Evolving Game

Game Master Ancient Dragon Master

Starting Meta Rules

Right, how do we start this thing up? And what are our base gamerules?

Also...I will run the game as in statblocking monsters, creating NPCs, rolling saving throws and perception/ sense motive
If this is OK I would also like you to help me create plot hooks.
I will try and recruit new players after we get some rules ironed out.
EDIT: Fixed it

I think we start with no gamerules. Meaning once we feel good about our player count, we can just start by creating gamerules in the listed fashion. Heck, we could just start with the 3 of us and watch it grow. Kind of like a fancy forum game.

EDIT - Ninja'd! I like those base rules. Add a metarule stating what a GM can do, and yourself as the current GM. Also, a metarule about character creation. Perhaps something like once you have permission to join the game from the current GM, you may make one character through an alias. Also specify starting conditions for characters please.

Are we sure pathfinder is the way to go? I imagined starting off with more of a blank slate and building the game from there? With this approach, won't we just be playing a heavily houseruled version of pathfinder?

Are we sure pathfinder is the way to go? I imagined starting off with more of a blank slate and building the game from there? With this approach, won't we just be playing a heavily houseruled version of pathfinder?

Probably and yeah blank slate is Probably better

#1) Main die system E.x. 1d20, 2d10, 2d6 e.t.c
#2) Number of stats & their names
#3) How 'Leveling up' Works
#4) How 'spellcasting' Works, if it exists at all
---------------------------
I'll start here are my proposals \/
#1) 2d10
#2) 3 (Body, Mind, Spirit)
#3) you will gain experience from completing challenges determined by the setting
#4) Spellcasters draw off their spirit to create incredible but taxing effects, however Everybody can cast spells, just Spellcasters are trained to be able to use it more with less consequences

aye

aye

To which?

You ninja'd in more proposals in front of my aye xD

I agree with all proposals, here are my proposals.

#1 Spirit should be (renamed and be) a general measure of a characters stamina, allowing fighters to draw from the same pool to perform feats of great strength.
#2 There should be a stat for a characters social capabilities (Lets call it charm for now)
#3 New players are accepted by the active gm

Issues I feel need solving:
- What does it mean to level up?
- How is a characters training and "class" determined?

You ninja'd in more proposals in front of my aye xD

I agree with all proposals, here are my proposals.

#1 Spirit should be (renamed and be) a general measure of a characters stamina, allowing fighters to draw from the same pool to perform feats of great strength.
#2 There should be a stat for a characters social capabilities (Lets call it charm for now)
#3 New players are accepted by the active gm

Issues I feel need solving:
- What does it mean to level up?
- How is a characters training and "class" determined?

#1 is reasonable, that was kind of my idea in the first place, glad you could make it more coherent. AYE

#1 to 'level up' means to gain skill sets from training. Character sheets are a document of this training.

#2 a characters starting training is mostly determined by where they grew up, what school they went to, what their parents taught them, etc, etc.

(#1 and #2 are proposals response to your questions, You can reject them)

I agree to your revision of #3.

So what you're saying is that you start with X skillpoints that you distribute into Y different skills, and that is your character? So we're running a classless system?

in that case;
#1 aye

#2 aye

I agree to your revision of #3.

So what you're saying is that you start with X skillpoints that you distribute into Y different skills, and that is your character? So we're running a classless system?

in that case;
#1 aye

#2 aye

Yes. Mostly to remove the commonly cropped up problem of 'I killed goblins so I learned Celestial' and crap like that

Aye to everything thus far. Once we get going properly, would it be possible to post the current rules to the campaign info and update frequently (I don't know how GMing works on here)?

Collected rules that I think are unanimous, edited slightly for clarity:

Did I miss anything?

Aside from #2 in gameplay being replaced by 'equal to or higher than' for clarity
That is everything thus far
It will be included in the Campaign info tab
-------------------------------
How will the GM's character work? Does anyone have a proposal?
(I want to play too you know)
-------------------------------
Once we get the main rules ironed out I wouldn't mind trying to recruit more people if nobody else has a objection to it

That was weird. I accidentally removed this thread for a few seconds

(I don't know how GMing works on here)?

I think you may wrongfully be under the impression that either of us know what the hell we're doing here :p

Goddity wrote:

(I don't know how GMing works on here)?

I think you may wrongfully be under the impression that either of us know what the hell we're doing here :p

+1

Goddity, you should know best.

What we need to work on in order
1.Setting
2.Base Mechanics
3.Advanced mechanics
------------
I think I will probably design the world by the book (Gamemastery guide) which is probably better discussed in detail. But the first question is what do we want to do with this world?

Proposal:
#1 we do a Survivor type game with vast unexplored areas that the PC's are searching.

Of course, you assume that I've investigated PbP before. The GM should just have a character? We could rotate GMing if we have a standard world set up. Kind of like a monster of the week sort of thing. Actually...

New proposals:
#2 (meta): The current GM designs a short adventure covering a little ground. The GM's character may participate in this adventure or not as the GM wishes. After the conclusion of this 'adventure', which ends at the event of a satisfying goal, a new GM is elected.
#4 (meta): A third category of rules shall be created, containing 'Setting rules'. Setting rules describe the laws of physics of the 'setting', which is the worldspace the character occupy. Setting rules may be changed with the same method as other rules.
#3 (setting): The setting shall start as a stereotypical fantasy game.

Current proposals:
#1 Aye.

I keep having to stop myself from adding 'until this rule is revoked' to the end of everything, because that goes for all rules.

#2 Aye
#4 Aye
#3 could you define 'stereotypical fantasy' please?

Aye to all.

So the Gm is free to design an adventure within the limits of the setting rules?

I may be away for the next week depending on how things turnout
Is 'The Sesquipedalian Thaumaturge' okay to join?

Go for it, hopefully we won't break the game while you're away.

As for the new person, sure, Let's see what they bring to the table. ¨

Speaking of, do we have any thoughts on how many players there should be? And if there is a limit to characters, should people who have no character be able to take part in the metagame?

Okay. Yeah, the more the merrier! I dunno what I meant by fantasy, I was trying to avoid having to make a decision. Maybe in honour of Starfinder, we should do something sci fi...

Hm.

New proposals:
#1 (meta): The game shall contain at most 4 players + a GM.
#2 (meta): The GM is free to introduce whatever setting they like within the boundary of the setting rules.
#3 (meta): The GM can introduce setting rules during play by simply stating them. If the players later vote down one of these rules, it is on the GM to come up with an explanation for any events that occurred under the previous setting rules.

If you're going away, do you think we can play an adventure in a week and instate a new GM or should someone else start? I was also wondering if it would be possible to try a GMless game, where every player can show the reactions of the world, within the setting and game rule limits.

Hmm.. if we go for a gm-less game I think there needs to be some sort of order to things. I can easily imagine someone spending time writing a good response only to be sniped by someone else. Do we use some sort of initiative tracker for who replies? And how do we keep the game sufficiently challenging when playing against ourselves?

As for the rules:
Aye to all (until the inevitable hand of change comes around)

*Edit*
I guess I should probably add some rule suggestions.

First off, I think we need to officially rework the suggestion rules:

I suggest the following amendments to keep the written rules in line with how we're operating at the moment.
5) Each Player can make a Proposal, each player may only have one active Proposal post at a time.
7) Each player may vote Yea or Nay to each submitted Proposal.
9) Proposals to which the players have reached a majority are enacted or rejected immediately.

Initiative tracker is a good idea

New proposals:
#4 (meta): There is not a GM and all rules containing a GM shall be scrapped. When a player posts, someone may reply with a post containing any message. They then have one hour to edit their post in the usual fashion to contain a 'GM response' which describes how the world reacts. First response gets the job.
#5 (game): A player may never craft a GM response to their own post.
#6 (meta): Each player should have a GM alias to use for GM responses.

Perhaps we could create a points system, to be rewarded for good playing and GMing? Maybe using the favourite system somehow? Create a win condition and start a new game when it ends? The honour system is needed for challenge, I guess. Strict use of the meta rules could help? I dunno! That's why it's an evolving game! We try things and then change them! (These aren't proposals because they're still vague ideas).

Ops, I seem to have ninjaedited myself in before you.

I agree to #5, I believe the other two may be solver more elegantly.

What if a player just flags a post with a "Responding" post, then edits the post and writes how the world reacts and what the responding player does? It would make the gamethread much cleaner.

Hello all, The Sesquipedalian Thaumaturge here. It looks like everyone has voted in favor of my joining, so I figured I'd jump right in.

First, I vote Aye on all proposals currently being voted upon, except for Goddity's "stereotypical fantasy setting" proposal, as I would prefer creating a setting democratically. Note that once we have established a setting and characters I will probably be in favor of moving to a more traditional "GM responds to character posts" type gameplay thread.

Next, I don't entirely understand Greeeit's last suggestion regarding responses to character posts. Do you mean that whoever responds with the world's reaction to the last character's action includes their own character's action as well?

Finally, I have only a single proposal for the moment, which I hope will make this whole process drastically more organized.
1) All proposals and votes should be recorded on this spreadsheet in addition to being posted to the discussion thread (please correct me if anything on the spreadsheet is wrong). If this proposal passes, would Ancient Dragon Master please add the spreadsheet under the current rules list at the top of the page? (which should also be updated soon, as we are proceeding at a fairly breakneck pace).

Aye to the spreadsheet! Why didn't I think of that myself?

Yeah, I'm retracting stereotypes. I just wanted to get started fast, and said the first thing that came to mind. New proposal (that isn't an actual proposal in the traditional method):

#0 We start right now, and let it develop as it goes.

Ayes to the spreadsheets, ayes to startin!! Ayes everywhere! Viva la ...something.

What I meant was that if we're going with a gm-less gameform, the player responding should probably have to put up a "I am writing a reply here" flag, to avoid duplicates.

As for the character actions, I was thinking it would be a good way to force distribution of GM duties. So if you want to take an action, you have to do some GMing for the previous poster.

*EDIT*
I feel that the spreadsheet probably should give some notion of what the proposal text for each proposal is.

Yeah, I like that. Character action, GM previous poster. Place flag to say you're editing it and then spend one hour editing the response. Perfect. Proposal descriptions would be helpful.

Characters start with skills totalling 6 and skills can be negative? We can rapidly level them if required.

We could use the mythic rules for GM Emulation? An example is Here
I can't follow how the suggested system works. Does the 'previous poster' mean that they respond to there own post?
Aye to spreadsheet
Aye to Greeeit's suggestion

I agree with Goddity that some small description of each proposal should be put in the spreadsheet.
I think I will ponder the others.
I will edit the 'current rules' tab later
As for Skills
#2 5 Skills anywhere to represent natural intuition, + bonus skills to represent upbringing these bonus skills are set-they can not be moved around

Someone posts their character actions. The next poster posts a dot or something, and then spends one hour working the edit function to add the GM response and their own characters actions. Rinse, repeat.

ADM #2 - I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you saying we can pick 5, and then add more based on our backgrounds?

I'm with Goddity, not really sure what you mean with #2

I'd like to suggest a setting rule:
- The main religion in the world is the church of the metites, they worship the hand of perpetual change.

On another note, how will we drive plotlines along without single gm to come up with a plan? Or will we go for a more evolutional approach where we just throw some rules into the bucket and see what stories pop out?

If you don't mind, I'm following you, I like to see where my weird idea is going :)
Have fun!

I'm not sure how to add proposal descriptions to the spreadsheet in an elegant and useful manner (though it's publicly editable so if someone else wants to try go ahead), so for the moment I've created this google doc, which has an updated and consolidated copy of the rules and a list of current proposals. Also, we don't need to list numbers on the spreadsheet anymore as each player can only have one proposal at a time.

I also would like clarification on ADM's proposal and would prefer to have more information about "the metites" before voting on Greeeit's proposal.

TST Proposal (setting): The PCs begin in a land with technology and social structure roughly analogous to medieval Western Europe (Like Pathfinder, but without the guns and printing press).

I meant that you would start with 5 Skills anywhere, and then 2-3 bonus Skills depending on you schooling.

Ah I see. 5 skills anywhere sounds good, I dunno about bonus skills. How about we leave those out for now?

TST proposal: Aye!
Greeeit proposal: Aye! (Because I think the trick to this is to not overthink the new rules.)

If no one objects, I'm going to create a character, allocate my 5 stats, and start posting in gameplay.

If no one objects, I'm going to create a character, allocate my 5 stats, and start posting in gameplay.

Way ahead of you ;)

TST proposal: Aye

I suppose we should create a rule about stats, shouldn't we?

New proposal:
G1 (gameplay): Each character shall have a 'level' which determines the upper limit of their power. They may have skills that sum up to their level + 5. New characters start at level 1. Existing characters without levels shall become level one and reduce their stats accordingly. When stats are gained, level increases to match.

Also, I think that means TST passes.

Greeit + Goddity: what's with the Stats?
Aye to Goddity's just posted suggestion

Well, seeing as there are no rules for character creation, and no indication of what a point in a certain stat is worth. Until those are in place, I'm keeping my slightly above average charm.

There weren't any actual rules about stats. A clever move on Greeit's part. Unless TST joins us in voting for G1, we can't actually force Greeit to reduce in power. Very sneaky. I'm sore I didn't think of that myself.

Just to be clear, are the words stats and skills being used interchangeably?

At the moment. I imagine someone will make a rule regarding that eventually.

and would prefer to have more information about "the metites" before voting on Greeeit's proposal.

I was thinking about naming them "metaens", "metaites" or something along those lines, but felt it would make the joke too obvious. They're just a nod to the fact that their world, and how it works is subject to perpetual change :p

At the moment. I imagine someone will make a rule regarding that eventually.

In that case I guess I'll have to bow to common sense and vote for G1 =/

I see what you're up to. G1 passes. Assign level 1 to all characters. Also new proposal:

Goddity 2 (gameplay): 'Skills', which are separate from 'stats', govern the training of a character. Skills may be put into anything the character has been trained in. When rolling the dice to complete an action, you may add a relevant skill. If there is any doubt as to whether or not a skill is relevant, the first third party to comment breaks the tie.

If you don't mind, I'm following you, I like to see where my weird idea is going :)

Have fun!

You're not playing, so you don't count for voting majority right?

You're not playing, so you don't count for voting majority right?

No, no, I'm just an observer :)