Designing Abilities

Ghost Whistler · May 22, 2013, 06:06:34 AM

I'm designing abilities for what will be around 8 different character types, each completely unique (no mix and match). A rather broad question: what is the optimum number of abilities/powers (call them what you will) and what advice can you suggest when designing them other than, presumably, keep it reasonably simple.

Bill · May 22, 2013, 03:40:34 PM

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;656597I'm designing abilities for what will be around 8 different character types, each completely unique (no mix and match). A rather broad question: what is the optimum number of abilities/powers (call them what you will) and what advice can you suggest when designing them other than, presumably, keep it reasonably simple.

Well, variety usually is good. I would try to have as many unique abilities per character type as you can.....as long as those abilities still feel unique.

If I had to pick a number, at least 5. More, possibly many more if the uniqueness can be maintained.

Sacrosanct · May 22, 2013, 04:16:30 PM

Apparently, even the impression of having a dead level will cause nerdragers to blow up in fits.

Depending on how else your class features are designed, might be something to consider.

1of3 · May 22, 2013, 06:40:33 PM

What kind of abilities are you talking about? Class features / Kewl Powerz?

Kewl Powerz should be visible. Other players should be aware that a power has been used. Bonus points, if there is no need to utter "I use Kewl Power #3".

Ghost Whistler · May 23, 2013, 05:52:28 AM

Cool powers that are class based. Like Feng Shui: each class has a suite of abilities.

deleted user · May 23, 2013, 12:17:53 PM

5 at the most.

My criteria -

-useful - so you need to know what kind of gameplay you're promoting.
-special - makes them stand out from Johnny Peasant (for good or ill)
-either inherent, based down bloodline or took mucho practice
-if a genre game - emulate the genre rather than just realism

Phillip · May 24, 2013, 10:38:33 AM

What it takes.

Have you seen the Thief class in TSR-era D&D? Half a dozen different abilities with only minor differences in chance of success, could easily be combined into one rating (which I prefer).

On the other hand, the Monk and Druid classes have more distinct abilities, acquired at different levels.

Ghost Whistler · May 25, 2013, 03:04:46 AM

Quote from: Sean !;6569655 at the most.

My criteria -

-useful - so you need to know what kind of gameplay you're promoting.
-special - makes them stand out from Johnny Peasant (for good or ill)
-either inherent, based down bloodline or took mucho practice
-if a genre game - emulate the genre rather than just realism

I meant abilities in general - to choose from. Not how many the pc ends up with.

Also, I really don't like the idea of using points to fuel abilities (in my case, Chi). Such as "spend X Chi to add X damage". It seems like a huge amount of work to balance and to process a means to replenish. Unlike boardgames or cardgames, rpg's don't have specific timed processes (like turns - except in combat - or passing go in monopoly), so getting that right sounds like an absolute mare.

However, without that kind of flexbility abilities are much more limited - aren't they?

john_tan · August 05, 2013, 08:07:42 AM

Quote from: Bill;656723Well, variety usually is good. I would try to have as many unique abilities per character type as you can.....as long as those abilities still feel unique.
If I had to pick a number, at least 5. More, possibly many more if the uniqueness can be maintained.

I agree. I personally think, the more the better (in the reasonable numbers though

and practice shows that it's good.

Doccit · August 06, 2013, 11:50:01 AM

Spoiler

Quote from: Sean !;6569655 at the most.

My criteria -

-useful - so you need to know what kind of gameplay you're promoting.
-special - makes them stand out from Johnny Peasant (for good or ill)
-either inherent, based down bloodline or took mucho practice
-if a genre game - emulate the genre rather than just realism

I agree about the number five being important. The problem with dead levels is quite vexing. Players constantly need to be given new toys, but having too many to keep track of can make gameplay very confusing. I tend to try and give players lots of different categories of abilities that only applied in certain situations of the game.

For example, in the current game I am working on there are only 10 levels, and the time it takes for players to level up is determined by the GM (so campaigns can last a very long time if they choose to, or resolve very quickly). Players get Combat Abilities and Talents on even levels, and Feats Of Creation and Developments on odd levels. So they get five of everything.

Combat abilities are either actions that they can use in combat, or passive or situational boosts for combat.

Talents allow them to make new kinds of skill checks, and grant them the ability to succeed at some very specific things automatically.

Feats Of Creation are powerful items that the players make for themselves, companions they recruit, and powerful spells, who's applications are mostly out of combat (this game doesn't keep track of currency and the player's cant buy magic stuff for world building related reasons)

Developments are static boosts to stats. One might take the form of "+2 [of one thing], -2 [of the other].

This way the GM decides how quickly he/she wants to increase the complexity, and players get lots of new stuff to play with without significantly increasing their burden of memory at the higher levels.

Oh. I just read the last post and you weren't talking about the number.

I find a great way to give players new toys to play with without increasing complexity and paralyzing people with choice in combat is to give them skill abilities as well. They could get an ability, for example, that let them climb a wall for 10ft before they have to make a check, and makes checks for climbing walls easier.

Null levels are bad, but so is too much choice slowing down combat. The majority of stuff that they are given, in my mind, should not affect their capabilities in combat, because giving them too much combat stuff makes combat less fun.

I once built a game where players chose a "class", which gave them skill stuff and other non-combat perks, and a "fighting style" which conferred the combat benefits.

john_tan · August 30, 2013, 03:43:51 AM

Quote from: Doccit;677872[
I once built a game where players chose a "class", which gave them skill stuff and other non-combat perks, and a "fighting style" which conferred the combat benefits.

It will be interesting to try your game. How this can be done?

robiswrong · August 30, 2013, 04:18:43 AM

The biggest thing about abilities is that there needs to be a decision involved in using them - there should be instances where A is better than B, and B is better than A. To use game theory terms, there shouldn't be any dominated strategies.

The more abilities (choices, really) you have, the more likely it is that one will be better than the others in all situations.

TristramEvans · August 30, 2013, 06:19:47 AM

Holy Necro Batman! How long has Ghost Whistler been banned?

Doccit · August 30, 2013, 10:32:18 PM

Dear me, I didn't notice that.

Quote from: john_tan;686986It will be interesting to try your game. How this can be done?

The game was based off of the show adventure time, but it helped me flesh out a lot of ideas for my original stuff in terms of mechanics. Here it is.

As for how it can be done, classes gave them talents, which let them make new kinds of skill checks unavailable to others, or things they were guaranteed success at without making skill checks, and windfalls, which were items (magical or otherwise extravagant), contacts, reputations, and etcetera.

Something that helped the windfalls along was that the game didn't have formalized currency. Carrying lots of money around everywhere doesn't make sense without extra dimensional space, and there isn't a huge market for very expensive things. Finding a vendor of a magic gauntlet is a lot more difficult then scrounging the money together to buy it, and likely, he isn't interested in selling.

---

I don't think I necessarily agree with you Robiswrong. There is a lot to be said for passive abilities. The players still get to make meaningful decisions in terms of which passive abilities that they will take, and it will still alter the way they make decisions in combat without necessarily giving them more choices (EX, if you've got fire resistance, you can swing your sword at the fire snake with impunity. If you don't you might want to pick a different target). Too many choices in combat is bad, and slows things down a lot.

Designing Abilities

TristramEvans