I don't want to make FATAL 2nd Edition

[Jim de Mighty]

Hey guys, I've lurked here a lot, now I've finally seen a golden opportunity to join you on this forum (much better than /tg/).

I have a sort-of problem. I'm making my own RPG system with a friend, I'm sure everyone here has. It uses percentile dice for task resolution vs a target number. In order to speed up play, there will be no negative modifiers, instead the TN is adjusted for difficulty.

So far, it seems simple enough, and I'm really tired, so it must be REALLY simple.

But for some reason, I'm worried. I don't want to make another FATAL. The very mention of it, the thought of it sends shivers down my spine. Can you help me? I don't want to make... it.

[The Colonel]

Yeah, I think the main sins of that system revolved around casual obscenity, misogyny, actual genuine racism and an evil child's delight in gratuious cruelty.
Having an overcomplicated dice based system would be more like cloning Rollmaster ... and on the face of it your system doesn't sound too complicated...

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by The Colonel

Yeah, I think the main sins of that system revolved around casual obscenity, misogyny, actual genuine racism and an evil child's delight in gratuious cruelty.

That's a minor sin. The real sin was to have all sorts of stats that are severely peripheral to the subject matter of the game which is sex and violence (preferably combined, or so I gather). All those unimportant stats amount to a kind of attempt at deception, trying to make the game seem nobler and more intellectual than it really is.

If FATAL had been honest about what it was and what it was about, I'd find it much less objectionable (although I stil wouldn't want to GM or play it).

[Jim de Mighty]

Cheers for all the replies guys. I will take everything that you say into consideration, it is all incredibly useful and your advice is amazing.

My major influences for this system are GURPS, from which I will attempt to capture the modularity and at least some of the universality.

AD&D 2nd Edition, which provides some stylistic influences and the idea of the d100 (although it is roll-over and not roll-under in this system).

Ars Magica, which uses the dice+attribute relevant to skill test+skill mechanic, and finally,

Mount&Blade, which isn't a P&P game, but has a sort of percentile system going, with increasing skills and attributes which I seek to encapsulate.

I like the idea of unpredictable results where rookies can sometimes kick the ass of pros, which will definitely create some interesting situations...

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Jim de Mighty

I like the idea of unpredictable results where rookies can sometimes kick the ass of pros, which will definitely create some interesting situations...

This brings up a good point - some players like their RPGs to have that wild element, and consider it a sales feature. Other players like their RPGs to minimize that wild element as much as possible, or even eliminate it entirely.

Both approaches are appropriate, IMO - but it's good to make it clear to the GM and the Player which one you're taking, and to be consistent about it across the whole system.

[Anaraxes]

Welcome. I'm sure you'll get lots of comments -- once the thread gets to the point that there's something to discuss. You ask for help, but what problems in particular are you struggling with?

Personally, I see no difference between addition and subtraction in terms of speed of play.

Play gets slowed down by the very existence of modifiers, especially when there's lots of them scattered through books that people have to look up. The common answers seem to be (a) learn the system so you don't waste time looking things up; (b) estimate modifiers freely on the spot, which might result in inconsistency from fight to fight, but keeps things moving; (c) have a simple, rules-light system that doesn't have many (or any) modifiers in the first place, which won't model detailed reality particularly well.

(a) as well as (b) are helped by good organization of the rules -- put modifiers for similar situations all together in tables where you can find them easily, and have a good index.

FATAL is infamous as much for its subject matter and writing as the rules themselves.

[ed_209a]

As long as you don't plan on putting in mechanisms like what happens when the circumference of "Tab A" is greater than the elastic limit of "Slot B", you will be safely out of FATAL territory.

Other than that, I'd say don't try to to design your system in a vacuum. Stand on the shoulders of giants. Look at earlier systems similar to yours. It doesn't matter if it was successful or not, they will tell you things you want and don't want in your system.

Bravo on choosing a nice, solid, simple basic mechanic like D100 vs TN. Let the innovation be in your content, not your randomizing tool

Other than that, playtest, playtest, playtest the stuffing out of that system.

(And if your system does make it big, I'd love a mention on your 25th anniversary deluxe edition :) )

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by ed_209a

Bravo on choosing a nice, solid, simple basic mechanic like D100 vs TN. Let the innovation be in your content, not your randomizing tool.

Though as to any randomizing tool, make sure it's doing what you think it's doing.

The problem that people often have when using dice and target numbers is a lack of understanding of what the odds actually are.

I used to know an actuary who enjoyed taking any game's mechanics through a statistical analysis to see what the odds really were, the statistical reality was often miles away from the perception the game writers had while writing the rules.

[combatmedic]

That thread title sounds like a serious threat!


''Give me that sweet, sweet can o' Coke Classic or I'll unleash a Second Edition of F.A.T.A.L. on an unsuspecting world!'

[PK]

F.A.T.A.L. is only as infamous as it is because of its pro-rape attitude, incredibly poor writing, and fascination with various body parts. The fact that it's 900 pages long doesn't help, either.

However, as a game system alone, it still fails, but "uses percentile dice" is certainly not one of the reasons. In fact, although it's regularly mocked, using (4d100-2)/2 to produce an "IQ-like range" of attributes is actually an interesting (if flawed) idea. (For example, (6d100-3)/3 would've been more realistic, and (3d100+49)/2 gives more playable results.)

The biggest problem with F.A.T.A.L.'s system is that nothing is connected. Attributes and subattributes are all random and unrelated. You can be a vocally talented speaker yet too dumb to know any languages. It's a hodge podge of descriptors that only occasionally make sense together.

The task resolution system is okay. Nothing spectacular, but nothing broken. It just gets ridiculous when the rules direct you to one of the thousands of critical success or failure results.

So, keep your system simple, clear, and sane -- and by the latter, I mean it should be hard to build a character that doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and actions should have results that one might expect.