I have done some limited group playtesting of Baseline RPG before, but it never really occurred to me that solo playtesting could be useful - RPGs are played in a group, after all.

However, that group playtesting had missed one large aspect. You see, I handled everything to do with the chart in those playtests and the rules were a simpler form.

Those two things bashed me on the head in the self-playtest I just did. While the end result was satisfying and potentially fun, the process was *Annoying*.

Specifically, the process of consulting the chart for when the attack happens (Tick-based initiative), then for how much damage (Thankfully not for wether you hit), then for damage resistance to subtract for damage...Add that to the normal stuff of adding a couple stats...

Granted, it wouldn't be as bad with one character, but even the two-character ~Paladin vs. Zombie fight was annoying...

I'm not giving up on the chart. The chart is, I think, a good idea. However, I'm clearly going to have to remove the chart from the process of playing, beyond a +5 to a trait being twice as good. It'll be everywhere else, but not where you're trying to figure out how much damage you just did.

Preliminary analysis: Problem fixed. v0.3 needs to be written.

Solo playtest:

QuoteTwo zombies again! Slay the evil!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 42/42; 13, 7. Z #1: 42/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 42/42; 11, 6

Zombie #1: Monster Bash! Tick 16, To-Hit 4, Damage 3d8+10
Zombie #2: Monster swipe your Health! Tick 14, To-Hit 8, Damage 3d8+4

Sir Mordren Smites #1 with Holy Power! 12.0, To-Hit 10, Damage 5d8+5!

Tick: Sir Mord: 12.0. Zombie #1: 16. Zombie #2: 14.

Sir Mordren Smites! To-Hit 10 + = 9: Hit! Damage roll 29 (5, 5, 5, 6, + 5 = 34! - DR = 28! Zombie #1 is slashed from shoulder to hip! A Good Defense on Zombie #1: Tick +12.5, To-Hit 6, Damage 4d8+6!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 42/42; 13, 7. Z #1: 14/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 42/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 24.5. Zombie #1: 16. Zombie #2: 14.

Zombie #2 swipes at Sir Mord: To-Hit 7: Hit! Damage 10 (7, 1, 2) +4 = 14. Ooh, low roll for the zombie! - DR = 7. Z #2 scratches Sir Mord on the face. Z #2 readies to take another single-claw swipe! Tick +14

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: 14/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 42/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 24.5. Zombie #1: 16. Zombie #2: 28.

Z #1 bashes at Sir Mord! To-Hit 4 + = 1! Hit!: 11 (8, 2, 1) + 10 = 21 - DR = 14. More damage, but that low roll sure penalized him! Z #1 smashes his fists into Mordren's chest! Another bash attack for the Zombie: Tick +16

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: 14/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 42/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 24.5. Zombie #1: 32. Zombie #2: 28.

Sir Mord demonstrates that the living are faster than the dead: To-Hit 6 + = 9 - hits! Damage 18 (6, 3, 6, 3) + 6 = 24 - DR 18. With a deft swipe, he cuts off Zombie #1's head and sends it flying! A normal attack - See if he can set up some sort of rythm for a constant beatdown! Tick +9.5, To-Hit 4, Damage 3d8+4

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -4/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 42/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 34.0. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 28.

Zee #2 takes a swipe. He's looking to chow down! 8 + = 9! Damage = 15 (8, 5, 2) + 4 = 19 - DR 12. Mordren takes a bloody gash on the arm! Going for that again! Tick +14

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 42/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 34.0. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 42.

Sir Mord is hard-pressed, but no paladin is going to loose to a zombie!. To-Hit 4 + 1 = 5! Damage...13 (4, 6, 3) + 4 = 17 - DR 11. Zombie #2 is unimpressed. "Thagt alglg you GOGT?!?!" Sir Mord goes for another swing! Tick +9.5

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 31/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 43.5. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 42.

Zombie #2 swipes again! To-Hit 10, Damage 15 - DR 8. Sir Mord laughs. "Tis but a flesh wound!" Tick +14 for next swipe!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 31/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 43.5. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 56.

Mord yells "Time to make you deader!" To-Hit 5, Damage 19 - DR 13. "Oh yeah? Is that what you call a hit?!" The zombie gurgles back! Tick +9.5 for the next normal attack!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 18/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 54.0. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 56.

Looks like Mord's rythm is going to pay off! Sir Mord: To-Hit 7, Damage 18 - DR 12. "Ha! Hit you again!" Mord cries. "ZOMBIE CRUSH YOU!!!" comes the reply! Tick +9.5, normal attack!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 35/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 6/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 63.5. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 56.

The zombie aims, swings...And it's a Hit! To-Hit 8, Damage 11 total, to be precise! "YARGGHH!" comes the cry from the zombie, as claws leave bloody wounds down Mord's side! Tick +14, Swipe!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 24/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 6/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 63.5. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 70.

"Hah!" cries Sir Mord. "I've got you now!" To-hit 1 - A hit! Kind hard to miss a zombie. Damage 12 - DR 5. "Bah!" gurgles the zombie. "That was pathetic!" Tick +9.5, normal attack!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 24/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 1/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 73.0. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 70.

When Zombie attacks! To-Hit 6, Damage 13 - DR 6! "Bah! You speak of scratches?" scorns Sir Mord! Tick +14!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 18/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: 1/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 73.0. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: 84.

"MORD...SMASH!!!" To-Hit 4, Damage 22 - DR = 16! Sir Mord smashes the zombies head and ribcage!

Health; DR Normal, Lethal: Sir Mord: 18/42; 13, 7. Z #1: -3/42; 11, 6. Z #2: -13/42; 11, 6
Tick: Sir Mord: 73.0. Zombie #1: Dead. Zombie #2: Dead.

Yeah. It's something to be thought about. I usually have playtesters who provided me with this kind of feedback. It is why I strongly suggest a series of playtests. One run by you the owner (group before you), one by people you think will give feedback appropriate to your aims, and as close to random a collection of other gamers as possible. Although the latter should be "people who play lots of varied games", as I've had playtesters whose goals were too narrow and specific and different than just play the game they were given. (They had a bias, I won't say what kind of bias, but that influenced too much of their feedback.)

I always go through a two stage playtest. The first stage, Alpha test, is to get the rules down. This is myself running my own group. They know how to find and exploit loopholes, and this test encourages that. As the test goes on, I find and seal the loopholes and introduce new rules to shape the game the way I want. When the rules seem tight to me, I begin the second stage.

The second stage is Beta testing, where I give a playtest package to several groups and allow them to run the game as written. This is a test of the expression of the rules, as the rules themselves should work properly from Alpha testing. This is where I adjust how the rules are stated, where I need examples, and in general nailing down the language. I take feedback from the Beta groups, and use the feedback to guide me. It is very rare that any rules are introduced at this stage.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmice;262894I take feedback from the Beta groups, and use the feedback to guide me. It is very rare that any rules are introduced at this stage.

I suppose that typical feedback is an AP report by the GM right ? And I guess some play test reports are more detailed than others. Or maybe it's less formal and you're ok with a conversational debriefing ? What guidelines do you give your testers to try and optimize the quality of the feedback ?

Quote from: boulet;262905I suppose that typical feedback is an AP report by the GM right ? And I guess some play test reports are more detailed than others. Or maybe it's less formal and you're ok with a conversational debriefing ? What guidelines do you give your testers to try and optimize the quality of the feedback ?

It's seldom an AP. Unless an AP is a log of the game, it's just a story, which doesn't help figuring out what went well and what didn't. Usually it's in the form of questions from the group's GM. These questions tell me what has been misinterpreted - so I need to explain it better, what has been glossed over - so that I need to emphasize it more, and what has been confusing - so I need to re-write it more simply and directly. My guidelines are just to do whatever they want within the parameters of the game, which are very elastic. If something is attempted which falls outside the boundaries of the game, I can either ignore it because it wasn't what the game was designed to do, or I can include it within the games parameters, because it's cool and other folks might want to do the same thing. Almost always I will go for the latter. Game groups like to stretch rulesets, and I do my best to make mine as elastic as I can for this very reason.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmice;262914It's seldom an AP. Unless an AP is a log of the game, it's just a story, which doesn't help figuring out what went well and what didn't. Usually it's in the form of questions from the group's GM. These questions tell me what has been misinterpreted - so I need to explain it better, what has been glossed over - so that I need to emphasize it more, and what has been confusing - so I need to re-write it more simply and directly. My guidelines are just to do whatever they want within the parameters of the game, which are very elastic. If something is attempted which falls outside the boundaries of the game, I can either ignore it because it wasn't what the game was designed to do, or I can include it within the games parameters, because it's cool and other folks might want to do the same thing. Almost always I will go for the latter. Game groups like to stretch rulesets, and I do my best to make mine as elastic as I can for this very reason.

-clash

Very much this. Reports I get are more along the lines of:
Problem: Argument for change: Proposal for change (repeat)

Oh...and this worked nice.

So, AP really does nothing for me. And I do not do nearly as good a job at game design as Clash so I get ALOT of iteration of the process.

Bill

So, if I get you right guys the process is quite tester driven. Meaning if they didn't detect a "problem", or if they didn't use some part of your ruleset you won't hear about it. Or maybe you give them a memo like "I've reworked the gun fight system, please use it when you test and tell me how it went" ?

The thing I have trouble to wrap my mind around isn't about the crunchy aspect of beta-testing. It's the more subjective aspects of roleplaying. Let's say you're creating a Cthulhuesque game, and you designed a subset of rules to emulate characters mental sanity. How would you deal with testing this part ? It's not like a fight sub system where you can easily describe objectives ("I want deadly lightning fast combat" or "I want over the top stunts and built-in morale rules") and evaluate how you game qualifies. How do you test parts of your game with subjective objectives like "I want my game to fit in this genre", "I want my game to create an atmosphere of fear and suspiscion" or "I want my game to convey how fragile the characters mental health is".

Quote from: boulet;262927So, if I get you right guys the process is quite tester driven. Meaning if they didn't detect a "problem", or if they didn't use some part of your ruleset you won't hear about it. Or maybe you give them a memo like "I've reworked the gun fight system, please use it when you test and tell me how it went" ?

The latter.

QuoteThe thing I have trouble to wrap my mind around isn't about the crunchy aspect of beta-testing. It's the more subjective aspects of roleplaying. Let's say you're creating a Cthulhuesque game, and you designed a subset of rules to emulate characters mental sanity. How would you deal with testing this part ? It's not like a fight sub system where you can easily describe objectives ("I want deadly lightning fast combat" or "I want over the top stunts and built-in morale rules") and evaluate how you game qualifies. How do you test parts of your game with subjective objectives like "I want my game to fit in this genre", "I want my game to create an atmosphere of fear and suspiscion" or "I want my game to convey how fragile the characters mental health is".

Those things should be apparent in Alpha testing. The testing of the expression of these rules in the Beta test would be mostly anecdotal.

Tester: "The sanity rules didn't work the way I thought they would, as most of the PCs were able to shrug off their hinderances with little effect, using their personality trait bonuses." Designer: "The traits can't be used against the derangements caused by contact with the unknown, as their personalities are warped in the process. I'll have to set that out more explicitly."

Or

Tester: "The sanity rules were too harsh - PCs were running about raving like loons at the end, leading directly to the TPK." Designer: "That shouldn't have happened! Did they roll their resistance checks based on their fortitude? Did you apply personality trait bonuses? They would still apply before their personalities were warped! Maybe I need to make that bit clearer!"

-clash

Quote from: HinterWelt;262920So, AP really does nothing for me. And I do not do nearly as good a job at game design as Clash so I get ALOT of iteration of the process.

Bill

Bull hockey! Your games are sweet to handle and strongly designed. The fact you get a lot of iteration is a GOOD thing! It's what makes your system strong, Bill!

-clash

Lots of good advice. Thanks.

Well, a little number re-arrangement, a little playtesting...Lots more needed...

Snapshot:

Quote'Tis a zombie! To battle!

Health, DR Normal/Lethal: Mord 42/42; 13/7, Zombie 42/42; 11/6

Mordren does Holy Smite: Tick +11.5, To-Hit 8, Damage 7d8+10, Min. 9 - Mordren is using a Heavy, Cutting weapon and Zombies are soft targets, so a minimum damage and more damage.
Zombie swipes with a single claw: Tick +11.5, To-Hit 8, Damage 3d8+4

Tick: Sir Mordren 11.5. Zombie 11.5

Tick 11.5: In order of Grace. Mordren is more graceful, so goes first.
Sir Mordren: To-Hit + (d6-d6) = 8, Damage 7d8+10 (6, 2, 8, 1, 5, 8, 7) = 39 - DR = 33. Zombie is burned most fiercely by holy light! Next, an ordinary attack: Tick +8.5, To-Hit 4, Damage 4d8+6
Zombie: To-Hit 8 + = 3 and a Critical Failure. Zombie falls down. Damage 3d8+4 = No damage. Standing Tick +6.5

Health, DR Normal/Lethal: Mord 42/42; 13/7, Zombie 9/42; 11/6
Tick: Sir Mordren 20.0. Zombie 18.0

Tick 18.0: Zombie stands up. Zombie takes a two-clawed bash at Sir Mord: Tick +13.5, To-Hit 4, Damage 3d8+10

Tick: Sir Mordren 20.0. Zombie 31.5.

Tick 20.0: When zombies are attacked, on now! To-Hit 4 + = 12 and almost a critical hit, Damage (8, 3, 6, 7) 24 - DR 18. Sir Mordren bashes the zombie's head open!



Two Zombies! They want your braaaaiiinzz!!!

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Mord 42/42; 59%; 13/7.
Zombie #1 42/42; 34%; 11/6. Zombie #2 42/42; 34%; 11/6

Mord opens with his favorite, Holy Smite, Zombie #2 - But what's this? It's an overhand swing - Slower for more damage! Tick +15.0, To-Hit +61%, Damage 8d8+6, Min. 6, vs. Soft Targets 9d8+8, Min. 9
Zombie #1 and 2 aren't going down without a fight - Bash attacks...Altered to focus on damage. Tick 14.0, To-hit +23%, Damage 4d8+7

Tick: Sir Mordren 15.0. Zombie #1 14.0. Zombie #2 14.0. - Looks like the zombies go first!

When Zombies #1&2 attack! #1: To-Hit 27%...Aah, no. vs 59%, clear miss. Damage...N/A. Zombie #1 claws at thin air. #2: To-Hit 118% and almost a critical! 95%. Damage...(6, 3, 3, 20 - DR = 13. No brains for you...Zombies will try again. Tick 14.0, To-hit +23%, Damage 4d8+7

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Mord 29/42; 59%; 13/7.
Tick: Sir Mordren 15.0. Zombie #1 28.0. Zombie #2 28.0. - Looks like the zombies go first!

Sir Mordren swings: To-Hit 93% - Good thing he has a high to-hit, or he'd have missed - 31% roll. Damage (3, 6, 3, 8, 5, 6, 6, 1, 2) 40 - DR = 34. Holy light sears the zombie like an undead match, but the foul creature survives! A good defense, ordinary at Zombie #2: Tick +11.0, To-Hit +48%, Damage 4d8+6, Min 6, vs. Soft Targets 5d8+8, Min. 9

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Zombie #1 42/42; 34%; 11/6. Zombie #2 8/42; 34%; 11/6
Tick: Sir Mordren 26.0. Zombie #1 28.0. Zombie #2 28.0. - Ooh, cruel follow-up. Zombie #2 is going down...

Sir Mord steps up to bat...It's a swing...130%! A hit, a solid hit, I say! (7, 6, 6, 4, = 31 - DR = 25 damage! A good, solid bash, wot? Zombie #2's head flies off, it's going, it's going...Oooh, hole in one! Mord is going for a solid, good defense series on Zombie #1 next. Tick +11.0, To-Hit +48%, Damage 4d8+6, Min 6, vs. Soft Targets 5d8+8, Min. 9

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Zombie #1 42/42; 34%; 11/6. Zombie #2 -17/42; 34%; 11/6
Tick: Sir Mordren 37.0. Zombie #1 28.0. Zombie #2 Dead. Zombie #1 wants vengeance! And Braaaiiinzz!

Zombies #1 attacks! But does it have the guts? Does it have the brains? Does it have what it takes to win? Well, I think I know, but let's roll some dice...76% - Hit! Damage? (2, 1, 8, 7) 18 - DR = 11. "Bah! I've had worse from flies!" Sir Mord scoffs! But is that true? Frankly, Mord is down there in health and doesn't have much left. But on the other hand, he's doing more damage and a better chance at it. Tick 14.0, To-hit +23%, Damage 4d8+7

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Mord 18/42; 59%; 13/7.
Tick: Sir Mordren 37.0. Zombie #1 42.0. Zombie #2 Dead.

Sir Mord isn't backing down from foul undead! He's going to put this thing in the ground! To-hit is 128% - I think we can call that an easy hit! Damage...(4, 7, 3, 8, 1) 23 - DR = 17. A good, solid hit, but can he hit enough to keep from being killed? That's what we're here to find out, folks. Tick      +11.0, To-Hit +48%, Damage 4d8+6, Min 6, vs. Soft Targets 5d8+8, Min. 9

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Zombie #1 25/42; 34%; 11/6. Zombie #2 -17/42; 34%; 11/6
Tick: Sir Mordren 48.0. Zombie #1 42.0. Zombie #2 Dead.

Zee-monster #1 says "Crack open the skull, eat the brains!" To-Hit 74% - A hit! Damage is six, one, four, seven...18 - DR = eleven. Mord lives...For now. The zombie is lunging fast on the next attack, though, so who knows? Tick +11.5, To-hit +42%, Damage 3d8+6

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Mord 7/42; 59%; 13/7.
Tick: Sir Mordren 48.0. Zombie #1 53.5. Zombie #2 Dead.

Sir Mord takes his best shot...Believe me, he needs it! 129%! Hits, yes, hits! Damage...(3, 3, 6, 6, 3) + 8 - The dice are regular on this one...*Cuts to commercial break*...And we're back, folks. Damage is 28 - DR = 22! Good, but not good enough! But - I've been forgetting the bonus! Well, that's bound to happen when something changes, such as the new percentile success system.

Health; Defense; DR Normal/Lethal:
Zombie #1 10/42; 34%; 11/6. Zombie #2 -17/42; 34%; 11/6
Tick: Sir Mordren 59.0. Zombie #1 53.5. Zombie #2 Dead.

And Zee #1 attacks again...Is this the end of Mord? To-Hit 126%! Very much a hit. Damage...4, 1, 7, 1) + 6 = 19 - DR = 13. And the zombie bashes Mord's brains in! Well, folks, sometimes you get the bad guy, sometimes the bad guy gets you. Sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug. And speaking of cleaning windshields...*Commercial break*