Hi!
My name is Daron. If you don't know who I am: I'm the guy that writes this stuff.
This thread isn't really about Abandoned Arts, though (but knowing that I represent an RPG publisher might shed some light on the "why" behind this strange little idea; read on).
This thread should serve as an "interest check" with regards to exploring something a little different in terms of play-by-post games. Let's get this out of the way: this idea IS about a Play-by-Post Forum game, but it's NOT about the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game or any other published RPG (or even about tabletop gaming in general... at least not directly).
What I'm proposing is a unique and wholly NEW (and also free) game designed for playability right here on the forums. This would NOT be a "tabletop roleplaying game," but rather a "tactical, play-by-post, dungeon crawl RPG" (with heavy roguelike elements, for those of you familiar with the genre). It would have a strong emphasis on dungeon crawling, exploring, resource management, problem-solving, and - of course - tactical combat and monster-fighting.
The game would be modeled more after a turn-based PC or console RPG, in that the emphasis is on gameplay, resource management, replay value, strategy, and combat... and also in that the GM would behave more like a "computer script" than a "dungeon master." The reason for this is simple: this new (and completely free-for-everyone) Play-by-Post Forum game would not only serve you as a fun game to play (and to spectate on), but it would serve me, as a publisher, as an avenue with which to test some mechanics and ideas that I'm developing for a couple of projects down the road.
The rules would be published right here on the forums (and in PDF form, for anyone who wants to run a game), and I myself would be hosting the games for groups of perhaps 1-3 players (each required to post at least once per day, etc). In terms of complexity, the game would be a fairly simple one by "tabletop RPG" standards - but not without depth... we are talking about a roguelike, after all.
So! Would the forums be interested in a roguelike-inspired play-by-post game actually designed for play-by-post play right here on the Paizo forums? Sound good? Sound crazy?
Looking forward to your thoughts.
Daron Woodson
Abandoned Arts
I'm sure the Amulet of Yendor is not at the bottom of every game. However, I am curious about the depth and breadth that this PbP game has. Count me in.
As a fan and longtime player of Rogue, Hack, Moria and Angband (plus a couple Angband variants) count me in. Can I play a Half Troll? :) PM me for sure!!!
I think this is a fantastic idea and I'm interested in our proposed system... I have often thought that RP-less hack'n'slash on PbP is perfect for playtesting PF stuff.
Seems cool I'd like to see how it pans out, color me interested.
Big dot of interest. Rogues are fun. My favorite char ever was a spell thief from 3.5
I'm sure the Amulet of Yendor is not at the bottom of every game. However, I am curious about the depth and breadth that this PbP game has. Count me in.
I'm sure the Amulet of Yendor is not at the bottom of every game. However, I am curious about the depth and breadth that this PbP game has. Count me in.
Depth without complexity is exactly my aim with this game.
At "release," so to speak, there would be a small handful of races and classes available (4-6 of each), but the core character creation idea is that the game's replay value should come from character-building as much as the roguelike-standard random dungeon elements.
Character builds achieve depth and diversity through four factors: race, class, faith, and skill choices.
Race and class are fairly self-explanatory choices.
Faith is a choice which matters more to divine classes like priests, but may still have considerable impact on your non-religious characters if you want it to.
Skills, however, would be the real bread-and-butter of character-building. Races and classes offer unique skill options (the Sorcery skill for sorcerers, the Thieving skill for thieves, and so on), though a wealth of general skills are available to members of any race or class. Each level in a skill offers a new benefit, ability, or option (think Dungeons of Dredmor, or X-Com: Enemy Unknown).
All this is to say that playing an adventurous hobbit warrior with a balanced skillset should "feel" completely different than playing a grim dwarven warrior with a sturdy combat skillset, or a nimble and arrogant elven warrior with an emphasis on mobility, and so on. Similarly, playing a human priest of the god of fire and forge should "feel" completely different than playing a goblin priest of the godess of chaos, or a gnomish priest of the god of magic and arcane knowledge.
For that matter, even two human warriors could "feel" very different, allowing for different skill selections and deity choices.
The game - as it stands - is still only partially-developed... but close enough that playtesting could begin pretty soon (a month, maybe). I'm holding off on the more... concrete stages of development because I'd like to know that there's interest in a play-by-post game actually designed for play-by-post gameplay before I devote a month to constructing one!
As a fan and longtime player of Rogue, Hack, Moria and Angband (plus a couple Angband variants) count me in. Can I play a Half Troll? :) PM me for sure!!!
I think this is a fantastic idea and I'm interested in our proposed system... I have often thought that RP-less hack'n'slash on PbP is perfect for playtesting PF stuff.
If the project pans out, "development" would continue in the form of amassing a TON of races and classes for character-building, to ensure that the replay value of the game is at an absolute maximum. So your half-troll would be a real possibility, yep. ; )
Big dot of interest. Rogues are fun. My favorite char ever was a spell thief from 3.5
Actually, a roguelike has nothing to do with rogues... but your interest is noted, nonetheless. : )
That all sounds pretty cool Daron. What races are you thinking will be available?
[EDIT - oh, ok! Sounds great!]
That all sounds pretty cool Daron. What races are you thinking will be available?
At release, I'm developing the classics:
the Warrior; a versatile martial character;
the Priest; a divine caster whose playstyle is heavily influenced by the player's choice of deity;
the Thief; a character best suited for avoiding combat or winning the day through cleverness; and
the Sorcerer; a traditionally "squishy" arcane caster
As for races: we'll start with humans, hill dwarves, high elves, and hobbits.
Replay value and versatile roguelike gameplay would be the core design goals, so we'll be delving into some much less traditional classes and races before long, if this project takes off. Races like gnomes, trolls, fairies, gremlins, and different flavors of elf, dwarf, and so forth... plus stranger stuff like troglodytes, yeti, vampires, medusa, and who knows what else.
Even more so than expanded race options, additional classes would be a MAJOR post-release development goal: classes that use engineering, alchemy, necromancy (and stranger magic schools), early firearms, mounts, and so forth.
The game would also be "episodic" in a sense (one game = one dungeon run), so you can retire a character, or play with it again after you've won your first "game" or dungeon playthrough, etc. That is, if you do manage to survive a delve - like any self-respecting roguelike, difficultly should be high, success should be hard-won... and death should be permanent.
He he. Roguelike. So now I understand. Interest grows!
Hmm. Ok! Put me down for a High Elf Priest. ;)
|
Currently I'm enveloped in a few other games going on, Daron, but I do love y'all's works as well as rogues. I'll throw my hat in as interested, but want to make it clear that due to time constraints currently I can't actively participate. If you need help, let me know. Otherwise, I'll be actively lurking this.
Currently I'm enveloped in a few other games going on, Daron, but I do love y'all's works as well as rogues. I'll throw my hat in as interested, but want to make it clear that due to time constraints currently I can't actively participate. If you need help, let me know. Otherwise, I'll be actively lurking this.
Actually, if this project does take off, lurking and spectating will be strongly encouraged, if only to encourage the popularity of the idea of a play-by-post game designed to be a play-by-post game. Popularity would, in turn, allow me to put MORE effort into developing the product by producing a fan base large enough to make it worth my while to devote Abandoned Arts' time toward writing purchasable products for the base game (which will always remain a free "product").
High Elf Warrior for me!
Also thanks for the Roguelike link, I've for some reason never heard that term even though I like Diablo, XCOM and FTL.
Also thanks for the Roguelike link, I've for some reason never heard that term even though I like Diablo, XCOM and FTL.
Prepare for enough Rogue-Likes to choke a Valkyrie. Head to RogueBasin
Sorry, that wasn't a total hyjack. The idea of a system made for PbP excites me. I really look forward to seeing your work.
Count me in.
Note Amulets and Armor and TOME 4.0 are free for download and highly recommended.
Amulets and Armor? Never heard of it - I'll look into it. ToME is excellent, I agree, but my favorite roguelike of all time has to be Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup. Google it - it's free and it's amazing. And HARD... good lord.
Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup looks interesting, and available for OSX! The species list looks fabulous (mummies, octopodes - able to wear eight rings yay!, ghouls, naga) though I'd be unhappy if it was too hard...
I like my vanilla Angband, have tried a few *band variants, always looking for more classes and wilderness exploration that Angband doesn't have... However I always tend to return to Angband.
Funny as it sounds, I usually run a kobold berserker whenever I play Stone Soup. Berserking solves just about any early-game problem (and remains useful forever), and kobolds are one of the only saprovores. After you play a non-saprovore, you'll never go back. : P
Oh, and one of the most interesting and horrible elements in Stone Soup? When you die, your character leaves a "ghost" on the dungeon level you died on... and your next few characters stand a very good chance of encountering it. So when your 44'th-level minotaur priest with a ton of amazing gear dies... you get to face it down with your next character.
ON-TOPIC Poll:
Interested parties... if the basic release were to include 6 classes instead of 4, what sorts of classes would you be most interested in playing (drawing from just about any fantasy storytelling trope or archetype)?
I'm for this!
I'm in(terested). If there are 6 classes to choose from, my preferences for the other two would be Druid and Monk.
other classes, Dark/Hellknight and Warlock/Necromancer
Okay, I'm hearing druids, monks, hybrid classes, and "darker" classes.
Any other thoughts? Would traditional hybrids, druids, monks, and so on be more appealing than stranger stuff like alchemy-, artifice-, or engineering-based classes?
Some of the classics of the roguelikes and the era that spawned them:
Necromancers
Chaos/Death Knights
Paladins
Druids
Monks
Bards
Rangers
Wanderers/Explorers.
P.S. Played DC:SS last night - Ghoul Death Knight. Got to 5th level. Animating corpses and having an undead goon squad is too much fun!!! I hate that you can't SELL to the shops! GRRR!!!
An undead race on your first run? That's rough; I salute you.
Oh lord, I guess I'll have to join.
My biggest accomplishment was lasting WAY longer than I should have in StoneSoup as a Chaos Knight of Xom.
An undead race on your first run? That's rough; I salute you.
I thought it a good choice - at least i'd never go hungry!!! Why do you think undead are hard/difficult? Any DC:SS advice appreciated!
I've never played a roguelike RPG before, but I love me some PBP and I'm always interested in game development.
What do you need from us at this point, just an expression of interest?
I'm sitting at around 11,000 posts right now between all my aliases, 99% of which were on the PBP forums.
Only because, for the undead, healing and resting becomes much more challenging. Some undead can't even drink potions, and I don't think any of them can recover health when they rest/wait.
That said, some of my best runs have been mummy runs... but honestly I can't recommend kobolds highly enough. Saprovores can basically ignore the "food clock," and kobolds make very good assassins and passably good berserkers and fighters. I've never run a kobold magic-user, but their aptitudes aren't so bad.
I've never played a roguelike RPG before, but I love me some PBP and I'm always interested in game development.
What do you need from us at this point, just an expression of interest?
Yep! Interest, thoughts, and maybe some feedback as ideas are posted.
Speaking of which...
Here's a tentative list of basic skills (augmented by any given player's choice of race and class). These would be skills that any character could invest in, though members of certain races and classes will have better aptitudes with some skills.
Sound sufficiently rogue-y? Share your thoughts.
BASIC SKILLS
Strength: Used to determine weapon damage for most kinds of weapons.
Dodging: Used to defend against most kinds of attacks.
Endurance: Used to determine the severity of injuries that you receive.
Mobility: Used to safely move in and out of melee with opponents.
Perception: Used to spot stealthy enemies, traps, and other dangers during the precombat phase.
CRAFT SKILLS
Alchemy: Used to create and identify potions.
Artifice: Used to create, use, repair, and identify scrolls, wands, and various magical devices.
Blacksmithing: Used to create, repair and identify metal armor, weapons, and tools.
Craftsmanship: Used to create, repair and identify non-metal armor, weapons, and tools.
Engineering: Used to create, use, repair and identify mechanical devices.
PHYSICAL SKILLS
Athletics: Used to navigate dungeon obstacles such as gaps, slopes, walls, and so on.
Blocking: Used to block with a shield.
Brawling: Used for brawling attacks, commonly made as a reaction when an opponent fails a mobility check.
Camping: Used to recover more effectively during downtime camping periods.
Dexterity: Used to determine the effectiveness of physical maneuvers and attacks.
Escape: Used to escape from grapples, nets, traps, and other entangling dangers.
Lockpicking: Used to unlock locked chests and doors.
Riding: Used in place of the mobility skill while mounted.
Stealth: Used to move undetected, gaining the stealth advantage during precombat phases.
Swimming: Used in place of the mobility skill while in the water.
INTELLECTUAL SKILLS
Exploration: Used to better navigate a dungeon.
Husbandry: Used to train and control mounts.
Leadership: Used to aid and improve allied morale.
Lore: Used to learn about dungeons. Class and race skills may expand the usefulness of Lore.
Mercantile: Used to turn a better profit from treasures bought and sold.
Outfitting: Used to gain additional encumbrance (equipment capacity).
Piety: Used to determine the effectiveness of divine abilities, worship, and so on.
Speechcraft: Used to determine the effectiveness of social skills during the precombat phase.
Spellcraft: Used to determine the effectiveness of most arcane abilities, and to interact with arcane spells and effects.
Wisdom: Used to determine mental defenses, solve riddles, see through illusions.
WEAPON SKILLS
Archery: Used to determine combat proficiency with bows and crossbows.
Axes: Used to determine combat proficiency with axes.
Blades: Used to determine combat proficiency with swords and similar bladed weapons.
Cudgels: Used to determine combat proficiency with hammers, maces, and similar blunt weapons.
Firearms: Used to determine combat proficiency with firearms.
Knives: Used to determine combat proficiency with daggers, knives, and short blades.
Lashes: Used to determine combat proficiency with chains, flails, and whips.
Polearms: Used to determine combat proficiency with halberds, spears, and similar hafted weapons.
Staves: Used to determine combat proficiency with staves.
Throwing: Used to determine combat proficiency with bolas, nets, throwing knives, throwing stars, tomahawks, and other thrown weapons.
Those seem to cover most of the normal bases.
What's the core mechanic going to be? Still a d20+modifiers? 2d6+mods?
Some things that're essential to a PBP game with tactical combat to flow well is that players and DMs need to be able to fully resolve actions on their own whenever they post. Initiative needs to be run in blocks or go by posting order, as doing so prevents numerous retcons, or reordering of posts, or waiting for other people to post. Finally reactive abilities should be minimal or nonexistant. AOOs can really slow down a PBP combat in Pathfinder, as can abilities that force rerolls or interrupt someone else's action in any other way.
I implement these things in my PF PBPs by allowing the players to see monster stats as out of character knowledge, using AOO macros and modifying the way initiative works.
Is there going to be a core campaign setting?
Comments:
Strength - stands out as more a stat than a skill. Will there be stats like Str/Dex/Con etc?
Perception - I could see this being a stat like some RPGs have it.
Camping - Interesting! I like it. I want to be better at resting!!!
Blocking - seems too specifically shield related. Still if you are a shield user that migh be good. i.e. What abou parrying? How would a shield bash slam/spike interrelate - what weapon skill would that be?
Apart from that it looks pretty good. I do like Piety as a skill. DC:SS has some interesting divine stuff going on.
Question-answering time!
Those seem to cover most of the normal bases.
What's the core mechanic going to be?
The core mechanic would revolve around an Action Point (AP) system, using "hold or spend" resource management. If you spend more AP on your turn, you have less to contribute toward an active defense when it's the enemy's turn. Rolls are resolved by comparing skill checks to target numbers, and those target numbers will often be based on your opponent's skill levels and/or special abilities. I'm still tossing around some ideas as to exactly what the rolls might look like (number of dice, etc).
Some things that're essential to a PBP game with tactical combat to flow well is that players and DMs need to be able to fully resolve actions on their own whenever they post. Initiative needs to be run in blocks or go by posting order...
Turn order would go in phases - good guys, bad guys, good guys, bad guys. That way, you're never waiting on some piddling little kobold - you're either waiting on the GM to take ALL of his or her actions, or you're taking your turn (in any order you like). Also, if there's something you want to wait to do before one of your allies goes, you can always take only part of your turn (e.g. spend only some of your Action Points), and save the rest until after your allies post. In this way, you can actually break up your turn across multiple posts, so that you're less often left with nothing to do if you find yourself waiting for this-or-that character to take this-or-that action.
As with most roguelikes, there's no such thing as readying actions.
However...
Finally reactive abilities should be minimal or nonexistant. AOOs can really slow down a PBP combat in Pathfinder, as can abilities that force rerolls or interrupt someone else's action in any other way.
Okay, so there is a subsystem for handling reactive attacks in development... and it's designed for PbB use. More importantly, though, I'm really into the way it'd look and feel. Check it out.
You ever notice how, in every action movie, any given character ends up tossing around quite a few "unarmed attacks," even if said character wields a signature weapon, or is generally just armed to the teeth? Even in the middle of a sword fight or a shootout, action heroes (and antagonists, and minions...) will throw an elbow into the other guy's face, or kick, trip, shoulder, tackle, headbutt, knee-in-the-groin, and otherwise generally bash-em-up, hand-to-hand. That's because what we think of as an "attack of opportunity" really is a matter of opportunity. If an opponent drops his guard or leaves an opening for just a second (or less), you likely don't have time to bring your broadsword to bear (especially if you're actively using it at that moment) but you very well MIGHT have time to elbow your enemy in the teeth if he leaves his jaw vulnerable for just a split second.
Well, basically, there'd be a skill called Brawling. Now, for classes focused on unarmed combat, Brawling will have special usefulness; but it would NOT simply be "the unarmed weapon skill" that every character will ignore if they're not built for hand-to-hand combat... because it'd also be the "attack of opportunity" skill.
Now, I use that term loosely - there wouldn't really be an "attack of opportunity" system. You wouldn't "provoke" for drinking a potion, opening a door, waving to your mum, gazing at a butterfly, and so on. Basically, there'd be a skill check (Mobility) for attempting to safely withdraw from melee with an enemy. If your check fails... you've allowed that opponent a chance to "brawl" you - you weren't fast enough. Like any other attack, your Dodging check determines whether or not you're hit... and what is the target number for that Dodging check? Why it's based on your opponents Brawling skill.
Your opponent wouldn't need to ROLL anything, you see. You'd roll your Dodging vs. a target number set by his Brawling. If you got hit, you'd roll your Endurance against your opponent's damage value to determine how serious the damage is, etc. All die rolls would happen on the active player's turn - there'd never be any waiting for someone else to roll.
And the end result of this system would be one in which a battle would look like an action sequence, with characters throwing improvised bashing and brawling attacks around in the middle of sword-swinging, spellcasting, and sneak-attacking battles. That's the dream, anyway.
Is there going to be a core campaign setting?
Sort of? Remember, this wouldn't be a tabletop RPG in the vein of D&D or the PFRPG. The focus would be on roguelike dungeon crawling. There absolutely WOULD be a place for characters who like to talk their way out-of-or-into trouble (I have some neat classes planned for exactly that kind of thing), as well as for things like crafting... but ultimately the focus would be on the dungeon and the delve, not the world.
All that said... yes. There would be a distinct world growing out of the settings, gods, and numerous races that are all a part of the game. Remember, one of my long-term design goals for this project is maximum replay value... and that means (among other things) LOTS of races, classes, and deities to belong to (and in lots of combinations). In particular, I want to give the gods a lot of character. I've long felt that "patron deity" would be an awesome mechanic as the third cornerstone of character creation, right alongside "race" and "class."
Comments:
Strength - stands out as more a stat than a skill. Will there be stats like Str/Dex/Con etc?
Nope! Depth without complexity. For our purposes, "skill" would mean "numerically ranked value." Strength is a skill (as are Wisdom, Mobility, and a few others typically though of as "ability scores" or "attributes.")
Camping - Interesting! I like it. I want to be better at resting!!!Glad you mentioned this. So... resting, or camping, is something you want to do as little of as possible during a delve. This skill helps you get more out of it so that you have to do it less often. You see, the more often you rest in the dungeon, the more likely you are to wake up only to find monsters on high-alert, having had time to react to your pre-naptime killing spree. Classes like rangers will be good at this skill, which means that a ranger will help you minimize your downtime and better conduct quick, two-or-three day raids against a dungeon (as opposed to rest-and-fight-and-rest-and-fight-and-rest-and-fight-and-rest-and-fight cycles). If my design aims are met, those "fifteen minute work days" will just get you killed, or make your life harder.
Blocking - seems too specifically shield related. Still if you are a shield user that migh be good. i.e. What abou parrying? How would a shield bash slam/spike interrelate - what weapon skill would that be?
Some classes would gain abilities which allow them to use the Blocking skill to block with a weapon, or even without one... but most characters will use this skill only in conjunction with a shield. As for "shield bash" attacks, I think those might come down to the Brawling skill, but I'm not sure yet. In any case, "shield bashing" would be another class-dependent option. Members of some classes will have the option to learn such abilities, but most characters would simply use shields for defense (if at all).
Speaking of shields, I have some neat mechanics penned in for them. I'm actually happier with my "shield system" than I am with that of any PnP game that I know of.
Apart from that it looks pretty good. I do like Piety as a skill. DC:SS has some interesting divine stuff going on.
I hope to take a lot of cues from DC:SS as far as divine patrons go. A devout follower of one god or another would have solid, mechanical reasons to behave in accordance with the dogma of his religion.
Question-answering time!
Those seem to cover most of the normal bases.
What's the core mechanic going to be?
The core mechanic would revolve around an Action Point (AP) system, using "hold or spend" resource management. If you spend more AP on your turn, you have less to contribute toward an active defense when it's the enemy's turn. Rolls are resolved by comparing skill checks to target numbers, and those target numbers will often be based on your opponent's skill levels and/or special abilities. I'm still tossing around some ideas as to exactly what the rolls might look like (number of dice, etc).
Some things that're essential to a PBP game with tactical combat to flow well is that players and DMs need to be able to fully resolve actions on their own whenever they post. Initiative needs to be run in blocks or go by posting order...Turn order would go in phases - good guys, bad guys, good guys, bad guys. That way, you're never waiting on some piddling little kobold - you're either waiting on the GM to take ALL of his or her actions, or you're taking your turn (in any order you like). Also, if there's something you want to wait to do before one of your allies goes, you can always take only part of your turn (e.g. spend only some of your Action Points), and save the rest until after your allies post. In this way, you can actually break up your turn across multiple posts, so that you're less often left with nothing to do if you find yourself waiting for this-or-that character to take this-or-that action.
As with most roguelikes, there's no such thing as readying actions.
However...
Finally reactive abilities should be minimal or nonexistant. AOOs can really slow down a PBP combat in Pathfinder, as can abilities that force rerolls or interrupt someone else's action in any other way.Okay, so there is a subsystem for handling reactive attacks in development... and it's...
Sounds good for PBP. Sounds kinda like this game Dungeon World that I tried one time, except made for PBP efficiency. I'd love to design some races/classes/gods or help to playtest once you're ready to share your rules.
Another thing I've found with PBP dungeon crawls is that they tend to slow up massively if the search for traps/search doors/decide which way to go guy doesn't post regularly to drive things forward. Have you thought about that problem and any kind of rules based solution?
@Daron - understood. I've devoured the DC:SS wiki except for the Deck stuff and the god related to Decks. Currently have a Demonspawn Death knight at 3rd level. Chaos knight of Xom sounds like a lot of fun!
Gotcha on the skills as attributes/depth without complexity. Species and class affinities help with different skillsets. I await your rules.
Another thing I've found with PBP dungeon crawls is that they tend to slow up massively if the search for traps/search doors/decide which way to go guy doesn't post regularly to drive things forward. Have you thought about that problem and any kind of rules based solution?
The Exploration and Perception skills are meant to handle that. I haven't got the finer details worked out yet, but it'd go something like this:
Between encounters (which have clear beginnings and endings), the party will determine what doors, halls, rooms, or areas (out of all the ones they know about) to check out next. A majority party decision could determine this, so it is likely that a group would be able to reach a decision even if one or two players is being slow or unable to post on any given day.
Once the party selects the next area (by consensus or majority decision), the GM will announce what the characters find and/or are aware of. Nobody needs to say "I check for traps" or "I check for secret doors," because its assumed that you're looking for that sort of thing when you make your Exploration and Perception checks between areas and/or encounters.
Gotcha on the skills as attributes/depth without complexity. Species and class affinities help with different skillsets. I await your rules.
Heh. I do, too.
I'm getting there, though. Currently working on fleshing out an entire class so that a little actual playtesting can happen. In the meantime, let's keep the discussion going in the interest of generating, uh, interest.
Any more thoughts, questions, ideas?
If it's just endless randomly generated dungeon won't it get boring really fast? How are you going to prevent the same enemies from appearing over and over, the same rooms, etc?
It wouldn't be endless at all; the idea is to create almost episodic, "delve-by-delve" gameplay. It takes years to bring a Pathfinder campaign to a full 1-to-20 playthrough - it's no wonder that Play-by-Post games so very rarely finish. That's one of the main "PbP-friendly" elements of this idea... each game is finite in length, and doesn't require a lifetime of commitment from each player. Players who ARE committed, though, have the option of carrying their character(s) over from game to game - so everybody wins. : )
Each dungeon crawl would start in a tavern (where players can say hello, and make Lore-type skill checks to choose a quest), then proceed to the dungeon. If they do well on the Lore-type check, they might have a handful of quests (dungeons) to choose from, and a minimum of information on each. If they don't, they might be stuck with just one or two quests to choose from.
The delve represents one quest, or "adventure," and - if you survive - you head back to the tavern after you're finished. "Tavern-time" or downtime could be used to craft items, etc. You can even retire your character after a game or save it for the next game you play.
Each dungeon will have a suite of monsters and dungeon elements (types of traps, structures, interactivity) associated with it - so you won't see swamp trolls in a mountain crypt, etc. This would mean creating unique dungeon suites over time in addition to new classes, races, deific patrons, and so on. Lots of work, and part of the reason I'm eager to see this idea gain popularity. The base product would be free (forever), but that's not to say that extra content will always be.
And thus more interest justifies more effort toward this project. : )
Working diligently on the ruleset. Anything you folks can do (or feel like doing) to further interest and/or propose ideas can only help the project.
As the development gets closer and closer to something resembling a solid ruleset, so grows a sort of "FAQ" I'm writing alongside it - I'm thinking of polishing it up and posting it soon. Sort of a breakdown of the game mechanics - how it's played and such.
Questions for you guys: What elements absolutely define a roguelike for you? In other words... what tells you that you're playing a roguelike?
Random treasure lying around without rhyme or reason including food, rings, amulets and spellbooks.
Cursed items.
Variant monsters for every type.
Mana points for spellcasting.
Mining for gold/jewels and to carve out new areas.
Cool spells like Magic Mapping and Balls'n'Bolts of Fire/Frost/Lightning.
Crazy races like Half-Trolls, Demonspawn and Octopodes.
Shops in dungeons and shops in town with crazy proprietors and dealing with haggling.
Word of Recall. Identify. 'Nuff said.
Colored potions. Scrolls with unpronounceable names.
Mobs of creatures.
Strange structures/rooms/geometric patterns.
Named/unique foes.
Dragon treasure-burst dumps.
You know what would be really awesome for a PBP RPG? No randomness, except when you spend an action point/hero point or whatever. Since I haven't seen your rules I'll use Pathfinder as an example.
It would be the equivalent of everyone always taking 10 on everything, but also everyone (including monsters) having a pool of hero/action points they could use to add a +1d6 or whatever dice to their taking 10.
So your level 1 fighter has a +5 to hit? He'll always hit a creature with an AC of 15 or less until that creature spends an action point to make him miss by subtracting 1dX from his roll. He can never hit a monster with an AC 20 without spending some of his resource pool.
This avoids the situation I'm in right now in one PBP game where I've spent the last week or so of real time (the last two rounds of combat) rolling two 4s in a row and missing a damned *goblin*. It's no fun for me, makes no sense that my dwarf can chop down fifty goblins and then get to this one and roll badly twice and suddenly he has no skill. This goblin is no different than any of the others, why is it so much harder to kill?
Edit:The problem with that is, it would reintroduce waiting for someone else to roll/decide something. Hmmmm....
I am also a fan of more "predictable" results. There ARE such things as luck and circumstance, however, and randomness allows for players to be surprised and challenged. Also, randomness is a MAJOR part of the roguelike experience.
That said, the formula I'm working with strikes what I hope is "happy medium" between the wild randomness of the d20 and the rigid predictability of a "take 10" system. Skill checks (which include everything from attack rolls to "saving throw" type rolls) and die modifiers in general will range from +1 to +10, and will usually fall within a +2 to +8 range for PCs and for more NPCs than not. Extraordinary circumstances and high-level magic items may skew these values northward, but this smaller range of modifiers generally means a smaller, more predictable range of die roll results. It would be very, very hard to get modifiers high enough that the die roll ceases to matter (as is sometimes the case in games like Pathfinder or - god save us - D&D 3.5).
More importantly, however, this system will not use the ubiquitous d20 at all. Skill checks (as I'm working with them at the moment) would use a 3d6 system, which would produce an average result of 10 or 11 (just like a d20) but would also produce a minimum result of 3 (instead of 1) and a maximum result of 18 (instead of 20). Furthermore, very high and low values would be extremely rare. Only one combination of numbers produces a roll of 3 (1, 1, and 1), but there are several combinations that produce "middle" numbers like 10 and 11 (6, 3, and 1; or 5, 3, and 2; or 4, 4, and 2; or 5, 4, and 1, and so on).
The end result of the proposed system would be one in which only very rarely would a lowly goblin grunt "get lucky" going up against an experienced dwarven goblinslayer.
Thoughts?
Sounds good, I'll have to play it to comment more.
So we've established that one of the design goals for this game would definitely be to minimize the amount of time any player spends waiting on another poster to determine what he or she can or can't do, or what the results of his or her actions are.
In that vein, what do you guys think would be an elegant system for the distribution of loot? Finding (and identifying) all sorts of items is a HUGE roguelike staple, but waiting for other players when it comes time to distribute loot (which should happen very regularly) in order to determine who gets what, and when, seems clunky by comparison to the otherwise-streamlined, play-by-post friendly game flow I'm trying to cement.
My first thought was to regulate distribution to the GM, who could randomize it (e.g. Hector the Warrior finds a unidentified potion and 24 gold, and Sarellis the Sorceress finds an unidentified trident). Once treasure is distributed, the players could trade it freely. This would ensure that treasure gets doled out fairly evenly, and most treasures are just as good for player X as they are for player Y, so it doesn't much matter if Hector gets more gold and Sarellis gets more scrolls (which she can just sell for gold later, if she doesn't want them). On those occasions where players end up with a piece of treasure that is useless for him or her but potentially good for another player (like that trident), he or she can just offer it or offer to trade it.
Unfortunately, this would mean that treasure gets distributed during some sort of "treasure distribution phase," which would prevent characters from being able to pick up and use treasure in combat.
Desperate situations (like grabbing a scroll off of the floor in the middle of a terrible situation in the desperate hope that it's a scroll of teleportation that'll allow you to escape the mess you're in) are a staple of the roguelike genre, so I'm not 100% happy with this idea.
For example, let's say the players enter a room with a desk, some shelves, and - I dunno - a werewolf. On the shelves are: two unidentified scrolls, an unidentified potion, and a potion of poison. Givil the Thief might want to go for the poison, because he has abilities that allow him to use poisons against enemies... and he wants to use it on the werewolf (because being bitten by the werewolf is BAD). If he has to wait until the "treasure distribution phase" at the end of combat, then that player has missed an opportunity to do something dynamic and interesting (and very roguelike-ish).
On the other hand, if any player can grab all the treasure he or she wants, arguments over treasure distribution (or instances of players spending actions in combat doing things like picking up gold) could arise. Remember, the game would be designed to be both difficult and episodic. When you know you'll be able to use your character in another game later (if it survives)... and when death is permanent... you're going to want your character to survive.
What do you think? Am I overthinking this? Will players naturally gravitate to an even, or "need-before-greed" distribution of treasure? Even if that's the case, will (frequent and regular) treasure distribution discussions slow down gameplay a lot?
Another thought: limited inventory space. If you can only carry a set amount of treasure out of the dungeon, players might not be so quick to grab things they don't need (or don't need right now).
Thoughts?