Professor Rabbit's page

I’m going to apologize up front, because this is going to be a relatively long post. I printed out the entire thread and looked it over and here’s some things I just caught:

I'm a big fan of NOT using classes (also a big fan of NOT using levels and NOT using "hit points").

…
I prefer a hand of cards for each player though - gives players more of a choice in where to use their better cards and when not to (adds more narrative story control). Drawing a random card, especially with a range between 1 and 30 is a fair bit of random.

I was thinking the maybe the hand could be a type of life point/skills control mechanism. Each player get ten cards per “game day” and makes their decisions based on their hand and their skills. Also, their a “penalty” for being too aggressive with their action as it will wear them out sooner.

[Anyhow, I thought it might be worth picking up as a project. Stonehenge generates multiple "killer apps" in multiple genres, then it will take off in a big way. Icehouse, for example, does have Zendo, and some others.

As a “Demo Rabbit,” that’s the hook of this proposed game. The minigame for each type of skill will draw people to play this game.

I think you want the attribute blocks broken up into more general categories, and you can mix two or more colors together to get other attributes.

That’s what I wanted too. For the basic “stats” of the player, I was looking at a holistic view of the human condition based on other RPGs and thought how that might work in this system. You can combine physical and mental to get DEX for example.

In the case of attack and defense, I think black and white should represent more basic attributes, and you combine them with another attribute to get attack and defend. You want the system to be general enough, that you can run a wide enough range of genres, even factoring in there not being any combat.

Yea, sorry about that. Attack and defense was a bad choice of words. I was looking for something more yin/yang. Black is an active color and white, for a lack of a better term, was supposed to be passive. I was looking at those two stats to be the foundation of the rest of the skills set. (I don’t know how yet, I’m still working on it)

There is also day and night to be factored in also.

With regards to the cards, it is a 50/50 shot of getting one or the another. It could be “a hand of fate” or something like that.

What about reworking the published rules for a roleplaying version?

I’m not sure what you mean by “reworking.” We can’t adapt other RPGs (even OGL stuff) to this system because of the “third-party” rule in the game creation license.

Well the board and stuff can be used to represent a control panel for higher power beings to manipulate the affairs of the characters. You could also end up having different mini-games, like Stackhenge, to represent different types of challenge situations for players, with their stats giving them...

I was longing at the inner and outer ring as “power” of the character in a situation based what skills they have and the nature of the situation. For example, if it is a battle, the figure could position themselves on the outer ring based on their strength and the disks could represent different types of enemies. The bars could represent “friendly” npcs.

Wow, that was a long one. Two more points:
1.) We need to start writing some of this stuff in rule form.
2.) At GenCon, there’s a “design a Stonehenge game” (SEM00216) Sunday Aug. 19th Noon to 1 PM at the Embassy Suites (Chancellor 3). I think it would be cool if all of us were there working on this game.

That’s all

How about just giving a nudge in the right direction so it results in people buying supplies from Paizo to keep it going. The community could pretty much run with this. The trick, from the Paizo perspective, is to have the RPG community buy the Stonehenge game to play the RPG.

That's what I thinking to. Stonehenge could be combined with Gamemastery stuff. Just a thought.

I was thinking the orange could be world effects, also I was that players could have the day deck and the gm could have the night deck.

Professor Rabbit wrote:

Stat Blocks:

I've been working on 4+2 system for stats for another game I designed:

The starting player would be given 60 points to be split up between six stats:

Physical (Green), Mental (Blue), Health (Red), Psych (Yellow), Attack (Black) & Defense (White). No one starting player's stat block can be less than five points.

Attacks would resolve based on if it was a physical, mental, health or psych attack. The player's attack plus type stats would be added together and the attacking player/npc would draw a card. The defending player/npc would draw a card and their defense plus type would be added together. The highest score wins the attack. If there's a tie, defender wins.

Would the colour of the card be significant when adding to the same coloured stat? Some kind of additional advantage?

I prefer a hand of cards for each player though - gives players more of a choice in where to use their better cards and when not to (adds more narrative story control). Drawing a random card, especially with a range between 1 and 30 is a fair bit of random.

For example, if they use mental attack and they play a blue or white card, it gives them a bonus. (I'm still working out the system, it's just a start)

DocReason wrote:

So, would Paizo be interesting in getting an RPG based around Stonehenge's components published?

Honestly, I can't image strong sales for such a product, but it might be fun to see.

It could be a free supplement or a two dollar pdf download :)

Stat Blocks:
I've been working on 4+2 system for stats for another game I designed:

The starting player would be given 60 points to be split up between six stats:

Physical (Green), Mental (Blue), Health (Red), Psych (Yellow), Attack (Black) & Defense (White). No one starting player's stat block can be less than five points.

Attacks would resolve based on if it was a physical, mental, health or psych attack. The player's attack plus type stats would be added together and the attacking player/npc would draw a card. The defending player/npc would draw a card and their defense plus type would be added together. The highest score wins the attack. If there's a tie, defender wins.

I think it sounds like a great idea and I would be more than willing to help you design it. Who knows, it could be the next expansion.

I will reply here instead of the Yahoo forum for the second question. What at the LEAST you should do is credit Doomtown in your design. You can contact the designers and ask them.

People borrow elements from all over the place when doing a game.

One of the elements in question was using a poker mechinism to resolve "shootouts" which should be fair game, but I wasn't sure.

Another element was to allow players to cast spells and call spirits, the poker hand was allow the method of resolution. That one was more iffy to me.

Merci!

1. What are the two new colors they're adding for the expansion?

2. Let's say I like Doomtown and want to adapt elements of Doomtown into a game design. From TPTB, are there any legal issues I need or should know about before designing a game for Stonehenge based on another system?

Hey, is the problem now fixed? I happened to see the latest PDF you have for the Final Exam game.

I think so. I just followed the advice I give my students, "Save every five minutes" :)

I've been working on a game a little bit at a time. Sometimes when I hit "save changes", all of my work I've done to between my last save and now disappears. It's happened at least four times. Help!

What about GenCon? Do you need help there?