|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | == Always on Top == | + | ==Armor== |
| | | | |
| − | These important notes should stay at the top of the page
| + | I think our example character should have armor. This would lengthen the character generation and combat examples, but I think this is important enough to warrant the extra effort. |
| | | | |
| − | === Titles on Mano a Mano pages ===
| + | :I am currently working on the Squawk RPG book, once the first rough draft is together I'll revisit MaM for this and other editorial enhancements. (I'm waiting for the rough draft to get done so I know what '''I''' need MaM to do.)[BFG] |
| | | | |
| − | '''DON'T''' put chapter titles (<code>== Chapter Title ==</code>) on chapter pages (Introduction, Rolling Dice,Characters, Abilities, Equipment or Action Rules.) If you visit a chapter from the [[Mano a Mano|ToC]] the extra title is redundant. The chapter titles are built into the [[Mano a Mano:Complete System|Complete System]] page (which is printing-oriented and does not need edit links.)
| + | ==Organization== |
| | | | |
| − | '''DO''' put section titles (<code>=== Section Title ===</code>) on pages that contain sections of a chapter. They are redundant if you visit the individual page, but you will usually see these pages as part of a chapter page, and being able to click on the title allows you to edit the section.
| + | I have re-ordered the sections on the [[Mano a Mano|Table of Contents]] and [[Mano a Mano:Complete System|Complete System on One Page]] to reflect this. The broad overview of Gameplay is still first, followed by Action, Character Development, Character Creation and finally Game Design. We will probably want to make further changes so that the system makes sense when presented in this order. We may even want to move the example Ability and Equipment lists into Character Creation or even Character Development. [SL] |
| | | | |
| − | ==Discussion==
| + | : Yeah, that's what I figured. Now it looks to me like perhaps even example occupations may need to be moved forward to at least character generation, and possibly into character development (since it's hard to imagine character development in MaM without the potential for new abilities, equipment, or occupations.) [BFG] |
| | | | |
| − | ===Seperate Optional Rules Section=== | + | ==Editing Character Sheet== |
| | | | |
| − | I am thinking that "optional rules" should have their/its own section at the end of MaM. This way it will be easy
| + | If you change the character sheet format when editing any of the following, you must update the others: |
| − | to grasp the basic system without having to consider possible optional rules. Also, advanced players interested in optional rules will be able to find them without having to sift through the entire system.
| |
| | | | |
| − | :Keeping optional rules close to default rules makes it easy to update optional rules when default rules change. It reduces the amount of cross-referencing needed. It encourages a selective approach to optional rules. It also makes optional rules easier to use so we can have a range of options from simple to advanced rather than hiding them away for advanced users only. This also means our default rules can be very basic, because popular but not essential rules are right where they need to be. | + | * [[Mano a Mano:Example Template|Example Template]] |
| | + | * [[Mano a Mano:Example Character|Example Character]] |
| | + | * '''Clone''' character sheet in the [[Mano a Mano:Combat Example|Combat Example]]! |
| | | | |
| − | :But we do want the basic system to be easy to grasp without having to consider possible optional rules, and less importantly, it is nice if advanced players can find optional rules quickly. Visually seperating optional rules from default rules without removing them from the context allows the reader to decide how much attention they want to give to optional rules. It also makes them easy for advanced readers to spot. Also if the optional rules are seperate wiki pages, we can easily create an appendix summarizing the optional rules if we want. Here is just one example of how they could be visually separated:
| + | Be sure you know which character sheet you are updating: |
| | | | |
| − | {| style="background:#eee; margin-left:5%; margin-right:5%; padding-left:2%; padding-right:2%"
| + | * The template creation example includes both the blank character sheet and the example template. |
| − | |-
| + | * The character creation example includes both the example template and the example character sheet. |
| − | |
| |
| − | ''Optional Rule''
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | {{:Mano a Mano:Mounted Combat}}
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::I must admit I'm much more concerned that the extra rules will add to the learning curve, than I am about some need of an advanced player. (Of course specific pritings can include and exclude whatever rules they like under the liscense.) For the purposes of this site, this suggested option might be best.--[[User:BFGalbraith|BFGalbraith]] 2005.12.07
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Template CP for unbalanced bonuses===
| |
| − | | |
| − | We could use a formula something like this:
| |
| − | | |
| − | Agility
| |
| − | + Absorption
| |
| − | + Power
| |
| − | + bonus based on the level of (Agility + Power)
| |
| − | + bonus based on the level of (Agility + Absorption)
| |
| − | ----------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Agi + Abs + Pow + f1(Agi+Pow) + f2(Agi+Abs)
| |
| − | | |
| − | The first three lines give us our current CP scale (+1 per size level). The next two lines add points if power or absorption are higher than agility, or if agility is higher than Power or Absorption, based on formulas f1 and f2.
| |
| − | | |
| − | If f1 and f2 are the 2 and 3 times the geometric CP scale (f2 is higher because absorption is almost always helpful and power only helps certain types of attack), then each point of power or absorption greater than -1 times agility adds 2,6,12,20,42... or 3,9,18,30,63... CP. On the other hand, if power and absorption are the same, each point of agility greater than -1 times power or absorption adds 5,15,30,50,105... CP. (In other words Agility is like 5 abilities)
| |
| − | | |
| − | --[[User:SerpLord|SerpLord]] 02:27, 1 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | === Special Armor Bonuses ===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Weapons have special bonuses based on their design. Some help you parry, others are used for grappling, and some help you hit by reaching around defenses. Armor can also be designed to have special advantages and we can reflect this with similar special bonuses:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Padded and ablative armor (bicycle helmet) absorb more blunt trauma, explosions, etc.
| |
| − | * Tough, flexible armor (leather, chainmail) resists cutting (including some stabbing weapons)
| |
| − | * Hard/smooth/angled/springy/stretchy armor deflects peircing attacks | |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | The ideal armor would combine kevlar (springy/stretchy/smooth with ablative padding) and chainmail (tough against cutting.) This would be reflected as a very high absorption bonus. This composite of clay and metal would be ultra-heavy, so in practise some types of armor are more specialized: | |
| − | | |
| − | * ("Blu") extra absorption against Blunt/Bludgeoning weapons - padding, clay, foam
| |
| − | * ("Cut") extra absorption against Cutting (not impaling) weapons - chainmail, leather
| |
| − | * ("Imp") extra absorption against Impaling weapons - lamina? kevlar (no clay backing)
| |
| − | * ("B/C") extra absorption against Blunt and Cutting weapons
| |
| − | * ("B/I") extra absorption against Blunt and Impaling weapons - kevlar (with backing)
| |
| − | * ("C/I") extra absorption against Cutting and Impaling weapons
| |
| − | | |
| − | Weapons with low sharpness are usually blunt/bludgeoning weapons. Weapons with high sharpness are usually cutting weapons - even if they are mainly used for stabbing. To qualify as an impaling weapon, the weapon must be specially designed with a long narrow tip. Natural weapons are often impaling weapons so they can penetrate vital organs even through bone.
| |
| − | | |
| − | (Note: if you use kevlar without the backing it still gives you an absorption bonus against impaling weapons - including bullets - but you don't get the regular absorption bonus, so it's only going to deflect the lightest grazing hits.)
| |
| − | | |
| − | === Generic Text ===
| |
| − | | |
| − | We should use [[Generic Text]] whenever there is good generic text to use - especially for things like Abilities and [[Generic_Text:Skills|Skills]] where Mano a Mano is very flexible.
| |
| − | | |
| − | <table align="right" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
| |
| − | <caption>'''Example Skills List'''</caption>
| |
| − | <tr><td>{{:Generic Text:Skills}}</td></tr>
| |
| − | </table>
| |
| − | *Use [[Generic Text:Skills]] as an example skills list (check it out ==>)
| |
| − | *Write a Generic Text article about the original Mano a Mano and GM-less role-playing.
| |
| − | *Instructions for creating your own dice when trapped in an extraterrestrial POW camp.
| |
| − | *Add hex-place holders (trees, boulders etc.) under "generic text". (See [[Generic Text:Hex Mat|Hex Mat]], [[Generic Text:Miniature|Miniature]], [[Generic Text|Grid]].)
| |
| − | | |
| − | === Disabilities & Using Abilities During Combat ===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Seriously guys. Don't allow players to take disabilities for negative CP. In fact make them pay double CP for disabilities if they want to be crippled and lame and blind and deaf and missing pretty much all their limbs and sensory organs because thats pretty much what they want anyway. Players who take disabilities can bite me.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Its pretty much an established fact that lawyers can just like see waves of sound bouncing off of your face. But at what cost? ''What cost'' indeed. If you use an ability to compensate for a disability it should require the minimum effort of 1 hitpoint per round. For example -- a blind person may use a cane to collect sensory data.
| |
| − | | |
| − | At times a GM might ask players to perform an ability check during a round of combat. My opinion is that players should not add their ability bonus to the check unless they specifically have established that they are using the ability. If the check is called before the player's turn and the player stated the use of the ability before the beginning of combat. The player would be allowed to add their ability bonus. If the check is called after the player's turn then the player would not be allowed to add their ability bonus the unless they specifically spent at least 1 hit point to use the ability.
| |
| − | | |
| − | --[[User:Ulrich|ulrich]] 11:00, 2005 Jul 2 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | : LOL! - A blind person might also use a cane to fight evil - which will take more than 1 hit point per round :-). Seriously, placing limits on disabilities is essential to good gaming. A good rule would be that a character should not have more than one disability unless (A) she has a sucking character template (and then those should be her only disabilities) or (B) GM's permission (or allowed by the specific game.) Another good rule (especially if you have lots of small quirky disadvantages in the game) is to allow no more than 10 (or fewer) points of disadvantages. (This is one of those optional rules so important it should not just be in an appendix.)
| |
| − | | |
| − | : I'm not sure I understand everything you are trying to say about ability checks, but we do need a rule for arbitrary actions during combat, to avoid the whole "while I fight these guys, I'm searching for traps, and burying bodies" problem.--[[User:SerpLord|SerpLord]] 15:17, 8 December 2005 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Team CP ===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Several characters with negative CP could beat a single character with positive CP. We may need to distinguish between an individual's CP total and the CP he adds to a team.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Individual CP Team CP
| |
| − |
| |
| − | -20 or less 1
| |
| − | -19 to -13 2
| |
| − | -12 to -7 3
| |
| − | -6 to -2 4
| |
| − | -1 to 2 5
| |
| − | 3 to 5 6
| |
| − | 6 to 7 7
| |
| − | 8 or more same
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Q: We can do individual character CP without including weapon CP, but can we do team CP without including weapon CP? --[[User:BFGalbraith|BFGalbraith]] 2005.03.28.12
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===hit point expendature===
| |
| − | | |
| − | There is some question as to whether or not our hit point system is working out as intended. One of many examples is that when two characters of significantly different mass encounter each other, they tend to have limited predictable responses, which are really more about doing a certain formula in their heads than about actually chosing from a wide variety of techniques.
| |
| − | | |
| − | If nothing else, we should make it impossible to do "stupid" moves of which there are two main types:
| |
| − | #Attacks that do not use enough hit points to manuver to even possibly succeed
| |
| − | #Attacks that do not use enough hit point to add attack power to even possibly manipulate, stun, or damage
| |
| − | | |
| − | -BFGalbraith 2006.04.28
| |
| − | | |
| − | The stupid moves problem is really the same as the limited options and one attack per turn problem: Characters do only one attack per turn, because it's not worth splitting up bonuses for attacks that barely have a chance of hitting (if you're big) or barely do any damage (if you're small.) | |
| − | | |
| − | Also, because character's are only doing one attack, each damage point is -1 to power or agility ''whichever is more important!''. This is strategically almost as bad as -1 to both power and agility. This means our damage system is excessively punishing.
| |
| − | | |
| − | --[[User:SerpLord|SerpLord]] 20:04, 30 March 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''No Hit Point System'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | For years now I've been playing around with an idea that would use damage points instead of hit points. Here's how it might work (and it sounds similar to what Ulrich's been talking about):
| |
| − | | |
| − | *Combat rolls - instead of adding a certain number of hit points to a roll, you would subtract all of your damage points from your modfiers (OR add them to your opponent's modifiers.)
| |
| − | *Attack Power Calculation - instead of adding a certain number of hit points to your attack power, you would subtract your damage points from your attack power.
| |
| − | *Maximum movement calculation - instead of using your hit points times your stride to move, your maximum movement range would be "max move range" minus your damage points in stride.
| |
| − | *"Health" might be the maximum number of damage points the character can take without being incapacitated (and may have a calculation similar to what hit points have had.)
| |
| − | Do note that this would solve the "stupid moves" problem listed above in "hit point expendature." It's actually pretty uncommon for characters to do more than one-attack-per-turn now anyhow.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Without hit points the combat round could be greatly simplified:
| |
| − | | |
| − | *On each characters turn they would do one action: a moving-attack (which could exclude moving or attacking.)
| |
| − | *If character A actively interferes on character B's turn, character A forfeits his next turn.
| |
| − | *Combo attacks - instead of a single big attack, a character can do multiple attacks, but has a minus-one modifier to both the damage bonus and the success of each attack. For example, if he was doing a three attack combo, each of the three attacks would have a -2 (or perhaps -3) to their combat roll and their power. (This makes "passive defense" very important.)
| |
| − | | |
| − | --BFGalbraith 2006.04.28
| |
| − | | |
| − | To be any fun, these damage points would have to be very small - probably smaller than we can hope to acheive with a formula like attacker's power minus target's absorption. Other possibilities include: giving -1 to pow/abs/mov for a certain number of damage points or a random system for calculating damage (e.g. divide damage by 6, then if there is a remainder, roll 1d6 and if it is greater or equal to the remainder, add one more damage point.)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Is health necessary?
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I was designing this proposed system to show how we could use damage points instead of hit points. Yes, it has the same weaknesses (damage is too strong etc,) and I full well hope we can get rid of the weaknesses of hit points if we get rid of hit points. :) --[[User:Bfgalbraith|Bfgalbraith]] 21:37, 2 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | A character will be rendered ineffective with just a few damage points. It doesn't make sense to calculate health the way we've been calculating hit points because health wouldn't improve performance, just how long you can keep trying when your performance is reduced. Other ways to determine when a character goes down might include: comparing damage to a stamina or toughness ability, or making a success roll vs. the damage each time you take damage.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Since combo attacks have -1 to both combat roll and power, it hurts small characters a lot, who should probably have an easier time doing combos than big guys. What if the first attack on a turn never has a penalty, the second has -1, the third -2, etc? What if maximum attacks per turn is some ability plus agility bonus? Would attacks-per-turn also be reduced by damage?
| |
| − | | |
| − | How do combos affect the interfering rule?
| |
| − | | |
| − | What if movement = maximum movement - damage (in meters), but never less than 1 meter? Most animals have maximum running speeds around 10-50 mph = 2-10 m/s = 4-20 meters per turn. Even really big and small animals are in this range. If normal combat speed is half of that maximum running speed, then 1 meter reduction is 10-50% for anybody - significant but reasonable. This rule favors faster characters, but if speed is your main way of surviving, then you need as much as you can keep.
| |
| − | | |
| − | What if certain types of damage reduce agility (leg damage) and others reduce power (arm damage)?
| |
| − | | |
| − | We could keep hit points, but instead of using them for damage, they become a flexible bonus that can be moved between combat rolls, power, and movement.
| |
| − | :Would we then be both subracting damage AND adding HP bonuses for each combat roll then?--[[User:Bfgalbraith|Bfgalbraith]] 00:17, 4 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::Yes, but the HP bonuses would only change when you intentionally change your tactics, not every time you take damage, so they could be added to combat and damage bonuses and penciled in.--[[User:SerpLord|SerpLord]] 16:55, 19 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | On the other hand, we could simply have options that let you focus all this energy on your highest priority:
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''normal balance''' normal move (half running speed) and combo attack
| |
| − | '''chase''' double move (full running speed) and single attack
| |
| − | '''flee''' double move, no attacks, +2 defense (90% of predator attacks fail)
| |
| − | '''all out''' normal move, combo attack, +1 power, -1 agility
| |
| − | '''ramming speed''' double move, single attack, +2 power, -1 agility
| |
| − | '''fancy footwork''' normal move, single attack, -1 power, +2 agility
| |
| − | | |
| − | Agility bonuses affect combat rolls and non-combat actions that require agility.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The fancy footwork option is a great catch-all for pure defense, aikido-style counterattacks, a matador fighting a bull, or the cautious approach that many other fighters prefer.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Where "combo attack" is listed, a single attack can also be used, but you can't do a combo with chase (a combo would slow you down) or fancy footwork (a combo commits you to aggressive movement.)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Double move options don't work with grappling, and require reasonable running space. The ramming speed option doesn't work against a target fleeing away from you. The fleeing defense bonus does not apply when running through a bottleneck, roadblock, line of enemies, etc.
| |
| − | | |
| − | --[[User:SerpLord|SerpLord]] 19:55, 2 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''Balance Considerations'''
| |
| − | Three aspects of the balance are extremely important to watch:
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''agility vs. agility''' - any fight between large and small characters runs into a problem where the big guy can't hit the small guy if there are more than 5 points difference between their abilities. We don't need to add health because hit points were added to both offense and defense (besides small guys with the same CP probably have more health, so it would simply exaggerate the agility bonus of being small.) The tactical options I suggest above can help - if the big guy uses fancy footwork, the little guy can do the same, but reducing the little guy's power is a more significant penalty.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''power vs. absorption''' - We definitely need power bonuses to overcome absorption, but this can be something more specific than "health". Tactics could give a +1 or +2, race template and individual build could give another +1 or +2, and weapons could give +4 or maybe even more. Armor can counteract this. Sharpness is also very important as 1 point of stun per turn (or however long it takes to recover 1 stun) is ephemeral.
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Are these bonuses of +1 and +2 likely to be big enough to allow an unarmed character to take out a superiorly built unarmed character of the same species? I think there would probably end up being some kind of ability-based power bonus (abilities are already agility bonuses,) though it could just be a universal +2 or something.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''damage vs. penalties''' - this is the really sensitive area. We haven't had gigantic damage numbers in the past because of (A) bean counting and (B) the severe affect of damage. The proposed no-hit-point system makes the penalties even more severe. This means we need to either reduce damage (very difficult because of the delicate power/absorption balance) or seperate damage and penalties.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Some ways to seperate damage and penalties:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * '''Threshhold''' - your long/short stun/damage example.
| |
| − | * '''Division''' - you get a -1 penalty for every X damage
| |
| − | * '''Unequal Divisions''' - a -1 penalty for 1st, 3rd, 6th, 10th, 15th, 21st ... damage points
| |
| − | * '''Ephemeral''' - the damage of an attack is used to determine whether it gives you a penalty, then you keep the penalty and throw away the damage.
| |
| − | * '''Specific''' - some damage points reduce agility and movement while others reduce power, perhaps some affect neither, this could be random, based on a formula (every other point?) or on the type of attack and area of the body attacked. Are stun and damage both specific?
| |
| − | | |
| − | Some combinations of these methods are synergistic. For example, threshold, and specific options are actually similar. The "short" types of damage/stun has no penalty, while the "long" types have a penalty to agility, movement and power. Instead you could have 6 types of damage:
| |
| − | | |
| − | Threshhold Stun Threshhold Damage No penalty
| |
| − | Disarming Stun Disarming Damage -power (and -attacks if attacks-per-round is a stat)
| |
| − | Hobbling Stun Hobbling Damage -agility and -movement
| |
| − | | |
| − | Damage and stun go into the Threshhold pools until they are full (based on Health?) then they go into the Disarming and Hobbling pools (1 point in EACH pool?) But if an attacker specifically targets the arms or legs (or equivalent organs) they can do either disarming or hobbling damage directly, bypassing the threshhold damage.
| |
| − | | |
| − | (Types of damage could actually vary between characters. For example a machine might have power and movement linked in a single propulsion system while it's agility is part of a seperate steering and/or weapons system.)
| |
| − | | |
| − | --[[User:SerpLord|SerpLord]] 21:05, 2 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Threshhold Damage System'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | We could have it so that Disarming stun and damage could be on the left hand of the character sheet, and Hobbling stun and damage on the right side of the character sheet:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <table>
| |
| − | <tr>
| |
| − | <td>
| |
| − | --------THRESHHOLD STUN------|----THRESHHOLD DAMAGE-------
| |
| − | D|Name______________________ Tmp__________(___)Sex______|H
| |
| − | I|TotalCP(_____)Enc_____Length______Health_____Age______|O
| |
| − | S|Occ__________Mis______________________________________|B
| |
| − | |ABILITIES Level(CP) |_______________ _____(___)|
| |
| − | S|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|S
| |
| − | T|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|T
| |
| − | U|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|U
| |
| − | N|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|N
| |
| − | _|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|_
| |
| − | |EQUIP. Qty Mas ___ Cmb Rch Cvr Abs Pwr Shp Tgh Spec. |
| |
| − | D| Body(___) ___ ___ ___ ___ all ___ ___ n/a Std___|H
| |
| − | I|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|O
| |
| − | S|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|B
| |
| − | |_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|
| |
| − | D|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|D
| |
| − | M|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|M
| |
| − | G|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|G
| |
| − | </td>
| |
| − | </tr>
| |
| − | </table>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Or we could try something simpler initially: have it be that only long stun and long damage was subtracted from the various modifiers listed above. In other words, only the damage points at the top of the following character sheet would be a universal negetive modifier:
| |
| − | | |
| − | -------LONG-TERM STUN--------|------LONG-TERM DAMAGE------
| |
| − | T|Name______________________ Tmp__________(___)Sex______|T
| |
| − | H|TotalCP(_____)Enc_____Length______Health_____Age______|H
| |
| − | R|Occ__________Msc______________________________________|R
| |
| − | E|ABILITIES Level(CP) |_______________ _____(___)|E
| |
| − | S|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|S
| |
| − | H|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|H
| |
| − | H|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|H
| |
| − | O|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|O
| |
| − | L|________________ _____(___)|_______________ _____(___)|L
| |
| − | D|EQUIP. Qty Mas ___ Cmb Rch Cvr Abs Pwr Shp Tgh Spec. |D
| |
| − | | Body(___) ___ ___ ___ ___ all ___ ___ n/a Std___|
| |
| − | S|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|D
| |
| − | T|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|A
| |
| − | U|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|M
| |
| − | N|_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|A
| |
| − | |_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|G
| |
| − | |_______ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ______|E
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | But without hit points, how do we figure out what damage points go in Threshhold and which go in long-term? I would suggest something like "Health = number of hitpoints that can be in a threshhold pool before it overflows into hobbling or dissarming pools." So if your health was 8, you don't start taking hobbling, disarming or long-term damage until you have 8 threshhold damage first (and you don't start taking hobbling, disarming, or long-term stun until you have 8 threshhold stun first.)--[[User:Bfgalbraith|Bfgalbraith]] 00:17, 4 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :My little concern about the threshhold system is that you are pretty screwed once you are past the threshold because you will probably recieve more than one point of damage, so the disabling effects of damage may cause a "game over" scenario. --[[User:SerpLord|SerpLord]] 21:05, 2 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::In MMA once a guy starts limping, he's usually pretty close to being totally KO'ed. Yes "threshhold damage" might be a little fast of a deterioration at the bitter end, BUT it's better than having too fast of a deteriation at the very beginning (and it might actually be a good balance, when it comes to playability.) Also, the above sepration of Hobbling and Disarming halves the speed of this deterioration.--[[User:Bfgalbraith|Bfgalbraith]] 00:17, 4 April 2006 (CEST)
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | ===Fix Cross-References===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Cross references like "(See Abilities/Skills.)" need to be hyperlinked to appropriate sections. '''Other text can also be hyperlinked.''' The only cross references that should be in (See ...) format are ones that are more helpful than distracting when you read the printed rules.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | ===New Structure for Linear Reading===
| |
| − | | |
| − | New sections and new names are in ''italics''. The order is basically "top down" but this is negotiable. For example, abilities can probably be moved before templates in describing game design without much change.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Short Version:
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | * ''Gameplay'' (absorbs Introduction and Rolling Dice)
| |
| − | ** ''Players and Characters (Mano a Mano is designed for one or more players with each player controlling one or more individual characters. It is probably too detailed for a game where a player directs armies or other large groups of characters. One of the players may be a GM. Etc.)''
| |
| − | ** ''Tools'' (formerly Things You'll Need) - Basics, Optional, ''Adventure Materials''
| |
| − | ** ''Success Rolls'' (formerly Rolling Dice)
| |
| − | * ''Game Design'' (absorbs Templates, Abilities and Equipment)
| |
| − | ** ''Adventure (basic definition of an Adventure/Scenario/Campaign/Sourcebook and what goes in it.)''
| |
| − | ** ''Supplies (paper, pencil, hex mats, blank forms for templates, occupations, ability and equipment lists)''
| |
| − | ** Templates (Description, ''Dimensions'', Natural Abilities, Armor, Limbs and Weapons, Template CP, Tutorial)
| |
| − | ** ''Occupations'' (Requirements/Abilities and Perqs/Equipment)
| |
| − | ** Ability Lists (''Availability'', Examples, Athletic Abilities, Disabilities)
| |
| − | ** Equipment Lists (Armor, Hand Weapons, Missile Weapons)
| |
| − | * Character Creation (Character Sheet, CP, Template, Customize, Description, Occupations, ''Equipment'', Tutorial)
| |
| − | * ''Action'' (formerly Action Rules, no changes other than the name)
| |
| − | * Character Development (''Developing Abilities'', ''Changing Occupations'', ''Equipment'', ''Making Equipment'')
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Long Version:
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | ''(untitled section formerly called History)''
| |
| − | ====''Gameplay''====
| |
| − | (absorbs Introduction and Rolling Dice)
| |
| − | * ''Players and Characters (Mano a Mano is designed for one or more players with each player controlling one or more individual characters. It is probably too detailed for a game where a player directs armies or other large groups of characters. One of the players may be a GM. Etc.)''
| |
| − | * ''Tools'' (formerly Things You'll Need)
| |
| − | ** Basics: Pencils, Paper and Dice
| |
| − | ** Optional: Hex Mats, Character Sheets
| |
| − | ** ''Adventure: Templates, Occupations, Ability and Equipment Lists''
| |
| − | * ''Success Rolls'' (formerly Rolling Dice)
| |
| − | ** Rolls and Modifiers
| |
| − | ** Success Level
| |
| − | ** Single Action
| |
| − | ** Difficulty
| |
| − | ** Opposing Actions
| |
| − | ** Multiple Opposing Actions
| |
| − | ** Half Success
| |
| − | ====''Game Design''====
| |
| − | (absorbs Templates, Abilities and Equipment)
| |
| − | * ''Adventure (basic definition of an Adventure/Scenario/Campaign/Sourcebook and what goes in it.)''
| |
| − | * ''Supplies (paper, pencil, hex mats, blank forms for templates, occupations, ability and equipment lists)''
| |
| − | * Templates
| |
| − | ** Description ''(the template's name, possibly including age or sex)''
| |
| − | ** ''Dimensions'' (Reach, Stride and Size: Length, Mass, CC, Pow, Abs, Agi)
| |
| − | ** Natural Abilities
| |
| − | ** Natural Armor
| |
| − | ** Limbs
| |
| − | ** Natural Weapons
| |
| − | ** Template CP (Dimensions, Abilities, Armor, Limbs, Weapons)
| |
| − | ** Make a Template - Template Generation Example (roughly follows the steps above)
| |
| − | * ''Occupations''
| |
| − | ** ''Requirements (abilities, training, social class, etc.)''
| |
| − | ** ''Perquisites (equipment, income, social status, etc.)''
| |
| − | * Abilities (or Ability Lists)
| |
| − | ** ''Availability (some abilities are limited to certain templates)''
| |
| − | ** Examples
| |
| − | ** Athletic Abilities
| |
| − | ** Disabilities
| |
| − | * Equipment (or Equipment Lists)
| |
| − | ** Armor - example armor list
| |
| − | ** Hand Weapons - example hand to hand weapon list
| |
| − | ** Missile Weapons - example long range weapon list
| |
| − | ====Character Creation====
| |
| − | * Character Sheet
| |
| − | * Character Points (CP) (Template, Build, Abilities, Missing Limbs)
| |
| − | * Choose a Template
| |
| − | * Customize the Character
| |
| − | * Description
| |
| − | * Occupations
| |
| − | * ''Equipment'' (replaces Character Equipment formerly in Equipment section?)
| |
| − | * Make a Character - Character Generation Example
| |
| − | ====''Action''====
| |
| − | (formerly Action Rules, no changes other than the name)
| |
| − | * Rounds
| |
| − | * Hit Points
| |
| − | * Interfering
| |
| − | * Maneuvering
| |
| − | * Manipulation
| |
| − | * Attacking
| |
| − | * Armor and Weapons
| |
| − | * Thrown Weapons
| |
| − | * Archery
| |
| − | * Stance and Posture
| |
| − | * Mounted Combat
| |
| − | * Combat Example
| |
| − | ====Character Development====
| |
| − | * ''Developing Abilities through Training and Experience''
| |
| − | * ''Changing Occupations''
| |
| − | * ''Inventory Management or Acquiring and Losing Equipment'' (formerly Character Equipment)
| |
| − | * Making Equipment
| |
| − | ** Equipment CP (see Armor and Weapon CP in the Template CP rules)
| |
| − | ** Make an Item - Equipment Generation Example
| |
