to be better than the generic "jackal mech" and if you want the "hyperion jackal mech" to have +2 armour-piercing damage then thehyperion and desert raider version should cost more. How much more, idk, but since they are beter versions than the generic one they should have a higher price.

BTW, how do you test your game? Do you do online or in- person? Because if it's online I'm interested in checking it out.

>>96729989
>how do you test your game?
I have no playtesters other than myself
it's sad, it's not optimal, but that's the only thing I can do...

>>96699455
Why do people like d20 as opposed to a multi die system with a proper bell curve? I don't mean that rhetorically, I'd honestly like to know.

>>96709373
Super rad

>>96730551
Exactly because it allows for more swingy results. It also more straightforward when using modifiers even if that is in large part an illusion.
Let's take a 5 round combat for example. Unless the system is super crunchy you are going to do 1-3 rolls per round. For a total of 5-15 rolls per combat. That's enough rolls for some upsets or critical here and there to excite people. But those upsets and criticals statistically do not happen in each combat, or won't be always that important. Yet in a sessions with 2-8 (if short ones) combat encounters you are almost assured to get some which in turn enhances player experience as he either gets a payoff from eviscerating someone or recovering from the deep shit his PC got due to dice rolls.

With 3d6 for example you get only 1/216 chance for max or minimum result. Which in turns means you aren't guaranteed to get critical successes/failures in a single session. Of course many systems make sure their chances for such things are higher, even GURPS, but players, especially new ones, can't see it at a glance. Thus making such setups less popular.

Effectively d20 exploits the same brain bugs that gambling does.

>>96730551
Oh, I strongly prefer success-based dice pool, namely the Year Zero Engine one with my homebrew. It works like Genesys, even better. BUT it has like twice as less design space due to low numbers. When you want a game with constant level ups, adding +1 to one or the other stat, or item upgrading like in video game with +1s, when you additionally use d4-d12 to represent different equipment, it is better when your system is based around d20. As for swingy binary outcomes, you can rule that the check failure is partial success and make 2-3 rolls for resolution of non-combat checks.

File: 018.05c298e48b8f86cd3fd9a(...).jpg (980 KB, 1000x1416)

980 KB JPG

>>96699230
Working on a system/world where the players are robots. All his bodyparts and programs are under the line the class and levels normal RPG have.
I put in some megacity in roman build style and some mytic psionic in and hope i have a system that play quick even against more then 5 enemys.

All based on D6 plus whatever bonus you can get.
What to fire/hit something? 1D6+your sensors vs the targets cloak to hit. then damage vs armor and if the structure points of your body reach zero your body parts can and will fly off a brocken junk. But all the same for the enemy.
Hacking goes with dice in pair, want to hack a CCTV? get a bigger pair together then your enemy. If there is a firewall it get harder and if you have more time (aktions) or a program it becomes easyer.
Rule of cool is the major idea.
example: the caterpillar tracks are "legs" but how would a organic version of this look like? easy: could be a snake or snail body.
Speaking of robot parts: There are currently 6 overarching types of robots (and there bodyparts) to mix and match.
Android: human shaped robotparts
Mecha: Bulky armord part
Drone: light weight skinny/bony parts
Chimera: the biohorror and mutant part of my system. It has its own DNA mutation system but does also suffer from alot more problems then normal robots
Nanites: gray goo that can reshape itself or mimic stuff.
Cyborg: the humans in my setting advanced so much they hardly what we would call humans. Cyberimplants to the max but yet becouse of an error long ago unable to convince the robots that they are there former masters and not just "biounits".

I can keep ranting about this but we all have limtide time. IF people like to know more just ask. it helps me alot putting the rules in words and hearing some feedback.

>>96730551
I just don't like rolling a ton of dice. Its just a hassle and slows down the game.

>>96729989
Ok, I see your point here, and let me verify if I understand correctly. If I put the faction bonuses on a separate layer, they become harder to balance vis a vis the purchase of parts. Basically by making faction bonuses purchasable I establish a baseline against which weaker and stronger parts can be measured. I want to follow up to this question and ask: what would happen if instead I made it so that respecting restrictions gives you more or less "special faction points" that you can spend for faction bonuses? This way even if you respect the restrictions you don't get an overwhelming advantage vs. an opponent that is using parts from multiple manufactures.

Also the game is currently being played in person and I can promise you, you are not interested in checking it out. It is very much still shit.

File: Untitled.png (2 KB, 190x159)

2 KB PNG

critique my d6 combat system please and thank you.
you add up two out of five attributes, depending on what weapon youre using.
ex. strength and agility.
that number determines what target number you need to hit.
you then select a number of dice from a pool that you want to use for attack.
successes are counted as hits.
damage is calculated as the damage of the weapon + the two used attributes and subtract from that the targets armor.

this would basically be the baseline for melee combat, without any other modifiers.
is there potential or do i need to start over?

>>96699230
>What are you working on right now?
A d12 based system where the goal is to try and cut and combine mechanics I've come up with in two previous precursor projects.
I finally nailed down the exact amount of crunch I'd like it to have, and I think it'll be just the right amount to keep the game at the speed I'd like it to be.
>Any issues? Lacking inspiration? Smashing your head against a creative wall?
All of the above, and it's all because of defense.
From the start, I wanted this to have contested attack vs. dodge checks, but I realized a short while ago that the method I was working with feels out of place compared to the entire rest of the game. Every non-situational modifier is attribute + skill, and dodge being attribute + attribute feels wrong.
Is this autistic to worry about? Yes, especially when if it's the only check to use it it makes it easy to remember. But I hit another issue with it, namely that if a player doesn't put points into the two attributes that use it (out of 5), then they're kinda shit outta luck. And it's very realistic that someone would choose to play a role that doesn't use either of those attributes.

Possible fixes:
-Make a separate "Special" attribute, and put HP and Evasion in there.
Problem: Not really anything else could/would go in there.
-Make Evasion a skill.
Problem: Inherently makes the attribute it's part of way better/maybe required.

>>96735206
Why it needs to be like that to begin with?

>>96736084
Just play test it with friends if you doubt how it will work on practice. Nobody will decide for you from a two sentence pitch what is better for the ruleset they don't see.

>>96730551
Anything less than a 5% chance is functionally unseeable unless you're rolling a hundred times a session

>>96736084
Is evasion the only defense, or just the best one?
if you have Parry/Block, Armor and Evasion with different downsides and advantages having Evasion as a skill is way less of a problem.

>>96736338
Yeah definitely, that's the plan. I'd just like to try and nip anything I see as potentially being an issue if I can.
>>96736385
It's the only universal one. Block is only an option for melee users against other melee users. Anyone with a gun or being attacked by a gun just has evade at this moment.
And armor is a damage threshold.

>>96736109
so combat effectiveness isnt dependant on a single stat and so you can decide to either fight more defensively or go all out on offense.
or are you asking about something else?

>>96730551
Gygax and Arneson teamed up in the afterlife and pressure the psychic field generated by humanity, forcing all of us to gravitate towards the naturally superiour Three Pamphlet DnD.

Hello everyone, is this thread just got RPGs or Wargamers as well?

>>96738500
go ahead
but if its shit 4chan HQ will send its paramilitary deathsquads after you

>>96738547
It's a Helldivers 2 ripoff

>>96738547
Is that what we're calling jannies these days?

Fellas any of you have tried Fantasy Grounds? I want to host a Daggerfall campaign for some friends, I mostly want a platform to handle the maps, the figures, the dice throwing and such, I don't mind having to do rhe rest of the stuff without automatization?
It's a lewd based campaign, so I don't know if roll20 would ban us for the chat logs or something idiotic

File: moonshine_raider__4___my_(...).jpg (112 KB, 828x601)

112 KB JPG

>>96734080
So, like, command points?

The thing is, assuming all parts are viable, balanced and equal in power then parts restrictions are just a gameplay style choice. There is no meaningful difference between a restricted list and a free for all list considering you can make a restricted list even by accident.

To make free faction bonuses not overpowered compared to "any parts" armies means you have to write out the synergies and restrictions between parts *veerry* carefully so that to gain the faction bonus (weather it comes in the form of points or passive buff) you have to give up on using parts that work very well together.

IK its not a tabletop game but it serves still as a lesson in game design. Look up "set bonuses" from TF2's history and why they have to be remouved.

A way you might go about it that might be easier is to have players pick a faction and just have "unaligned" as a faction option and unaligned armies would get a small bonus on top of no parts restrictions. Having unaligned armies have some base strength means you can give named factions bonuses that don't cost any points and also are significant.

If the "unaligned" bonus was "extra points budget" then that's a very roundabout way of making faction bonuses just cost points.

Currently deciding if my choice of using A5 format instead of A4 is correct.

I am writing an DnD supplement.
Posted it partially on /tg/ few days ago. Currently working through the recieved feedback.

>try to draft combat systems
>end up just making walmart 4e everytime

>>96699230
Bump for interest.

>>96711594
Tell me more about the capitalism TCG. Do you still have fighting guys and lifepoints?

it's funny, I was fine just making 5e homebrew every day when it was a hobby, but the minute I got ambitious and started trying to make my own game I completely crashed. now all I can do is sit in front of an empty text file and feel the urge to give up.

File: Rulebook.png (1.41 MB, 4667x1914)

1.41 MB PNG

>>96746605
The 'points' are Capital, they are what you use to pay for the cost of cards as well as what you need to win. Start at 20, first to 50. Reduced to 0 you lose.
There is no combat phase, you are mostly building up your own engine but there are many cards that can effect the opponent by either destroying their productions, limiting what they can play, or outright costing them Capital
You gain Capital at the beginning of your turn based on your Revenue - Expenses, and then can use that Capital during our turn to play card costs. It's up to each player to know when they need to stop investing in their engine and let the points rack up

File: Screenshot 2025-10-09 at (...).jpg (595 KB, 1294x1690)

595 KB JPG

>>96699230
Final cover design for Prim and Ill be looking at test prints this or next weekend.

>>96747705
Starting with nothing always sucks. Writing stuff has always felt like acceleration to me so I often just start with anything random and extrapolate from there. You'd be surprised how many rules you will write just because youre basically filling in pot holes as you go along just from that initial bit of momentum.
Though you must surely have an idea, even if its vague. Just start writing up a skeleton document of just bullet points and go from there, even if you dont get a lot done, you've made sure to record any important ideas you had.

>>96748006
I've found that if the win condition is directly tied to your resources, that can lead to a 'win more' spiral.
What you want is for there to be a sort of back-and-forth between players. When someone gets ahead the other should have a way to flip the momentum, but without resetting the progress.

Did you have trouble with that in play testing? That the person who gets ahead first is guaranteed to win, and that any mechanics meant to address this instead lead to games dragging on with no progress?

File: Demo3.png (351 KB, 1723x1582)

351 KB PNG

>>96749233
>What you want is for there to be a sort of back-and-forth between players. When someone gets ahead the other should have a way to flip the momentum, but without resetting the progress.
Precisely. There are cards available that can allow this to happen that don't always rely on removing opponents Productions, however there are the rare cards that allow you to destroy 1-2 which can be enough of a swing to eek out a victory.
>That the person who gets ahead first is guaranteed to win
It hasn't been the experience yet in playtesting but it is a constant thing to be aware of during design. However similar to Magic, if a game is clearly in one person's favor with no way of winning it is easy to scoop and try again

File: 71IQykgdc8L._UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg (112 KB, 700x1000)

112 KB JPG

>>96709320
>>96709373
they have a book out now

File: energy vampire.png (1011 KB, 1127x1568)

1011 KB PNG

still testing

File: cat.jpg (69 KB, 736x1308)

69 KB JPG

>>96749281
See, I haven't been part of a playtest for this, but my first thought is that if I'm behind on capital, I don't have the resources to spare for sabotages without delaying my own growth strategy as well.
Is there anything about them that makes them more useful to someone that's behind than to someone that's ahead?

File: 20250821_174124.jpg (3.34 MB, 4000x3000)

3.34 MB JPG

>>96752094
There are no specific rules or cards that factor in whether you're behind or not. There are cards that may benefit from having less Productions in play than your opponent like Carbon Tax, which could be played before using a separate sabotage that removes the productions as a sort of combo.
As each person builds their side up though one benefit is that 'one turn from winning' becomes a bigger and bigger window as you get more profitable. Someone who is behind may only need to make their opponent stumble slightly in order to take the win.
Soon I should be able to get a printable pdf of two starter decks so people from this thread could try getting it on the table

>>96750504
I have no idea why maid and bunny girls doing non maid/bunny girl things appeals to much to me.
Wanted to make a game just because I got my hands on miniature of maids, bunny girls and priestess with guns and need an excuse to use them beside Necromunda.

Tips on creating a combat system where actual damage is done like stat debuffs if your arm is slashed?
>Let's just say based in 5.5e?

File: file.png (50 KB, 681x446)

50 KB PNG

>Remember an old project from years ago
>Decide to open the file up and continue
>Start reading what I mean
I don't know what the fuck I was on, but I have a feeling it's best if I start completely over. Have some of my retardation for your own laughs.

>>96755587
>what I mean
What I made, I mean. Appears I still can't write.

File: fear.jpg (2.07 MB, 2828x4000)

2.07 MB JPG

here's the gray (Fear) deck
heavily focused on hand disruption

>>96755587
everyone has had this moment. dont throw it all out or you'll just have a graveyard of half-finished projects.

>>96758127
where's the ruleset? looks pretty cool. art and layout are already nice, though there's a lot of unused real estate in each bottom corner
maybe S/T/A should be a row along the bottom?

>>96758162
>where's the ruleset?
here >>96724680

I know that overlaying the stats on the illustration is not optimal, it could be done differently, but I think it adds depth to the card (look how the minions "pop out" from the frame)

>>96758190
>look how the minions "pop out" from the frame
that was my favorite part of the design. it just removes a lot of space that the artist could otherwise use.

>>96758226
oh, i see that other anons have made the same comments and you mocked up my suggestion already >>96722032

are these meant to be physical cards, or more like ygo with mouse hover card view and minimal display on the board? because a lot of the text is too small to be legible at a glance at card size.
>>96722159
if they're always in the same order, you dont even need labels - see MTG.
similarly, maybe Rank could just be a smaller circle that intersects the larger cost circle. in general, not everything needs a label - they tend to clutter the card with extraneous info. you could even keep the current layout if you drop the labels.

>>96758279
yes, they are meant to be physical

before deciding to include the whole stat name, I received some suggestions (mainly from Reddit, so take that as you will) that using only abstract numbers could not work
>maybe Rank could just be a smaller circle that intersects the larger cost circle
that's practically the same I did in a previous iteration, but I decided not to do that in the end
I must admit that I prefer to use stat names, as it gives a more "miniature stat block" look to the card, as if it was a reference card from a miniature game as much as a regular one from a card game, which is ultimately the feeling I want to achieve with this game

I think everything fits and has a cohesive look
in any case, I still appreciate all your suggestions

>>96758347
hey, your game in the end! I just think a test print would be helpful. hold the card rotated 180* at arms length to mimic your opponent placing the card on their side of the table.

>>96699230
I have a couple of games to share with the class today.

First is Duckhammer, a wargame. I don't play wargames (this was made as a joke basically), so feedback would be greatly appreciated. Word of warning: it uses d12s.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12TMaeOTc5ZG52yBlgEy5YrhgRg0rZYNSZc-mklj7xRk/edit?usp=drivesdk

Second is Hexenkrieg. Someone asked me to make a game some anon did in 2010 into a game. All I really did here was clean up the rules to Wizard Battle and add a few variant and joke rules.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hm4bLdzsX4bzYMxgs-N1fnCNVDUwKKXxwxqD9eddqdk/edit?usp=drivesdk

Last is Perfect Omen and Broken Crown. I made this game for a jam, but its working somewhat clunky. I have to write down some of the major changes i thought out and put them in the document, but hearing thoughts on its current state would be greatly appreciated.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/13dmabvUkQy3PKIvl7V3QGujHR1aR07Cn9Xrp9ciWCPo/edit?usp=drivesdk

pax4xanon here, had some more playthroughs of the game, had one person ask for a copy of it.

feels good man

>>96760527
it's a soft, fuzzy feeling to feel appreciated for your work
kudos, anon

>>96760600
thx

File: atk vs evasion.png (37 KB, 912x735)

37 KB PNG

need some input on whether im wasting my time or i just need to adjust some numbers.
its a d6 system which lets you decide a number of d6 out of a personal pool to use for attack.
left column is the attack score vs upper rows evasion.
so you compare the two and figure out what the minimum to hit is.
1 and below hits automatically its just there right now to help figure out the ranges.
conversely anything above 6 would be impossible to hit.

right now i think i need to adjust some of the upper left numbers and try to minimize the "impossible range"
a starting players attack would most likely be around 6-8 with mid level being around 10-15

please help me anons, you are my only hope

>>96760635
I was trying a somewhat similar thing, though simplified:
If equal 4+
If higher/lower 3+/5+
If double/half 2+/6+
If triple/one third 2+/6+ but you roll two dice and take the best/worst

So if attack is 6 and defense is 11 it's 5+
If defense is 12 it would 6+
If defense is 18 its 6+ but roll two dice and take the worse one

Seems to be pretty close to your table, but way easier to remember and always has a chance of success/failure.
Though I was aiming for the default stat to be 3, not 6. 6 was supposed to be maximum for humans.

bump

File: Gothic Witchblade.png (1.65 MB, 1127x1568)

1.65 MB PNG

>>96758127
I just realized that there's an oversight in one of the cards
"Gothic Witchblade" can't be blocked if the opponent has no cards in their hand
that's redundant
the defending player must pay the Rank cost of a minion in their hand to assign it as a blocker
so, if that player has no cards in hand, they can't block anyway

now, it's more like an "assassin" type of creature
it can be deployed to deal direct damage to another minion, and that ability costs less the bigger the difference between the size of your hand compared to the opponent
which ties to the hand disruption theme of the deck in general

bump

Any RPG brewers here? I'm designing one for fun as a little side project and I've spent a lot of time reading different games and also running them for my group in between our sessions. Right now the only thing closest to concrete I have in my head is an idea I have for the main gimmick of how combat works, but I don't know if it's even the right approach to build the other 90% of the game around that gimmick. How would you design a game from scratch?

>>96768954
whats the gimmick?
without knowing more its impossible to gauge.
but having it centered around a single mechanic shouldnt be too bad, but how can factors such as attribute, equipment, player choice, environment and alot of other things effect it?
also whats the vibe of the game? how crunchy do you want it to be?

>>96768954
Much depends on the gimmick. You can say that Slugbluster is based around a single gimmick of buying story pieces, or Electric Bastionland is based on a single gimmick of a randomized hex crawl. However, it is obvious that they are based on already established viable rules like BitD action resolution, and have a lot of content to run a very specific campaign. So what I want to say is you don't necessarily need to design a complete TTRPG for friends since it is a huge project that requires a lot of time, work, and dedication. But you can take the game you like and use homebrew combat on top of it and run a campaign. It sounds more realistic and something one can accomplish. An achievable goal is the most important thing in any hobby.

>rework my resolution mechanic again
>active defense doesn't work anymore
FUCK

>>96711356
That looks bad.
There's too little life. The star of the proverbial show is the art, which has to be big enough to bring life to the card. The design here is sterile, the audience's attention immediately drawn to this great robotic display that drowns the card in blue. After, we see the image in the center, but the experience is transformed into one of looking out from a laboratory at some fine specimen, locked in a cage.

Bump

>>96711356
This only works in games like Yugi where cards can or can not have special effects. Think of the instant readability. Will you utilize the text box to display anything relevant to mechanics? If the answer is yes leave it in this layout, if the answer is "No it's just cosmetic" shove the stats under the image and then the flavor under those
Think of how people will hold your card, consider their thumb when making a layout

random survey question: What system or rule would be good for hacking. I am struggling finding a way that isn't replacing/competing with the normal game.

>>96775505
What subsystems have you reviewed for this purpose so far, and what fantasy of hacking (and overall gameplay) do you want to have supported this way?

>>96775505
maybe you can adapt this from
https://ia601901.us.archive.org/20/items/RPGDesignPatterns91309/RPG_Design_Patterns_9_13_09.pdf

>Dogs in the Vineyard has an escalating conflict resolution system that follows the
Contest Tree design pattern. Characters on opposing sides of a conflict each have dice
pools whose number and type are set by the character’s attributes and traits. Different
attributes are brought into play depending on actions taken. The dice are rolled and the
aggressor selects two of his dice and puts them forth as a “Raise” (whose value equals
the sum of the two dice). The defender must then meet or exceed this value by putting
forth dice of his own to “See” the Raise. If he can See with a single die, he has attained
a “Reversal” allowing him to re-use that die in his next Raise. If he can See with two
dice, neither side suffers any effects. If he requires three or more dice to See, he suffers
“Fallout” (wounds and other effects). If a player feels he is losing the conflict, he can
decide to “Escalate” it by having his character pull a knife or gun, which allows him to
add the dice associated with the action to his dice pool. Of course, his opponent can do
likewise. The person winning the last exchange in the conflict wins the overall conflict.
The system contains low-level conflicts consisting of Raises and Sees that decide a
higher level result. The low-level conflicts’ Fallout also has an effect on subsequent
conflicts. Optionally, the Game Master may ignore the Fallout inflicted on an NPC and,
instead, hand the Fallout dice over to the protagonists to use in upcoming conflicts.
How all of this affects an adventure’s overarching goals, though, is not obvious from
the text. Supposedly, if the protagonists accumulate enough success, the GM will
eventually decide the players attain what they are striving for.

>>96775518
i am >>96731620
and i have a D6 system with a good working attack vs dodge/cloak system alrady. Or at least i hope so.
And becouse the players are robots they should be able to hack on the fly. But i keep getting into deep mechanical rebbit holes.
Just want to hear what other people hope to play or already like to play when it comes to hacking.

>>96775700
i will take a look at your pdf thanks
to your words: i realy need to reread this when i am less tired. Mind giving me a example fight how this would like?

>>96777746
>Mind giving me a example fight how this would like?
remember that the pdf is about game design in general so it covers a whole lot.

anyway the mechanic basically escalates with higher and higher rolls, until one side is successful.
so if the player succeeds, the target is hacked, and if not maybe they will suffer some consequences.
such as alarms, getting shocked, etc.

lets say you roll dice and add up to a total of 7, the opponent can deduce he must also use two dice and rolls 5, which means he has lost the contest, and the hacking is succesful.
but what if instead the opponent rolls 8? now the player has lost the contest, unless they are able to and decide to escalate, by adding dice to his original roll, which must then be contested by the opponent if able.

before hand you need to figure out how strong the "opponent" is, ie. the target of the hack.
is it some public net cafe a script kiddie could break? or arasakas main server?
add nuances with can or cant a target escalate if they lose? what actions/equipment/boons can a player take to increase their dice pool? what is the size of the opponents dicepool? can some dice be rerolled? and so on.

>>96699230
Getting ready to drop my wargame on wargame vault.

It's not properly playtested but I don't have access to sufficient playtesters anymore, so whatever. Time to be done with it.

Even though I have some ideas I'm tempted to work on, I'm finding myself losing the motivation to do homebrew dev. How do people stay motivated to work on projects that will likely never get any attention outside of the people you wrangle for playtesting?

>>96779914
discipline and actually enjoying the process of creating

File: 1646630044542.jpg (978 KB, 1920x1036)

978 KB JPG

>>96778067
Your example sound good
so the personal skills and maybe some programs can extante the escalation of the hack?
Currently i have programms with some sort of stability (represented by a pair of dice, lets say two 3's) and the enemy that want to hijack or kill the program needs to roll two 4's or manage to get a tripple pair.
Decorder and firewall programs help attacking or defending by adding more to the pair or giving +1D6 for a higher chance to find a pair.
I just fear this system may not feel like hacking and more like a gamble plus to much in favor for the defender.

I also have trouble weaving my Int/Will/Win properties. Right now everyone can hack like a pro given the right tools becouse int just limites the maximum of the programs but not how they act.
There is also also a rattail of my item systme but this would go out of hand quickly.
So just let me thank you for reading my rant, helps alot putting this into words and let me know what can i streamline or change after you read all this.

File: 1581952763284.png (755 KB, 600x939)

755 KB PNG

>>96780553
no problem dude, hope you figure it out.
imo, if hacking can occur alongside combat, it needs to be somewhat fast and streamlined.
as for your concern with the feel, i mean, any dice roll is a gamble, regardless of system or how its dressed up, numerical "skill" or player choice can mitigate that but still, i dont think you should worry about that too much.
good luck.

>>96731620
>muh jonny 5 tism triggered
So is there a consequence for dying? Does the same robot model roll off the factory? Backup reuploads? is jonny 5 alive? Is there any individuality for mass produced robonigger #751864? Can you hijack enemy bodies by transplanting your hard drive into a downed boss or is there a mind-body attachment? What keeps the grey goo type from being overpowered? I might need some examples for android/drone/mecha parts. Right now it reads like human(fat) human(thin), doesn't feel like they need to be separate categories.

File: 320a9ea570805973bd31c5bfb(...).jpg (117 KB, 750x1272)

117 KB JPG

>>96780590
Its less the gembling and more how to support the players powerfantasy of being "the weak but genius hacker boy". But thank you so far.

>>96780605
>So is there a consequence for dying?
All robots have AI cores
if a player goes down others (ally or not) can salvage the core to put it in anotherb body.
Destorying the AI core is a hard task but outside of combat a shure thing. So players better flee with there allys cores or risk being killed for good.

>Does the same robot model roll off the factory?
On paper yeah. There could be a factory that build the player characters robot but fresh build ones would not have the same mind or sentiants as the player ones. Part of the character creation is to explain WHY the robot stop following blindly its programming and start longing for the love of humankind.
In lore all robots get resetted from time to time to stop over eager smartbots doing unwanted good deets. With the humans gone this didnt happen and all the love turns into a messy afair of compeating robot factions wanting to prepear for the return of the humans. You can imagen how carbuiling bots want more roads while garnding bots want more flowerbeds will fight over ever meter.
[Spoiler] >is jonny 5 alive?
maybe /Spoiler
>Is there any individuality for mass produced robonigger #751864?
overtime robot 751864 will see and lern other things then his peers. All robots want to server humankind and without a human telling them how and yelling "work together" is easly turning into a shitshow.

>>96780605
>Can you hijack enemy bodies by transplanting your hard drive into a downed boss or is there a mind-body attachment?
So far the AI core is the center of the player character and if put into a new body it would work as fine as the old one.
hacking is a big work in process but i could imagen it be a fun thing. Have a good radio mechanic and i could add a extra cost playing puppetmaster.
>What keeps the grey goo type from being overpowered?
Yes, i have nanites (gray goo) in my system, but they cant eat everything to become more. Something something its high tech that isnt able to eat steel and gold to make more of itself.
That limits that problem. The other limits are how many programms can be used to deform and how much mass they have to form into.
Want a spike on your am to attack? This means losing the preprogramed nanite hand and turing it into said spike for 1 nanitemass and an active program. If you dont mind not moving this turn you could pump your nanite mass from your legs into it too but lose any movement.
So it becomes a balance of what needs to be done while fearing every hacker simply turning off your body.

>I might need some examples for android/drone/mecha parts. Right now it reads like human(fat) human(thin), doesn't feel like they need to be separate categories.
To answer this i have to go for a big rant but i try to keep it short.
Yeah you can be a housemaid andorid or the classic big hulking tank mech.
But also mix and max this parts from six types:
Android
Mecha
Drone
Chimäre
Naniten
Cyborg
six categories of parts:
Service
Industrial
Militärisch
Agricultural
Experimental
Artefakt
and six version of any bodypart.

example: a simple hand with singers.
It could be a service andorid hand.
or a militäry nanite hand that can deform into a lockpick or any other nanite program you get your hands on.
or a bulky industiral cyborg arm. Ones beloning to a human tasked to push cargo not yours to punch people.

File: 65953654_p0_Mech_doodle.png (397 KB, 1164x1116)

397 KB PNG

>>96781132
>>96781336
in short you can be this

File: 1557871994626.png (165 KB, 480x622)

165 KB PNG

>>96781342
or be this

File: 1705589752722075.jpg (59 KB, 828x570)

59 KB JPG

>>96781353
or even what ever this is.
the sky is the limit
and i hope my cluster fuck of tables offer rules and statts to every playstyle
its highly intented to end up into frankenstains robot.

File: melee.png (92 KB, 1504x459)

92 KB PNG

>>96769077
>>96769148
So my idea is a success based dice resolution for everything. Combat is resolved via opposed dice pool rolls and combat-related features will most likely be revolving around messing with dice pool size, target difficulty, etc. When I start thinking about the implications for everything else like skill resolution, how much character progression there will be, how gear will affect things, how to avoid the game being about tracking debuffs and buffs my mind kind of wanders too much into all directions and I was wondering if there's a more structured ground up approach that would be good for it.

>>96781494
one of the ways to make tracking easyer is to put it on cards.
This way the (de)buff is visible, easy to move around and a non debate problem.
>Player: "i want to attack"
>DM: "okey -1 on attack becouse your foot is still brocken."
>Player: "My what?" *Looks at the debuff card* "Oh i realy shouldnt jumped down, right?"
>DM: "Yeah but it can be fixed by a medkit later."

something like that.

>>96780485
Other people trying out the system is a pretty indispensable part of the creative process for me. Otherwise it's just me hallucinating onto a page.

If a game is good on your hard drive and nobody is around to play it, does it make a sound?

File: ChatGPT Image Oct 8, 2025(...).png (2.81 MB, 1024x1536)

2.81 MB PNG

>>96699230
I have been fiddling with fudge dice for a while and came up with some rules for mutation, what do you think? See: https://files.catbox.moe/ovwa0h.pdf

Been toying with the idea of flipping the importance of skill and traits with gear for years, have never committed. The main thrust is that it would facilitate a less handholdy game and allow the GM to use more randomly generated stuff from tables without needing to retune, allowing for more and faster prep. Losing characters would also matter less since you can roll up a new character and grab at least some of the gear from your old character, some mechanics in place maybe item destruction or attunement limits or a mix of many similar ones so you can't get it all back right away.

I've maybe been playing too many roguelites, since really that's kinda what this has felt like to me. A TRPG roguelite, but players of TRPGs are usually less gameplay focused and more character fantasy focused which is completely at odds with the GM fantasy here (worldbuilding and scenario building) and needs specific care and responses from the GM to cater to their character fantasy. Which sucks.

>>96788377
If you look at real life though, many very talented people can do magic with basic tools while normal people will look at plumbers' tape and wonder what the fuck it does. Tread carefully, but I see your thought process. Still, for me, I'd stick to the characters being the source of skills.

File: new codex.jpg (27 KB, 326x410)

27 KB JPG

>>96753547
>miniature of maids, bunny girls and priestess with guns
can I get some more info on those miniatures?

I'm working on a game, and I'd like some feedback on it's current version. Is there some place where I could upload a PDF and have people look at it?

>>96790621
/tg/

>>96791475
I tried, it wouldn't let me upload a PDF for some reason.

File: bunnies.jpg (118 KB, 1280x488)

118 KB JPG

>>96790493
Brother Vinni makes some, the maid and miku models i got them from the magical girl assault game.
I have procrastinated for ages since I've been painting mostly guy with little skin exposed or aliens so I need to re learn how to do skin

>>96790621
If youre working on it, i would advise keeping a google docs version for people to more easily comment to or make suggestions

File: perimeter officer.png (769 KB, 1126x1569)

769 KB PNG

working on the print-and-play version of my game
I wanted to emulate the grungy feeling of a picture photocopied too many times

but I'm not sure if it's precisely easy in the eyes...
what do you think?

Ok, screw it. I'm just going to try using catbox and see if that works.

https://files.catbox.moe/5vedbd.pdf

This is the game that I've been working on. The concept is that instead of players having one character, each player has a group of characters that typically act as a single unit in combat but can act independently otherwise.

File: examples.jpg (3.11 MB, 2256x3142)

3.11 MB JPG

>>96795759
I dunno...

>>96798087
try lowering the brightness and color saturation

>>96798539
okidoki

>>96795759
Get all those boxes out of the art box
Put Rank 1 either in the line saying Minion or at the top of the effect box (sharing a line with law enforcement demon). Alternatively, law enforcement demon should go with minion. Put strength toughness agility and skill on the bottom or the right side of the effect box.

Also consider how many stats you actually need, and ways to shorthand each of them (you dont want TOUGHNESS filling up valuable effect space; shorten to TGH)

>>96724859
Roll under what if there is no DC?

>>96800979
(NTA) Probably under the relevant attribute value, as roll-unders usually work.

File: ceb8518c51c60d92dbbc323a4(...).jpg (160 KB, 1024x576)

160 KB JPG

I'm working on a mecha themed ttrpg. One of the main things I want to do is to encourage not sticking with the same mech all the time, and changing depending on the situation. How could I do it?

Mechs work in a point buy system (IE: your mech has 100 space, that flight unit costs 75 space, the integrated rocket launchers 30 and the light machinegun 25, you can only fit so much stuff). Lancer does with specific abilities for each mech, giving some wiggle room with systems from another mechs, but it's a bit rigid. One idea I had was that repairing mechs took time, so having one or two spares to use while your main(s) are being fixed is useful (so you don't have to sortie with a half broken machine), but I don't know how frustrating that could be.

>>96804121
>so having one or two spares to use while your main(s) are being fixed is useful (so you don't have to sortie with a half broken machine)
There's no guarantee that this would promote changing loadouts, as opposed to running 2-3x of the same, either.

File: __jegan_and_heavygun_gund(...).jpg (152 KB, 850x602)

152 KB JPG

>>96804136
Hmm. Using gundam mechs as examples. I was thinking of something like: I have a Gundam (a super protoype unit) as my main machine, and in our ship there are 3 Jegans (mass production units), my gundam is in repairs so I'll swap to one of the jegans. It would depend on the economy (how expensive is to adquire such a unit, and how hard it would be to do su) a lot, if you can have 3 equal gundams without problem, there wouldn't be a reason to have a Jegan or two just in case.

up

>>96699422
Guys, this one is me.

Trying to get a basic set of test rules together to see how it plays. Probably another couple of days before I have anything actually playable. At the moment, it'll just be the playing a wargame bit rather than campaign rules.

That being the case, battlefield set up, missions, turn structure, rules for movement, fighting, retreating, effectes present with weapons and characters, unit stats... can you think of anything else I might need for that?

I'm also going to include cut outs of the robots, I'm figuring of anyone actually does want to give it a play the can sub whatever minis they have for soldiers and vehicles but I could draw some scale ones up for them as well. I may do some scale terrain... I've done flat scatter bits for objectives for fun and to fill in space around a couple of the robots, but buildings could also be fun and shouldn't be much effort...

>>96812148
Open/hidden information breakdown; visibility/detection; terrain effects; victory conditions.

File: 1745688970083441.png (48 KB, 1545x96)

48 KB PNG

>>96755587
Same, here's one from my ideas notes.
Is it for NPC behaviour? Is it for my magic system? Is it for oracling?
I don't know, it looks like it's been generated from AI or ripped from another ruleset.

Yours seems pretty self explanatory anon.
[Dave] is a [Butcher] who [Chops]. He gets minor stat bonuses for anything butcher related (identifying types of wounds on flesh/trading). He also gets more sizable bonuses for chopping stuff or using blades.

Weapons stats are split into categories but can be further modified by Major and Minor mods.

Something something meta-stat for infections. Pretty easy to understand.

Level rules seem explanatory but some might conflate Infection level with character level, which I don't think you're trying to do. Although that's a good idea for a game that i'd play.

File: 1752160461510352.png (668 KB, 512x512)

668 KB PNG

Are there many pen and paper games that do Kingdom scale PvP well?
I spent a while thinking about designing a Realm scale PvP game that could be played over weeks without a GM. I got stuck very fast because all my lines of thought were going to Play by Post or Tick systems.
The closest I got to a working idea was having orders be posted into a queue system and then executed by being pushed to the front of the queue but these types of games already suffer from AFK players.

>>96813216
I guess good news is I already have some of that included. Fingers crossed this continues to go swimmingly.

love to know if I'm wasting my time.

roll under but high a la Pendragon style. Degrees of success are measured. (e.g. stat of 18, roll a 5, that'll succeed with a success of 5)

armor reduces damage but can also halve it if success level is low enough (or other effects). Monsters can do the same, or 'react' with an ability. (e.g. that 5 we rolled earlier, opponent has a 'shield level' higher than that... say 6, so the damage recieved is halved) (a monster example could be, 1 degree of success and take 1d4 acid damage as it spits at you.)

High quality weapons have attack modifiers that use the format "[spend up to/use all] [add/subtract/either] x number of points"

(e.g. stat of 18, rolled a 5, a "use all +3" would make that (5+3) 8 degrees of success instead)

subtract would be more reliable, but prone to deal less damage or trigger reactions. Higher leads to more chances to miss, but higher degrees of success. 'Spend up to' and 'either' give the most freedom.

Weapons like this are better with characters of higher skills, I like the idea that a peerless duelist can use a legendary sword far better that a guard.

was also playing with the idea of other actions, like 'attack carefully' could give you a penalty, but lets a PC do "spend up to" instead of "use all".

>>96814342
Define well.
GURPS can do it, but it's a notorious autism central for pretty obvious reasons.

>>96816430
I assume GURPs doesn't drop its RPG shackles and still requires a GM to adjudicate?
I'm talking more about pen and paper strategy game, not really an RPG as such.

>>96814342
sounds like it could quickly devolve into Spreadsheets the RPG.
arent there like alternate versions of Risk with like westeros or middle earth or something?

>>96816629
Problem with pen and paper is that you have a lot of information that can be fudged. You either play in the open without secret info or trust each other to get everything right.
It's a bigger thing among board games - like Twilight Imperium - where you use cards and tokens, so you can have some things held in secret and some in the open with way more ease.

File: 1744160915738172.jpg (43 KB, 540x754)

43 KB JPG

>>96816814
Yeah I have a friend that plays Dominion and that literally requires huge spreadsheet calculators. My idea of hell.
>>96816950
Yeah I realized that but I hadn't bothered even thinking about hidden information yet, I was more bothered trying to think about ideas for getting the time progression right without having to use turn taking.
Real time Twilight Imperium is much closer to my vision but obviously you would have to make a lot of concessions to even begin to make it possible and it's way too crunchy for P&P.
I am in love with the flexible RPG approach to timekeeping and decision making but marrying it to a PvP game seems nigh impossible, at least with no referee. I am going to keep thinking about it.
I appreciate the responses to my badly written posts fellas.

File: E9KrwlTWYAEBch_.jpg (510 KB, 1896x2680)

510 KB JPG

I have nothing to contribute.

>>96814680
The bad news is, I realise I have two methods of ranged shooting, and each use the same stat i mutually-exclusive ways. Sigh.

File: 38174443_p0_master1200.jpg (235 KB, 1000x1000)

235 KB JPG

trying to design an OSR game that use gold as experience and i need some advice on implementation.
should it work like you pay a trainer to level up?
or that getting gold fills an xp gauge?
im leaning towards the former so the players will have to choose between leveling or a bunch of other stuff, like gear for example.

>>96825824
If you have to pay a trainer then I hope all options are viable whether the gold is spent on training or gear. Like, the difference between playing a monk or wizard who puts all that gold into training because they don't need better equipment compared to a paladin who needs that super expensive armor.

Inverse is also possible where characters that don't need equipment are left behind because their options at the shops are so poor.

File: 20251024_161629.jpg (2.37 MB, 4000x3000)

2.37 MB JPG

I don't have much to share right now, other than a printing test of the latest designs for my game

>>96830532
and I've realized, just now, that I made a mistake in the name of (at least) one of the cards
it's front and center, too...
how embarrassing

>>96830532
>>96830769
It's far more embarrassing that you've used AI art, to be honest.

>>96830813
sure!
let me spend thousands upon thousands of dollars (or euros) commissioning multiple artists during months on end, just to print a few test cards!
how silly of me!


it's just a placeholder, anon...
I will not use AI generated pictures if/when I get the game to be published
anyway... I don't expect you to believe me, but trust me on this

File: image-36.png (744 KB, 649x808)

744 KB PNG

>>96699230
Bumping the thread with my back cover WIP

File: disturbia.jpg (109 KB, 1241x1755)

109 KB JPG

>Version 1.0.35
>https://drive.google.com/file/d/1crqjmX9Q1buzBkpzmduPaJIcPDHyTwmt/view?usp=sharing

>Disturbia — Urban Fantasy Card Skirmish
Disturbia is a two-player urban fantasy card game that plays like a compact skirmish.
You command a faction of agents and monsters fighting for influence in an endless city.

>Deckbuilding
30 cards, 100 points total. Each extra copy costs +1 more point than the last.
You start with 0 Morale. Lose if you hit 0 and take more.
Once per turn, Rally by discarding 4 cards to gain 1 Morale.

>Colors
Gray – Fear (control, discard)
Blue – Curiosity (tricks, knowledge)
Red – Passion (aggression, chaos)
Green – Ancestry (endurance, growth)

>Resources
Advantage: Sacrifice your domains (territories) for colored power.
Skill Requirement (ACT): Used for Supports and Actions.
Deploy minions whose total Skill ≥ the card’s value; they "maintain" it in play.

>Card Types
Minions: Rank / STR / TGH / AGL / Skill.
Events: One-shots. Actions use Skill instead of Advantage.
Supports: Ongoing effects; stay only while maintained.
Locations: Free; create domains.

>Turn Flow
Initial Phase: Discard deployed minions, draw 3, resolve upkeep.
Main Phase: Play, advance, fight.
Final Phase: Cleanup: discard to 5, return Vault cards to bottom of deck.

>Combat
Attack by paying Rank.
If unblocked, the opponent loses Morale = Rank.
Blockers come from hand by paying Rank.
Damage = STR; destroyed if damage ≥ TGH.
After combat, blockers are discarded; attackers reshuffled.

>Pitch
Your deck is the battlefield. Minions surface through the streets, holding schemes and burning morale.
Fast, tense, and tactical; like a skirmish game without minis.


I doubt I'll be changing anything else after this last update
so, the rules are pretty much finished

>>96830532
>>96830769
I like the misprinted name. Keep it and run with it.

File: cristitunity.jpg (71 KB, 640x480)

71 KB JPG

>>96837001
>Gothic with C Blade

File: 1760872467063565.png (96 KB, 1061x430)

96 KB PNG

I am going to be implementing a miscast mechanic into my magic system.
It's roll under stat (WIL) for a successful cast. I was originally just going to go with critical failures or just straight up failed casts causing miscasts.
But I had the idea of tying the miscast to a different stat like INT or LCK on the same roll.
Do you think that is too clunky and annoying for players?

I already made this neat miscast generator on perchance, I was originally going to ask if anyone had an idea of how to convert it for P&P use but the more I look at it the more it looks fine to me. I could probably provide roll tables for the key words easily.

File: 1755045210906658.png (1.15 MB, 527x736)

1.15 MB PNG

>>96837030
Even better. Give it some lore too.
>hey anon, what the hell does Gothic with C Blade anyway
Now you've got the in-game and IRL answer to that question.

bump

File: reimoo.png (3.27 MB, 1127x1568)

3.27 MB PNG

I have nothing concrete to offer to the thread yet, just a small tidbit from a passion project


also bump

Got inspired by robo anons itt. I might try to make a small(non commercial) skirmish game based around the old power armor cyoa. Hope it pans out as something fun. I will aim for point buy like the cyoa, with options to dump powers into a couple of mega dudes or spamming a couple of units of 20 chaff models on the extreme end.

File: patterns.jpg (1.1 MB, 3385x1570)

1.1 MB JPG

>>96844323
something random
but the game slowly takes shape

these are just low-ink test cards

File: color.png (1.59 MB, 1127x1569)

1.59 MB PNG

>>96849373
and now for some color

Do different types of roll resolution affect the feel of a game? For example, if I'm designing a modern urban noir setting vs. a medieval fantantasy setting, is there a reason why I would consider d20 over 3d6 over d100 etc?

>>96846079
Depends how those 20 chaff and couple of super dudes move.
For example if each model gets do one action, one player will be playing 20 things while the other just has 2.
So eventually the chaff will get lucky by pure number games.
There must be some activation economy to compensate.

>>96850223
Well, 3D6 vs. D20 have different probabilities, so the does change the feel. 3D6 uses a bell curve, so its a bit more reliable on what you'll roll, where a D20 is a flat chance for each result. So compared, 3D6 feels safer with spikes being more exciting. While a D20 can feel like a coin flip, so it can create more tension in key moments.

>>96850575
>>96852942

And functionally, d20 vs d100 are the same except for the degree to which modifiers affect the results and the granularity of resolution. A +5 is worth more when your randomisation goes from 1-20 vs 1-100.

>>96855768
I'm still trying to decide whether I want to use xd20 keep highest or xd100 keep highest

>>96770275
Still stuck on this.
>roll under d6 pools
>number of dice is atteibute + skill
>tn for an attack is the size of the target
>tn for a parry or block is ???
Any ideas?