The Gaming Den

In your opinion what is the best game engine to hack? I have a functional knowledge of most systems out there but you need to spend a lot of time and practice to learn a systems language well enough to rewrite it's material around just the base engine and still get something good. If you were going to recommend a base system to someone to start hacking into one more fantasy heartbreaker what would it be? Discarding the obvious answer of "Whatever you already know".

A few options I've been floating around my brain to dive into and see what I could make them do are Fate, Feng Shui, and Kaelik's Fortresses and Fiends. But I'm open to anything and I probably know enough about any system you could name to at least get myself started relatively quickly.

Depends on what you're trying to make? Not just in terms of what will gel with what you want to do, but also in that if there's something you feel strongly about or enjoy writing, you don't need a system that's good at that, because you're going to replace that system entirely. For example I think progression systems are fun and easy to write, and CR systems are never as good as I want, so I'm not going to steal either of those from anything.

Here's things I'm likely to crib from:

Risus - maybe you just bolt some stuff onto it, maybe you use it as a skill system, maybe you keep hacking on it until it's unrecognizeable. But it's a good flexible starting summary of "roll vs number GM pulled out of their butt," the core of many an RPG

D&D 3E's skill section - a good source of reasonable DCs for physical challenges

D&D 4E's combat chapter - actual game is bad for other reasons, but it's a nice set of definitions you might want for a grid-based tactical game

Lasers & Feelings - if you're in a hurry

(Notably absent is Fate - It's very good, but I almost always end up reaching for Risus to do what it does.)

You could in fact start with a real tactical board game as your starting point for your combat system. Like Warhammer, XCOM, or Final Fantasy Tactics or something, whatever, I dunno. Gempunks started as sort of a cross between D&D 3 and Warhammer 40k 3, but rewritten from memory because it's more creative to not look things up.

5e seems like a candidate, just because so little is there already that you can build on top of it.

The basics of the d20 system are also something you can build on top of without too much trouble.

I don't enjoy the SAME system, but that's very small and you could start hacking on top of it if you are okay with writing everything except the most basic numbers.

I know that SRS has been used a fair bit. It follows the usual process of 2d6 + stat v. TN and is supposed to split characters into the usual fighter / rogue / mage triad. Its game engine has been used 10 or so RPGs, but I haven't played any of them so I can't tell you if they're any good.

I'm hoping to post a review of Blades in the Dark soon. It's a solid hack candidate and the market isn't saturated yet.

jt wrote:Depends on what you're trying to make?

Second that. Though, I'd probably expect something as simple as possible, the bare bones you flesh out yourself.

Fighting Fantasy is too bare bones, but maybe Dragon Warriors?

Dean wrote:I have a functional knowledge of most systems out there

Do you mean most major systems? Cause surely there's a gazillion and one systems of greater or lesser obscurity and nobody could know them all.

You want to consider what the game you want to make will be like. If it's level-based, you want to hack an already-level-based system. If it's skill-based, you want to hack an already-skill-based system. Do you want an injury system that's abstract or specific? Do you prioritize speed or depth of resolution? And so on.

Orion wrote:I'm hoping to post a review of Blades in the Dark soon. It's a solid hack candidate and the market isn't saturated yet.

It is a good system. Looking forward to a review.

I dunno, I'm not a fan of the resolution system... but that can wait for the review.

Dean wrote:In your opinion what is the best game engine to hack?

...
A few options I've been floating around my brain to dive into and see what I could make them do are Fate, Feng Shui, and Kaelik's Fortresses and Fiends. But I'm open to anything and I probably know enough about any system you could name to at least get myself started relatively quickly.

I look at After Sundown & Warp Cult on occasion, not so much to use the mechanics as they are but look at what to cover with mechanics.
Epic 40k, Bolt Action, various skirmish games.

D&D's are the best known. 3.PF has so much content that removing options or careful curation gets you AD&D , 5e, 4e. The core grappling system sucks though.

People have pointed out some nice base systems but pointing out elements like "Fate's skill categories" or "D&D3's skill DC list" is actually crazy helpful. It occurs to me that that's how I design new things at the beginning, finding what pieces of systems I know I think are cool and trying to get them to fit together well in a new space.

So I will add to my title question: What elements of games do you think are cool standouts in them that you would grab for other stuff?

jt wrote:Depends on what you're trying to make?

Y'know, a run of the mill fantasy heartbreaker. Orcs, elves, swords, mages. I guess I'm not in love with leveled classes, I consider them too restrictive on the game space. But I could still take a leveled system and just put class abilities in a generic acquisition system.

Thaluikhain wrote:

Dean wrote:I have a functional knowledge of most systems out there

Do you mean most major systems? Cause surely there's a gazillion and one systems of greater or lesser obscurity and nobody could know them all.

Yeah but it's like programming languages. There's a million but if you know the 11 that they're all based on then you're basically done.

Of course I'm not saying that "Risus" rather than Fate is a useless suggestion, far from it. The devil is in the details with UI. I was just saying people can suggest just about anything and I'll probably have a decent grounding in it so don't hold back.

Also I've just decided I'm playing a game where I have to name all the systems I know the rules for. I have to start writing now and if I can't think of one for more than, say 5-10 seconds, then clearly I don't know that system well and the game is over. BEGIN.

D&D, d20 all variants, Mutants and Masterminds, Star Wars d6/d20/Saga, Champions, Feng Shui, Shadowrun, WoD, Ars Magica, Call of Cthulhu, Gurps, Amber Diceless, Munchausen, Fate, Redwall, some LOTR stuff, Apoc world, all the Free League stuff, a bunch of bullshit kobolds ate my baby/failsnails/lasers and feelings fart-outs, Inquisitor? The 40k rpg game, a bunch of indies like Chuumbo’s marvelous wish granting engine and Shock, some heartbreakers people have made here like Dungeon Crusade, After Sundown, FaF, and then stuff I wouldn’t even say I know anymore cause I’ve forgotten them like Legend of Five Rings whose system I can no longer remember at all but that I could probably recall quickly if you got the book in front of me.

Not bad. With some reflection there's some on the edges of my knowledge that aren't there like some Japanese ones or old 80's rpg's but that was fun and I recommend it to anyone who wants to see what your brain can remember it remembers.

What's the stuff that makes you want to make a new fantasy heartbreaker? Are there systems that you think have never been done well before (like me and CR)? Do you just want to do some RPG content writing and need a framework to dump that into?

For Gempunks, the motivation was looking at all the huge messy piles of D&D homebrew and thinking "if I write new core rules, I can fix a lot of problems that have only been fixed with messy hacks before... and also if I start over then I get to write all the content and make things as coherent as I want them to be."

The next RPGs I would make if I still believed there was anything for me to gain from writing RPGs would be: a cyberpunk space fantasy adventure sort of inspired by Firefly or Guardians of the Galaxy based on the idea that the broader, more diverse challenges surrounding combat are actually better for rules-heavy TTRPGs than focusing all in on crunchy combat; and a "training montage" RPG about gaining power only through interacting with the world, collecting artifacts, getting blessings, studying under hermit ninja masters. These don't necessarily have to be different RPGs I guess.

Dean wrote:Y'know, a run of the mill fantasy heartbreaker. Orcs, elves, swords, mages.

I think it's worth considering having a setting that's well-integrated with the rules. Something like Earthdawn (though very much not actually Earthdawn), where the game logic is also the world logic.

So I will add to my title question: What elements of games do you think are cool standouts in them that you would grab for other stuff?

Looking at different mechanics to support different settings/flavor, sometimes it can be agnostic and just nice mechanics. Different categories of mechanics be...

Core Resolution Mechanics
- Roll vs TN: Overcoming a static number
- Opposed Roll: Two Characters roll off
- Poker, drawing colors of gummy bears

Power Schedule Mechanics
- Always On, At Will: Scorpion always applies poison with every sting
- Situational, Positional: Rogue sneak attacks when they have flanking advantage etc.
- Prep Time, Depletion: Using up a resource that refreshes at different rates
-- short rest (minutes), Swordsage, Warlock
-- long rest (hours, days), Vancian Wizard
-- round by round (seconds) Warblade, Assassin observation/marks
-- Vancian, Arcanist, etc.
- Build Up: Resource you gain with dropping foes, dealing damage
- Random Draw: Abilities drawn from deck and used up

Timing of decision making
- Before: Choose ability then roll, like "I cast lightning bolt and they make a REF save". Go into a 'stance' then all following hits have an effect
- During: Make roll, if it hits then apply an effect "I hit, then they make a save vs grappled condition"
- After: Make roll, apply effect then spend it later "I hit, place a marker on them. Then later I expend that marker to cause them to miss me and hit their ally"

Whatever wrote:

Dean wrote:Y'know, a run of the mill fantasy heartbreaker. Orcs, elves, swords, mages.

I think it's worth considering having a setting that's well-integrated with the rules. Something like Earthdawn (though very much not actually Earthdawn), where the game logic is also the world logic.

You've rumbled me mate! Alright I'll come clean, I've already done that. I've been working on a project for nearly 2 years where the "rules" are entirely in-world and it's come out really well! Exactly as you were saying, it's a game where the rules and structure of the game are able to be presented almost entirely narratively and I'm really pleased with it.

The game was built with a mathematical engine at it's base, a standard Roll+Stat vs TN. But the very nature of it makes it's incredibly easy to translate onto different systems. With a tiny bit of rejiggering and some X=Y into an XL spreadsheet you can run the game through just about any system, so we've been playing around with different base systems and seeing how they feel.

Every system has their own little things, their own unique UI experience, so what I'm focusing on right now is examining the difference in player response when running the game with different systems and with different elements attached. Focusing on honing the best user experience possible onto the players side of the game as the TTRPG field has left the player side experience very underdeveloped IMO. So tonight we did the "Risus" version of the game (on jt's suggestion) and so my notes tonight are about how people seemed to respond to the Risus bits, the descriptive specializations, the pumping dice mechanic, stuff like that.

So my question was looking for systems and subsystems to make translations for, to test and see what parts of what systems people respond positively to in a session of an average fantasy heartbreaker game.

Dean wrote:Alright I'll come clean

In retrospect. Was this thread and it's structure up until now the best, most honest, and most mature way to announce and ask for nebulous help with, your own heartbreaker that is not a hack of another existing system?

Is testing... "translations" of every other system except your own the best way to further the development of your own system?

And is asking people which system is "best" to "hack" in again a very nebulous manner with basically no further information or provisos and no mention of your actual project the best way to prioritize a list of systems and subsystems to test... instead again of your own apparent system for some reason?

Even now having revealed what you are actually doing. Because for some reason it was secret. I guess it was for fun. Do you realize these "Translations" you are testing are still... an exceptionally nebulous and undefined testing methodology in a deeply non helpful way?

Is "so... what do people think is cool?" in arguably the most round about way to ask it, really the stage you should be at on a project apparently 2 years in?

Do you in fact, only raise further questions with your answers?

PhoneLobster wrote:Is testing... "translations" of every other system except your own the best way to further the development of your own system?

While this is a classic PL threadshit it lets me talk about something cool anyway so I'ma do that. The answer is totally! A games physics engine, it's underlying math, and it's user interface/experience are all interwoven but different spheres of design. The most separate are the physics engine and the UI because the physics engine information is written as "DM side" information. It is intentionally removed from the player experience. The partition of information is such that the player is expected to know how strong their character is and the DM is supposed to know how strong the door is that the player wants to kick down.

So the physics engine side wants complete answers. The best fucking part about D&D3 is that you can answer definitively if a Ythrak can pick up a Behir and fly it over a cliff. That shit absolutely rules. When things have weights and strengths and encumbrances and real quantifiable scores then the games story can be told as something more than "whatever the DM wants to happen happens". It allows the DM to be surprised and to have stories told to them in some sense. This is why I think D&D 3 and Shadowrun 3-4 are the most popular systems with veteran DM's. You see behind the curtain and those games have things behind the curtain.

For all that that is good however it must be said that both of those games have absolutely abysmal UI's. Even getting a newbie to fill out a charsheet in those systems is fucking brutal. A game is going to be measured by the DM by how many questions it can answer, but every question a player has to ask to do what they want (and understand what they can do) is going to mark against it. So there's an inherent tension there. The success of rules lite games comes from their ability to get players into the action right away. *World stuff may be offensive lazy bullshit but the fact that their character sheets alone can contain every move a player can perform is a huge deal. You can just pick "Gun Bimbo" or whatever-the-fuck and play and people do have a good time with it until they realize it's vaporware and there's nothing behind the curtain.

It's my opinion, post D&D3.E that a game with a good physics engine behind it should be considered only half done. The feel on the players side needs to be worked on much more. Speed of entry into play, the enjoyability of the basic dice mechanics, fun and engagement in the character creation process, small flavorful subsystems.....I think that stuff is gonna be the name of the game nowadays.

When you read about the design of great games like Dark Souls or X-Com there's always these huge stories about how it went through like 20 different versions, constantly trying stuff from new angles to find ways to make the same underlying concepts fun and engaging. I think that's instructive. It's like Jute Keen Do but with gaming, keeping what you like from each new version and style.

My question hasn't changed in any way. We can talk about these ideas if you want but I'm still just curious what games and systems people have thought were cool to hack into stuff you've made

Have you looked at Lancer yet? It's similar in design to *World, but with most of the things that make *World games bad (terrible move design, quantum bears, only really having one difficulty level) fixed.

Ah, the classic "reply to someone then ban them from your thread" tactic. Gets 'em every time.

Lancer is basically a Hack of Shadow of the Demon Lord, and that game while a mess certainly had some interesting mechanics. Lancer itself is kind of hypserspecific, its mechanics really force a certain style of game.

Though I could totally see a fantasy hack of Lancer about being cool dudes who fly around on dragons who have spellcasters make all their cool magic weapons (instead of 3d printers)

The Adventurer's Almanac wrote:Ah, the classic "reply to someone then ban them from your thread" tactic. Gets 'em every time.

What's weird about it is that PL didn't ask a bad question and in answering it dean got to explain his thinking. I'm not sure how this equates to threadshit. My guess is that there's an expectation of eventual, actual, thread shitting and someone is jumping the gun.

Dean wrote:What elements of games do you think are cool standouts in them that you would grab for other stuff?

CP2020 is a mess in most ways, but I really like the intimidation rules. CP2013 and maybe CPR have hacking systems that are easy enough to use at the table.

Sounds like you want to play . . Shadowrun or Earthdawn?

MGuy wrote:What's weird about it is that PL didn't ask a bad question and in answering it dean got to explain his thinking.

I do find it somewhat funny that almost the entire den is basically tone-trolling PhoneLobster whenever he speaks.