Progress Tracking of Plans

There's a piece of GM advice I've been told in the past that I find hard to use. It says that one should make a rich world in which players can't manage to do everything, and then you should apply consequences to things they did not achieve. While I believe there should be consequences, I also don't want to drag my players down by making them feel like they'll miss out on cool things. At the same time, though, I want to create a sense of pressure. A sense that things are in motion. The mechanics described below started as a system of tracking the public opinion of three factions and evolved into something rather different: tracking the completion of plans and counter-plans.

I wanted to put an image of some futuristic presentation here, but didn't feel like looking for one too much longer. I kind of like this image more.
Dream War, by Beeple

Tracker

A tracker is a number between 1 and 12 that tracks which of two opposing sides is winning. If the tracker reaches 12 or more, the players have succeeded in their long-term goal. On the contrary, if the tracker reaches 1 or less, the opposing side succeeds in their plan.

Let's say that in Runehack, there's a company called Nexuspace that's developing an MMORPG entirely taking place in VR. Of course, the faction players are members of - Acumen - are suspicious of this endeavor and investigate it. With every successful mission, the tracker increases by 1, and with every failed mission it decreases by 1. This isn't done just by the one group of characters controlled by the players at your table, though, it's a process that's done many times over and over by all Acumen. Since generating them one by one would be a hassle, there's a simple way of abstracting this.

Once every time period (which I haven't decided yet. For now, I'm going with 5 days), the GM rolls a 1d12 for every tracker. The tracker increases or decreases by 1, going closer to the die. However, to make things more interesting, it increases and decreases by 2 whenever a 12 and 1 are rolled respectively.

Acumen are working on three fronts. First is taking out the Nexuspace's new VR MMORPG launch (tracker: 3). Second is a fashion company with some shady trackers put into their runic clothesline (tracker: 7). Third is a Runebot developing company (tracker: 8). The GM makes the rolls for the end of the period to see how the Acumen progressed. First roll is a [2], putting the tracker regarding the VR MMORPG at a 2. The second roll is a [1], decreasing the tracker for the suspicious fashionista down to 5. The third tracker rolls a [10], which means the Runebot developing company's goal has increased up to a 9. 

This provides a self-balancing way of tracking the ebb and flow of the plan's progress and attempts at countering the plan. A very high tracker number means the company is getting too defensive and protective, which makes it harder to increase the number further. On the contrary, the lower the number is, the harder it is to decrease further because Acumen get far more active. What holds the biggest sway here are the actions of the players: will they decide to protect a counterplan that's already almost failed with a tracker at a 3, or do they want to finish off a job that's at 11 just waiting for that final push? Their missions are not incorporated into the roll, instead, their successes and failures are applied directly to the tracker. This also raises the stakes in these extreme scenarios, where one of the parties is very close to reaching their goal. There would be a limit on how much time must pass between the missions to minimize consequences outside of them, which means the players can only be expected to contribute so much to each plan. The plans will all progress, whether the players manage to do something about them or not.

Nexuspace's plan has succeeded. The tracker went down to 0 after a botched mission by another team while the players were busy dealing with the Runebot-developing company, and now the world has been introduced to the world's first VR MMORPG without a controller involved. It requires a special face-worn device that many people now have in their household. The colors in the game grow more vibrant the longer you play it, making the real world seem dull in comparison to all its avid players. The game is filled with subliminal messaging of politics and ideologies in line with those of Nexuspace. And the microtransactions have set an awful new standard for the industry. 

This might be a lost war, but it is not the end of the world. The world just... changed.

What if we want to make things a little more complicated? Let's involve a third faction.

Third Faction

Nothing happens normally when the 1d12 rolled by the GM rolls the tracker's current number. However, if the GM deems it appropriate and wants to complicate things a little, they can introduce a third faction. This could be the rebellion that wants to destroy the power of corporations and reestablish the monarchies of old, a minor religious group that wishes to take the dangerous product and use it for their own gain, or anything else you deem worthy of having their own side. In doing so, a new tracker is created, and both trackers are at spots neighboring the last one (so for a 7, the trackers would be at 6 and 8). When three factions are involved, roll twice, once for each tracker, following the same rules. In the following scenarios, one of the factions loses and drops out of the plan/counterplan scheme until it is resolved.

• If a tracker arrives at a 1 or less, it ceases to be, and Acumen drops out of this tracking. What happens next is entirely between the company and the third party involved.
• If a tracker arrives at 12 or more, it ceases to be, and the Company drops out of this tracking. The conflict persists, but now only between Acumen and the third party.
• If both trackers are on the same spot, one ceases to be, and the third party drops out of the conflict. The status quo is reestablished, with the conflict continuing between the Acumen and the Company.

Extra note: Players' mission moves the higher tracker if it involves the Company. They move the lower tracker if their mission specifically targets the third party in an attempt to take them out of the picture.

In theory, on another roll equal to the tracker, you could introduce a fourth party with a third tracker and a third roll, or even more. I won't entertain that thought, three factions are complicated enough for me.

But Math

At least, that's what I would have written and posted yesterday. The article was finished, I just figured that I'll take a bit longer to mull it over before I publish it. I was feeling kind of bored, and curious about how it would work out in practice, so I wrote a Javascript code for running it. And... well, the numbers turned out to be awful.

Without players' interference, it would take on average about 160 attempts to resolve on its own. At least, that's what my poorly written code said back then. Right now I don't feel like rewriting it back to what it was to see how far off it was. With an assumption of a weekly game and one roll per session, this would take well over three years. That'd get way too tedious, and it would get nowhere. When I included the players' interference in the equation, it improved the odds a lot (nearly cutting the numbers in half!), but... it still didn't feel good.

So I got back to experimenting. Instead of attracting, maybe the dice could repel the trackers? Nope. Maybe the criticals could be ignored, or have a +3 instead of a +2? Nah. Making the ranges for victory and loss bigger? No. Truth is, using a d12 for this was a mistake because the chances of rolling a 12 or a 1 are quite low. Which is why I switched it to a d6. After a couple more alterations, it works well enough.

The tracker starts at a 3 because usually, the company has already started working on a project for it to be known by the Acumen. Every time period, a 1d6 is rolled. The tracker is attracted by 1 space closer to the tracker. The plan or counterplan is completed when the tracker reaches a 1 or 6 respectively. Players' mission applies before the roll. Rolling a 1 or 6 doesn't have any special effects on the tracker. No third factions are gonna get involved, because there's barely any space for two factions.

With this, it takes on average 10.5 rolls to resolve on its own. If the players are involved every time, and their failure can increase or decrease a tracker by 1, this probability shifts. Calculating it with an assumed success rate of 80% (it's probably gonna be more but for now), we see that on average they'd reduce the average number of rolls it takes down to roughly 2.4, which feels a little fast-paced to me, but then again... that's average. Meaning that some plans could be resolved quite quickly, and some could take more time than that.

Lesson learned, sometimes the idea might sound good, but the math won't math.

I've been busy lately. I got involved in a short-term Blades in the Dark campaign, I've played some other games too as part of my New Year's resolution, and I've been busy with stuff other than the Runehack RPG. I should get back to it and give it some more time so that I have at least the initial draft of it finished. Then... it's time to start playtesting. I hoped to begin the playtests once I'm done with the Blades game, but if it cancels again, I think I'll leave the party and focus on my playtests. Seven games to go, ... who knows how many more rules I need to write to my rulebook. I've been pondering thoughts of making YouTube videos more and more lately. Don't ask me when you can expect something though, that will be as much of a surprise to me as it will be for everyone else. So far, this has been a productive year.

Thank you for reading, and have an awesome day!

Two Heckadeck Games

So I couldn't resist any longer and ordered myself a Heckadeck earlier. It arrived sooner than I expected earlier today. And so I figured "Since February 29th comes only once every four years, I might as well try to make a game with the heckadeck before March begins." By the time I got around to actually writing the game, it was 10 o'clock at night. Let's call this a two-hour leap year one-person game jam.

I actually managed to write two games, because the first one I wasn't satisfied with. It was a tabletop game alright, but didn't feel like a TTRPG. Honestly, I don't feel like bothering with tables in CSS, so I'll just turn them into unnumbered lists for the sake of speed. The second one will be a lot simpler, but I can only do so much in two hours with an item I got earlier today. I'm posting both anyway.

Have a great day!

I might be in a hurry, but I can still afford to slap on a picture of a mage with cards on it. I don't know if I have time to find the source until midnight, so here's a link for my source, seems like someone who does commissions on Etsy.

The Wishstone

Players' characters are on a quest to obtain the Wishstone that can make their deepest desires real, represented by the Omnihedron. Take the Omnihedron out of the Heckadeck and put it in the middle of the table. It can only be taken by the player who discards Talismans of four different colors during their turn. The Omnihedron must always remain face-up on the table, even when possessed by a player.

Divide the remaining cards into two decks. The Character deck contains all Jokers, Jacks, Queens, Kings, Beasts, Hunters, and Travelers, as well as the Crone and the Watcher. The other one, simply referred to as the deck, contains all numbered cards, Arrows, Talismans, and the Darkness.

Each player draws three cards from the Character deck. They select which one is their character, and keep the rest as their Will, representing their close bonds. Once everyone has their cards, they can draw 7 cards from the deck. Before the game begins, anyone who holds a Talisman can reveal it. If any Talisman is revealed, the youngest holder of a Talisman starts the game. If none were revealed, the youngest player goes first.

At the start of your turn, a player by your left side draws two cards from the deck and chooses which one is your Challenge, as per the table below.

• Number: You need to discard cards with a total value of 6 or this card's value (whichever is higher).
• Arrow: There is no challenge. You can choose either the effect of success or failure.
• Talisman: You are overcome with a need to harm one character selected by the player who chose this card for you. To succeed, discard any 3 cards. You can keep this card only if you succeed.
• Darkness: You need to discard cards with a total value between 20 and 25. If you fail, you lose one Will. You can discard any number of cards.

To overcome a Challenge, you must discard enough cards, either from your hand or drawn from the deck. You can keep discarding cards this way until you discard a card that doesn't belong to your suit. Discarding the non-number cards has the following effects:

• Arrow counts as 1 or 11 (your choice).
• Talisman lets you automatically succeed.
• Darkness harms the character of the player who chose this challenge for you.

If you succeed, you can discard any number of cards from your hand. If you fail, you can take the challenge card into your hand. Either way, after a Challenge you can choose to discard cards for any of the following reasons:

• Arrow to attempt harming another Character.
• Talismans if you have Talismans of all four colors to obtain the Omnihedron.
• Darkness to end the game immediately.
• You can also discard cards at this time if a character ability you possess lets you.

You end your turn by drawing cards into your hand until you hold 7 cards.

When a character is harmed, they must discard one of their Will cards. A discarded Will always goes back to the Character deck. When one runs out of Will cards, they are eliminated from the game.

You get a special ability depending on what character you play.

• Joker: Select one additional Character card. You get its ability, but its suits are replaced by the suits that match your color.
• Jack: You start the game with 9 cards on your hand, and at the end of your turn you can draw up to 9 cards into your hand.
• Queen: You can discard one additional time in a challenge.
• King: Draw two additional cards from the Character deck for your Will.
• Beast: During your turn, you can discard two cards of your suit to harm one character of your choice.
• Hunter: Whenever you are harmed by a character, you can discard a card of your suits to harm the character too.
• Traveler: If you succeed on a challenge, you can give another player two cards of your choice from your hand, and take two random cards from their hand.
• Crone: You automatically succeed in a conflict resolution if you discard a non-numbered card (including your Will). You can discard five numbered cards during your turn and choose a player. They must switch their current character with one of their Will cards (their choice).
• Watcher: You can hold no cards. You fail your conflict resolution if the total you drew exceeds 13.

When the game ends, the player who holds Omnihedron wins along with all players whose characters' suits match the holder's.

HeckaRPG

This game requires a GM.

Take all Jacks, Queens, Kings, Beasts, Hunters, and Travelers out of the deck, and they stay out of the deck during the game. Every player chooses two random cards out of these and places them down on the table face up in front of them. The card on the top is their Body, and their Mind is the card on the bottom placed perpendicular. At the start of the game, draw 5 cards from the deck to represent your Determination. Keep them face down beneath both your Body and Mind. When you have 0 Determination, you are unconscious.

When you attempt to do something significant, the GM can challenge your Body or Mind. They tell you the difficulty, ranging from 1 (very easy) to 5 (nearly impossible). Taking someone's Determination away is 3, and giving someone Determination is 4. Draw 5 cards. Your success is measured by counting the cards with suits that match your attributes. You succeed if the number of matches equals or exceeds the difficulty, given by the GM.

• Crone has no suits.
• Darkness has no suits, and it costs you 1 Determination.
• Watcher has all suits, and the GM tells your character some new useful information.
• Omnihedron has all suits, and it gives you 1 Determination.
• Joker has both suits of its color. It also counts as a success for any single-suited card.
• Arrow has both suits of its color. It also counts as a success for any Jack or Beast.
• Talisman has both suits of its color. It also counts as a success for any King or Queen.

Replenish all Determination (max 5) when you get enough rest. Set yourself goals. Upon achieving them, the GM can let you draw additional characters and add them to your Body or Mind, keeping them parallel with the original Body and Mind to distinguish them.

That's all for today! February 29th article done, two-hour "game jam" finished, let's go!

Post-midnight edit: The second game is 300+ words too. Oh well!

3 Dice Mini-games

Gambling is part of many TTRPG tales. It's done with an imaginary currency, so how many players can genuinely say they have never enjoyed a good gamble? My go-to is usually the game I found on Reddit called "Kobold Knuckles" which I've also included an iteration of in D6 Feet Under. It's Blackjack played with d12s, but 11 and 12 count as a 10, and 1 can stand for 1 or 11, to reach 21. Simple, clean, good fun time. Well, lately I've been thinking about mechanics for downtime in my Runehack RPG, and my mind got hung up on the fact that rolling 5+ is twice as likely on a 1d12 than on 1d6. I had to get that out of my head to make space for something that would work way better, which is why I've put this premise into a classic game. Out of that was born another idea, and then one more.

In the end, I got three games of chance that are equally uncertain to the player as they are to the GM.

Shells Game

Three shells, one reward. The reward goes beneath one, and shuffling begins. The player rolls 1d6, or 1d12 if they know how the shells game tricks work. On a roll of 5+, they picked the correct shell and win.

Could it be played with more than three shells? Yes. There's a catch to their numbers though. You'll see later in this article.
Shell Game, by Zeon-in-a-tree

Quite simple, and effective. The chance of succeeding for most is 33%, and it's bumped up to 66% if you know the Shells game. Of course, this could be toyed with beyond the measure depicted. How about we go an extra step?

Monty Hall

Three doors, one reward. The player chooses one door, and the organizer opens one of the doors that do not have a reward. The player now gets a choice - swap to the other unopened door, or stay. Roll a 1d12 if they swapped their choice, or 1d6 if they stayed with their original choice. On a roll of 5+, they picked the correct door and win.

This is the shells game with a twist: You get to change your mind if you dare. It's also a probabilistic expression of the Monty Hall paradox, where switching the door is better than staying with the same door. If you don't believe me, think of it this way - imagine there are 10 doors, and after you pick one, I open 8 doors with no reward behind them. Is it better to switch or not? Of course, it is, the chance that you picked the right door on the first try was and still is 1 in 10.

That got me thinking about something else... could other pairs of regular polyhedral dice accurately represent this for different numbers of shells/doors, assuming there's a single prize every time? (In the case of Monty Hall, assume the organizer opens all but 2 doors.) Let's see!

• 2 doors: coin flip, impossible to open any doors after
• 3 doors: 1d6 on stay, 1d12 on switch, 5+ correct choice
• 4 doors: 1d4 on stay, 1d12 on switch, 4+ correct choice
• 10 doors: 1d10 on stay, 1d100 on switch, 10+ correct choice (treat 00 as zero instead of 100)

... and surprisingly, that's all the dice combinations I could find using regular dice. Maybe I could get Matt Parker on this if I send him a message. Until then, let's see how far we could go with irregular dice and a complete revamp of the game's concept!

Russian Roulette

Start by defining the number of chambers C and the number of bullets B. A player rolls 1dC on the turn (replace C by the current number of chambers), on a roll of B or less they were unlucky. Lower C by 1 after each turn, and lower B by 1 after each unfortunate turn.

Buckshot Roulette has been trending recently. I'm impressed at how they could turn the Russian Roulette into a whole game with actual tactical choices.

I don't know if it can get simpler than this. Highly intuitive, the stakes are clear. One would consider using a deck of cards to be easier, and it is. But... a deck of cards can be shuffled badly, or shuffled in a way to "load" it, keeping the top card the same throughout the whole shuffle. I used to do magic tricks, I know how things can be. Dice make it fair unless they've spent some time in the oven.

The disadvantage of using the dice should be clear by now. For a gun with six chambers, you're going to need 1d6, 1d5, 1d4, 1d3, and 1d2 (1d1 isn't a die, and 1d2 could be a coin). It is easy to do digitally, but not so easy in person. I know some companies sell such dice, but I'm not writing this as a how-to guide. This is just an article where I wanted to write down three ideas for tabletop mini-games to gamble with at the table. Well, four technically, since I described Kobold Knuckles at the top, but let this be the secret kept among everyone who finished reading this article.

That's all for today! I hope to get back to Runehack with my next article, but one never knows when a muse kicks them. Thank you all, and have a wonderful day!

Conflict Resolution based on Gatherings

I had another neat game design idea that I wanted to share. This one comes from a conversation with Izzy, Heavy, and the Moon Cell about how to do skills differently. Of course, don't expect this to be a part of the Runehack RPG, so far I actually don't have any plans for a game that would include this. I wanted to share it because I think it's neat.

Conflict Resolution based on Gatherings

A character is defined by a set of attributes with assigned values, as usual. But their purpose is not to be added or compared to a die roll. Instead, they define how many people you can attempt to influence by your attribute. Whether this succeeds is determined by comparing your level with theirs, and possibly a die roll if you want some randomness involved.

Let's make an example. Say you are trying to sneak through a corridor with some guards in it. Your stealth is 4, and there are 5 guards, so you need to select four guards you hide from, and figure out a way in which you could move so that the fifth guard doesn't get to see you. Then, your level is compared to the guards', successfully letting you sneak past anyone whose level is equal to or less than yours. So, if your level is 4 and the guards' levels are 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, there might be one guard who you couldn't have hidden from. You better hope it was that one guard who you didn't choose. What if the guards try to search for you together as a team? They add up all their levels, in this case totaling 15, and at least one of them is bound to find you with a skill that's not a zero. But if you make it past them safely, they might not know you were there in the first place.

Upgrading your skills one digit at a time might be boring, so how about we use an exponential here? Imagine if your skill doubles every time you get to upgrade it. You start off by being able to hide from one guard, then two, then four, then eight, then sixteen, and perhaps more eventually. Imagine a master thief hiding from a crowd of a thousand heads.

The biggest flaw I can see here is doing stuff that doesn't relate to people. When you're trying to pick a lock on a door, do you compare your level with the locksmith's? What if you're just trying to push a boulder up the mountain? It will feel like a cop-out, but I'd ask how many average people it takes to do the same task or something along those lines.

Teamwork here would allow one very competent character to carry the whole group, naturally leading to a more diverse group with various specializations. What would be the limit though? Maybe people who you assist with your abilities also count into the number of people that you can affect. I don't know.
Prince of Persia concept art. I will consider this the source for now.

It is a very raw idea, but that's why I'm posting it here. I don't feel like making it into something complete right now, if I did I would turn it into a short game. If you want to, see where you can take it.

Have a great day!

Runehack RPG 0: Goals and Foundations

The time has come. Let's talk about what I've been working on for some time now. Just to be clear, these articles will be focused on the game's design more than on the worldbuilding.

The old cover art for the Runehack RPG was drawn by Kate Chaste. While it's fine work, over the years I changed my mind and ended up not using it for the game. The new cover art has already been drawn by my wonderful girlfriend Arell, but I figured I could use this for the article series so that these would still get a thumbnail of some sort. I'll reveal the new cover art when the game is finished.

Premise

I like the idea of going beyond the usual pillars of experience. I feel like combat has been explored in many games, the exploration is something some games already do really well, and social interaction is something I have my own opinions on (briefly: give tools, not skips). I will have to do something for some of these, but generally, I don't want to delve too much into those. So, how do I plan to go beyond?

This game takes place in my world Runehack which I talked about several times on my blog. In this world dominated by megacorporations, there's a secretive organization with its own goals. The base assumption is that the organization will face the megacorporations, trying to dig up dirt on them by infiltrating their buildings to search for interesting information about them and then sharing it with the public. Imagine whistleblowers but with exciting freerunning and hacking involved.

That being said, this is the base game that I want to publish this year. I'd like to expand on the game after with extra pillars of experience that could be added or removed without anything changing too much. Of course, you would leave out the base premise of the game if you were to remove the hacking and the freerunning pillars. Still, the same can be said about any system - if I remove combat from D&D, it becomes a vastly different game from what most players experience it as. The big difference I'm leading to is that in my game, I want everything I label as a pillar of experience to be something the game could easily focus on throughout a campaign, even if other pillars are dropped.

Goals

I aim to finish the game's first version by the end of this year. This includes the rules for the three pillars I wish to begin with.

The core pillar is the only pillar you can't remove from the game, since it includes the mechanics that other pillars rely on. These include your fantasy species, regular rolls made using your attributes, some additional background-related traits, and the core of the action economy that's shared with all other pillars.

The freerunning pillar is what I spend most of the time developing. The best way I can put it is that it's an upgrade of what I tested with the Fairy Heist: areas connected by passages that some can pass, some can't, and some can pass but they'd get slowed down. Think of this as Mirror's Edge, or Assassin's Creed, but done in tabletop and ideally without the players fighting their opponents.

The hacking pillar is the final pillar that I want to have in the game when it's published, but it's also the one I'd have the easiest time dropping if I don't manage to finish it on time. It's the dice-placing minigame from The Asterist.

Core Pillar

While the core pillar is something I'm largely satisfied with by now, consider it still a bit of a work in progress. It's unlikely that it will change from now on, but it might if I am compelled enough to do so.

This system's method of rolling is a roll-over using 2d6 or 1d12, with the addition of one's relevant attribute. When a character rolls for its attribute, it can choose to roll Reliably (2d6) or Recklessly (1d12). This is a concept I've described before on my blog, and it's to give the players some control over how their die roll might end up. I will happily borrow the rules for advantage and disadvantage from Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition since I want the numbers to stay within their bounds. An attribute has a range of 0 to 4, with some exceptions.

For now, I'm feeling a bit experimental. I want to preserve a proven mechanic from a previous game, which is why I've decided this game will have five stats, but two of them can be replaced by a single one for some characters.

• Might - physical strength. Pushing, lifting, dragging, and so on.
• Agility - dexterity. Sleight of hand, dodging, acrobatics, balance, and so on.
• Training - tools knowledge. Picking locks, making mechanisms, artistic performance, and so on.
• Comprehension - abstract knowledge. Physics, chemistry, psychology, history, and so on.
• Hunch - guessing. Searching for hidden things, intuition, and so on.
• Height - replaces the Might and Agility of characters who are so tiny that their Might and Agility wouldn't matter more than their height. Unlike other stats, this one ranges from 4 to 17, and when one uses it, they roll 3d6 and succeed when they either roll their exact height, below their height when they would use their Might, or above their height when they would use their Agility. Possessing a height stat also reduces the number of acts you can perform in a turn by 1.

Most of these attributes also come with some extra benefit attached to them. For now, since it will be relevant, I will mention just that you get a number of hunches per day equal to your Hunch attribute, which you can spend to make a guess statement towards your GM about a thing your character could reasonably guess. You must make it clear that you are using your hunch, by saying something along the lines of "I have a hunch that..." for example. Your GM then tells you whether your hunch was correct or not. Yes, it's the mechanic I've tested with the Clues and Hunches, I like it a lot.

When it comes to the playable species, there's a plan to include seven of them. I've considered including the digital ghost that I've introduced in Runehack: The Asterist, but in the end, I've realized it might be too powerful for the freerunning pillar. It would be fine as an opponent now and then, but as a player character, it's just too much. As for the rest, here they are listed along with a rough outline of their traits:

• Dwarf. Possesses a touch so sensitive, that they can see anything that's touching a surface they touch with their bare skin. This functions up to 1 area away.
• Elf. Can see in the dark and perform one additional activity per day. Their lifespan is also extra long, but that doesn't really matter within the game itself.
• Fairy. Possess the Height stat, and they can also naturally fly. Once per turn, they can use an act to move twice. I might add one or more traits, since right now a Small Runebot is an objectively better version of a fairy.
• Goblin. Over a week, they can adjust their physiology through a diet, gaining a trait of their choice. I'll be honest, neither do I know what exactly will these abilities be just yet.
• Human. One of their attributes is increased by 1. Furthermore, they can spend 1 hunch after a roll to force a reroll, keeping the new result.
• Orc. One of their attributes is increased by 1. They get an additional act on their turn that they can only use to move. They can also choose one attribute that they can increase after a time beyond 4.
• Runebot. Their body is a puppet remotely controlled by their mind from a safe location. Their body is highly modular, and it can come in a Regular or Small model (the difference being that the Small model has a Height stat). With the increase in level, they get more and more components that they can attach to their body. I will need to find a way of compensating the Small runebots for a loss of an act, but for now, this is it.

Pillars' Commonalities

I don't know yet how I'll work out the progression across all the pillars, but what I do know is that every time a character gets to "level up", they will have to increase one of their lowest pillars by a level.

There are two ways of tracking what a character does in this game: activity and act. A character gets to choose to do 6 activities per day. They could in theory be split up and shuffled around, but I've wanted a way of tracking the activities one does that's somewhat simple, so for now consider them uninterrupted blocks (as unnatural as it may be). Some activities can include sleep, work, mission, or anything else of significant time investment, such as an important social interaction, or research. Matters such as transportation, eating, and so on, aren't tracked and are assumed to be performed as part of these activities. On a turn-by-turn basis (like during a mission), a character can take 3 acts per turn.

I'm quite hyped for this project. It's been a long time coming, and I want to play it. There's still a long way to go though, so for now this is everything I can say here. Thank you for reading, and have an awesome day!

Opposed Rolls Combat System

I watched a video recently that described a combat system with possibly the best balance between authenticity and simplicity. I figured I'd take the idea and develop it a little.

"I missed!" "The enemy missed too." "Natural 1." "Enemy missed too, don't worry." "Aha, a critical hit! ... That's, uh... six damage."
Success in regular combat isn't just about hitting the opponent, it's about hitting an opponent without getting hit.
Shadow Fight, by Yerbol Bulentayev

At the start of its turn, a character gets a number of maneuvers determined by its level. (I'll keep the exact number vague since this would probably depend on the game you wish to make with this.) These maneuvers can be spent during the turn in the following ways:

• Attack. You attempt to strike another creature of your choice within the range of a weapon you wield. Roll the weapon's die, add a relevant attribute, and compare the result to the target's total for defense (see below). If your rolled total is greater, the target takes an amount of damage equal to the roll.
• Move. A maneuver can be used to move X spaces. X could be defined by your level, or armor, or just the same for everyone.

You can use maneuvers that remain in following mostly defensive ways even outside of your turn:

• Block. If you are wielding a shield when you are attacked, you roll its die and add a relevant attribute.
• Counter*. If you are wielding a weapon and your attacker is in its range, you roll its die and add a relevant attribute to it when you are attacked. If your roll is greater than the attacker's, you instead deal damage to the attacker equal to the amount rolled.
• Dodge. When you are attacked, you roll the die determined by your armor and add a relevant attribute to it.
• Strike*. If you are wielding a weapon and a creature leaves its range, you can attempt to attack it. (For the sake of brevity, works the same way as Attack would, and the target can use the above three maneuvers against it.)

* At your own discretion, the attacking maneuvers used outside of your turn might be restricted just to melee weapons.

All weapons, shields, and armor come with a die that you roll to see how effective it is. Shields and armor reduce any damage you take from weapons by their defined amounts.

• Dual-wieldable (2d4, 1d4 if just one is wielded)
• Ranged (1d6)
• Single-handed melee (1d8)
• Two-handed melee (1d10)
• Shields (1d12, damage reduction 2)
• No armor (1d10, damage reduction 0)
• Light armor (1d8, damage reduction 2)
• Medium armor (1d6, damage reduction 4)
• Heavy armor (1d4, damage reduction 6)

Action economy beyond this could exist too, of course, and I have no idea how this would work in the long run. What the hit points required for this system would be, what the distances would be, the height of the attributes, and so on is frankly something I'm too lazy to figure out right away. Unless I'd be making this into a full game, it feels like something someone else will be happy to do.

Now, someone might look at this and go "This discourages the players from attacking at all", to which I say... yeah? A battle isn't about enemies missing each other with 40% of their hits, it's about their hits clashing, and seeing who's gonna manage to damage whom. Unless you can make lots of maneuvers and take lots of hits, you probably shouldn't be on the front lines.

Until then, I hope you've enjoyed my article, and I would like to wish you all a wonderful day!

Interrogation Minigame

Recently I encountered a minor problem. Since most TTRPGs are about combat, their fail state is death. However, an absolute death with no way back is an anticlimactic way to end a character, especially when they have unfinished business. Which is why I assume resurrection magic was introduced. And that creates a slew of worldbuilding issues I'm not even going to go into.

My game won't be about combat. Death could occur, but it's not the only fail state in the game, nor is it the most frequent one. See, the players in my game are to be members of a secretive organization that works against the megacorporations that own the cities. Capturing them alive is a lot better than killing them off because they might provide information. It could just take some... convincing. This is an ideal fail state for my game, seeing how this allows the other players to run a rescue mission, saving their friend.

But that got me thinking... what would the character be going through in the meantime? I mean, players will likely prioritize the rescue mission, but what if they don't? What if they leave the one player waiting for too long? What will the player do in the meantime (besides likely playing some weaker character substitute)?

My initial thought was "Oh no, I can't cover this with any of the stats in the game, do I have to add a Willpower stat into my game?" After some thinking, though, it turns out I don't need to. I can just reuse an old idea of mine: dice towers. No, I don't mean the kind that you'd use to roll the dice.

The dice are stacked, by Michael Summers

On every day of the interrogation, the GM asks a question and rolls 3d6, dropping the lowest roll. The player needs to put this many d6's on top of one another to keep the information away from the interrogators. If the stack of dice collapses, the information is revealed. The player can choose to reveal the information at any moment, or they can spend their Energy to lower the number of dice required for the stack. Additionally, the GM can decide after the die roll that the interrogators are going extra hard on the character. The player character takes a Wound when they have stacked a number of dice equal to the higher of the rolls, and when the stacked dice collapse. A character doesn't replenish its resources while captured this way and is stripped of its ways of using special abilities (in 5e terms, spellcasting foci and weapons would be perfect examples).

I started to write this back in December, believe it or not, but I didn't get to finish it until 2024. I'm honestly not sure if this will make it into the final game, but I'll have to test that in playtesting. This might be difficult because the first hurdle to overcome is the fact that I'll likely be doing my playtesting online. I want to make a minigame for this that would keep things interesting for the player characters who are out of the game. I want the minigame to have at least one choice for the player to make, otherwise it's more or less a waste of time.

At the end of the day, I might just replace it with a less physical minigame, but this was a neat idea that I figured I'll share here. See you soon!

Review of my 2023

Another year has come and gone. It was an eventful year at that.

2020 | 2021 | 2022

How was 2023?

In one word, this year could be summed up as eventful. With 11.6K views of the blog, it surpassed the last year, but not 2021. I feel like that's partially because of the fact that I stopped making D&D homebrews 3 months in, for good. Part of the reason for that is the distance that grew between me and D&D since then (see my review of 2022), but another part of this is an elephant in the room. Starting in early January, Wizards of the Coast have seen controversy after controversy. OGL, Pinkertons, AI art, misprinted cards, and so much more. The two things they have succeeded at are the D&D movie, which was good, but came to the cinemas with bad timing, … and Baldur's Gate 3. At the same time, One D&D has been renamed to D&D 5e 2024, and it's... not looking all that much different from what's currently 5e.

All this in combination with my dislike of D&D in general is why my publishing has slowed down this year. On April 1st, I released Null, my only serious published full class for Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition. This was also meant to be my final 5e homebrew, so I made sure it was an interesting one, breaking the conventions of the game to open up the readers' perspectives. I haven't stopped following D&D for some reason, though I did redirect my attention elsewhere.

Here's some good news, though! I managed to surpass my personal record of articles written in a year once again. My former record was in 2021 at 27 articles. When I found out that I was very close to this number in December, I figured I'd go just a bit further, pushing it up to 28. Maybe that's why there were more blog views than last year. The biggest contributing factor to this would have to be the fact that I gave myself a new monthly challenge of making a 200-word game every month. What I find funny, looking back at it, is the fact that my busiest months were April, October, and December. I can somewhat understand April - April Fools is something I always try to do, and the monthly 200-word game added another article there. October was around the time when I finished The Asterist, published a design article for another horror game of mine, and made a 200-word game, then I had some extra ideas. As for December, well... like I already said, I went a bit further than expected to break my personal record. I wonder if I will be active in these months next year too.

That being said, let's address my resolutions from the last year.

Resolutions from 2023

I find it funny that I said I wanted fewer technical successes, that's pretty much most of the stuff I accomplished this year.

• Runehack: The Asterist is finally released! While I can't say I'm 100% satisfied with it, at least it's out for people to see and play.
• As for more Runehack Cities, I wrote... one. It's not much, but hey at least it's a technical success, right?
• Streaming was hardly present during the year, I think the Twitch recap told me I've streamed five times? Well, that changed a bit in December when I started to stream Lethal Company more. I'm not sure if I should count that though. I also started a Youtube channel like I hoped I would! But... it also has just one video for now, and even that's just an introduction.
• Dungeon23 was a big failure, with most of the wind being taken out of my sails due to the OGL controversy. Over time, I didn't feel like returning to it because I realized... I don't enjoy dungeons. I don't enjoy combat as much as I used to. My tastes have changed. However, during January I felt like releasing a 200-word game, and I also made one in February. This made me reconsider this goal, and instead of making a daily room for a megadungeon I'd never use anyway, I made a 200-word game every single month, most of which I will probably never play.

Some of my successes were not resolutions for me last year (or at least they should have been mentioned in my last yearly review). I managed to republish the Slasher Oneshot System with a new name Final: Sole Survivor. I started gathering information regarding my worldbuilding and even personal notes into an Obsidian vault, which I find to be highly useful now. I also traveled ten thousand kilometers to meet Arell, which was a fantastic experience, even if it was rather scary since I had to do it on my own.

Hopes and Goals for 2024

I'll still keep it light because I don't know how much I can afford to aim for. I only have two resolutions this year, the first of which is finishing and publishing the Runehack RPG, with regular updates on this blog, YouTube, or Twitch (based on whatever I'll go with this year). It will be a mixture of many things I wish to get out of playing TTRPGs, including most of the design from Runehack: Fairy Heist and Runehack: The Asterist. Both of these projects served as testing grounds for the concepts that would go into the Runehack RPG, and I can make it work within the next year. My goal is to cover at least the hacking and freerunning pillars of experience along with the core rules. I already started writing the first blog post regarding the system, though I wonder if I should be more active on YouTube. Not many people read my blog, it might be more interesting as a video. Besides, you can listen to a video while you do other things, such as chores.

My other resolution was actually something I came up with after New Year's Eve. I consume a rather small amount of media. There are recommendations I received for good things, and I was never too concerned with not spoiling myself on them, so I already know a fair bit about them. As some dude once said, the secret to creativity is in well-hidden sources. It needs food for thought, so my idea is to play 12 good games this year. If they are video games, I need to play them until I believe I've finished them to a sufficient degree. If they are tabletop RPGs, I need to play just one session. Those of you who have read my previous New Year resolutions might be wondering why I worded it the way I did - why not make it another "once a month" deal? Why not play one good game every month? Well, to put it bluntly, Witcher 3 is the primary reason. This game supposedly has 100+ hours of playtime. If I were to play it every single day in a month, I'd need to play for over 3 hours daily. There's no way I could afford to do that. But at the same time... I want to finish it finally. I don't know if I'll ever have enough time to finish it otherwise.

I can't guarantee I'll keep making more 200-word games, seeing how each one is more of a proof of concept rather than an actual game, but I can't say I'll completely stop either. The rest of my goals are either too personal to list here, or something I can't 100% guarantee I can do. Game jams, NaNoWriMo, and other kinds of challenges might have to go to the side since I want to focus on Runehack and gaming a lot more.

Thank you for reading my blog. I would like to wish you a Happy New Year 2024. Have a great one, I'll see you soon!