TRPG General Chat

Ben

00:00

@BESW So are you suggesting that the Corruption system uses a similar mechanic? If you roll higher than your total corruption, you gain additional Corruption?

linksassin

@Ben But as you say, currently being corrupt is a net positive (until it's not) and you are trying to get the players to try hard to avoid it. Perhaps you need some stronger disincentive.

Ben

@linksassin The opposite. There is no reward to avoid it, which is hard work. So the players that make all the effort are left behind, and in that situation, likely feel like they have been snubbed

BESW

@Ben A shifting target difficulty is one way to control Corruption escalation. I don't know if it's better than what you've got.

Ben

@linksassin I want the players to embrace it, but I have not accounted for those that do not.

@BESW At the moment I don't really have anything, other than the outcome of each level. Haha

I am liking the direction it's taking however

BESW

Broadly speaking you've got two toggles: "How certain am I that I will get more Corruption?" and "How much more Corruption will I get?"

A Cthulhu Dark style sliding difficulty roll makes getting more uncertain, but if it happens you get 1.

A dice pool makes getting more certain, but you don't know how much.

Hmm. If someone's working hard to avoid being corrupted, does that mean they've avoiding the mechanic (never rolling) or beating the mechanic (rolling but avoiding consequences)?

Ben

00:08

Right. And the threshold for each level should reflect that then. Like it would be unfair for them to roll a 12 at level 2, when the threshold for the next level is 10

@BESW They would be making choices to avoid the mechanic. paragon vs . renegade; Don't pick up the Giant Sword that the Big Skeleton was wielding, that glows and whispers at you, etc

BESW

And narrative question: does avoiding corruption for a long time mean that when you ARE exposed to corruption it's easier, harder, or the same, to succumb to it?

linksassin

@Ben Maybe have an equivilant 'holyness' system? Everyone starts in the middle, players that do a good job of avoiding corruption can earn the favour of the gods.

BESW

Example:

Ben

@BESW As it is, it would be the same. If you are only at level 1 Corruption, at the end of the dungeon, every one else is at level 4, you only roll 1d6, everyone else rolls 4d6

BESW

@Ben That's why I'm asking narratively.

"I spent the whole game not picking up awesome talking swords and wearing gloves whenever I shook hands with anybody, so I am completely uncorrupt. Josh over here has been licking the demon puppies and now his eyes glow in the dark and angels weep when he enters a church. We both walk into the Unholy Den of Unholiness for the final boss fight, and both Josh and I automatically get 10 Corruption."

Ben

00:14

Narratively, the entire dungeon is Corrupt. There are no gods here, this is the domain of evil. So it would make sense that as you go deeper, the influence is stronger.

BESW

Is that what you want?

That the demon-licker and the saint both get the same amount of corruption from a single source regardless of personal context?

Hot RPG Questions

6

Q: Are there any consumables that function as addictive (psychedelic) drugs?

Long story short Today a PC in a homebrew campaign that I DM tried out a natural drug that he found and heard about: Flashberries. In my world it's believed to be a psychedelic drug and those who use it, become delusional: they claim to "see magic" and some say they can even interact with it. Th...

dnd-5e

trogdor

I'll just point out

BESW

I'm not being judgy, whatever you answer is fine; I just think it's really important to be very very clear on the narrative a mechanic pushes.

trogdor

If I was the saint person I would be mad about that

BESW

00:16

And that means picking your narrative before you commit to mechanics.

Ben

@BESW In my head, it would make more sense that the focus would be more on the player with less corruption. The evil forces can see their aura "shine more brightly", whereas everyone else is pretty much there already, so they don't need as much attention.

So, in that situation, the Saint would get 10, and the demon licker would get 2

BESW

@Ben Hmm. Do you want it to be possible to traverse the dungeon unscathed?

Ben

@BESW No. It's unavoidable

BESW

And this is a D&D 5e addon, right?

Ben

I am intending to use this with 5e, yes. I didn't really "base" it on 5e, but I feel by omission, it would not really work with anything else

BESW

00:20

[mulls]

Do you and/or your players like rolling great fistfuls of dice, or do you/they find tallying up an ocean of dice to be tedious and would rather roll just one or two?

Ben

For clarity, this system is to be used for a Diablo megadungeon campaign. It is an optional system, but the idea is that all players will come out corrupt at the end of the campaign - no one comes out unscathed.

I agree with you (based on a statement you made, I believe about KoM?) more dice is better, but there is such a thing as too much.

2-4 is good

trogdor

What's the point of mechanizing it then?

If everyone is supposed to be corrupt by the end

Ben

@trogdor By the end of it one player will be more corrupt than the others - and narratively they are the one that becomes the "Dark Wanderer"

BESW

Okay, I have a suggestion that isn't fully formed but seems useful.

Ben

The system just adds another level to the gameplay. There are three types, each with their own development.

@BESW Ok?

BESW

00:27

Gaining Corruption grants extra bonuses/abilities with some attendant penalties or restrictions. Each significant obstacle you encounter has a Corruption rating on the same scale as the PCs'. Whenever a PC first meets an obstacle with more Corruption than the PC, it forces a dice pool roll to give the PC more Corruption (always at least 1 Corruption for a 1-dice pool). PCs have advantage on all rolls against obstacles with more Corruption than they have.

Something like that.

Throw low-Corruption PCs a bone with advantage, but they're rolling for Corruption more often.

But high-Corruption PCs are rolling bigger dice pools for Corruption despite rolling less frequently.

Ben

Ok. Yes, that is a good way to meet that narrative approach. I like it.

BESW

Keep the "pick up whispering swords at your peril" thing so players can still choose how much Corruption to embrace.

(Use the same mechanic, it's just an optional roll)

But there are scripted Corruption rolls at dramatic moments so everybody gets corrupted when they walk into the desecrated church or get lectured by the devil, even if they've carefully avoided stuffing their bra with salamanders.

Though if you have enough demonic amphibians in your bra, you may not have to roll at the scripted events.

Idle speculation: you should probably mess with what happens if you invert the dice pool.

Ben

I am liking this.

BESW

Thanks! I've... done a LOT of reading and playing with these kinds of things.

Heck, I even used 3.5's horrible taint mechanic.

Ben

@trogdor @linksassin would you feel that, knowingly entering this place is going to end up in your corruption, that the "purity of your soul" and your personal decisions can "protect" you from the evil in this place? Would that be enough, when the others are becoming... well... "rewarded", at a cost?

I cc'd you guys because you had suggestions and feelings on the latter

BESW

00:40

Yeah, that's why I threw in a very broad advantage boon (narrow it to your taste, I don't know 5e balance), but it's admittedly a flat and boring bennie.

linksassin

@Ben Is the campaign going to continue beyond this dungeon? Will the negative effects of corruption be ongoing?

Ben

@linksassin No. At the end of the dungeon, the Campaign is over.

linksassin

@Ben The question is what is the advantage to avoiding corruption then? As you said it is hard work to do it and at the end they just get less cool things than if they hadn't bothered.

Ben

There is none. But that doesn't mean players won't want to, at the very least, for narrative reasons?

linksassin

@Ben Perhaps if the final room required an uncorrupted soul? Somehow completing the final test is easier with lower corruption. Or it will give you 20 points of corruption or something so only a pure soul can do it without being lost to corruption

Narrative reasons, I'm sure they would. But I wonder if there is a chance that they would feel a bit upset at the end. Thinking "well that was a waste of effort" at the end of a campaign is not what you want.

Find a way to reward them for there decisions at some point.

Ben

00:48

@linksassin narratively there is no reason to avoid corruption. I'm not saying I don't have any; there is no narrative reason for it. What I'm getting caught up on is the mechanical advantage.

Using the Diablo lore as an example, 3 heroes went into the dungeon. And at the end, one became the "Dark Wanderer" - Diablo's vessel; one became a demonette, and the other went mad.

trogdor

@Ben so my feeling on it is, if you have any players who want to avoid corruption there should be some way they can at least reduce what they get

linksassin

@Ben I'm not sure I understand what you just said. Narratively they want to avoid it because corruption is bad... mechanically they don't because it gives them bonuses.

Ben

In this system, the same is going to happen. One becomes Diablo's vessel, the others go mad or turn into demons

trogdor

I can't speak for everyone in this situation but for me I would expect my actual choices to matter vis a vis the corruption mechanic

Especially if I wanted to get as little as possible

linksassin

@Ben I would advise against any system with a predetermined outcome. There has to be a way to win without losing control to corruption.

trogdor

00:51

But I don't know what YOUR players want

BESW

@Ben ooooh so we're coming at this from the wrong precedents entirely. This isn't Cthulhu Dark, it's freaking Don't Rest Your Head.

trogdor

I will say that if I was in the game and didn't decide to be a demon licker who stuffs whispering swords in my pockets I would want corruption to be to some degree avoidable

But again I can't speak for your players

Ben

@linksassin Yes.

trogdor

My advice would be to ask them how they feel about how avoidable corruption is

If they all feel good about a certain amount of unavailable corruption you are all good

BESW

DRYH is about people who have stayed awake so long they've got insomnia superpowers. Everything you do is either something a normal person could do (and you get more tired, will eventually fall asleep and be eaten by nightmares) or something empowered by your insomnia-fueled paranoia (and you get more crazed and will eventually become a nightmare).

It's almost impossible to get a happy ending in DRYH, everything you do drives you toward one horrible end or another.

So here's what you want: competing scales between Resist The Darkness And Go Mad, vs Embrace The Darkness and Become One With It.

That's the choice your characters have, so don't dangle the illusion of purity.

trogdor

00:57

Yeah

Ben

To some degree, there are ways to avoid Corruption. The idea is you can (to a degree) control how much you are corrupted. For example, you can stay within the first tier of corruption, which is basically just "skin deep", as it were. However, if you do achieve this, you gain nothing of it. You don't get extra abilities, skill bonuses, or anything. You simply remain "uncorrupted".

trogdor

@BESW That's basically my point too get player buy in first

Ben

Ok, I don't believe I have, really, all I've offered is ways to manage it.

This whole argument of "no reward for avoiding it" is a point that my friend brought up when I discussed it with him.

trogdor

If I walked into this game thinking I could play lightey lightman the purest unicorn frolicking person I would be upset if you had never told me the price of that was all the insanity points

But if you told me those were the options from day one I would probably be gunning for one side or the other

Ben

@trogdor I think at the beginning of the rules I added something to that degree - no one comes out unscathed, everyone will become corrupt to some degree.

BESW

01:00

"Unicorn-frolicking" is my new bowdlerized euphemism.

Ben

You can simply manage it, as to as to avoid losing yourself to it completely within the dungeon.

trogdor

@Ben "to some degree " might not cover it but it might be a good start anyway

It sounds like "to some degree" is an understatement

BESW

11 mins ago, by Ben

In this system, the same is going to happen. One becomes Diablo's vessel, the others go mad or turn into demons

Ben

Though, that said at the end - everyone becomes lost to it, eventually.

trogdor

@BESW yes this

Ben

01:02

But that's after the end.

trogdor

That's,....

Ben

I see your point

trogdor

If you narrated that end for me though, just as an example here, I would be pretty mad after being the guy who made sure to avoid as much corruption as possible

Ben

I was coming from the other direction. within the scope of the game, there is a promise of avoiding it. You were coming from the other end - "oh but after all that hard work, I became a demon anyway". I get ya.

trogdor

My point is they need to know this stuff up front

@Ben yes

I'm just trying to point out that if the ending is more or less set in stone that's something that needs to be bought into

BESW

01:05

So, I'd suggest offering competing paths, probably with offensive and defensive features, representing either resisting (and you will go mad) or embracing (and you will become a demon or Diablo).

Maybe if you resist, you get bonuses to defenses and access to defensive abilities; if you embrace, you become better at murder.

[scribbles notes]

Ben

I am liking this

trogdor

Because if you lead your players on about how much thier corruption choice matters or how it matters, even accidentally, someone is likely to get mad at that ending

BESW

For nuance, let everybody travel on both paths but whichever path you're further down is the one that gives you bonuses.

Ben

Insanity vs Corruption. @MikeQ @Miniman do you remember how that system worked in regards to final outcomes?

From memory, it really just sort of impacted on how your player interacted with things (insanity) or was physically altered (corruption), and if you reached the max level, your PC wwas lost.

@trogdor "Of everyone that entered, no one came out the same. Babbling of the madness they witnessed, or physically altered in unearthly ways... be warned adventurers"

linksassin

@Ben I think we are considering it more from a player's point that was trying to avoid it. I agree with @trogdor if I spent the entire campaign avoiding it whereever I could only to be told at the end it happened anyway. I'd be pretty bummed.

trogdor

01:11

@Ben yeah that's a fairly good warning I would say XD

linksassin

@Ben It is a good warning, however part of D&D's heroic playstyle is achieving things no one has done before.

Ben

@linksassin Yeah. It took me a while to catch on to that

trogdor

@linksassin yeah, exactly, the counterpoint to this is that if all the players go in knowing what the actual options are they can gun for the outcome they want out of what's available

Ben

@linksassin None have reached the bottom of the dungeon. Hence why there is still a threat to the town.

trogdor

And if they absolutely don't like those options they have a chance to tell you if they have been warned that those are the options there are

linksassin

01:14

@Ben You could give out similar warnings to fighting a dragon. "None have survived an encounter with Thordak the cruel. Wrecker of towns and destroyer of armies. Great champions have challenged him only to be left burned out husk, dead upon the battlefield... be warned adventurers" That in no way would prevent the party from trying to slay the dragon.

BESW

Yes, you're pushing hard against a basic assumption of modern heroic gaming that unmitigated success is a reasonable outcome to expect.

trogdor

@linksassin that's also fair, the game system itself comes with certain expectations

It would be better to tell your group in no uncertain terms what you are gunning for here

Which seems to be "you have two choices that are both bad for your character in different ways"

Ben

Well, the gaol of the campaign is to complete the dungeon, reach the bottom and kill Diablo. That's the "thing that has not yet been completed". This optional system is meant to be just a flavour over the top of everything.

@trogdor Yeah. Again, Insanity and Corruption in DH/RT are very similar. Both are unavoidable, but you can choose which one you get, based on your choices and actions within the camapign

trogdor

@Ben there's nothing wrong with that but it doesn't change anything if you are,... Still using that flavor

MikeQ

@Ben In Dark Heresy? The insanity and corruption tracks were independent. Neither had good outcomes built-in; your character can gain disorders or malignancies by reaching certain point increments. At 100 points of either track, the character is unplayable.

trogdor

01:20

Basically, if your players know this is what they are getting into, unequivocally, you remove the possible accidental option of leaving them to think they have full control over thier character and the outcome of character success, which if they still have, they will be mad at you for removing at the ending

I would be

Ben

@trogdor Yes, so if that is made clear from the beginning, It removes that possibility of misunderstanding

trogdor

Maybe they would, and maybe not, but I bet some of them would feel the same as I would under those circumstances

@Ben yes

Ben

Right

trogdor

And you Know on the flip side, if I knew that from the start I would probably roll hard on the concept

Go full "demon licker" I like that term now

Or Maybe gun for captain insane-o at the end

Ben

So, I feel we're probably all on the same page now. This system, if used, is unavoidable. No-one will come out with 0 points, and narratively, the PC is lost at the end of the game, regardless.

linksassin

01:24

@Ben Sure, I would expect most players to get to level 2/3 fairly quickly then because there is clear benefits to doing so.

Ben

This is going to incur a fairly major revision to the system. Haha

linksassin

@Ben Yes, I think the feedback we have given you up to this point has all been assuming this was something they could avoid and trying to balance that.

Ben

At this point, I am open to suggestions for a madness breakdown. Currently I have 3 variations of corruption: Bloodlust, Madness, and Decay. Obviously, Madness is going to be removed, so I need either 2 "madness" suggetions, or 3, and one corruption

I am basing this very heavily on the original PC game. Lore wise, the 3 heroes that went in, came out and were eventually lost to madness or corruption. So, there is no real reason to say that in this game, the players will not turn out the same way, but one of them will be.

linksassin

01:41

@Ben I haven't played Diablo so I can't give you much advice on good mechanics to replicate the feel of the game. I can help you balance the 5e parts once you come up with them though. Which is what I have tried to do up until now.

Rubiksmoose

@V2Blast I'm always super impressed when you catch spell rewordings btw. For whatever reason, unless I'm very familiar with the spell (eg polymorph) I usually implicitly trust the quoting. Keep up the good work :)

V2Blast

It's pretty easy just by looking at the link :P

Ben

@linksassin Basically there is no "good" influences in this game. Only evil. So the system is based on the idea that you can embrace the evil or avoid it. Story-wise, the only influence is the final outcome. There is no "corruption" system in the original game, the idea to come up with this system is just based on the math that only one person will become the Dark Wanderer, so I need a way to determine who does.

Other than that, there is no link to the original game.

Rubiksmoose

@V2Blast Well sure, but there isn't always a wrong link, and it does require effort to check and all that. Regardless, I appreciate your attention to detail.

V2Blast

Haha, thanks :)

Hot RPG Questions

01:52

2

Q: Can Medicine checks be used, with decent rolls, to completely mitigate the risk of death from ongoing damage?

Here is an example of the type of situation that brought up this question. Say a PC has been pinned under the foot of a massive animated stone statue. The PC in question is knocked unconscious by the initial damage and will take additional damage each round, forcing failed death saves, as the sta...

dnd-5e character-death

Ben

02:28

Another item to add to the list of "Sentient Magical Items", along with the Bag of Scolding and the Autobiographical Diary; the Stubborn Rod: An Immovable Rod that needs to be convinced to cooperate.

SmokeDetector

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in answer (92): Can I interfere when another PC is about to be attacked? by charlotte1 on rpg.SE (@doppelgreener)

Ben

03:43

@BESW I am enjoying this immensely

BESW

Yeah, I don't really appreciate the personal-attack-y-ness of his "Measured Response" type videos but I enjoyed most of the rest of his material. I've linked his video about existential horror a few times here too.

His description of the "no shield" choice in Bloodborne is basically what we've been saying for years about trap options in D&D.

trogdor

@BESW oh about how shields are basically useless and they shouldn't have included them in the game because that's just kinda mean?

(both people I watched play it said almost the exact same thing about it)

BESW

@trogdor No, that the first two games start you with a shield, which teaches new players to use it, which is the most boring way to play... and Bloodborne doesn't give you a shield at all.

It's like how WoW used to wait ten levels to give hunters a pet, and then wonder why so many hunters kept running up to melee range at max level.

trogdor

@BESW there actually is a shield you can pick up in Bloodborn

Although you can't start with one

And it is a horrible option

BESW

He mentions it, yes, but that it's basically a joke and crucially that it's not given until after you've been conditioned how to play rather than as part of the conditioning.

trogdor

03:54

@BESW oh yeah, glad I only made one after that stopped

@BESW that is fair ok

BESW

In other words, in addition to providing mechanics and showing how to use them, the way mechanics are introduced has a strong influence on how games are played.

trogdor

I should watch this but I'm still at work currently

linksassin

@BESW I'm interested in your trap argument. Are you saying that traps should be included more or less in the learning part of the game?

trogdor

Less I think

BESW

@linksassin Quite the opposite, that bad options shouldn't be options.

trogdor

03:56

I think the point is that the Bloodborn shield isn't a trap, it's a joke because you get taught not to use it before it comes up

BESW

I'm not going to summarize an hour-and-a-half video here.

trogdor

Lol yeah I'm going to watch it when I get home

linksassin

So you're saying that traps are a bad option and shouldn't exist at all?

BESW

Suffice to say, one of his interlocking theses is that Bloodborne retroactively makes the previous Dark Souls games "better" because it's the first in the franchise which actually guides players toward the intended, fun, non-boring playstyle.

trogdor

Or more likely listen to it because I've watched the game already and I doubt the images are gonna be crucial to my understanding

BESW

03:58

And that one way it does this is by, contrary to the other games, forcing you to start with that playstyle by removing your other options.

linksassin

Ah and by giving traps as a option DMs are encouraged to create a less fun play style focused on traps?

BESW

....oh you're being literal.

"Trap options" are not "the option to use actual traps as challenges."

They're bad options masquerading as sensible options, trapping you into unsatisfying play.

Like using the shield in a Dark Souls game is an option, but it's a trap.

linksassin

Ah... right... I thought it might be that. Things like "two-weapon fighting"

BESW

Sep 27 '16 at 12:26, by BESW

@BlueMoon93 A trap option is a choice that you can make which is significantly poorer than other available choices, but is presented without comment or indication of its relative lack of merit.

Sep 27 '16 at 12:29, by BESW

D&D 3.5 was rife with trap options, making character creation itself an analytical game; without system mastery, character build choices that seemed narratively powerful (or at least reasonable) could render a character much less effective than his peers.

linksassin

Or the ranger class.

BESW

04:01

Apr 5 '18 at 12:57, by BESW

For playstyles that value system mastery, trap options can be an exhilarating part of the experience.

Apr 5 '18 at 12:58, by BESW

But for playstyles that value mechanical agency and use it to control spotlighting, trap options are gopher holes in the track.

linksassin

I think Shadowrun could be the worst example of that I've seen.

trogdor

@BESW I don't even think this is true at this point, trap options are just bad options that shouldn't exist, otherwise what's to stop new players from deciding that's all the game is?

BESW

@trogdor I'm not going to say "git gud" is an attitude I ever want to play alongside, but I'm not going to pretend that for some people removing the journey from frustration to mastery would be to fundamentally change the game experience in ways they fear would reduce their fun.

Shalvenay

@BESW yeah, some people value trial-and-error learning experiences

trogdor

I suppose so

linksassin

04:06

@BESW Agreed. Personally I don't appreciate games that require system mastery to get any enjoyment out of. But I respect that there are those out there that the journey to system mastery is a large part of the fun.

Shalvenay

one of the big issues with D&D 3.5 trap options that I see is that their problems only manifest after playing for a while -- it's a "fail later" paradigm instead of a "fail fast" one

trogdor

@Shalvenay I suppose that's each person's perogative, but I do worry still about new players getting caught in the crossfire of that

BESW

This is part of what @Ben was struggling with: he wanted to give room to people with a particular playstyle but giving a "purity" option was going to create extreme ludonarrative dissonance because of the story he wanted to tell.

GcL

@linksassin For some people this is definitely true. As a child, I loved learning all the idiosyncrasies of 2nd edition. Now, not so much.

Shalvenay

and that makes it far harder to iterate quickly and get errors "out of the way" without having to rely on the collective wisdom of others

BESW

04:08

Mmm. I think it's easy to conflate a system which rewards mastery, with a system which fails to communicate its basic assumptions about play.

Again, the Dark Souls thing: Bloodborne is better, Brewis argues, because it doesn't waste your time with dead-end options, instead getting you on the road to developing mastery right away.

linksassin

Rewarding mastery is fine so long as it doesn't do so so disproportionately that it is effectively punishing you for not having it.

BESW

And it retroactively makes the previous games more fun because it's shown you what the dead-end options are.

trogdor

@BESW I will say it was faster paced and more fun to watch at any rate

Hot RPG Questions

6

Q: Does the radius of the Spirit Guardians spell depend on the size of the caster?

The spirit guardians spell description states: Spirits float around you up to 15 feet away. Certain other spells like antilife shell state: A barrier extends from you in a 10-foot radius and moves with you. Does this mean the range of spirit guardians is affected by the size of the cr...

dnd-5e spells creature-size area-of-effect

BESW

> Dark Souls kills you and hands you a shield.
Bloodborne kills you and hands you a blade and a gun.

Ben

04:11

@BESW I'm trying to use this similar argument about how you learn the system of Dark Souls and Bloodborne, and pass that on to Sekiro, because I have a friend that is in love with the Soulsborne series, but detests Sekiro.

trogdor

@linksassin this is exactly what worries me about it yeah

@Ben why do they hate Sekiro in particular?

Ben

His argument is that the game doesn't teach you anything, except "Deal with it or go home to mum". Problem is I haven't played much of it myself, and I'm avoiding spoilers, which makes it difficult. Haha

trogdor

(I've been watching a playthrough of it and so far it just looks like Bloodborn plus new moves and a stealth system)

@Ben but that's,... That seems very similar to the other games honestly

If I hadn't watched two people who had both actually played through the games before I would not have understood what was going on

Ben

It seems he keeps getting caught up in the responsiveness of it.

trogdor

The need to properly respond to enemy attacks and such?

Ben

04:17

I think more in terms of push button - action happens.

BESW

There are a lot of games which don't get the full range of what's necessary for a game to succeed.

Brewis mentions a Dark Souls knockoff which has only slow moves, for example.

MikeQ

I wouldn't consider shields a trap option, since moving from shield defense to dodge defense was relatively low-cost

Shields existed so new players could get acquainted with the game and its pace, whereas Bloodborne was like "Be fast or don't play"

Ben

Yeah. I'm having a discussion about it and one of the main arguments is that it appears that Attacking and Dodging are actually secondary mechanics, in Seklro. Deflection (aka a perfect parry) is the primary mechanic.

BESW

@MikeQ Brewis isn't talking about a mechanical trap. He's quite clear that using shields is a completely viable way to play the game.

Bloodborne Is Genius, And Here's Why

►

MikeQ

Yes yes I know what trap options are. PF is full of them.

BESW

04:21

Yeah, and WoW didn't give a hunter a pet until level ten so you could get used to the game first too.

MikeQ

Trap options usually indicate that "moving out" of the option is costly or impossible

BESW

But it teaches bad habits.

That's what we're talking about. Not mechanical costs.

What Brewis coins "play conditioning."

MikeQ

Eh... maybe? I suppose it didn't teach parrying early on, or indicate that boosting INT was easy mode

BESW

And yeah, there's an accessibility argument to be made there and I'm totally on board for it... but it's not this subject.

Ben

@BESW I ran a game that was very heavily influenced by this. My father played when he was younger, and the game was full of unforgiving traps. In my game, this slowed everything down immensely, because the party would spend 20 minutes deliberating what to do with a door. Was it trapped? how can we tell? Does anyone have the skills to check? How can we check if no one does? If we can't tell, how can we avoid the trap if there is one?

BESW

04:24

And I'm not going to argue someone else's point about a game I haven't played.

Ben

It got painful.

BESW

@Ben I call this Ten Foot Pole Paranoia.

And it's an excellent example of play conditioning.

MikeQ

@BESW I do agree, though, that the character options in DS aren't well balanced relative to one another. Lots were holdovers from Demons Souls - so DS ended up with similar options thematically, but balanced differently.

BESW

Again, mechanical balance is not what we're talking about; we're talking about how choices and the way they're presented influence how a player interacts with a game.

MikeQ

Right, sorry... Got distracted with the DS stuff.

Hot RPG Questions

04:29

6

Q: Can you lasso down a wizard who is using the Levitate spell?

My character is a Level 3 wizard who used the levitate spell on herself to avoid some ground enemies. Since she is able to use non-concentration spells during its duration, the DM began to think up ways to try and counter this. As of right now, they are aware that any damage done to the wizard ca...

dnd-5e spells combat concentration

MikeQ

@BESW Maybe it's a thing with games that have leveled progression, and whether the early game is indicative of the long-term play

BESW

The original context is a Diablo hack @Ben is working on. He knows some players will want to avoid corruption as much as possible, but he also wants a game where corruption is inevitable and everyone comes to a bad end.

Ben

My current system is... good, but there's no allowance for those that want to avoid it. There's no allowance in the system, and the outcome makes the effort redundant regardless.

BESW

His initial thought was to provide support for purity play during the game, but retain the impure ending. This is like having a shield be the very first item you get in a Dark Souls franchise game: it might seem like a good idea to help people who are new to the concept, but it's just giving them bad habits that will make them miserable later.

V2Blast

@HotRPGQuestions yee-haw

BESW

04:33

When you've got a narrowly defined lane of intended play, it's best if you put bumpers in the gutters so your players don't strike out.

2

GcL

@Ben Is it like that Denzel Washington movie... Forsaken? Where the good guy gets possessed at the end and the demon lives on?

Ben

Can't say I've seen it. Lol

kviiri

@BESW hear hear

MikeQ

@BESW Possible solution: Minimize the cost of switching from the purity route into the corruption route of equal magnitude, so that a player who chooses purity early on can eventually catch up with the players who chose corruption

BESW

@MikeQ I've got two ideas. Both are based on defining it not as "purity" and "corruption" but as "resisting" and "embracing" the corruption.

GcL

04:36

@MikeQ Or catch up on a parallel and equally interesting track for those that were pure and fell further?

Ben

@BESW This is the route I'm going with - narratively there is no "purity"

BESW

One is to treat them as separate tracks you can walk simultaneously; you get the effects of the one you've walked furthest down, modified by how far you've walked the other.

The other is less well developed, but... eh, I'd have to go back to the drawing board, there are ideas running around but they won't hold still.

And it's Ben's game anyway.

I do like the idea that things you encounter in the game have Corruption ratings, which you interact with differently depending on if your rating is higher or lower, and whether you're resisting or embracing.

MikeQ

@BESW Except striking out is good in bowling. Bad in baseball.

Ben

@BESW This option is very reminiscent of Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader in that regard. In that system it's only a deficit, and therefore should be avoided as much as possible, whereas this system it's unavoidable, so therefore should instead be carefully considered, at the very least.

BESW

@MikeQ Happily, analogies are not allegories.

Ben

04:41

@BESW Me too. This gives a sense of power over the influence.

GcL

@BESW Analagories! .... nevermind. That just sounds dirty.

V2Blast

@GcL ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

MikeQ

Another option is using the narrative to make corruption seem semi-desirable, like a dangerous but necessary power source

And drop the purity route entirely because it seems like the "bad" path

Ben

@MikeQ That was the direction I was going... "gain but at a cost", with all the abilities having a tradeoff

MikeQ

I meant, early on you indicate that corruption is necessary and inevitable if the PCs want to delve into helltopia

Ben

04:47

@MikeQ That is the precursor to using the mechanic. Corruption is unavoidable, but manageable.

Same but different?

BESW

05:00

@Ben Do you want to have, like, specific customized features for the gains, or just a flat bonus kind of thing?

Ben

Currently what I have is Level 1: +2/-2 to an ability. Level 2 is adv/disadv to ability rolls. Level 3 is unique ability, but automatically causes corruption.

GcL

I ran a campaign where we kept track of madness points.

They had various narrative effects and some areas where they had game mechanical effects.

Ben

So Bloodlust for example
Level 1: +2 to atck/dmg; -2 to defense.
Level 2: adv on all Str, disadv on all Dex
Level 3: consume blood to regain hitpoints, gain 3 corruption

GcL

One of the extremes was an area where aberrations wouldn't attack the character. On the downside the character had to role play that he viewed them as allies on par with his friends.

BESW

@Ben Terminology idea: dungeony things have Influence ratings; PCs have Corruption scores; Resist and Embrace are actions you can choose when facing an Influential thing.

When you face an Influential object/place/creature, you can either Embrace or Resist its Corrupting influence.

Ben

05:14

I like.

Question.... How does madness fit with the "slippery slope" idea?

The further you get, the easier it is to gain.

I'm feeling like madness might go the other way? The more you experience, the more resilient you are. "Oh what's this? A twisted man-beast that is spewing forth all my worst nightmares? Pffft. Fake."

BESW

Ooh I like that. [scribbles notes]

Ben

Otherwise these systems come across as very "same but different"

This does coincide with the focus on the PC, in terms of corrupting influence, though. They would be the main focus of said corruption, but they have a higher defense against it, the more mad they are

GcL

@Ben Yeah, it made them more efficient at getting through the enemy (abberration) defenses, because seemingly insane things "just made sense if you stand back and look at it a certain way"

On the other hand, they lost all their land holdings and ended up as enemies of the crown because they were mad as hatters.

BESW

If you Embrace, you get +Corruption if you roll UNDER your Corruption score. If you Resist, you get +Corruption if you roll OVER your Corruption score.

Ben

@BESW I like

@GcL in case you are unaware, just for your knowledge, I'm going in a direction that there is no good outcome to this system. At the end of the game - you're either mad or turn into a demon (post game). Did you have something like that? Or were there ways to avoid this influence?

BESW

05:21

The trick is, it becomes easy to game if you get to choose Embrace/Resist each time you encounter an Influence.

You could just tell players to choose one or the other at the beginning of the game.

And then.... hm.

Oh I've got it!

GcL

@Ben There was a way out for one, but that resulted in 30 days of enfeeblement... so they'd have to be babysat and that had some little side adventures. However, none of them took it.

Ben

I am enjoying the fact that you are enjoying this too :D

BESW

You can choose to Embrace or Resist each time you encounter an Influence. Track how many times you choose each. At the end of the game, if you've Embraced more than Resisted then you become a demon (the most Embraced becomes Diablo); if you've Resisted more than Embraced, you go mad.

GcL

All the characters ended up with at least 4 insanity points at the end. Two became evil, so they're coming back as villains in some subsequent adventure.

linksassin

@Ben I like that idea that the different types of corruption give you different options to deal with later corruption. Madness allows you to ignore it. The others have different effects.

BESW

05:24

And then stick something fun and bad at the top of the scale.

GcL

On a happy note, they did manage to keep their NPC alive and shield him from insanity points. He retired and lives a quiet life in Wroat.

In the end, they won, but weren't really sure if they did or not. They murder hobo'd their way through a lot of plot points... so ended up very confused... which kind of worked out for the crazy thing.

Hold on. I have a conspiracy board the players made.

@Ben drive.google.com/open?id=1ptp7kdEtegw_fyx4drd2hhfxki8Tqcfs

Ben

@linksassin At the moment the type of orrup[tion is pre-determined. this interaction causes (Bloodlust) Corruption. If you are not corrupted (i.e. below 10 points) you gain the bloodlust type if it puts you over 10 points. If you are already there, you simply gain more corruption, regardless of corruption type.

@BESW the way I'm reading this, it simply bypasses the collective system I have. Level 1, 2, etc. Or are you saying that you gain these abilities, regardless, then at the end you go mad, or turn into a demon, based on that choice?

BESW

@Ben Pretty much yes; I'm not touching your tier system, I don't understand it well enough. I'm just fiddling with how to pull the levers on that box and what else it might connect to.

Ben

Right

BESW

You mentioned that you want at least one person to have maxed out the corruption scale by the end of the game; why is that?

linksassin

05:33

@Ben I think to expand player options it would be cool to have different tracks for the different types. Players can choose to resist madness but give in to the bloodlust or similar.

Ben

@BESW For the experience. It's not required, but by that point, everyone knows what to expect.

linksassin

@GcL You're players made that based on information you gave them? Wow I would give a lot for my players to be that organised

Ben

@linksassin I was thinking the same.

GcL

@linksassin There were a lot of moving parts and NPCs

BESW

@Ben Alternately, have different tracks available for resist/embrace and tie their powers to the number of times you've used each.

V2Blast

05:35

heh. A conversation on race essentialism has broken out in the /r/dndnext discord

BESW

@V2Blast [squints at cautiously] I don't expect that to end well?

linksassin

@GcL Even then, I can't believe they paid that much attention. I rarely get away with any more subtly than a sledgehammer

V2Blast

eh. it's going fairly well

despite me being a little drunk

BESW

...I'm tempted to brag about my group's session 0 relationship map from Bubblegumshoe.

linksassin

@BESW That's cool, but I have to admit @GcL's was on another level.

MikeQ

05:38

@Ben two more observations:
1. The slippery slope is fun narratively, but positive feedback loops can become a can of worms mechanically. It risks having 1 player at high corruption and the others at none, or vice versa. Possible fix: Implement a negative feedback loop by making the intervals between tiers increasingly larger.

GcL

@linksassin Two of my players really enjoy complex intrigues. Give the players what they like.

BESW

@linksassin Oh, sure. Just... that's what my friends came up with during pre-game.

MikeQ

@Ben 2. I noticed the corruption system doesn't account for other party members. Each person's corruption is entirely independent of other party members. Maybe you want to incorporate something like that, e.g. gaining some corruption via association?

BESW

(Blue is teens, red is adults, dark blue is PCs. Orange is hate, green is like, purple is love. Squares are rich, ovals are poor.)

MikeQ

@BESW Who was "Eddie Hitler"?

linksassin

05:41

@MikeQ Like during a long rest everyones corruption moves 2 points toward the mean corruption of all creatures resting?

Ben

@MikeQ The influences should be aimed at the "party". Items would be either specific to a PC or explicitly non-specific to them, and generic to the rest of the party. Interactions would affect the whole party. Etc.

BESW

@MikeQ He was a classmate with understandable attitude problems, who could always be counted on to be found in detention for acting out or finishing fights someone else started. We haven't actually met him in-game yet.

He didn't ask for that name, and he's going to change it as soon as he's legally able to do so.

Ben

@MikeQ So easier to gain, but harder to "benefit" from? E.g. at level 3, you're rolling 3d6 to gain points, but it takes twice as much to get from 3-4, than it did from 2-3?

GcL

@BESW Was his Dad's name Rob?

Did they pronounce it "Hyte-ler" ?

BESW

@GcL Probably yes.

MikeQ

05:44

@Ben It's a possibility. Either via a negative feedback loop, or shift toward average, or gain by association, I am suggesting some method of nudging everyone's corruption to more similar levels, so that nobody is too ahead or behind

trogdor

@BESW seeing this always makes me feel pretty good

Ben

There would also be enough items for everyone to gain one item per level. So no one misses out

V2Blast

@GcL I've never played an intrigue campaign. I made a Mastermind rogue in one campaign because I'd played the same character as a Swashbuckler rogue in another campaign, but it turned out it was a combat-heavy campaign with basically no intrigue...

BESW

@trogdor I've been talking to folx in the Gumshoe Discord channel about how to best modify BGS into the 1:1 system.

GcL

@V2Blast I run what my players like. Sometimes I pitch stuff to them to see if they'd be interested. Ultimately, I do a little survey for what kind of stuff they want to focus on.

trogdor

05:47

@BESW well part of it was that our group made this together

BESW

Yes, that was very cool.

trogdor

Though if we can manage a good 1:1 that would still be cool

Ben

I'm embracing the resist/embrace mechanic, because it forces a choice against an inevitable challenge, with the outcome that regardless of who chooses what and to what degree, they all end up lost regardless.

V2Blast

@GcL The DM of this campaign actually never DMed before... and I don't think he played before either. This was his first 5e experience. He actually has run it very well, all things considered. :)

BESW

@V2Blast My group had a hard time running a relationship/faction game even when we wanted to, it kept devolving into combat-heavy stuff, until we used systems (like Bubblegumshoe above) which were specifically designed to push that kind of story hard.

GcL

05:48

@V2Blast Whoa. That's cool.

trogdor

I feel a little wary of that though because we have had it work out poorly a few times

Ben

That said, there is a way (currently) to remove corruption. Narratively this makes sense. Scripture, holy water, and Icons (because after all this dungeon is meant to be a holy place).

BESW

@trogdor Well, the Gumshoe One-2-One system seemed to work best?

So that's what I'm focusing on.

trogdor

@BESW yeah that is true

V2Blast

@BESW to some degree I'm interested in playing other systems... but I'm also intimidated by having to learn a new system

BESW

05:50

@V2Blast That's reasonable!

It's one reason I focus on tiny free systems so much.

Ben

I'm trying to think of a mechanic that helps remove the madness, but this is a more irredeemable influence.

MikeQ

@Ben Ah, so the purification option mitigates penalties, but not the degree of corruption itself? That could definitely work.

Ben

@MikeQ What I have currently is that it reduces overall corruption. If you fall below a tier, you lose the effects of that tier.

BESW

This sounds like it's getting really complex really fast.

Ben

So basically, you have influences that cause corruption.

As you gain corruption, at certain points, this gives you effects. More as your level increases.

Once you reach the max quota, you enter a "death spiral" - 3 rolls to save vs losing your PC to Influence.

This alone is a one-way trip. You can avoid it or not. Your choice. Your suggestion @BESW to go with madness when you resist simply changes that from avoid/gain, to gain/gain.

So, I added a mechanic to remove this influence, if you chose to

Transcript for