I've been away from all forums for a long time, working on my game. I apologize that my first post back is one where I talk about my own project. I just need input from actual gamers. I'm still playing RPGs every week, but not this one. It's not ready, and my own groups would only be polite if I asked them.

This isn't a backwards way of promoting my game, as I'm not even sure if my sig has a current link to my site in it. I'm actually having a crisis of well, Faith.

I've spent the last 11 years learning Kabbalah from a mostly agnostic standpoint (with periods of full on mysticism), in order to turn what I learned into a generic RPG like Fate or GURPS. It's a long way to go to make a game, but I'm happy with what I've learned and experienced. As I near the point of a playtest document, though I'm wondering if what I have will be appealing to gamers, rather than Kabbalists.

I chose Kabbalah because it did the job I set out for the game, as a model that attempted to describe reality.

Back when I started, I decided that I wanted my game to be able to handle certain things, such as the concept of worlds within worlds- movies like The Matrix, The 13th Floor, and later, Inception. Wherever the action took place, the rules would be handled the same way, even if they were combined differently to create differing laws of physics in a realm. In other words, damage is damage, and resistance is resistance. This meant that spiritual combat had to use the same basic effects as physical combat, though with different stakes.  I also wanted a game where what you were fighting for had a cause and effect relationship with what you could accomplish, and where you could build anything from component parts.

I won't keep pushing what I wanted, as whether I got it remains to be seen, but I found a model that did everything I was asking of this game in Traditional Jewish Kabbalah. It was never a gimmick, if it had been I'd likely have finished the game long ago. Rather, I wanted to find a conceptually solid model to crib from. Kabbalah was it for me.

I decided to model the forces of creation in Kabbalah-- the letters of the Hebrew Alphabet and the sephiroth of the Tree of life-- using what I called "Elements"- words that serve as the components of Effects and structures. They are simultaneously nouns and verbs, so you can use them as either in context. I've talked about the game before, so maybe if you Google me with regards to the project (called "Tribute"), you'll get more data. Long story short, it works a bit like a syntactic magic system with nouns and verbs- or perhaps a simple object-oriented programming language. I't's not a traditional Effects-based game where you can buy powers off the rack, because you can build your most basic effects from components that do things like convey their target in any specified frame of reference, or drain energy of any kind, rather than taking a flight power and tailoring it. There will of course be premade powers for those who want them, but that's not the standard mode that the game intends. What I have works in the tests I've done, but it's a high commitment game- more Pathfinder or GURPS than Fudge.

Here's the crux of my question; do you think that there is a market for a game like this? I'm not asking if you'd play it, per se, but whether you think others might and why or why not. I'm having trouble getting feedback from people who previously signed up as playtesters, and was beginning to doubt the game's appeal to its intended audience. I fear I've gone off the rails in those playtester's eyes, and lost them.

As for the Kabbalah aspects, so far they look sound. I've been going over my outline documents with a Rabbi who focuses on Kabbalah, and he thinks that what he's seen looks good. When we finish going over my files soon, I'll fix whatever needs work and get started on the playtest document. He's mentioned possibly funding the game, and using it as a teaching tool for students. I'd just like it to go beyond that. I'd like actual roleplayers to play and enjoy it. I'm trying to figure out if that's realistic.

I'd just hate to have spent 11 years developing a "game" that was useful mostly as an academic curiosity. I want to play it!

Is the source material in any way a turn off or draw in itself? Would you judge it on its own merits as a game?

Thanks.

What kind of characters one can play and what do they do?

These are the two questions I always start with when opening a new rpg.


Beyond that, I personally don't have much of an interest in learning jargon in any rpg, and kabbalah basically does not mean anything to me really.

First RPG endorsed by Madonna?

I doubt I'd be drawn to Kabbalah:the RPGing, but a magic system based on a fantasized version of Kabbalah may be interesting.

But even then, I doubt I'd buy a game based only on the magic system.

You can make the same kinds of characters you can make in GURPS, FUDGE, or Fate. It's a generic metasystem for customizing a campaign that will place further limitations on your options, and give you choices.

A lot of what you're fighting for is self-defined within the context of the campaign's reality, though with any structure in the game, the GM and the group can build a list of acceptable options. Once the game's done and out there, I hope to spend most of my time building these kinds of campaign frameworks.

As for jargon, the game rules are expressed as English words, called Elements which mean what you expect them to mean. Most of them have different meanings, depending on context. You combine the words to build Constructs (things) and Effects. The hardest part is remembering how the game manages a specific type of phenomenon mechanically, but there's a limited set of rules, and no exceptions. If you want things to work differently, you use a different tool for the job- a different Element.

This may be a turn off, of course, just clarifying.

Quote from: Spinachcat;848678First RPG endorsed by Madonna?

I doubt I'd be drawn to Kabbalah:the RPGing, but a magic system based on a fantasized version of Kabbalah may be interesting.

But even then, I doubt I'd buy a game based only on the magic system.

Madonna's Kabbalah is Mcdonalds Kabbalah. This is old time stuff.

But the system is far beyond a magic system. You build every thing in the game, from your character to the car he drives, along with any powers you have, from these Elements; procedural tinker toys.  

You can also buy abilities off the rack, if you like what's available in your campaign, but that's not the power of the system. If you do that, it becomes more like a typical RPG, not that that's a bad thing.

It's kind of like the choice between programming in a low-level language with all its power and potential difficulty, or buying a program from the store. There are also gradations in between.

The game is a toolkit for campaigns. The GM and the group may define the available abilities, and make them work exactly as they imagine without game balance concerns- the game is balanced on the lowest level.

First off you have the challenge of not being the first to tap into the nomenclature (albeit previous games did it poorly). Check out a few games out there, namely Kult. There's quite a few more angel-based games out there which sound reminiscent; we can discuss that later if interested.

Second, you are going to either have one of two major problems: scholastics with an entourage, or crafting madness from mechanics munchkins. The former one will be more in the vein of Ars Magica; everyone will be all excited, make characters, and then fade away not knowing what to do as supporting cast. The latter will be more in the vein of D&D 3e/PF where crafting rules are just thrown out there; he who games the system most wins, even over the GM (who essentially handed over the reins of their game).

Third, is it really so bad to be a niche scholastic theological RPG game? For all the mockery around Christian subculture this-and-that, some interesting products have germinated. One such game was Dragonraid (the oldest of them actually), where you had to exemplify spiritual virtues and defeat enemies through rhetoric and fortified spiritual character. Yes, it's evangelist, but it is intriguing as an Ur-text for social combat and reinforcing dogma.

With that recommendation of products to research first, see where you want to be dissimilar and where you want to feel the same. It might help your game development. Best of luck!

Good points, all.

I do think that since the game rules are written plainly, and a person can know what a power is capable of just by reading its "expression", or code, there shouldn't be too many mechanical surprises. If a GM allows a Power because he doesn't know what its Elements do, that sucks, but he can quickly read the page that has that rule.

The rules are discrete, and don't create emergent properties when they interact (except in four intentional cases with hard boundaries). There's only one rule for a specific type of phenomenon, and there's, if I do my job right,  no overlap. If you want a skill to make a roll more reliable, there's only one Element to do that with, with a specific price. You can't nickle and dime your way to a crazy bonus, you have to buy the overall level of "FOCUS" to the proper level.  

Most imbalance will come from situations where the GM gives a player too many points to spend, or more points than another player. That's a table issue though.

I'm trying to keep the rules simple and straightforward, though there are a decent number of them. There are no exceptions or traps built into the game. System mastery is rewarded, but the curve shouldn't be too steep, considering the number of rules- one set for each Element.

I am building this game for tinkerers- myself included. I love building stuff, and want a game that balances things from the ground up.

Right now, the game sounds somewhat complicated. At least in terms of system and how it works.

I kind of have an idea of what you're saying, but universal setting games like "Fate", "Fudge", "Champions", and "Savage Worlds" don't approach system from a theological standpoint...they do so strictly from a mechanical stand point.

You may be making your game overly complex by having religious symbolism and jargon for what should just be straight forward mechanics and rules.

For example... In Savage Worlds... Spells, Psionics, Miracles, Mad Science, and the like are all handled by the stripped down "Powers" system. Powers such as "Bolt" which is a basic damage effect..

However, depending on if that's a Bolt from a Miracle Worker, a Magic User, or a Psionicist changes the effect dramatically. It may get the holy quality from a priest and do double damage to undead... It may have a "Fire" quality from a Wizard and set flammable things on fire, It may be "Mental" when used by a Psionicist and ignore all physical damage and only work on living things...

But the point is, the "System" makes it all easily understandable...From a purely mechanics and tinkering point of view, I just need to know what a basic "Bolt" does, and then season to taste for the particular world/setting/Arcane Background, I'm creating...

Fate does the same thing of course with it's "Aspects" where an Aspect can be "I fight better at night" or "Holy Wrath Strike!" At the end of the day, they can have very different effects within the game world, but mechanically they can just be represented as a +2 aspect...

So when we come to your game...it more sounds like you're dealing with an "In universe" system of tinkering. You mentioned using Hebrew words for powers in the game...and that it's a universal game system...

Well, it comes across as somewhat strange...if I want to play a guy who uses a Mechanical "Ghost Gun" to hurt baddies, and my buddy wants to shoot fire from his hands... Are we both using the same Hebrew magic word to do so? Is the effect different within the game world?

If the answer is "Oh no, that's just the name of the rule, in game your ghost gun would have a different effect from his fire fingers" then why weigh the game down with needless obtuse jargon?

If you're just making a universal game system, you should keep the language easy to understand... If you're making instead a "Multiworld Setting" system, then you can use your jargon, but should avoid using it when it comes to your rules system...

OK, I think I get it.

A generic game that uses a lot of fiddly bits in a balanced way to create usable 'powers' for characters. I think that there could be a target audience for this kind of game, but it is small and probably already set in their pre-existing systems.

I think it would be better to go in the direction where many other games have gone. First you do at least one evocative full game where the rules and the setting are intertwined, then if there is enough demand, give the bare mechanics separately. Or perhaps do it in a way some new sci-fi game did, which name I forget right now. Put the rules first into the book, then give multiple full setting examples in which they can be tweaked to taste. That's a lot more work than the first option, but seeing that you've already done 11 years of work on it (!), that probably is just another drop in the ocean.

Quote from: Orphan81;848690Right now, the game sounds somewhat complicated. At least in terms of system and how it works.

I kind of have an idea of what you're saying, but universal setting games like "Fate", "Fudge", "Champions", and "Savage Worlds" don't approach system from a theological standpoint...they do so strictly from a mechanical stand point.

You may be making your game overly complex by having religious symbolism and jargon for what should just be straight forward mechanics and rules.

For example... In Savage Worlds... Spells, Psionics, Miracles, Mad Science, and the like are all handled by the stripped down "Powers" system. Powers such as "Bolt" which is a basic damage effect..

However, depending on if that's a Bolt from a Miracle Worker, a Magic User, or a Psionicist changes the effect dramatically. It may get the holy quality from a priest and do double damage to undead... It may have a "Fire" quality from a Wizard and set flammable things on fire, It may be "Mental" when used by a Psionicist and ignore all physical damage and only work on living things...

But the point is, the "System" makes it all easily understandable...From a purely mechanics and tinkering point of view, I just need to know what a basic "Bolt" does, and then season to taste for the particular world/setting/Arcane Background, I'm creating...

Fate does the same thing of course with it's "Aspects" where an Aspect can be "I fight better at night" or "Holy Wrath Strike!" At the end of the day, they can have very different effects within the game world, but mechanically they can just be represented as a +2 aspect...

So when we come to your game...it more sounds like you're dealing with an "In universe" system of tinkering. You mentioned using Hebrew words for powers in the game...and that it's a universal game system...

Well, it comes across as somewhat strange...if I want to play a guy who uses a Mechanical "Ghost Gun" to hurt baddies, and my buddy wants to shoot fire from his hands... Are we both using the same Hebrew magic word to do so? Is the effect different within the game world?

If the answer is "Oh no, that's just the name of the rule, in game your ghost gun would have a different effect from his fire fingers" then why weigh the game down with needless obtuse jargon?

If you're just making a universal game system, you should keep the language easy to understand... If you're making instead a "Multiworld Setting" system, then you can use your jargon, but should avoid using it when it comes to your rules system...

I'm not using the actual Kabbalistic terms anywhere in the rules. I'm translating the concepts into English words that point to related rules. The background of Kabbalah is edifying to people who are interested, and will be addressed in the introduction and an appendix, but it has no bearing on the game play.

I will also, based on the interest of certain Kabbalists, be writing another book discussing the deeper Kabbalistic derivations, but it's not going to affect how you play the game unless you want it to.

I see three books;

Tribute Essentials- The core rules and ways to use them without much of anything else. A Game manual. This will also be free online as a sort of SRD.  

Tribute Companion- Premade material useful in many campaigns, as well as (potentially) some other mini-games made with some or all of the Elements. "Stupid game mechanic tricks", etc.

Tribute Unveiled- A book about Kabbalah, primarily, and how to use the game to explore its concepts. Includes all my rationales for the assignments of the Elements to give deeper meaning to the game for people who want it.

Basically, Kabbalah was the bike that got me here. You won't have to ride it to play the game.

I really am appreciating this conversation. It's helping me understand what to say, and how, when presenting my weird-ass game.

I do think I need to tell people up front, in the introduction, that the Elements are derived from the concepts in Kabbalah. However, at that point, I just need to shut up and go into the game rules, as game rules.

That appendix might have a listing of the correspondences for any curious Kabballists, but it can easily be ignored.

I just think that if I were to ignore the Kabbalah angle altogether until a later book, certain people might start playing the game, and later get pissed that I "tricked" them in some way.

I guess the key is to mention it, then get on with it until I can write about it more fully. Anything else muddies the waters.

Quote from: Moracai;848692I think it would be better to go in the direction where many other games have gone. First you do at least one evocative full game where the rules and the setting are intertwined, then if there is enough demand, give the bare mechanics separately. Or perhaps do it in a way some new sci-fi game did, which name I forget right now. Put the rules first into the book, then give multiple full setting examples in which they can be tweaked to taste. That's a lot more work than the first option, but seeing that you've already done 11 years of work on it (!), that probably is just another drop in the ocean.

I had entertained the notion of having a few campaign frameworks in different genres in the first book. Maybe I need to revisit that idea. Another friend who designs games also suggested starting with a complete game/setting combo as well, so I'll be thinking about it. Thanks.

You had me with a syntactical Kabbalah magic system.

You lost me a little when everything in the world was going to be built using the Kabbalic elements.

You lost me more when you said they weren't going to really be Kabbalic terms.

If you're gonna do the Kabbalah thing, go whole hog, go big or stay home.  

GURPS with some basis of Kabbalah in the Point Buy system...meh.

A system that tells me what I can do with different combinations of the 72-fold name of God...pure fucking gold.

Quote from: CRKrueger;848697You had me with a syntactical Kabbalah magic system.

You lost me a little when everything in the world was going to be built using the Kabbalic elements.

You lost me more when you said they weren't going to really be Kabbalic terms.

If you're gonna do the Kabbalah thing, go whole hog, go big or stay home.  

GURPS with some basis of Kabbalah in the Point Buy system...meh.

A system that tells me what I can do with different combinations of the 72-fold name of God...pure fucking gold.

It does that, though- if you translate the letters into elements, it gives logical expressions, that tell you (mostly) what you're really saying, Kabballistically, when you say a Hebrew Word. This will sound crazy, but I started translating Genesis, and decided to stop until I was sure the elements were in proper order. I got up to "Let there be light." It was telling a parallel story that mirrored the Kabbalistic story of the shattering of the vessels, with a few issues that were probably mistakes in attribution on my part.

So yeah, it still has all of that, but it's not required.  

For those who think this sounds insane, I hear you. But I have a sane possible explanation. Remember that Hebrew had pictographic roots. In a pictographic language, you build words for new things from the existing roots.

For example, if you showed a modern smart phone to an ancient person speaking a pictographic language, they'd need a word for it. You might hold it in your hand, tell them that it sends messages to others, and show them the screen, with its bright lights and images.

Taking all this information, they might decide to use their word for "bird" meaning "messenger" in context, their word for "Hand" because it fits in your hand, and their word for "Sky", because like the sky it displays images of light.

Lets say the words for these three things were "Ba" "Ha" and "Ska". The final word for smart phone might be "Bahaska", which would take on the simple meaning of "Smart Phone", but which could be broken down into its concepts to tell a short story like "The Bird Flew from the Hand into the Sky".

A person fluent in such a language could cleverly tell two parallel stories at once, by simple word choice. It wouldn't even take a genius.

There may be a reason why Jewish scribes are so strict about making sure that every new copy of the Torah is identical to the old ones.