I'm starting work on a revision of the 4C System. I hope to incorporate several ideas that were left out of the original project created by Phil Reed. It will also be geared toward a wider scope than a simple retro-clone of the old FASERIP from yesteryear. I plan to show how the system can be adapted to other genres than just supers.

So, with that in mind, what would you like to see in this revision?

Been working on something along the same lines for the better part of a year now, under the rather unimaginative working title of Phaserip. Playtesting is almost done, and I hope to have it in pdf form in a few months time.

Have you checked out G-Core yet? That's another FASERIP revamp.

I have to say, I would like to see a "finished" version of 4C, or rather a version of 4C that was actually an RPG and not a "toolkit".

As much as I want this, I'm afraid the 4C toolkit needs a lot of work. I'm more than willing to pitch in when I can, but I'm very busy, as usual.

I want to see: Good stat names, and good rank names. I want the numbers to be paired down a bit (using them more for advancement than anything else.) I want good weapons list, and methods to make weapons like those in the book, and vehicles as well. Covering everything from common cars and planes on up to super rockets and starships if you are doing "general."

Plus, better powers versions for "Probability Manipulation" and Special Weapon.

Loved the old MSH game, though I've only run a couple of one-shots, I'm starting a proper game of it shortly. Still my supers game of choice since I like the medium crunchiness over the too-heavy d20 mutations like M&M, Champions, or DC Heroes or the 'too lite' (for me) ICONS type systems.
'More balanced PCs' would be my main thing to wish for, I guess (point buy?). Perhaps faster advancement and/or a splitting up of advancement Karma and spendable Karma.

Myself I did pick up G-CORE (it was cheap) but didn't think it was a particularly good rebuild. Though killing the table has some merit IIRC they went to an additive d100 roll for attribute checks? (urk) and other than that, most of the changes (like of stat names) managed to irk me... and it gave characters multiple actions equal to 1/10 agility...

Sometimes considered having a more detailed talent/skill system, where you add the Rating Number of the skill to the Rating Number of the attribute to get a final rating (i.e. Excellent (20) base Fighting + Excellent (20) Weapon Talent = Incredible (40) Fighting), rather than just a +1 CS.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;462761Sometimes considered having a more detailed talent/skill system, where you add the Rating Number of the skill to the Rating Number of the attribute to get a final rating (i.e. Excellent (20) base Fighting + Excellent (20) Weapon Talent = Incredible (40) Fighting), rather than just a +1 CS.

I actually like the ease of +1CS, but I think the talent system should be expanded a bit. Basic +1CS, Expert +2 CS, and Master +3 CS, to keep adding simple and fast. So  Fighting person with Excellent Fighting, and say "Blades"  at Expert gets Incredible fighting. Same essential effect, but faster.

Quote from: TristramEvans;462710Been working on something along the same lines for the better part of a year now, under the rather unimaginative working title of Phaserip. Playtesting is almost done, and I hope to have it in pdf form in a few months time.

Have you checked out G-Core yet? That's another FASERIP revamp.

I have to say, I would like to see a "finished" version of 4C, or rather a version of 4C that was actually an RPG and not a "toolkit".

Sweet! Can't wait to see what you've done with it!

I do have G-Core, but I haven't dove into it very deeply yet.

It will still essentially be a "toolkit," but a more finished version. I want folks to be able to pick up the core book and be able to run a western, and then next time a space opera, next fantasy, and so on.

Quote from: Silverlion;462757As much as I want this, I'm afraid the 4C toolkit needs a lot of work. I'm more than willing to pitch in when I can, but I'm very busy, as usual.

I want to see: Good stat names, and good rank names. I want the numbers to be paired down a bit (using them more for advancement than anything else.) I want good weapons list, and methods to make weapons like those in the book, and vehicles as well. Covering everything from common cars and planes on up to super rockets and starships if you are doing "general."

Plus, better powers versions for "Probability Manipulation" and Special Weapon.

I figured you'd jump in on this! I hope to bounce ideas off you whenever you have the time. I knew that build rules were what you were wanting, I'd seen you post on that before.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;462761Loved the old MSH game, though I've only run a couple of one-shots, I'm starting a proper game of it shortly. Still my supers game of choice since I like the medium crunchiness over the too-heavy d20 mutations like M&M, Champions, or DC Heroes or the 'too lite' (for me) ICONS type systems.
'More balanced PCs' would be my main thing to wish for, I guess (point buy?). Perhaps faster advancement and/or a splitting up of advancement Karma and spendable Karma.

Myself I did pick up G-CORE (it was cheap) but didn't think it was a particularly good rebuild. Though killing the table has some merit IIRC they went to an additive d100 roll for attribute checks? (urk) and other than that, most of the changes (like of stat names) managed to irk me... and it gave characters multiple actions equal to 1/10 agility...

Sometimes considered having a more detailed talent/skill system, where you add the Rating Number of the skill to the Rating Number of the attribute to get a final rating (i.e. Excellent (20) base Fighting + Excellent (20) Weapon Talent = Incredible (40) Fighting), rather than just a +1 CS.

A point buy system is definitely going in. In fact, I'm using a version created by Bill Browne that he posted over at the Year of Living Free Wiki as a basis. Another friend, Curt Meyer, did a revamp on it to expand it from Bill's original. He set it up where you can use it to build characters from different ages of supers play style; silver, gold, etc.

Quote from: Silverlion;462771I actually like the ease of +1CS, but I think the talent system should be expanded a bit. Basic +1CS, Expert +2 CS, and Master +3 CS, to keep adding simple and fast. So  Fighting person with Excellent Fighting, and say "Blades"  at Expert gets Incredible fighting. Same essential effect, but faster.

Yeah, I came up with a new skill/talent system along these same lines, but mine has 5 levels of expertise. I plan to include it, or a similar version of it as an optional system.

It's been yonks since I've looked at 4C, I remember waiting for it and then when it was finally released not seeing much to inspire me with, especially with the free downloads of MSH.

I'd welcome a fleshed out version that inspires me. I wonder if, since 4C's a clone of MSH, it could be expanded to handle more than Marvel Supers type stuff? Is there anything say, in DC Supers, Image or whatnot that isn't in/handled by 4C? Or does 4C (and by extension MSH) already handle non-Marvel super-heroes fine?

Quote from: Casey777;462776It's been yonks since I've looked at 4C, I remember waiting for it and then when it was finally released not seeing much to inspire me with, especially with the free downloads of MSH.

I'd welcome a fleshed out version that inspires me. I wonder if, since 4C's a clone of MSH, it could be expanded to handle more than Marvel Supers type stuff? Is there anything say, in DC Supers, Image or whatnot that isn't in/handled by 4C? Or does 4C (and by extension MSH) already handle non-Marvel super-heroes fine?

A friend of mine, "back in the day," used the MSH rules to run a most excellent Star Wars campaign without much tweaking. With the tweaks I plan to introduce, I think it will be a very versatile system indeed. One of the projects I have on the back burner is a WWII aerial combat game, so to me at least, it can handle just about anything.

Quote from: Silverlion;462771I actually like the ease of +1CS, but I think the talent system should be expanded a bit. Basic +1CS, Expert +2 CS, and Master +3 CS, to keep adding simple and fast. So  Fighting person with Excellent Fighting, and say "Blades"  at Expert gets Incredible fighting. Same essential effect, but faster.

Not quite. Your way is simpler, but giving the skill its own rating would mean that a character can be very highly talented without a good base rating.  Also makes a +1 CS harder to acquire if your base ability is already at Unearthly i.e. diminishing returns.

Quote from: Jamfke;462775A point buy system is definitely going in. In fact, I'm using a version created by Bill Browne that he posted over at the Year of Living Free Wiki as a basis. Another friend, Curt Meyer, did a revamp on it to expand it from Bill's original. He set it up where you can use it to build characters from different ages of supers play style; silver, gold, etc.

Thanks!

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;462780Not quite. Your way is simpler, but giving the skill its own rating would mean that a character can be very highly talented without a good base rating.  Also makes a +1 CS harder to acquire if your base ability is already at Unearthly i.e. diminishing returns.


Thanks!

You're welcome!

I think I see what you're saying about giving the skill/talent its own rating. Sort of like how powers are handled, but with better advancement rules? The way I have my version of leveling for skills is not based on the attributes. Skills have their own advancement structure. I had used 250 points times the level being raised to, so level 1 would only cost 250 karma/build/whatever points, no matter what the base attribute score is, then level 2 would cost 500 points, level 3 750 points, and so on. I might change the cost a bit depending upon how I decide karma/advancement points are handed out during a game.

Quote from: Jamfke;462903You're welcome!

I think I see what you're saying about giving the skill/talent its own rating. Sort of like how powers are handled, but with better advancement rules? The way I have my version of leveling for skills is not based on the attributes. Skills have their own advancement structure. I had used 250 points times the level being raised to, so level 1 would only cost 250 karma/build/whatever points, no matter what the base attribute score is, then level 2 would cost 500 points, level 3 750 points, and so on. I might change the cost a bit depending upon how I decide karma/advancement points are handed out during a game.

G-Core handled this by having the skills give a percentile based bonus to the roll result instead of the roll itself. (a +10 to +30 range IIRC).

I've handled this by allowing talents to be doubled (Charmx2) or tripled (Blind Fighting x3), with them providing a passive bonus (+1, +2, or +3), which can be  "stacked", during opposed actions, and an active bonus for unopposed actions that allows them to adjust the colour result of the roll.

Quote from: Jamfke;462903You're welcome!

I think I see what you're saying about giving the skill/talent its own rating. Sort of like how powers are handled, but with better advancement rules? The way I have my version of leveling for skills is not based on the attributes. Skills have their own advancement structure. I had used 250 points times the level being raised to, so level 1 would only cost 250 karma/build/whatever points, no matter what the base attribute score is, then level 2 would cost 500 points, level 3 750 points, and so on. I might change the cost a bit depending upon how I decide karma/advancement points are handed out during a game.

Well I think that (particularly if you want to have the system work for non-supers, you definitely need more detailed skills, since characters won't have super powers as their defining feature. The basic options for doing this that I can see are:

1. Give a skill gives a varying number of column shifts depending on how good it is.
2. A skill has its own rating/rank (from Feeble to Unearthly), and not adjust for attribute at all.
3. Give it its own rating, but add that to the attribute to work out a total (what I was suggesting)
4. Give a skill its own rating, and characters can make a stat roll if their first check fails.
5. Completely change the core mechanic and do something else (e.g. G-core's additive roll).

One of the things I like about MSH is that it can handle absurdly high stats without being unbalanced, because it takes more stat points to move up to the next rank - 2 points to go from Feeble to Poor, and 50 points to go from Unearthly to Shift-X, even though both of those are
one rank shift and so equivalent to about a +5% chance of success.
A flat +1 CS is worth 2 points if your stat is Feeble, and worth 50 points if your stat is Unearthly.

With a separate rating for skill, that you add to attribute, you basically have a flat cost - it might be 10 Karma per rating point, say...and it takes more and more points to get a benefit just because of the way the Rank system works. That is, it'll cost me 2 points to get to Feeble skill, and 25 to go from Amazing to Monstrous skill.

Also at the upper end, if the highest level of skill is Unearthly say, then if you're adding them then attribute makes little difference now: the guy with amazing Strength (50) + Wrestling (100) then he would have a 150 total (Shift-X) while the ancient judo master might have Strength (2) + Unearthly wrestling skill = 102 (still just Unearthly) - a one rank difference. Consequently a massive skill lets someone catch up a lead of several ranks.

On the other hand, having a rank shift of +1 to +5 say means a good attribute is still always the main thing driving how good someone is at a skill. Someone can get at most +5 ranks for skill training in your system, vs. +9 ranks for just being Unearthly (counting from Feeble).

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;4629672. A skill has its own rating/rank (from Feeble to Unearthly), and not adjust for attribute at all.
3. Give it its own rating, but add that to the attribute to work out a total (what I was suggesting)
4. Give a skill its own rating, and characters can make a stat roll if their first check fails.

After taking some time to think about skills, I kind of like these three options the best so far. For a genre that doesn't have "special abilities," or powers, giving a hardy skill set with the same use structure as powers would help to keep the "feel" of the system intact.

Quote from: Jamfke;464035After taking some time to think about skills, I kind of like these three options the best so far. For a genre that doesn't have "special abilities," or powers, giving a hardy skill set with the same use structure as powers would help to keep the "feel" of the system intact.

I'm a very keep it simple kind of guy. Couldn't you find a functional medium to keep a single option?

Quote from: Jamfke;464035After taking some time to think about skills, I kind of like these three options the best so far. For a genre that doesn't have "special abilities," or powers, giving a hardy skill set with the same use structure as powers would help to keep the "feel" of the system intact.

If you zer0-averaged the attributes, then you could simply combine them with skills. For example, in the game Tribe 8 the system has something like 13 or more attributes, but they are zero-averaged, so a person only needs to record those attributes that are above or below the norm. Combine this with the skills system and you have something like this:

Manchovie

Fighting: Gd, Strength: Rm, Reason: Pr, Swimming: Lg, etc.

This would allow you to "cut out" the Talent/Skill rules completely, in effect treating attributes/Talents similar to the concept of Aspects in FATE.