For my Glorianna game, which is finally seeing the light of day this year, I was originally intending to use the standard StarCluster Percentile  Task-Resolution sub-system, as in StarCluster 2 or StarCluster Light (free DL) as the game is set in the Cluster on one planet. However, when I rewrote Sweet Chariot 2, I used the StarPool Dice Pool T-R sub-system instead, and that is also set in the Cluster - in fact, it's set on the next planet over from Glorianna.

So, knowing that the highly advanced, peculiarly stable world of Glorianna would probably not have a lot of combat - although what there was should be brutal - and have lots of duelling, political maneuvering, and such, I thought it might be better to use my StarKarma diceless rules.

My current plan is to use StarKarma, but put the percentile rules in the Optional Rules Appendix. What do you guys think?

-clash

Have you got a more detailled outlined of the game somewhere. I like to think that system fits the setting and would like to read up a bit more about the setting.

From the sounds of your one-liner description, diceless would do the trick nicely. If there is lots of combat or other statistical actions, then percentile system is lovely. Talky-talky scenarios and settings lend themselves better to diceless or low-dice mechanics.

I seem to have lost my command of the English language today, sorry about that.

Quote from: Rob LangHave you got a more detailled outlined of the game somewhere. I like to think that system fits the setting and would like to read up a bit more about the setting.

From the sounds of your one-liner description, diceless would do the trick nicely. If there is lots of combat or other statistical actions, then percentile system is lovely. Talky-talky scenarios and settings lend themselves better to diceless or low-dice mechanics.

I seem to have lost my command of the English language today, sorry about that.

Ooops! Sorry, Rob! It's been on the back burner for so long I forget people may not have heard of it!

Here's the blurb from the Flying Mice site:

"Extreme technology, morphing weapons, a Code Duello, elegant human courtiers, downshifted android peasants, uplifted animal shopkeepers, and a wildly inventive culture ruled over by the cloned Virgin Queen. Welcome to Glorianna!"

The Gloriannans are extremely high tech neo-Elizabethans. The focus of their culture is their Queen, Elizabeth, who is cloned from their first queen of the same name, descended from the current Queen Elizabeth of the UK. The colony ship they came on practiced a single Cultural Emulation - a practice designed to keep ships from falling apart during the 1200-1800 year voyage from earth - that of Elizabethan England. They met up with another ship with three different cultural emulations practiced on the three different "watches" - Germany under Frederik the Great, Spain under Phillip II, and France under Louis XIV - and decided to colonize a single planet together to give the colony the best possible technological and population base.

That was almost 500 years ago. Like many Cultural Emulative societies, nobody wanted to play the peasants, so they had to make them. At first robots played the part, but they were far too expensive to waste tending cows, so they began working on uplifts. Uplifts worked for a while, but they gradually drifted into the cities and towns and became the middle class. Then they created deliberately "downshifted" android peasants, bioroid animals who could be trained to productive work, but were not sapient.

The Queen is always a clone of the first queen, and fresh clones are always being brought up among the noble Great Houses of Glorianna. When the current queen dies, or is assassinated, there is an intense competition between the clones which gradually reveals the best suited to rule. Those who fail go into exile.

The entire culture is based on trust, which extends throughout everything that's done. It's very strange, but works - I've been playtesting it online. Once you get the hang of it it makes sense...

-clash

Splendid! What a fab idea, clash. Elizabethan England as I was forced to study at school extrapolated insanely and brought to life. Love it.

I think a low-dice/diceless system would fit very nicely. It sounds too fantastic to get bogged down in statistics, science and definitions of things.

Quote from: Rob LangSplendid! What a fab idea, clash. Elizabethan England as I was forced to study at school extrapolated insanely and brought to life. Love it.

I think a low-dice/diceless system would fit very nicely. It sounds too fantastic to get bogged down in statistics, science and definitions of things.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

-clash

Well, you can probably guess my answer Clash but here goes.

You seem to have a clear image of the elements you wish to reinforce. Let's see if I can sum them up.

1. Strong political interplay - Supported by...

2. Strong emphasis away from combat - Supported by ...my guess would be a deadly combat as you mention. This is good bu make sure to spell that out.

3. Dueling - Supported by...again, plays into combat.

So, in summary, let's ask a few questions.

1. Does the system have deadly combat?

2. Does it emphasize or have an appropriate sub-system for dueling?

3. Does it have an appropriate model for the type of political maneuvering?

So, the first two are best answered by you and I would most likely not add much even if I wanted. However, #3 is one that I have always found fascinating.Some questions:

3a. What sort of political maneuvering do you wish to model? Honor? Political influence? Wealth? Public popularity? All of the above?

If yes, should it be a series of meters maybe? Some influencing others? Just brainstorming but you could have a method of Scandals vs Popularity and have both modified by Celebrity. Influence could be modified by Scandals and Popularity.

Not sure if that helps or is even the direction you are going but thought I might add my muddled views tot he mix.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltWell, you can probably guess my answer Clash but here goes.

You seem to have a clear image of the elements you wish to reinforce. Let's see if I can sum them up.

1. Strong political interplay - Supported by...

2. Strong emphasis away from combat - Supported by ...my guess would be a deadly combat as you mention. This is good bu make sure to spell that out.

3. Dueling - Supported by...again, plays into combat.

Right! This is the intent.

QuoteSo, in summary, let's ask a few questions.

1. Does the system have deadly combat?

Yes. Much deadlier than the typical StarCluster combat. I will be tweaking the StarKarma sub-system to reflect this.

Quote2. Does it emphasize or have an appropriate sub-system for dueling?

Yes. I'm adapting the sub-system from the StarCluster Guide to Duelling.

Quote3. Does it have an appropriate model for the type of political maneuvering?

So, the first two are best answered by you and I would most likely not add much even if I wanted. However, #3 is one that I have always found fascinating.Some questions:

3a. What sort of political maneuvering do you wish to model? Honor? Political influence? Wealth? Public popularity? All of the above?

If yes, should it be a series of meters maybe? Some influencing others? Just brainstorming but you could have a method of Scandals vs Popularity and have both modified by Celebrity. Influence could be modified by Scandals and Popularity.

An odd one which reflects the culture - Trust. Trust cascades from the Queen, through her immediate courtiers, to secondary and tertiary levels. Everyone on the planet has a Trust Index, which is increased by successful completion of assignments, and decreased by failure, improper behavior, and scandal. A courtier might have the Queen's Trust, which means he can draw upon her resources so long as his Trust Index warrants it. A character in a lower level campaign might have the Duke's Trust, or the Earl's Trust, or the Trust of some other less renowned but still respected figure.

QuoteNot sure if that helps or is even the direction you are going but thought I might add my muddled views to the mix.

Bill

Not in the least muddled, and very much what I was aiming at.

-clash

I think I'd probably go with a dice (but simple) based resolution. That's because I like and prefer dice. Unless Starkarma has a really good support for the playstyle--and allowing players to choose/influence events easily as dice do.

Quote from: SilverlionI think I'd probably go with a dice (but simple) based resolution. That's because I like and prefer dice. Unless Starkarma has a really good support for the playstyle--and allowing players to choose/influence events easily as dice do.

Like I said, Tim, the dice T-R sub-system will be an option. Changing T-R sub-systems is pretty much painless. I abstracted the heck out of everything when I wrote StarCluster for this very purpose.

-clash

Removed

Clash,

With respect to Glorianna, what is the intent of your design? Is it to design a game that is primarily about politicking and diplomacy? Or is to present players with a cool new setting? If the setting takes precedent, then I would use something other than StarKarma.

Quote from: JohnnyWannabeClash,

With respect to Glorianna, what is the intent of your design? Is it to design a game that is primarily about politicking and diplomacy? Or is to present players with a cool new setting? If the setting takes precedent, then I would use something other than StarKarma.

Why? This is very interesting. I'm listening. No one I've talked to has voiced a coherent reason why I shouldn't other than "I don't like diceless, man!"

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceSo, knowing that the highly advanced, peculiarly stable world of Glorianna would probably not have a lot of combat - although what there was should be brutal - and have lots of duelling, political maneuvering, and such, I thought it might be better to use my StarKarma diceless rules.

I have nothing against a diceless system. You know me. I lean towards the "system doesn't matter much" camp. I need you to explain how StarKarma can do the duelling and politicking better than your other systems. If your answer is, "Well, it can't really," then there's the answer to your quandry. Why use a system, just because?

If, however, the StarKarma system can do these things better, then you have to ask yourself, "Am I creating a game that pushes players to engage in politics rather than combat?" If the answer is, yes, and you are okay with that then use StarKarma. If that isn't your intent, then revisit what you want to do with the game.

I hope that makes sense. I am answering a thousand questions at work while I'm typing this.

Quote from: JohnnyWannabeI have nothing against a diceless system. You know me. I lean towards the "system doesn't matter much" camp. I need you to explain how StarKarma can do the duelling and politicking better than your other systems. If your answer is, "Well, it can't really," then there's the answer to your quandry. Why use a system, just because?

If, however, the StarKarma system can do these things better, then you have to ask yourself, "Am I creating a game that pushes players to engage in politics rather than combat?" If the answer is, yes, and you are okay with that then use StarKarma. If that isn't your intent, then revisit what you want to do with the game.

I hope that makes sense. I am answering a thousand questions at work while I'm typing this.

This was what I was trying to get at with my questions Clash. Only you can really answer them. Since I am a setting guy, I think your answers say that your system works for your goals but again, if you want to force a certain play style (non-combat politicking) you might need more explicit mechanics. Again, though, only you can answer that (or play testers).

Bill

I don't want to force any play style. StarKarma is out. I'll go with the standard system.

-clash