[APEX] Free Universal System Feedback
Parylus:
Hey Forge!
I'd like to get some feedback on my new system called the Adaptable Play Engine v10, or APEX for short. It's a free, simple set of universal mechanics built for simplicity and ease of access. I'm shooting for light weight, traditional RPG mechanics that can be used with any setting you throw at it. The link is found below:
http://apexrpg.wordpress.com
The site linked above is going to be the front face for the game, but it's a work in progress. You can see some first draft material there, but here are some notes and a quick primer for the system:
We've eliminated the idea of having Attributes and Skills as seperate entities. We found it to be slightly redundant, so we simplified everything into a single list of Abilities. Abilities cover just about every task or activity, or could without too much stretch. Some examples are Agility, Athletics, Awareness, Close Combat, Deception, Influence, Marksmanship, Mechanics, and so on. The Abilities available to characters are based off of the setting in which they exist.
Each Ability is assigned a type of die (from d4-d12). So your character might have the following Abilities: Agility d4, Athletics d6, Awareness d8, Influence D10, and Marksmanship d12. Whenever you character wants to attempt to use an Ability, they roll the Ability Die against a default Target Number of 5. Rolling equal to or over 5 is a success. If you roll the maximum result on the die, you can reroll it and add it to the result, repeating every time you roll the maximum result. Situation modifiers from -4 to +2 can be used to adjust a roll based on the entire group's common sense opinion (the Players and the Narrator should come to a consensus or at least compromise).
Characters also have defenses which are static target numbers for others to roll against when trying to use Abilities on your character. They are derrived from the die types of specific Abilities. For example, the Dodge defense is equal to (2 + 1/2 Agility Die), so someone with an Agility of d8, would have a Dodge of 6 (2 + 1/2 of 8 = 6). If you want to shoot another character or creature, you'd roll Marksmanship vs. Dodge.
Those are just some basics for the mechanics. Please check out the APEX website.
Here is what I'm looking for as far as feedback:
1) Would you ever consider using a free set of mechanics for your game?
2) Would you ever consider creating a setting to go along with a set of rules like this?
3) How does the APEX website look?
4) How do the rules look based on what's there?
Here is what I'm NOT looking for:
1) Any comments/discussions on player vs gamemaster power
I'm also looking for any like-minded individuals to assist in the creation of the website and a pdf document. Of course, this is a free product, so any contributions would be for credit only. So let me know what you think or if you'd like to get involved.
Thanks guys!
SteveCooper:
Would you ever consider using a free set of mechanics for your game?
Probably not, but I'm reading this forum because I want to write my own set of mechanics, so I'm the wrong person to ask.
Would you ever consider creating a setting to go along with a set of rules like this?
If I were to run a game with a group that were most comfortable with the system, I'd consider running a campaign with it.
How does the APEX website look?
I like it. The getting started page has plenty of examples, which really help get in getting to grips with something new. The visual design is nice and the sidebar showing the structure of the site is good.
How do the rules look based on what's there?
This reminds me somewhat of the Cortex system, used in games like Battlestar Galactica. I've had problems with Cortex because of the unpredictability of character skills; someone who is amazing at a skill fails far too often, and someone poorly skilled does too well too often.
For instance, if I understand your system, a world-class character (d12) only succeeds a standard test 2/3 of the time. That is, Chuck Yeager crashes 1/3 of his test aircraft, and Mozart fails 1/3 of composing rolls. On the other end, someone with no skill at all passes a standard test 1/4 of the time. I'd like to see more variation in the outcomes; more like d4 passes 5% and d12 passes 95%, with a smooth progression in between.
Because a small number of small-sided dice is highly random, tests are unpredictable; that makes players fear to act. This might stifle exciting things because players fear for their characters.
Have you seen this effect in playtesting?
(Probabilites calculated using TROLL using expression 'sum accumulate x:=d12 while x=12')
Parylus:
Thanks very much Steve! That was exactly the type of feedback I was looking for, as far as the rules system. Yes, the latest version of APEX is influenced heavily by Cortex and Savage Worlds, just simplified in our eyes and made a bit more manageable. I definitely do want to respond to you in length, but I'd like to get a few more other snippets of feedback from others before I start flooding the thread with ideas and stuff. :)
Chris_Chinn:
Quote
1) Would you ever consider using a free set of mechanics for your game?
2) Would you ever consider creating a setting to go along with a set of rules like this?
3) How does the APEX website look?
4) How do the rules look based on what's there?
1. Definitely! It mostly depends on what the rules support and what issues it brings up for me, as a creator.
2. Maybe? If you mean a setting book or product to an existing set of rules, that depends on what obligations it produces, much as #1.
3. There's a lot of organized entries and that's really useful! A lot of what's under "Getting Started" looks like it could get repeated in "Action Basics" and other parts under "Rules" (not a bad thing repetition).
4. There's not enough rules to say much. Rules exist to help push play and set up choices- there's a general idea of a resolution mechanic, but nothing much on what informs what choices the players have at their hands, or what kinds of things are rewarded in play.
To go a bit further with "obligations" mentioned above, there's game systems like Clinton R. Nixon's Solar System and FATE, for example that don't put much restriction on what I can do with the mechanics or any ownership of the game (aside from, giving attribution to folks).
Chris
Parylus:
Thanks a bunch for the feedback guys! My name is Zack by the way :)
Okay, so to respond to Steve. I defintely appreciate where you're coming, and that is a concern for me as well. I haven't had the opportunity to playtest yet. I've been considering hitting the forums with playtester requests, but I kind of wanted to get some general feedback first and get the website a bit more complete. Without playtesting though, my gut feeling is that the spread is pretty decent for starting characters. I tried to use the TROLL link you posted, but had some trouble figuring it out completely. Here are the fractional probabilies as calculated by me, all at the default Target Number of 5:
Die Fraction of Success
d4 1/4 (25%)
d6 1/3 (~33%)
d8 1/2 (50%)
d10 3/5 (60%)
d12 2/3 (~67%)
I was trying to figure out how to proceed further with better Ability dice. I'm leaning towards going with d12 + dx. In other words, each step above d12 receives an additional die of ascending type. Keep in mind, the d12 is just the max for normal characters. You mentioned that as you saw it, d12 was meant to be a 'world class' Ability. After looking back at my description, I can see how it could be percieved that way, so I added a little snippet to say "Talents are far above human average, but by no means legendary." A d12 is meant to be the maximum "natural" aptitude for normal people, but I'm considering adding a rule to allow for higher level aptitudes for characters in Tiers 2, 3, and 4 (levels 6-10, 11-15, and 16-20 respectively). Here is an example:
Advanced Ability Dice
d12+d4 (Tier 2)
d12+d6 (Tier 2)
d12+d8 (Tier 3)
d12+d10 (Tier 3)
d12+d12 (Tier 4)
For the characters who are meant to be "legendary", not only would it be assumed that they have much higher aptitudes that d12 in their respective forte's, but they may also have Perks to help them as well. In the example of Chuck Yeager, he would probably be considered a "Tier 4" character, which means he would have a higher aptitude than d12, such as d12+d12 or something. He'd also likely have the "Ace Pilot" Perk, which gives an additional +1 when piloting air vehicles. Further more, it's likely Chuck would be pumped up during his test flights, so he would probaly use "Adrenaline" to help boost his rolls. It's not detailed on the site yet, but spending an Adrenaline point will award you with an extra d4 for your roll.
On a similar thought, in the Rules System section, when I do the write up there, I'd like to point out to the Players and the Narrator that not every roll is complete Success/Failure. Some rolls are best if the effects are "softer". In other words, just because you got a successful roll on your Mechanics doesn't mean you fix the car instantly. It may require more successes or Crits to fully fix the vehicle. At the same time, just because you fail your Mechanics roll doesn't mean the engine explodes on you. Failures can often come in the form of setbacks or "less then desireable" outcomes without being complete failures.Another, maybe more poignant example, is climbing a wall. If your character fails their Agility or Athletics roll to climb the wall, that doesn't mean they fall on their face and take damage right away. It may just take them a bit longer to scale the barricade.
Back to the subject of legendary characters then, Mozart would probably have a legendary Composition Ability of d12+d12, he'd probably have a Perk, such as "Master Composer", and he'd probably spend Adrenaline to make sure his compositions are masterpieces. In the event that does happen to fail his Composition roll, its not that he writes a garbage symphony, it may just take longer because he isn't happy with the results, which likely happened to Mozart all the time.
Does this help the way the curve feels?
Okay, now for Chris. From what I understand, you're saying there just isn't enough substance there to be useful, correct? So your suggestion would be to give example of how to handle different situations? Like, "If you want to climb a tree, use Agility."
Things like that?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page