Return to “REKT”

Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#391
Since when does REKT need fixing?
Most things being more or less up to the DM is not a bad thing. It just means certain guidelines would have to be noted for other DM's if other people would run a campaign. (But that goes for, say, DnD as well - there's a reason the DM and the players each have a rulebook.)
DnD has a specific HP and armor system, yes, but it's very simple to the point of being gamy - if your armor is 18 the enemy needs to roll 18 or more to hit you. That's all. And HP is one number.

I daresay the only thing REKT would need for being played as a tabletop is a ruleset for making combat turn-based while still keeping the current weapon amount and speed intricacies in some way.
Warning: do not ask about physics unless you really want to know about physics.
The LT IRC / Alternate link || The REKT Wiki || PUDDING
Image
Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#392
Dinosawer wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:06 am
Since when does REKT need fixing?
Most things being more or less up to the DM is not a bad thing. It just means certain guidelines would have to be noted for other DM's if other people would run a campaign. (But that goes for, say, DnD as well - there's a reason the DM and the players each have a rulebook.)
Which is basically what i want.
Some guidelines on the rp part and where applicable roll modifiers outlined.

Hence why im talking only about so coarse damage definitions which are RP descriptors and nothing hard numerical like everything in dnd is
Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#394
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 1:07 am
Dinosawer wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:06 am
Since when does REKT need fixing?
Most things being more or less up to the DM is not a bad thing. It just means certain guidelines would have to be noted for other DM's if other people would run a campaign. (But that goes for, say, DnD as well - there's a reason the DM and the players each have a rulebook.)
Which is basically what i want.
Some guidelines on the rp part and where applicable roll modifiers outlined.

Hence why im talking only about so coarse damage definitions which are RP descriptors and nothing hard numerical like everything in dnd is
Well, maybe some numerical things would be handy, for distance in combat.
Such as:
Gauss rifle
Range: 120 feet (-1 to rolls closer than 30 feet, -1 on rolls while moving)

And stuff like how effective it is against which armor is already on the wiki (gauss rifle, e.g., says "Great for punching through armor - can even manage heavy armor if the user is skilled enough")
Warning: do not ask about physics unless you really want to know about physics.
The LT IRC / Alternate link || The REKT Wiki || PUDDING
Image
Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#395
Yes, that could be handy, but the issue I typically come up against is that I'm never good at pinning those values down in my head. I'm not sure how to describe different "types" of damage, effectiveness, effectiveness while wearing armor, etc. At some point it all comes down to something like a super-complicated hitpoint system. REKT has an inherent advantage over something like D&D specifically because it does not have a hitpoint system, which means I can leave you limping along for an extra turn if I feel like it, just so you can have an epic moment or complete the mission. (e.g. Dino managing to drag himself to the alien ship to set up a beacon before he died) So while some values might be handy ("Does heavy damage to unarmored targets/light damage to armored targets" etc), other things wouldn't so much. It's difficult to decide exactly how far to take it, though.
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#396
Talvieno wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:32 am
Yes, that could be handy, but the issue I typically come up against is that I'm never good at pinning those values down in my head. I'm not sure how to describe different "types" of damage, effectiveness, effectiveness while wearing armor, etc. At some point it all comes down to something like a super-complicated hitpoint system. REKT has an inherent advantage over something like D&D specifically because it does not have a hitpoint system, which means I can leave you limping along for an extra turn if I feel like it, just so you can have an epic moment or complete the mission. (e.g. Dino managing to drag himself to the alien ship to set up a beacon before he died) So while some values might be handy ("Does heavy damage to unarmored targets/light damage to armored targets" etc), other things wouldn't so much. It's difficult to decide exactly how far to take it, though.
not claiming any completeness but i think most of that can be done within the general modifier-adding system thats in place already.

weapons do damage based on some general table based on their rolls (mostly a GM guide but also for player information of the skill ceiling), using a very general light/medium/large damage/injury like i already outlined.
with something like
  • <2 does medium damage to wielder
  • 2 does light damage to target
  • 3-4 does medium damage to target
  • 5 does heavy damage to target
  • 6 does heavy damage to target + whatever gm thinks of as "went too well" penalty
the list above could be a generally used list or be an individual list for each piece of equipment (depending on how much effort the GM wants to spend on it during play)

armor and effectiveness against armor is a modifier.
  • no armor +-0
  • light infantry armor/unarmored vehicle -1
  • heavy infantry/light vehicle armor -2
  • heavy vehicle armor -3
  • dont bother capital ship/building/bunker/PLOT armor. only touched by special RP/story actions (like the nuking or getting capital turrets fire on it)
armor piercing weapons partially negate armor penalties.
a gauß rifle would have a +1 modifier neutralising light armor and weakening the effects of other armor with it maxing out at +0. as armor piercing doesnt give you anything when its already unarmored.


the damage system i outlined is mostly a roleplaying outline anyway, to be handled how the GM thinks of as adequate.
heavy damage could mean something like dino's death crawling or just straight up rapid unplanned disassembly.
its a guideline defining rough effects, nothing hard that'd force the GM to do something if e were to adamantly stick to the rules.
Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#397
Again, this sort of per-weapon complicated rolls system doesn't match the needs I have for REKT. I need REKT to be intuitive (to me, because I'm the one doing all the rolls, and it's a lot to handle) and flexible. Sometimes I may not want you to get damaged on a <2. Sometimes it might be more fun if you shot an ally, or destroyed something supporting the roof, or blew a hole in your ship, just to name a few examples.

Most importantly, I think, is the amount of extra variables we'd need for such a system to work. Your system introduces ten new variables for a single weapon. We have over a hundred weapons, and many of them have multiple "firing modes". At the minimum, that's around 1000 new variables for me to keep track of, when I could barely keep track of what we had before. :P I wouldn't be able to GM such a system - at least not nearly as effectively, as I'd have to keep checking stats on the wiki all the time, which would make updates take much longer to write out (and wasn't that the point of cutting down to 10 players anyway? making it easier for me to deal with?).
Have a question? Send me a PM! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#398
I think you should more see them as a set of loose guidelines than specific rolls and numbers and rules that the GM cam use or ignore when it's more fun. That's fairly standard for an RPG.

Edit: note that I'm still talking about a tabletop version of REKT, not the online one we play now
Last edited by Dinosawer on Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Warning: do not ask about physics unless you really want to know about physics.
The LT IRC / Alternate link || The REKT Wiki || PUDDING
Image
Post

Re: REKT: Beyond The Edge (Main Thread)

#399
Talvieno wrote:
Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:29 pm
Again, this sort of per-weapon complicated rolls system doesn't match the needs I have for REKT.
Guess why i first said "use a generalised list" and only then "maybe per weapon lists" :P
Talvieno wrote: I may not want you to get damaged on a <2. Sometimes it might be more fun if you shot an ally, or destroyed something supporting the roof, or blew a hole in your ship, just to name a few examples.
Because theres only the meaning in there that i literally wrote down and no "use your brains" in what i write :V
Talvieno wrote: Most importantly, I think, is the amount of extra variables we'd need for such a system to work. Your system introduces ten new variables for a single weapon. We have over a hundred weapons, and many of them have multiple "firing modes". At the minimum, that's around 1000 new variables for me to keep track of, when I could barely keep track of what we had before. :P I wouldn't be able to GM such a system.
No it doesnt. It only does when you read in the most stupid way imaginable which isnt what i wrote :V
its at most 7 values.
and 6 of those can be shared over all equipment and 1 is optional (armor piercing)

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron