May 22, 2024 4:34 pm
Yeah, I'll defer to your knowledge. Haven't had time to look at that part of the system in quite that much detail yet.
Character and Ark Creation
load previous
May 22, 2024 4:40 pm
I can't stress enough, I'm only making suggestions. I don't want anyone to feel like they can't or don't have a say.
And we certainly don't need to default to my ideas just because sometimes I do dumb things like read RPG books on the bus to work. Lol
I don't want anyone to feel they don't have a say in our game.
And we certainly don't need to default to my ideas just because sometimes I do dumb things like read RPG books on the bus to work. Lol
I don't want anyone to feel they don't have a say in our game.
May 23, 2024 1:37 am
Thanks for saying that MaJunior! And I've also not tried to rush us into making decisions, even if the flip side is that we aren't starting as quickly as we could've. Hope everyone's interest hasn't flagged, and that the discussions back and forth have been helpful to set the right kind of decision-making mood and perhaps even getting us excited about what lies ahead. There are six of you, so there'll always be a bit more discussion even as we start the game as there'll be choices to make along the way.
To help summarise from those who've chimed in, it does sound like Tech is a high priority, and rightly so. Culture you're prepared to ignore for now, so expect people to be unfriendly, demoralised, etc. For the last two, if you're generally okay with Food being low as well, the environment at the start will feel the shortage acutely, I'll describe that. Likewise if Warfare is low, I'll probably start the scene with a bit of a setback to the ark which you will need to recover from.
This is all very post-apoc! So you're on the right track!
To help summarise from those who've chimed in, it does sound like Tech is a high priority, and rightly so. Culture you're prepared to ignore for now, so expect people to be unfriendly, demoralised, etc. For the last two, if you're generally okay with Food being low as well, the environment at the start will feel the shortage acutely, I'll describe that. Likewise if Warfare is low, I'll probably start the scene with a bit of a setback to the ark which you will need to recover from.
This is all very post-apoc! So you're on the right track!
May 23, 2024 1:43 am
I'm good with all that, sounds like MaJunior has a good understanding of a good path forward. I'm just happy to be a long for the ride!
May 23, 2024 3:00 pm
AceRancheros says:
I'm good with all that, sounds like MaJunior has a good understanding of a good path forward. I'm just happy to be a long for the ride!May 25, 2024 2:20 pm
I've taken a small liberty with our last proposal for development levels. As this is the beginning, I'm going to out all four categories at a starting level, so instead of 10, I've distributed it down to 8, just shy of the next level.
The more important and practical reason for that is narratively if we put Food and Warfare at 1, it'll literally mean you starve in one or two days time, and that you're utterly defenceless against any sort of enemy. Food 0 means starvation now, and Warfare 0 means a swarm of overgrown rats would scuttle the ship.
As described, Culture 0 doesn't just mean you have no art and stories. It also means there's no common narrative, no society to speak of. You're at anarchy. (And that's probably a great place to start a game!)
The more important and practical reason for that is narratively if we put Food and Warfare at 1, it'll literally mean you starve in one or two days time, and that you're utterly defenceless against any sort of enemy. Food 0 means starvation now, and Warfare 0 means a swarm of overgrown rats would scuttle the ship.
As described, Culture 0 doesn't just mean you have no art and stories. It also means there's no common narrative, no society to speak of. You're at anarchy. (And that's probably a great place to start a game!)
May 25, 2024 2:56 pm
That's really not a "small liberty" IMO, and I honestly wish this liberty had been proposed first.
Mechanically, 0 is the same as 9 (except for prerequisits for projects) for all of the categories.
○ Food of 1 narratively means the stockpile is almost out and we *have* to raid or hunt (but keep in mind we have about two weeks before people start dying).
○ Warfare 1 is still a Battle Level of 1. We still roll our die, push it as appropriate, and compare it to our enemy's results. We top out at one success, but if the enemy gets a fail and we get a success that's still a +1 result.
But having food and warfare at 2, or 5... is the EXACT SAME THING.
The entire point of the proposal was to get Tech to the next level. If you've decided to ignore that, then it doesn't need to be an 8.
Mechanically, 0 is the same as 9 (except for prerequisits for projects) for all of the categories.
○ Food of 1 narratively means the stockpile is almost out and we *have* to raid or hunt (but keep in mind we have about two weeks before people start dying).
○ Warfare 1 is still a Battle Level of 1. We still roll our die, push it as appropriate, and compare it to our enemy's results. We top out at one success, but if the enemy gets a fail and we get a success that's still a +1 result.
But having food and warfare at 2, or 5... is the EXACT SAME THING.
The entire point of the proposal was to get Tech to the next level. If you've decided to ignore that, then it doesn't need to be an 8.
Last edited May 25, 2024 2:59 pm
May 26, 2024 12:09 am
Ah, I hear you MaJunior, and I honour that view. I'd be happy to switch to Tech 10, meaning we put that to the next higher category. The narrative start point would be just as interesting. So no concerns from me there. In fact, I've posted to say how the people perfectly understand the water system and its importance, rather than to start with no one understanding how technology works, so I haven't tried to finesse too much the difference between 8 and 10 (in fact what I've described feels like 10 to me).
Let's have a discussion about actual DEV rating values though, I think that's the interesting conversation here. It is for certain that mechanically, 0-9 mean the exact same thing, according to the development tables (p113 for thos who need to quickly refer to it). Narratively though, I'd much prefer to run it as if it were different, ie a 0 should feel different from a 9, with 0 likely to mean you're out of food in a day, and 9 meaning you still have two weeks to a month, tops.
Same with Culture, Tech and Warfare. Had you gone for Tech 0, you would still have water, but have zero idea what the machine does and how to maintain it, and it'd be probably very close to breaking down. Warfare 0-9 would still give you Battle level 1, but at 0 I'd narratively describe how much easier it is to breach the ship at multiple points, how you have a shortage of bullets, or that your scrap weapons are way more prone to breakage, etc
Best for me to declare that I am likely to gauge successes rolled, and other numeric values, in a similar fashion. One or many succeses still mean you succeed, but perhaps narratively a big margin produces a more generous outcome than a single success, and so on. I'm happy to sound everyone out on this, to see if this is a concern.
So, let's pause for a moment, and talk about those DEV values again. But before that, tell me if my understanding of how I intend to apply the rules presents some difficulty for how we imagine this game to play out.
On a related note, I'm also not adverse to a different opening scenario if that's what you all have been imagining instead. I'm starting with a survivalist mood, as pitched. But if we prefer a more peaceful, idyllic start, let's bounce ideas. Remember my opening post is intended to seed some options so that when the party gets together you can propose your first project (or even projects!)
Let's have a discussion about actual DEV rating values though, I think that's the interesting conversation here. It is for certain that mechanically, 0-9 mean the exact same thing, according to the development tables (p113 for thos who need to quickly refer to it). Narratively though, I'd much prefer to run it as if it were different, ie a 0 should feel different from a 9, with 0 likely to mean you're out of food in a day, and 9 meaning you still have two weeks to a month, tops.
Same with Culture, Tech and Warfare. Had you gone for Tech 0, you would still have water, but have zero idea what the machine does and how to maintain it, and it'd be probably very close to breaking down. Warfare 0-9 would still give you Battle level 1, but at 0 I'd narratively describe how much easier it is to breach the ship at multiple points, how you have a shortage of bullets, or that your scrap weapons are way more prone to breakage, etc
Best for me to declare that I am likely to gauge successes rolled, and other numeric values, in a similar fashion. One or many succeses still mean you succeed, but perhaps narratively a big margin produces a more generous outcome than a single success, and so on. I'm happy to sound everyone out on this, to see if this is a concern.
So, let's pause for a moment, and talk about those DEV values again. But before that, tell me if my understanding of how I intend to apply the rules presents some difficulty for how we imagine this game to play out.
On a related note, I'm also not adverse to a different opening scenario if that's what you all have been imagining instead. I'm starting with a survivalist mood, as pitched. But if we prefer a more peaceful, idyllic start, let's bounce ideas. Remember my opening post is intended to seed some options so that when the party gets together you can propose your first project (or even projects!)
May 27, 2024 12:42 pm
My opinion on the subject:
those numbers are(should be in the way I imagined this game) for narration, I complete agree with that.
I don't understand this reasoning/pov (but I'm willing to learn!). For me:
1. Mechanicaly: 0 is 10 points before we get to another 'tier' of things. At 9 we only need 1 more. So it does matter mechanically in my eyes. What am I missing?
2. Narrativly: until this day it was obvious for me that 1 should be different then 8 - the changes comes with each project finished and each expedition to the zone. I don't think they 'appear magicaly' just when we go from 9 to 10. Do they ? (maybe its how mutation works in this world ? ;) )
So basically:
Food : 2
Culture : 0
Technology : 8
Warfare : 2
FEELS better to me. It would be strange to have so smart people that they understands things at 10 Technology and - in the same time - them not to stop for a second and think about that if everyone would starve to death there will be no one to mention this magnificent equipment.
Unless... we have an ark of Science Nerds (and gamers??? ;) ) that don't see world around them apart from doing their research (playing video games...;) ) all the time? :)
those numbers are(should be in the way I imagined this game) for narration, I complete agree with that.
MaJunior says:
Mechanically, 0 is the same as 9 (except for prerequisits for projects) for all of the categories. 1. Mechanicaly: 0 is 10 points before we get to another 'tier' of things. At 9 we only need 1 more. So it does matter mechanically in my eyes. What am I missing?
2. Narrativly: until this day it was obvious for me that 1 should be different then 8 - the changes comes with each project finished and each expedition to the zone. I don't think they 'appear magicaly' just when we go from 9 to 10. Do they ? (maybe its how mutation works in this world ? ;) )
So basically:
Food : 2
Culture : 0
Technology : 8
Warfare : 2
FEELS better to me. It would be strange to have so smart people that they understands things at 10 Technology and - in the same time - them not to stop for a second and think about that if everyone would starve to death there will be no one to mention this magnificent equipment.
Unless... we have an ark of Science Nerds (and gamers??? ;) ) that don't see world around them apart from doing their research (playing video games...;) ) all the time? :)
May 27, 2024 2:42 pm
The hitch is, narrative aspects shouldn't have mechanical consequences. Describing things narratively is one thing, but enacting mechanical repercussions based solely on narrative measures is kind of bad. It unbalances mechanics. And while I understand most games aren't super-well balanced, unbalancing them even further isn't advantageous.
But as for narrative vs. mechanical, let's use Food as an example.
Narratively, you can say that at Food 0 the stockpiles are gone. People are going to start starving, and there is a lot of panic. However, mechanically, it impacts the Session Body Count the same as Food of 9. You wouldn't increase the Session Body Count arbitrarily between the two scores. So yes, mechanically the results of a 0 and a 9 are equal. You roll a d6 at the end of a session (whatever we determine that to be in PbP of course) and apply no modifiers.
Nothing "just appears." The projects are there to improve the arc, but let's say we finish the Hunting Parties project. It gives +2d6 to food. But we roll snakeeyes. So we add +2 to our Food development level. Yes, we narrate that we started hunting for food... but until that Food score hits 10, there are no mechanical benefits from the +2 we added.
We won't get into a more narrative point that a person can go three weeks without food, so even if we had Food 0 no one should be dying of starvation for at least about 2 1/2 weeks of in-game time.
All that being said, if we want to say "screw the rules" and go for some houserule shenanigans where every point of rating matters, that's fine too -- but is something to have brought up in the pitch, IMO. As for discrepencies between the number of successes... remember that this system doesn't usually have a ton of successes (1 to 3 seems typical, barring crazy rolls). We should also remember that most rolls already outline what happens in the event of multiple successes, because the player "spends" them for additional results.
Last note: From a personal standpoint, I've had exactly one excursion into the zone in a short lived game myself and Pedrop were both in. I'm in favor of sticking to the rules, just because I'm still learning them.
But as for narrative vs. mechanical, let's use Food as an example.
Narratively, you can say that at Food 0 the stockpiles are gone. People are going to start starving, and there is a lot of panic. However, mechanically, it impacts the Session Body Count the same as Food of 9. You wouldn't increase the Session Body Count arbitrarily between the two scores. So yes, mechanically the results of a 0 and a 9 are equal. You roll a d6 at the end of a session (whatever we determine that to be in PbP of course) and apply no modifiers.
Nothing "just appears." The projects are there to improve the arc, but let's say we finish the Hunting Parties project. It gives +2d6 to food. But we roll snakeeyes. So we add +2 to our Food development level. Yes, we narrate that we started hunting for food... but until that Food score hits 10, there are no mechanical benefits from the +2 we added.
[ +- ] Also...
We won't get into a more narrative point that a person can go three weeks without food, so even if we had Food 0 no one should be dying of starvation for at least about 2 1/2 weeks of in-game time.
All that being said, if we want to say "screw the rules" and go for some houserule shenanigans where every point of rating matters, that's fine too -- but is something to have brought up in the pitch, IMO. As for discrepencies between the number of successes... remember that this system doesn't usually have a ton of successes (1 to 3 seems typical, barring crazy rolls). We should also remember that most rolls already outline what happens in the event of multiple successes, because the player "spends" them for additional results.
Last note: From a personal standpoint, I've had exactly one excursion into the zone in a short lived game myself and Pedrop were both in. I'm in favor of sticking to the rules, just because I'm still learning them.
May 27, 2024 3:06 pm
Quote:
Narratively, you can say that at Food 0 the stockpiles are gone. People are going to start starving, and there is a lot of panic. However, mechanically, it impacts the Session Body Count the same as Food of 9. You wouldn't increase the Session Body Count arbitrarily between the two scores. So yes, mechanically the results of a 0 and a 9 are equal. You roll a d6 at the end of a session (whatever we determine that to be in PbP of course) and apply no modifiers.Yes: it doesn't matter if you have 0 or 9 at Food stat - you roll the same.
But: if you have 0 in Food you don't know(what will be the result of 2d6) if your Hunting Parties project will bring us to the next tire (better roll), but if your Food is on 9 -> you can be sure that doing a Hunting Parties project will give us better rolls. So the fact is: there IS mechanical difference between 0 and 9.
Maybe I phrased something wrong, but I didn't want to claim that narrative should influence mechanics. Only my claim that I'm aware of is: the other way around -> 0 in Food should be different narratively than 9. And getting some more points in Food means that we somehow are getting better at producing food, but until 10 we are "not quite there", to cross the threshold when our food production will be able to save more lives.
But You know what MaJunior? I simply don't care that much to continue this agreement with you. If technology at 10 makes you happy -> let's go with that, it won't spoil my fun of this game!
But please: don't try to make a false claim that 0 in food and 9 - don't have any difference from mechanics point of view. My mathematical mind can agree with that:)
May 27, 2024 3:20 pm
I was primarily replying to our GM, but I'll say this:
Being closer to a threshold is not a mechanical difference than being further away. In D&D, 901 xp is the same as 2,699 xp -- you're level 3 no matter how you slice it.
Being closer to a threshold is not a mechanical difference than being further away. In D&D, 901 xp is the same as 2,699 xp -- you're level 3 no matter how you slice it.
May 27, 2024 3:49 pm
Again I hear you MaJunior, and I'm afraid I tend to lean towards having mechanical effects arising from narrative aspects. (We've shared at least one previous game together, and I'd like to think we've played well together, so I think you might be familiar with these leanings). I do so not because I'm trying to make a set of rules hard to follow for GM and players, ie I won't be doing so arbitrarily and on any whim. That said, I do favour the rulings over rules approach in general.
So for example I would definitely trigger a session body count (for PbP it'll be either per chapter, which is arbitrary, or per significant event, again arbitrary because I'd be the one determining when that significant event is) and it will definitely have more narrative impact if Food were at 0 than if Food were at 9. Because I'm not seeing the population only mechanically as alive or d6 worth of dead, I'll be seeing it narratively as a larger number of members too weak to fight or work near Food 0, versus people being able to soldier on at Food 9. The technically d6 dead is simply a rule, ie, just another indicator of how severe the food situation is in the collective. It's a way of 'telling' the GM and the players what the situation is, not merely '3 persons die', but if we raise Food to 10, then only '2 persons die'. That's probably a terrible way to tell a story. It also doesn't mean no others die from other causes like disease etc.
A similar vein for 2d6 after Hunting Parties. Sure we roll a 2, but maybe people are more confident, more prepared to stretch their supplies far longer. Whereas if we roll a 12, it means the hunting party hit a motherlode, suddenly we cross the redline from starvation to less anxiety about food.
I guess until we play this out a bit more, what I'm describing will still sound abstract or in theory, hence I'm declaring a session zero minimally for individual threads, followed by an initial chapter for a group thread. I don't know how else I can allay your concerns if you need more clarity than what I can currently assure you about my GMing preferences except to either invite you to go along for a bit, or observe the game for a while first. Because I'm pretty certain I won't be rules-lawyering as an approach to this games (or the others I run).
On a lighter note, (if that felt heavier!), I'm very open to feedback and criticism! :) Note how I'm very happy to accede to going back to Tech 10 if that makes you feel a greater clarity about the starting point. Like I said, 8 to 10 matters little, either no one really understands the water system at Tech 0, or a few people generally know how to maintain it imperfectly around 4-8, but when we hit 10, we should have a handful of individuals who are decently confident about maintaining it. Hence notice my narratively saying there's a roster to help do so. (If it were Tech 0 there wouldn't be a roster, there'd be just ignorant worshippers of the magic water fountain). Hope this last frivolous example helps!
So for example I would definitely trigger a session body count (for PbP it'll be either per chapter, which is arbitrary, or per significant event, again arbitrary because I'd be the one determining when that significant event is) and it will definitely have more narrative impact if Food were at 0 than if Food were at 9. Because I'm not seeing the population only mechanically as alive or d6 worth of dead, I'll be seeing it narratively as a larger number of members too weak to fight or work near Food 0, versus people being able to soldier on at Food 9. The technically d6 dead is simply a rule, ie, just another indicator of how severe the food situation is in the collective. It's a way of 'telling' the GM and the players what the situation is, not merely '3 persons die', but if we raise Food to 10, then only '2 persons die'. That's probably a terrible way to tell a story. It also doesn't mean no others die from other causes like disease etc.
A similar vein for 2d6 after Hunting Parties. Sure we roll a 2, but maybe people are more confident, more prepared to stretch their supplies far longer. Whereas if we roll a 12, it means the hunting party hit a motherlode, suddenly we cross the redline from starvation to less anxiety about food.
I guess until we play this out a bit more, what I'm describing will still sound abstract or in theory, hence I'm declaring a session zero minimally for individual threads, followed by an initial chapter for a group thread. I don't know how else I can allay your concerns if you need more clarity than what I can currently assure you about my GMing preferences except to either invite you to go along for a bit, or observe the game for a while first. Because I'm pretty certain I won't be rules-lawyering as an approach to this games (or the others I run).
On a lighter note, (if that felt heavier!), I'm very open to feedback and criticism! :) Note how I'm very happy to accede to going back to Tech 10 if that makes you feel a greater clarity about the starting point. Like I said, 8 to 10 matters little, either no one really understands the water system at Tech 0, or a few people generally know how to maintain it imperfectly around 4-8, but when we hit 10, we should have a handful of individuals who are decently confident about maintaining it. Hence notice my narratively saying there's a roster to help do so. (If it were Tech 0 there wouldn't be a roster, there'd be just ignorant worshippers of the magic water fountain). Hope this last frivolous example helps!
May 27, 2024 4:09 pm
MaJunior says:
I was primarily replying to our GM, but I'll say this:Being closer to a threshold is not a mechanical difference than being further away. In D&D, 901 xp is the same as 2,699 xp -- you're level 3 no matter how you slice it.
I will put my vote for whatever you will propose MaJunior in terms of our ark's stats.
May 27, 2024 4:10 pm
Run whatever Dev levels you feel are appropriate. I just think if there was going to be a setting cap, it should have been discussed beforehand.
May 27, 2024 7:41 pm
I am fine with the levels really.
Story should always go over mechanics. I posted earlier how I'd thought the Arc, being a ship, would be like.
Either set of development levels seems to reflect that. If a value is 8 or 10, is fine with me.
Story should always go over mechanics. I posted earlier how I'd thought the Arc, being a ship, would be like.
Either set of development levels seems to reflect that. If a value is 8 or 10, is fine with me.
May 28, 2024 3:01 am
Got it! Thanks all for the specificity of the discussion, I'm good with Tech 10 Food 1 Warfare 1 Culture 0, so let's park it as that.
Sorry if my proposal felt unilateral rather than discussed beforehand, which is one of MaJunior's points. I'll reiterate that where decisions are meant to be made collaboratively by the players, if I contribute in the discussion, it's not final, so feel free to have right of reply.
That's way different from if I have to make a GM call or ruling. The ruling can be disputed or raised for discussion, and typically I'm happy to accede, but if we can't solve it, then I'll go with my decision.
Sorry if my proposal felt unilateral rather than discussed beforehand, which is one of MaJunior's points. I'll reiterate that where decisions are meant to be made collaboratively by the players, if I contribute in the discussion, it's not final, so feel free to have right of reply.
That's way different from if I have to make a GM call or ruling. The ruling can be disputed or raised for discussion, and typically I'm happy to accede, but if we can't solve it, then I'll go with my decision.
Jul 15, 2024 12:40 pm
Gonna start talking about projects here.
Projects
At the start of every session, as long as one or more PCs are in the Ark, the players should hold an Assembly. That means you step out of your characters for a short while, and instead represent the entire People. Consider – as players, not as PCs – what projects you think the People should undertake. An Assembly follows these simple steps:
Discuss which projects you think the People should undertake at this time. Remember that you can’t start a project if the Ark’s DEV ratings are too low. You cannot choose a project that has been completed before (with some exceptions). If one or more projects are already underway, you don’t need to start a new one.
After a few minutes of deliberation, each player can nominate a project that he thinks should be undertaken by the People. The players don’t need to agree on one project, but as we will see, projects will be completed much faster if they do. Every player that has chosen a project notes it down; we will talk about it here.
Projects
At the start of every session, as long as one or more PCs are in the Ark, the players should hold an Assembly. That means you step out of your characters for a short while, and instead represent the entire People. Consider – as players, not as PCs – what projects you think the People should undertake. An Assembly follows these simple steps:
Discuss which projects you think the People should undertake at this time. Remember that you can’t start a project if the Ark’s DEV ratings are too low. You cannot choose a project that has been completed before (with some exceptions). If one or more projects are already underway, you don’t need to start a new one.
After a few minutes of deliberation, each player can nominate a project that he thinks should be undertaken by the People. The players don’t need to agree on one project, but as we will see, projects will be completed much faster if they do. Every player that has chosen a project notes it down; we will talk about it here.
load next