Hi! I’ve just gave the doc a quick read, but man! it’s a breath of fresh air. I really like the concept and the implementation. I only have a couple of questions:
I think there are potentially too many modifiers to keep track of. In my experience, more than two modifiers for any action will get a confused look from the players. Isn’t there any other way to make this simpler?
How can the St define a character’s personal moral code? How much exhaustive you have to be in order to cover for most of the potential breaking points the PCs may face?
Well, you’re not going to have more than a five-die swing in any direction anyway. If you get to that point, stop and roll, I guess?
The other thing is, the modifier list is really meant to be a guideline for the ST. If you’ve got +/-5 to work with anyway, you can afford to say, “OK, +1 for self-defense, -2 because you used a jackhammer, -1 net, sound good?”
As for the ST defining your moral code, yeah, it does put the onus on the ST and the players to make sure everyone understands a given character’s outlook. I don’t think that’s a bug, myself, because I like doing that kind of thinking about my character. But as an ST, I’m also OK with saying to a player, “Do you think this is a breaking point for your character?” which in playtest has worked pretty well.
I like the new system, but I have a player that is always gonna make a character that exists in a vacuum and never ponders or has trouble with moral issues. In this system trying to define their moral code would like pulling teeth. Their breaking points would be non-exsistant or so rare that they wouldn’t come up. I love it, and with most of my players it would work, but one or two of them would be problems.
Well dang, this is some cool stuff, and goes to the heart of some struggles I’ve had with the Storyteller/Storytelling system for years now. Especially curious about the Beats and Conditions and how they affect play, and that you can even get those on a good roll. Fun!
I feel like the modifiers for morality should be reversed. It should be easier to lose morality when it is high and harder when it is low. Also, who is more likely to be crippled with guilt when they kill someone, a saint or a psychopath? As it stands, with a -2 for extreme low morality, the psychopath is the one more likely to feel bad about killing someone while the +2 for the saint makes him less likely to feel guilty and more likely to rationalize it.
It’s not Morality anymore, it’s Integrity. Not trying to be pedantic, it makes a difference, because the stat is measuring something different than it used to.
Looks interesting. Excited about it for tabletop, fearful of it for LARP. Who knows though- maybe it will make people think more about Morality as a space for story, rather than just a limitation on depravity.
Hi! I’ve just gave the doc a quick read, but man! it’s a breath of fresh air. I really like the concept and the implementation. I only have a couple of questions:
I think there are potentially too many modifiers to keep track of. In my experience, more than two modifiers for any action will get a confused look from the players. Isn’t there any other way to make this simpler?
How can the St define a character’s personal moral code? How much exhaustive you have to be in order to cover for most of the potential breaking points the PCs may face?
Well, you’re not going to have more than a five-die swing in any direction anyway. If you get to that point, stop and roll, I guess?
The other thing is, the modifier list is really meant to be a guideline for the ST. If you’ve got +/-5 to work with anyway, you can afford to say, “OK, +1 for self-defense, -2 because you used a jackhammer, -1 net, sound good?”
As for the ST defining your moral code, yeah, it does put the onus on the ST and the players to make sure everyone understands a given character’s outlook. I don’t think that’s a bug, myself, because I like doing that kind of thinking about my character. But as an ST, I’m also OK with saying to a player, “Do you think this is a breaking point for your character?” which in playtest has worked pretty well.
I like the new system, but I have a player that is always gonna make a character that exists in a vacuum and never ponders or has trouble with moral issues. In this system trying to define their moral code would like pulling teeth. Their breaking points would be non-exsistant or so rare that they wouldn’t come up. I love it, and with most of my players it would work, but one or two of them would be problems.
Yeah, I feel ya. I think, though, that’s an issue with players rather than mechanics.
I like where this is going 🙂 What is a “Condition” rules-wise?
Well dang, this is some cool stuff, and goes to the heart of some struggles I’ve had with the Storyteller/Storytelling system for years now. Especially curious about the Beats and Conditions and how they affect play, and that you can even get those on a good roll. Fun!
Quick question. Whats a “Beat”?
I like it. Very much. The one thing I’m confused on is what a “Beat” is. Is that something that will be defined elsewhere in the book?
A beat is 1/5 of an experience point, as far as I understand this. And experience buys you new stuff for your character.
I feel like the modifiers for morality should be reversed. It should be easier to lose morality when it is high and harder when it is low. Also, who is more likely to be crippled with guilt when they kill someone, a saint or a psychopath? As it stands, with a -2 for extreme low morality, the psychopath is the one more likely to feel bad about killing someone while the +2 for the saint makes him less likely to feel guilty and more likely to rationalize it.
It’s not Morality anymore, it’s Integrity. Not trying to be pedantic, it makes a difference, because the stat is measuring something different than it used to.
For some reason the file seems corrupted.
Looks interesting. Excited about it for tabletop, fearful of it for LARP. Who knows though- maybe it will make people think more about Morality as a space for story, rather than just a limitation on depravity.