GAMERS is the generic version of the "six-letter system" - I always found it hard remembering the order of attributes in those attribute number strings in Classic Traveller, so I thought hey, if the attributes were also the name of the game, that'd make it easier, yeah? The idea is to have different six letter names, thus different attribute names, but everything else is the same - though each worldbook would have a bit more detail, like there's no point in having twenty different kinds of swords in a modern espionage game, but you might like it in the fantasy version.

The system was written to use the basic mechanics CT does, while being generic. It's written as simply and clearly as I can, with rules and trait descriptions each in 25 words or less.

I used the basic approach CT does, but I streamlined it a bit - so there's only one character generation system, only one skill resolution system, and so on. I also added a few bits and pieces. It's been playtested in a modern espionage game and works pretty well.

One thing I didn't include was those tables with the minimum and bonus strength for melee weapons. I'm not sure it's worth the complication for what it adds. But then thinking of HEROIC - the fantasy version - it's looking more attractive.

The wiki version is here, and the lengthier (a whole 19 pages) pdf is here. Some of that length is taken up by tests so you can make yourself as a character, or at least get a more concrete idea of what Strength 8 or Mind 4 really mean.

Playtested as it is, it's still of course a work in progress, so I'll be interested to hear what people think.

As I come to do the fantasy version, I've decided to make armour simply add to Reflexes, which is the usual difficulty required to hit someone.

eg Ref 7 + mail 4 = 11
sword +3 + 2d6 = ?

after I read some old D&Der commenting that medieval armour, basically you rarely cut through it, you find a weak or uncovered spot and hit there, instead. So the armour either protects you completely, or not at all.

This is simpler to run and avoids the delay where players add and subtract to figure out if they got the guy or not - that delay always takes away the dramatic tension.

Encumbrance reduces effective Endurance, Reflexes and Strength, too - so there'll be a tradeoff for some PCs.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;369177As I come to do the fantasy version, I've decided to make armour simply add to Reflexes, which is the usual difficulty required to hit someone.

eg Ref 7 + mail 4 = 11
sword +3 + 2d6 = ?

after I read some old D&Der commenting that medieval armour, basically you rarely cut through it, you find a weak or uncovered spot and hit there, instead. So the armour either protects you completely, or not at all.

This is simpler to run and avoids the delay where players add and subtract to figure out if they got the guy or not - that delay always takes away the dramatic tension.

Encumbrance reduces effective Endurance, Reflexes and Strength, too - so there'll be a tradeoff for some PCs.

The only problem is that in a fantasy setting you might well have touch based attacks or attacks that don't need to overcome armour to deal damage or super strong guys.

So if I cast a shocking grasp touch attack it should actually be bloody easy to hit the guy in plate and it should do more damage if anything (actually faraday cages ... hmm..)

Also exceptionally strong things probably can crush through / pierce armour. So a guy in plate fighting a giant is probably more at risk than a guy in leather that can get out of the way.

Personaly I prefer armour reduces reflex and movement and has a protection score. Plate 12 points, chain 7 points or whatever. If you want to aim for the slits in the visor or the chink between the arm and the breastplate then that is a called shot of some description. I don't think it removes drama you just move the drama from the roll to hit to the roll for damage.
Also means you can have optional tactical choices arround weapons and attack types. A pick reduces the defense of armour, a thrust is more effective against chain than a slash etc etc. Its more complex but richer.

Well, you can always have a chart of varying protections like CT did.

Or we could have lots of subrules tacked on. Like the Shocking Grasp spell mentions that "metal armour does not protect, in fact the victim suffers +1 damage." It'd just be hidden there in the spell description, easily forgotten. Now that's old school.

I love the illustration!

Quote from: boulet;369195I love the illustration!

The Jabberwock.

Interesting.  

First Question: Why did you feel the need to bulk up 216 quirks? In a 19 page document three or four pages of just... and mostly non-mechanical... quirks is a lot of bulk.  Even keeping the list intact, you could probably condense that down quite a bit into a columnar table, taking out redundant flavor text (really, who needs to have Shyness explained to them?)

Second question: THe sample character 'Samantha' has, under her GAMERS profile/code a string of four or five characters that, at a guess are greek or hebrew symbols?  No explanation forthcoming in my quick scan of the document.  If they are not part of the game, leave them out of the sample character. If they are you might want to... highlight them more?

EDIT::: I saw where it was explained.  Please, leave fancy 'player quirks' out of your examples. They make them less useful.

Quote from: jibbajibba;369187The only problem is that in a fantasy setting you might well have touch based attacks or attacks that don't need to overcome armour to deal damage or super strong guys.

Couldn't you just do what D&D 3.5 does:

If armour doesn't matter ('touch attack'), only use the reflex bonus.

If dodging doesn't matter ('flat-footed'), only use the armour bonus.

?

Quote from: Spike;369205Second question: THe sample character 'Samantha' has, under her GAMERS profile/code a string of four or five characters that, at a guess are greek or hebrew symbols?  No explanation forthcoming in my quick scan of the document.  If they are not part of the game, leave them out of the sample character. If they are you might want to... highlight them more?

I also found this confusing.

Yeah, I've entirely ditched Features in my most recent revision. Too thespy.

Quirks give flavour, baby. Plenty of short games have that many pages just for firearms.

I don't disagree that Quirks give flavor.

But a full quarter of your document is given over to this single 'flavor' block that is essentially 'rule-less'.

Imagine a White Wolf Book that is 25%.... you know? Bad example...

Imagine a D&D book that is 25% table of 'describing wounds'.  There is room for somethign like that, but there's a limit.

NOte that I didn't suggest cutting it out, merely condensing it. Alot.

As I recall its teh single largest part of character creation in your book, and yet the absolute least involved.  It could easily be replaced without a major loss by a single line saying 'Take a quirk. At the GM's option it give a +/- 1 DM to rolls where it is a factor. Example: Shyness.'

And mechanically you wouldn't lose anything except a random roll for flavor. Nothing wrong with having that random roll for flavor, either.

Maybe just a list of the quirks, then. It could be a big chart. Charts are good.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;369384Maybe just a list of the quirks, then. It could be a big chart. Charts are good.

Use a table.  One column is mental quirks, the next physical quirks, and maybe a metaphysical or supernatural column.

Pffft there are no supernatural ones. Naw, a nice alphabetical list of the more or less good ones followed by the more or less bad ones, with numbers next to them so you can roll them up.

Quote from: Age of Fable;369272Couldn't you just do what D&D 3.5 does:

If armour doesn't matter ('touch attack'), only use the reflex bonus.

If dodging doesn't matter ('flat-footed'), only use the armour bonus.

?

Yeah but doesn't cover the giant hits you with a tree or the I am using Armour Piecing arrows bits so you end up rulling for those as well and then you ahve a simple system with 8 or 9 exceptions you need to remenber and the target value keeps shifting about.

Armour absorbs physical damage and reduces reflexes is simple and generic and I doubt you would need to have any other expection rules.