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

-clash

Sorry if you thought I was implying you were forcing a play style with starkarma, it was not my intent.

That said, there is forcing and then their is supporting. My questions were oriented towards the support side of it. You want to enable political play. Starkarma seems to do this.

When I say "support" I ALWAYS phrase it in positive terms. So, supporting a play style is never "discouraging combat" but is "enabling political mechanisms". So, does you standard system "enable political mechanisms". It sounds like you are addressing this with what I call external extension mean a subsystem outside the standard mechanisms of the core system. If this is the case, the system does not matter. If you are using internal extension, then you are using mechanism from the core system to model the politicking. So, in the case of Star Karma, it would be tied to the diceless mechanism.

And I can't say this enough, other than general questions and advice, unless we were play testers, only you can really answer.

Now, from a marketing point of view, diceless is a hard sell. Also, you are fragmenting your base by branching into other systems. However, you must remember this is coming from a guy who has four systems for his settings and made his lite version look very different from his standard one.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltSorry if you thought I was implying you were forcing a play style with starkarma, it was not my intent.

When two designers I like and respect say the same thing, I look at my intended course of action twice, then I look again. Attempting to look at the thing from the outside, I think the StarKarma sub-system shines in gaining advantage in political/non-combat situations, but is not nearly as engaging in combat. By selecting it as the primary T-R sub-system, it certainly looked like I was attempting to force people away from combat and into political/social machinations. The standard percentile system is more balanced, in that it can do everything with about the same effectiveness. It also has the benefit of not frightening the horses - as you point out, diceless games make a lot of people suddenly disinterested. The external political support sub-systems can be grafted to the diced games exactly as well as to the diceless game, so that's a wash.

If people want to play the game with heavy combat and disregard for social structures, who am I to stand in their way? The standard system will give them overall better tools, and won't stop people playing a more social/political game. Thus my decision. Thank you both for making me think twice. I had succumbed to the lure of a neat system, and put it in because the setting showcased the system, rather than the reverse.

-clash

Quote from: HinterWeltWhen I say "support" I ALWAYS phrase it in positive terms. So, supporting a play style is never "discouraging combat" but is "enabling political mechanisms". So, does you standard system "enable political mechanisms". It sounds like you are addressing this with what I call external extension mean a subsystem outside the standard mechanisms of the core system. If this is the case, the system does not matter. If you are using internal extension, then you are using mechanism from the core system to model the politicking. So, in the case of Star Karma, it would be tied to the diceless mechanism.

What Bill said.

If you want to develop a mechanic that encourages politicking because politicking plays a large part in the setting then I suggest you use your standard system with a new optional politicking tool. You can explain that the tool is added to assist players in exploring the politics of the setting and it is there to use (or not) at their discretion.

Unlike you two, systems interest me for their own sake. I like interesting systems. That said, and interesting system without an interesting setting leaves me cold. In any case, you guys are immune to the system-fascination thing, and I'm not. It makes you better judges of such things.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceUnlike you two, systems interest me for their own sake. I like interesting systems. That said, and interesting system without an interesting setting leaves me cold. In any case, you guys are immune to the system-fascination thing, and I'm not. It makes you better judges of such things.

-clash

What I think it really does is make our combined view of a design very potent.

I also want to point out that perhaps my position is overstated. I do value interesting system but I just don;t think it is the whole ball of wax. I will buy a game if the setting interests me. I might buy it if the sytem interests me. However, the telling point, I think, is I will buy a setting despite system but if the setting does not interest me, the system will never get me to buy it.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltWhat I think it really does is make our combined view of a design very potent.

I also want to point out that perhaps my position is overstated. I do value interesting system but I just don;t think it is the whole ball of wax. I will buy a game if the setting interests me. I might buy it if the sytem interests me. However, the telling point, I think, is I will buy a setting despite system but if the setting does not interest me, the system will never get me to buy it.

Bill

Oh, I'll buy an interesting system without a cool setting, alright! I'll just hate myself in the morning. I can't help it - my father was an engineer.

-clash