Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Questions to help design of Cobalt RPG System

Joe Hocking

Literate
Joined
Mar 12, 2022
Messages
5
Hi! I am looking for information to help me design my custom RPG system.

This is my rule system for lightweight RPG games (both tabletop games and tabletop-feeling video games). It’s somewhat quixotic that I designed a tabletop game system to use in a video game, but I want to recreate that old school feel of bringing an RPG from pen-and-paper onto the computer. The most interesting part of these rules are the progression mechanics.

https://jhocking.itch.io/cobalt-rpg
or
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FL5QYfIhcufafZUvOBaMOfs97uFzgPXg/view?usp=sharing

Other than just general reactions from rpg experts reading the rules I've devised, I want to make sure there are no glaring holes in this ruleset. For example, in the first iteration I totally forgot initiative in the Combat section. I want to get as much tackled now before wasting playtesters' time.

Incidentally, previous rounds of feedback discussions have focused a lot on my questions about the pros and cons of character classes versus a classless system. I've got a pretty good handle on that issue now, but I'm still curious if there are new insights to be had.
 

ProphetSword

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
1,755
Location
Monkey Island
Let's start with this:

Characters have 4 base attributes, each ranging in value from 1-4 (I suggest letting players
assign each number from 1 to 4 to the attribute of their choice, rather than rolling):

Is there a reason why an attribute can't be 0 or a negative? Wouldn't a better and more balanced range be -1, 0, 1 and 2 vs 1-4?

Example: I decide to play a Barbarian-type tribal warrior. It makes sense thematically that he might not be super smart if he's the kind of typical Barbarian who smashes stuff based on emotions. Scores could look like this:

STR +2
DEX +1
INT -1
WIL 0

Here's why I think this: Giving a player a +4 right off the bat gives them no room to expand later on. This same Barbarian with a +4 in STR would be able to automatically beat any Easy task STR-based skill since his minimum roll would be 6. Even with the lowest skill in the base rules, the lowest score you provide (+1) would mean they would only miss an Easy task on a 2 on 2d6.

I get it's supposed to be an "Easy" task, but you have basically turned it into an "Automatic" task for any score of 2 or higher. So, you might also consider revamping the skill levels like this:

Easy Task: 6
Normal Task: 8
Hard Task: 10
Severe Task: 12

Just some thoughts.
 

Joe Hocking

Literate
Joined
Mar 12, 2022
Messages
5
Is there a reason why an attribute can't be 0 or a negative? Wouldn't a better and more balanced range be -1, 0, 1 and 2 vs 1-4?

Example: I decide to play a Barbarian-type tribal warrior. It makes sense thematically that he might not be super smart if he's the kind of typical Barbarian who smashes stuff based on emotions. Scores could look like this:

STR +2
DEX +1
INT -1
WIL 0

Here's why I think this: Giving a player a +4 right off the bat gives them no room to expand later on. This same Barbarian with a +4 in STR would be able to automatically beat any Easy task STR-based skill since his minimum roll would be 6. Even with the lowest skill in the base rules, the lowest score you provide (+1) would mean they would only miss an Easy task on a 2 on 2d6.

There isn't any particular reasons not to go 0, and I did consider having 5 stats with a 0-4 range. However there's little reason to go negative, and that's because the stats aren't directly used for skill checks. I think you misunderstood that part of the rules (quite understandable mistake, since this ties into the unusual progression mechanics.) Your skill checks are entirely about your level of skill, and your stats are made relevant in how easily you can level up a skill.

So for example, if both a smart character and a stupid character have "Research Lv 2" they have the exact same roll for success (specifically, 2d6 + 2). It's just that it costs the smart character less XP to buy and level up that skill.

I get it's supposed to be an "Easy" task, but you have basically turned it into an "Automatic" task for any score of 2 or higher. So, you might also consider revamping the skill levels like this:

Easy Task: 6
Normal Task: 8
Hard Task: 10
Severe Task: 12

This is a fair point. I don't want to go any higher for the hardest tasks, but maybe I did make the easy tasks TOO easy. I mean, at a certain point if the task is that easy then why even bother rolling? In fact, I may even codify that in my table: Trivial Task - success, don't roll
 

Lord Rocket

Erudite
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
1,089
the main issue here is how vague it all is -- is it a classless system or not? Just pick one, making up my own rules is easy enough. If it's a class system provide some sample classes, and also give an actual list of 'abilities' (just call them skills tbh, that's the standard jargon at this point) that GMs can build on.
XP rewards seem very generous too, 10 XP per adventure is a new skill point even for shitty characters, and two for skilled ones, basically every session -- assuming 'adventures' are supposed to last that long ('per adventure' rewards also make campaigns that have no clear break point per adventure tough to adjudicate btw. Certainly a concern if you want to use this for CRPGs). I would prefer to see more granular rewards, with suggestions for per session rewards based on character actions.
In the absence of a separate stat, 'Charisma' skills would be better off being based on WIL. How many unlikable smart people have you met? (billions if not trillions)

The advancement rules are very sensible btw. I've thought for a while that skill + attribute systems are goofy, in that they either make raw talent more important than anything else or discount talent in the learning process.

ALSO (annoying pedantry follows, reading is non-compulsory)

I designed this system because I'm starting on some turn-based RPG projects and I needed a tabletop rule system for them. I couldn't find anything quite in the sweet spot I wanted: less cumbersome than DnD, but more substantive than something like "Lasers and Feelings".

?????????
there's heaps of games like this. Off the top of my head, Traveller, Advanced Fighting Fantasy and Barbarians of Lemuria all use 2d6 resolution systems. Getting away from the two cubes, Savage Worlds, The Fantasy Trip, Call of Cthulhu (and many other Chaosium-descended RPGs) and Tunnels and Trolls qualify as well. Sheeeeeeit, even D&D can be less cumbersome than D&D sometimes -- see TSR-era Basic D&D and it's many retroclones (google OSR).
 

Joe Hocking

Literate
Joined
Mar 12, 2022
Messages
5
Thanks for the detailed feedback! I think between you and ProphetSword these are enough changes to merit another version, so I will probably do that tomorrow.

the main issue here is how vague it all is -- is it a classless system or not? Just pick one, making up my own rules is easy enough. If it's a class system provide some sample classes, and also give an actual list of 'abilities' (just call them skills tbh, that's the standard jargon at this point) that GMs can build on.

This system definitely depends a lot on the abilities and classes that come with a setting, so I'll probably write up a sample setting soon. I mean, I was already starting down that road with the optional sections at the end. I purposely de-emphasized classes to the point that this system could even work classless, but I do intend for most settings to have classes, and I might write two sample settings: one with classes, and one without. Maybe it'll sound less vague if I point out that classes don't do a ton, so even if you technically have classes, it's basically the same as being classless.

Incidentally, the reason I called them "abilities" and not "skills" was alluded to in the section about abilities: to me the word "skill" implies something you learned (ie. a learned skill) whereas these can also be natural abilities that just kinda manifest over time. That said, maybe I will change to the word "skill". I definitely kept catching myself referring to them as "skills" and (as the final bionics section points out) the word "ability" doesn't really encompass everything either, so sometimes you just need to call it an "enhancement" but use the exact same mechanics as a skill.

XP rewards seem very generous too, 10 XP per adventure is a new skill point even for shitty characters, and two for skilled ones, basically every session -- assuming 'adventures' are supposed to last that long ('per adventure' rewards also make campaigns that have no clear break point per adventure tough to adjudicate btw. Certainly a concern if you want to use this for CRPGs). I would prefer to see more granular rewards, with suggestions for per session rewards based on character actions.

On the one hand, I think you missed where I said "assuming an adventure takes around three sessions". That said, I could reword this to be both clearer and seem more granular: how about "Award XP at logical stopping points, like the end of an adventure or the party rests at an inn, at an average rate of 3 XP per session." The way this would work for CRPGs is you wouldn't get XP from combat, but instead you get XP when you clear a dungeon.

Incidentally, the XP mechanics were one part that got reworked A LOT from previous drafts. Originally I had XP more similar to DnD, with much higher costs and awards depending on how the difficulty of the enemies defeated. But someone pointed out that one of my stated goals was to be simpler than DnD, and they frequently houserule simpler XP mechanics. Originally the XP mechanics involved a lot of math, and they pointed out that while math is fine on a computer, tabletop games should minimize the amount of math.

In the absence of a separate stat, 'Charisma' skills would be better off being based on WIL. How many unlikable smart people have you met? (billions if not trillions)

Good point. WIL doesn't really do a ton right now anyway, so it'll be nice to give it more reason to exist.

The advancement rules are very sensible btw. I've thought for a while that skill + attribute systems are goofy, in that they either make raw talent more important than anything else or discount talent in the learning process.

Thanks! The progression mechanics are the part I'm most proud of and think are most interesting, possibly even unique. This does delve into philosophy of learning beyond games, nature versus nurture and all that. I definitely fall into the camp that I think society overemphasizes natural talent, and that "talent" is often just people practicing so much that they make it look easy.

there's heaps of games like this. Off the top of my head, Traveller, Advanced Fighting Fantasy and Barbarians of Lemuria all use 2d6 resolution systems. Getting away from the two cubes, Savage Worlds, The Fantasy Trip, Call of Cthulhu (and many other Chaosium-descended RPGs) and Tunnels and Trolls qualify as well. Sheeeeeeit, even D&D can be less cumbersome than D&D sometimes -- see TSR-era Basic D&D and it's many retroclones (google OSR).

Yeah the progression mechanics are the ONLY part that's even possibly unique. On the itch.io page I list out a bunch of other games that I got ideas from. In particular, I basically hacked a lightweight system I found called LARA. Also, one of my sample settings is likely to be very similar to Beyond the Supernatural (which is a lot like Call of Cthulhu).
 

Joe Hocking

Literate
Joined
Mar 12, 2022
Messages
5
fyi I just updated to v0.77 (on both itch and the google link)
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom