Stregoneria RPG Feedback.
Callan S.:
Quote from: Stregheria on September 07, 2011, 07:22:40 AM
The mechanics were supposed to be flexible. The game is perfectly playable without any complicated rules for parrying, critical hits, impales wound infection etc. The mechanics were supposed to allow for a simple story-driven game where number crunching was secondary, or a fairly realistic simulation of combat on a medieval battlefield; that isn't to say that you could have a more narrativist game and use all the cruncyh rules as well.
But how would you play it? What's important to you, in the game/in playing it?
You seem to be trying to cater to the crowd, which I've seen often enough on forums, who say they are all about the story (and sometimes they don't touch a die all session, apparently), or for a crowd who want to run an 'authentic' battle.
But there's a third crowd, one who wants to experience the authors own idiosyncratic construct, a crowd who actually enjoys when a game grates against their day to day expectations (a crowd who has an expectation of having their status quo expectations not met). With that crowd, you basically do what you want (though I think forwarning text is required *thinks of a certain ronnies RPG*).
Do you need to cater to that third crowd? Not at all. But I think I'm part of it, and I wonder, since catering to the third crowd is essentially catering to yourself, I'd like to know how you'd play the game? What would you play it for? Specifically I'd like to know the rules you use, or even just the habits you have in gaming, codified into a sort of rules shadow of those habits?
But if it's just aimed at the first and second crowd, fair enough. I'm not really part of either demographic, I think, so I'm not sure my reading would be worth much to you.
Stregheria:
But how would you play it? What's important to you, in the game/in playing it?
You seem to be trying to cater to the crowd, which I've seen often enough on forums, who say they are all about the story (and sometimes they don't touch a die all session, apparently), or for a crowd who want to run an 'authentic' battle.
But there's a third crowd, one who wants to experience the authors own idiosyncratic construct, a crowd who actually enjoys when a game grates against their day to day expectations (a crowd who has an expectation of having their status quo expectations not met). With that crowd, you basically do what you want (though I think forwarning text is required *thinks of a certain ronnies RPG*).
Do you need to cater to that third crowd? Not at all. But I think I'm part of it, and I wonder, since catering to the third crowd is essentially catering to yourself, I'd like to know how you'd play the game? What would you play it for? Specifically I'd like to know the rules you use, or even just the habits you have in gaming, codified into a sort of rules shadow of those habits?
But if it's just aimed at the first and second crowd, fair enough. I'm not really part of either demographic, I think, so I'm not sure my reading would be worth much to you.
[/quote]
I would play it as a game that leant towards gritty realism with interweaving storylines. NPC development and their importance in the minds of the players is important to me. I would play the game with a lot of the complicated rules excluded. I would use my critical hit tables, impaling rules and wound infection rules however.
I think the fact that the game has its own mechanic and has its own idiosyncratic approach to many areas of the rules such as magic, enchanted items, demons etc will bring out the personality of the rules and their creator no matter how people choose to play it.
I wrote the game that I would most like to play, a game that I had not come across in all my years of buying rpgs. I then took that idea and expanded it into a modular system that had extended options for allowing players other than myself to customise the game to their liking. None of these extra options alters the game's basic premise though, that of being a low fantasy rpg with a dark, gritty edge.
Callan S.:
Quote
I think the fact that the game has its own mechanic and has its own idiosyncratic approach to many areas of the rules such as magic, enchanted items, demons etc will bring out the personality of the rules and their creator no matter how people choose to play it.
*snip*
None of these extra options alters the game's basic premise though, that of being a low fantasy rpg with a dark, gritty edge.
I think with any RPG which has alot in common with traditional RPG design, I, atleast, can pretty much turn the mechanics into an echo chamber of myself, simply by selectively ignoring rules or applying them in certain ways (which a traditional RPG permits in the rules it gives).
Indeed, I think when it's 'flexible', I can do nothing BUT talk over the games basic premise, instead saying my own premise. When it's really flexible, what's to stop me just doing whatever comes to my own mind? And so I'm left in an echo chamber with myself and like minded friends. It's in restriction that I can hear someone elses premise, not in freedom. Not that large number of gamers out there don't get excited about such a situation - generally they confuse doing what comes to their mind as actually playing someone elses game, and they don't percieve an echo chamber because they are playing 'the game' and don't recognise that they are following their own footprints, rather than someone elses. They never click as to the reason why "This game is exactly what I want!".
Or maybe that never occurs. But it seems that way to me.
Well, anyway, I'm looking for 'firmer' rules, myself, not more 'flexible' rules. But I might be a minor demographic, I totally admit.
Quote from: Stregheria on September 08, 2011, 03:52:21 AM
I would play it as a game that leant towards gritty realism with interweaving storylines. NPC development and their importance in the minds of the players is important to me. I would play the game with a lot of the complicated rules excluded. I would use my critical hit tables, impaling rules and wound infection rules however.
I'll line myself up to give it a read over with this in mind, soonish.
Stregheria:
I'm pushing the game once again and have people looking at the gae on another forum as well and am starting to get some useful feedback and have already made some minor changes: clearer character sheet, fixed some typos and made some minor formatting changes. Ron doesn't like people making announcements here at the Forge but hopefully he won't mind me saying that the 1.03 Beta release version is available for free download from my site: www.stregoneriarpg.com as I am engaging in active discussion about the game in this thread.
It would be great Callan if you could look at it, by the sounds of your posts I should be able to get some worthwhile feedback from you.
As a general note that relates to something you said in your post, I think that you can only bend a system to your whims so far before it breaks, or changes so much that you may as well be playing something else.
Stregheria:
If you're still interested having a look at my game Callan, I'd suggest getting the latest version (1.05) from my site: www.stregoneriarpg.com
I've been getting feedback from around the web (and some very positive feedback too :) ) and some fixes had to be made such as page numbers and other little clarifiacations here and there.
All feedback and comments are also welcome from anybody else, but please also get the latest version of the document first.
Thanks Forgers. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page