Grimace

Moderators
  • Content count

    2,090
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Everything posted by Grimace

  1. OpenD6 is open. Not much they can do about that. They can make changes to D6, official changes, and NOT make them open. That's their prerogative. But what's been opened will, under the OGL license, remain open.
  2. I think I remember a brief, and rather small, release of cards that people could get for D6. It was supposed to add enhanced things you could use to describe things and fire your imagination. I've never seen them, and I knew of only one person who ever had them (online), and they didn't find them particularly amazing (more like an "interesting idea, but not really necessary"). I don't even know if they are even posted anywhere online. I have never seen them.
  3. If it works for you and your players, then use it! I never understood the convoluted nature of the Magic system in D6 Fantasy, etc. books. Just too much work and none of the enjoyment. It's the very reason why I came up with my own Magic system (highlighted in "Magic & Miracles"). I didn't relish spending a lot of time calculating up spell upon spell. I wanted a completed spell listing without all of the "bones" showing in it. I don't care how the spell was built and all of the features that added to the difficulty to cast it. My players didn't either. They wanted to know what they needed to roll to get the spell to work, and what the spell did when they rolled that number. That's it! So if you have a player who loves to spend a lot of time calculating up spell after spell, then hopefully this system works out better than what was published in the D6 Fantasy book. It never worked for me, and I have something different now, and no reason to use a spell construction formula, but I hope this works for what you're wanting it to do!
  4. Interesting idea. If you give it a play through, let me know how well it works.
  5. Maybe "Thinking Based" as well, for the educators, inventors, scholars Otherwise, I think you have the vast majority once you add in Pilot based.
  6. Somehow I don't think so.
  7. Savar, you may be at or very near capacity for your messages. I sent a message to anlarye, but before I could, I needed to delete some messages from my inbox. I was "over" capacity. I believe all of our prior messages from the old site also ported over, and this site has less capacity for keeping messages. So clean out your inbox and see if that alleviates the problem.
  8. No, that was under a much older discussion board format. This site has undergone a number of changes since then and the chat room is no more.
  9. I'll be hanging out in the chat room for the next half hour if anyone wants to chat about whatever.
  10. If a profession has a "requirement", will you offer opportunity for a starting character to gain skills needed for the requirement before they actually get to chose a profession? If not, it may be a bit like a "unicorn" in that people see a profession but cannot get it because they cannot meet the requirements, so they chose a different profession and will likely never think of changing their profession once they achieve the requirements. Or am I misinterpreting what you mean by "requirements"?
  11. I would suggest the order in which a person would need to learn it in order to play the game. However, as I know from experience, sometimes the ideas for a particular idea flow more smoothly than an idea that you MUST come up with because you are trying to keep it in order. So attempt to keep some order, but don't let the order bog you down if you end up getting a brainstorm on a particular idea out of order. Just make sure you assemble the rules in the correct order.
  12. Yeah, it can really build upon itself. At least you realized what else you needed before you thought you were all done.
  13. Good to see this back up and running! Thanks Magman!
  14. Yes, you could make a completely new mechanic PI, but that kind of defeats the whole purpose of OGL. Just think if the creators of Mini Six did that. You wouldn't be able to use any of their material. So do a favor to those who may very much enjoy your new mechanic.... make it OGL (non-PI) so others can use that idea in their works just like you may use some works from others in your work. If you want to keep aspects of a SETTING as PI, then by all means do so. That way only you can legally expand on that setting. But if it's a mechanic for D6, consider putting it into OGL so that others can use it in future works as well.
  15. If things are multiplied, such as attributes, the cost is added BEFORE multiplying! Unless you find that too costly, then put it after. But my gut says put it before multiplying.
  16. I think, to better fit in with D6, rather than putting a "maximum" and reducing it upon each reincarnation, you make it more and more difficult to advance the character with each version of themselves. So a person that is on their first version is just like a regular character for skill advancement. But once they die and come back, now they have to pay +1 more to do what they used to in order to advance. They die again, and come back, well now they have to pay +2 more than normal. Third death, now everything is +3 more expensive. This is for skills and and attributes! So while they get the benefit of always being able to come back alive, they have the drawback that it's more difficult for them to learn things. It doesn't "reduce" anything of theirs, it just makes it more difficult for them to get up to a high level of skill. That provides some negative feedback, so to speak, for dying too much. Plus, you can weirdly track how much a character has died based on their penalty. A character is at +7, that means they have died and come back to life 7 times. But advancing from 2D to 2D+1 in a skill now costs them 9 Character Points instead of the usual 2.
  17. Yeah, I, too, am puzzled by the auto-failure of the spell in the 4th round AND the suffering of potential damage. Why in the world would a person EVER keep it up if the failure is automatic AND there is damage to resist? You need to determine if the benefit of the spell is worth enough for the person to keep it up, regardless of the pain and suffering they might experience. At the same time, don't have the spell automatically fail if they go over. Only have it fail if they fail to resist the damage inflicted upon them by holding that spell up even into the threshold where pain starts impacting them. So if the spell was, say, "Fast Speed" and a person got to double their movement each round, but didn't have to make checks for the increased movement, they might not want to keep that power up if it starts to cause damage to them. However, if they are being chased by a cybernetic ursine that intends to shred them, they may feel the need to resist that 22 Stun damage is worth keeping it up because the alternative would mean being torn apart by the metallic bear. Also keep in mind that you can't necessarily have the same effects for keeping spells up. Inflicting "stun attacks" against a person for keeping spells active might be rather mundane if there is a spell that increases a character's endurance to resist damage to a significant degree. So maybe some could affect the body, while others affect the mind. Imagine a mental check that, upon failure, causes the person to lapse into a sleep-like blackout stage for a number of rounds. So it doesn't physically damage them, other than they might fall down, but their brain is hindered to the point that they shut down.
  18. Again, I have one setting that used this idea, and I was dabbling with another. Professions make sense in some settings, but not in other settings. So use professions carefully, and make sure they make sense for the game you are running. I also tied initial starting skill choices to profession, besides starting funds. That way each character had a different feel from another. Kind of like how templates worked in Star Wars.
  19. In one setting, I used 8 attributes once. It worked for that setting, but would not have worked for every setting. What's great about D6 is that it allows a person to make tweaks to it, and use it how they want for certain aspects. The one I used it for was a Gamma World type conversion to D6.
  20. I thought that while it paid homage to the original, it was different enough to stand on its own. Some parts were some of the best acting I've seen in Star Wars movies.
  21. Yeah, do you have an easier to access version of it?
  22. I can't seem to get anything on the Flashing Blades link. I am a member of Yahoo Groups, but the link takes me to a page that says I cannot access the files.
  23. Looks interesting. I'm not real well versed on the Dark Sun setting, but it looks like you put a fair amount of work into this. Thanks for sharing! Hopefully someone with more experience with Dark Sun will be able to comment on what they think.
  24. This sounds akin to the Earth, Air, Water and Fire focuses that was shown in the movie "The Last Airbender". Are you thinking that it would possible for a person to use the focus of more than one element? So can a person who is focused on Earth also do things that the one focused on Air also does? I would suggest "unlearning" what you have learned. You can use the Extranormal attribute, but call it what best fits your setting. In this case, you could go with the obvious and call it "Elementalism". Then, rather than breaking it into Skills, create a "Focus". Say that when a person focuses on an element, everything revolves around that. All of their "EM" power goes into that Focus. Should a person attempt to drift in their Focus to another element, then that EM Power gets split in half (only 50% power to each Focus) and the time to gain any spells takes twice as long as it would with just 1 Focus. The Focus spots can just be the straight elements: Earth, Air, Fire, Water, Aethry You could make it so players can increase the character's "Focus", but their "Elementalism" remains unchanged (or is VERY expensive to increase) and is the only thing used to RESIST and spell-slinging by others. So while an Earth-focused spell-slinger might have a Focus of Earth at +4D, their base Elementalism is only 3D. So they can be pretty potent with spells concerning the Earth, but when they are hit by a spell from a Fire-focused person, they only get to resist the spell with 3D. That also gives an idea of what splitting the Focus could do. Imagine going from 7D in something (3D EM +4D Focus) to only having 5D+1 when they have 2 Focus. And only having 1D+1 to resist spells. Those are just some random thoughts off the top of my head. Maybe it'll give you some ideas.
  25. Actually, three shots until dead isn't that bad, especially considering it's a pistol. Most people don't realize how many people actually survive shootings every year, or that survive them for a while, only to bleed out later on. Instant kills are not all that common from bullets, unless they are in the head. Television and movies with the "one shot kill" doesn't quite accurately reflect what really happens with bullets. Now when you move up to rifle rounds, it's much more likely that one shot could significantly drop a person. If a "typical" person is 2D, and a bullet does 5D+1 or 6D+1, you are looking at a pretty significant chunk of Body Points from a single shot. I will also say that I grant added damage base on "quality of shot". For every 3 points the shooter rolls above the target's dodge, +1 point of damage is applied. An example: Soldier fires rifle at Enemy. Enemy rolls to dodge, getting a 12. Soldier rolls to hit, and gets a 20. That is a difference of 8, or two complete sets of 3 (not quite 3 sets). Thus the damage of the shot (base of 5D+1) is now 5D+3. Damage is rolled, getting a 18. Add the 3 on for a total of 21. That's one shot doing 21 Body Point loss on a character who may only have 30 (or less) Body Points. Using the above chart I provided, that would be down into the Incapacitated category. The Enemy is knocked out for 1Dx5 rounds and when he comes to, he is -3D to all rolls. Just a couple more points lost and he will be in the Mortally Wounded category and start bleeding out. The "quality of shot" really benefits the people who decide to shoot just a couple of times rather than taking all sorts of multiple actions. One player, playing an archer, soon realized that while her character COULD fire 6 arrows at 6 different targets, sometimes if she wanted to make sure she killed the target, she would shoot once or twice at most. With an NPC dodging at 3D or so and a heroic player character rolling 10D or so, the hit roll may well be significantly higher than the dodge roll, meaning a lot of extra damage. This reflects a skilled shooter knowing where to hit the target to do the most damage (or a lucky shot doing more damage to a person, in the case of the Wild Die going crazy with 6s) In terms of hidden things you might be missing by reducing Body Points: Well, the biggest one is you may be taking away the "heroic" nature of a player character. I guess if you want to run a game where any character can catch the "bullet with their name on it" and be dead with a single shot, and your players don't mind, then that's fine. But most people understand that when you're playing a cinematic game, you need to have some things BE cinematic, and one shot kills on Player Characters isn't usually conducive to cinematic feel. The player characters are typically those people who "rise above the mundane people", they are people who become more skilled and do more daring things. That may be less likely if the PCs a dying left and right. Nothing can kill the drive of a player more than having to make up a new character every other game session. If you REALLY want a grim, gritty feel where death sits in every barrel of every weapon, then go ahead and lower the Body Points. If you do, though, you'll want to move the emphasis of the game AWAY from action and place it more into skill based challenges. Have the PCs solving mysteries, hacking computers, and performing more "white collar" activity where fortunes are made or lost electronically rather than in actual bank heists or burglaries. Don't throw potentially dangerous things at the players every game session, as each time you do it could be the quick end to a character they may have been playing for a bit and be invested in. Throw in action only when it's REALLY important and greatly emphasizes the dire nature of the situation. Watch the television show "Scorpion" for ideas on how to have challenges without having action with shooting or fights. Beyond that, there is not any other hidden facets. Player characters simply become much more fragile and expendable. Non player characters, already generally having less Body Points due to lower attribute levels, will be even more fragile.