Short Update

Having only two people in the party can be a challenge as it is, but when neither one has healing it really makes it difficult to gauge an appropriate challenge.  In the most recent game, and the one before that, at least one character has fallen into negative hit points, and needed to be dragged to a temple for healing.  It seems like the encounters I've been giving are either way too easy, or way too hard, and I'm having some trouble trying to find the middle ground.  Then again, I don't really get a lot of time to find it.

With Great Power Comes A Need For Control

I recently showed my static mana plan to my mother, the woman who raised me in modified AD&D. She liked the concept and implementation, up to a point - she raised concerns over it being too much power for a low-level character. My original thought was that, yeah, a 1st level mage might end up being able to cast 18 magic missiles, but magic is to a wizard what a sword is to a fighter, and the latter aren't restricted to how many swings in a day.

But then I thought about some of the other system changes I'd made from 1st and 3rd, and how weaponry and armor, as well as multiple attacks, have less to do with your class and more with your inherent stats. A mage might have stats optimized for casting, but if they'd taken fighter as a class instead they'd be no better off in physical combat. Any class can wear any armor, and my spell failure for arcane magic is based off of how much metal is in the armor rather than how much it inhibits arm movements for somatic components (something which seemed far too easily remedied with careful manufacture anyway).

So maybe I'm being too nice to casters.

Rather than come up with a system that limits how much mana is available until the maximum is reached, however, I thought about the possibility that spells might, at first, take more mana than would be indicated by their level. Say, for example, that at first level, a 1st level spell costs 5 mana instead of 1. You're just starting out in the world of magic, you haven't had a lot of practical experience, and you're still learning how to properly, and efficiently, wield the power you have. At second level, the cost goes down by 1 point. At third level, it now takes 3 mana for a 1st level spell, and so on until you reach the minimum of 1 point for a 1st level spell at 5th level.

Every time you gain access to a new level of spells, the cost of them is X higher than normal, let's say 4. That would mean that 4 levels after you start getting spells of that level, they would cost the normal minimum of 1 mana per spell level.

This could be a bit confusing for cantrips, since they normally take 1/4th of a mana. I could start them at 4, or I could be nice and start them at 1, dropping by 1/4 each level until the minimum.

Thoughts?

Keep Those Dice a'Rollin'

So my friend Jonathan came out this past week (Huzzah!) and we got to game a little bit. I am still fairly enamored with my new experience system, especially how clean it looks/feels to me at the moment. One potential concern that I noticed is that my system for saving throws and skill checks may be inherently flawed. The concept is that you roll 3d10, and you are aiming for a number lower than the relevant stat with a bonus gained from a secondary stat. With an expected average stat of 15, and a range of 3 to 30, I figured 3d10 would be appropriate. However, it seems that the majority of rolls are landing above 16 even after adjustments. I should have expected this, but I'm not yet sure how to deal with it. I was trying to approximate a d30, but I don't actually have any of those and they're not terribly common anyway. I suppose I could do a d6 and a d10, like how d20 rolls used to be done before d20s became popular. 1-2 on the d6 means the d10 is 1-10, 3-4 means it's 11-20, and 5-6 means 21-30. I'll have to do some blank rolling to find out if that brings the average down.

In pondering further upon the topic of skills, I thought about the idea of a slow method of improving skills based directly on Intelligence, rather than class as 3rd Edition had it. I'm thinking about putting a limiter, though, on how much of a bonus you can give any individual skill, based on the primary stat governing that skill. Maybe half of the stat? One of the things that really bugged me about 3rd Edition skills was that within a few levels the bonus to the skill far outstripped the ability of most challenges to keep up. Difficulty ratings kept getting arbitrarily bumped up just to have any chance of failure. I'm also, personally, a believer in inherent ability being a greater contributor than training.

Minor Update: Death Threshold

After playing around with various ways to implement the concept I wrote about here, including lots of number crunching and contemplation, I realized that messing with the death threshold and altering it from -10 would necessarily mean I would have to alter some of the other Fighting Skills I'd implemented. Certain abilities already altered how far below zero someone could go without dying. This isn't a major concern on its own, since it's easily enough fixed.

But I also came to the conclusion that unless I was going to go ahead and strip the ability to bring back the dead, as the other person had, then all I was doing was increasing an already generous hit point system at high levels, and in some cases (depending on how I chose to implement it) making lower level characters less likely to survive.

So at least for the moment, I'm not going to be using altered death threshold rules. I'm still fond of the idea, and like the increased realism that such a system would bring, but I'm already concerned about the level of complexity in my system anyway. Until I manage to do some serious playtesting to determine current power levels, I should probably just leave the mechanics alone.

Nielsen Family Diaries

A few weeks ago we got a letter in the mail from the Nielsen ratings people. They really do exist, and not just as a plot-device in movies! They gave us five new, crisp $1 bills to fill out a quick survey essentially stating how many television sets we have. I explained, in my responses to the online survey, that we do have televisions, but that we don't have cable or satellite or even access to public channels because of reception issues, and I expected that would be the end of it.

It wasn't. They called, and my wife answered and spoke to someone who said they wanted to send out a TV Viewing Diary for us to fill out, as well as $30 for the trouble. The diaries (one for each television set) arrived yesterday, and we got a reminder call today about filling them out. While I had the guy on the line, I again pointed out we don't have cable service, only internet, and asked if viewing a movie online, say through Netflix or similar, would be something they would want recorded. He said I could write that down, sure, as long as it was being shown on a television. I don't have any such internet movie subscription, but maybe Hulu would count.

I neglected to ask about purchased or rented DVDs, though. I mean, if Netflix would be something recordable, it would seem to follow that a rented DVD from an actual movie store would be just as valid. The instructions in the book only state what to do if you're watching something while recording it, or recording something for later viewing. It doesn't mention the possibility of viewing DVDs that have already been bought. Fortunately, such a circumstance is listed in the FAQ on their website, and it looks like I should write it down though it's still worded as though you had recorded the DVD yourself.

I guess I'll be keeping track of what DVDs our son watches, and maybe I'll see about some sort of movie night during this survey time. Then again, would that alter the actual information they're looking for, since I might not have done it otherwise? I must maintain the integrity of the survey, and not allow such a paradox to creep in!

Wow, who knew being a Nielsen family would be like time travel?

Methods of Improvement

I already had a system in place that would allow a character's Faith score to be malleable through the course of normal play, changing the score based on exceptional success or exceptional failure with Turning checks. Just today I wrote down and implemented a similar idea for the Luck stat, where the Luck would alter with exceptional critical hits (consecutive natural 20s), or exceptional critical fumbles (consecutive natural 1s).

I also allow stats to be built up using Combat Proficiencies (my term for Weapon Proficiencies, Non-Weapon Proficiencies, or Feats, depending on your chosen version. I don't know what the 4th Ed. equivalent is, but I don't care), but since I have these two stats as potentially variable I was wondering if there were other stats that people thought should be so quickly alterable. I know that physical stats such as Strength should not be so quickly or easily changed, but maybe Charisma might be affected by apparent wealth, or the Charisma scores of the people you're with?

Probably not, since it's a bit trickier than the systems I have in place for Faith and Luck. As it stands, Faith is really only important to one class, or anyone who wants to Turn or Rebuke undead. Luck is a bit more universally useful, since it affects saving throws, but there are two classes in particular that are majorly helped by having Luck as a primary stat. I like having these two stats alterable on-the-fly because I think it reflects the concept behind them well, but I don't know that any of the others really lend themselves to such.

New Exercise Program

I'm by no means a small person, and haven't been for the majority of my life. Part of this is simply skeletal structure passed down by genetics, and part of it is personal willpower limitations. I recognize I should "eat less, move more" to improve my body image and overall health, but quite frankly I find that I'd rather be spending my time on other things, like video games.

My solution? Video games that make you move. Sounds great, except that I don't have a Wii or any other system that really logs movement. I have a PS2, and an Eyetoy, but the only game I have for the Eyetoy isn't really engaging. When I first saw a Dance Dance Revolution arcade game, I thought that would be a great way to lose weight, except for the fact that (a) it costs money every time you want to play and (b) you have to potentially look like a completely uncoordinated goof in front of an arcade full of people. The latter reason became especially true after knowledge of professional DDR players became widespread, with videos like the one where the man starts breakdancing on both dance pads, and ends with a perfect score.

But wait a minute, didn't Dance Dance Revolution get converted to console gaming before they introduced the PS3?

Yes, yes it did.

I am now armed with two DDR titles, as well as a pair of dance mats. They arrived in the mail today, and I'm so far very pleased. Just tonight I have, according to whatever calculations the game uses, done the equivalent of a two mile jog. I'm not sure how accurate that is, since I didn't feel terribly winded afterwards (though I definitely felt like I had a workout!) and I was still sorely tempted to keep going. I'll probably play again for a bit after I'm done here.

I've made a few observations on my initial play-style, however. For one, I have trouble switching legs, with my right leg dominant. It's actually easiest for me, so far, to just stand on my left leg and use my right to do all the steps, even crossing in front or behind of the left leg to hit the left arrow. For some reason, I'm not nearly as adept at playing with my left leg, as when I tried to reverse things and just stand on my right leg, I ended up switching very quickly because of coordination issues. I have to wonder if this comes from the fact that the arrows on the screen are read as a pattern, and therefore under the "left brain's" authority. I also wonder if this is why having two left feet is a negative thing in dancing, since it implies that the left foot is already inferior.

Despite my right leg doing all the steps, though, my left leg may actually get the harder workout as it ends up being my sole balancing post and support for much of the movements. Either way, I'm definitely excited about this prospect.