Live Changeling: the Lost - Rules part I
As mentioned a few times, I'm really loving C:tL and, especially reading Dancers in the Dusk (review pending!), I kept wanting to run a live game. For now, it's still in the possible future as a one-shot or a quarterly event tied to the seasons. The trouble now is finding a system.
- I don't like any of the Minds Eye Theatre systems created.
- I really wanted to update the bead system for it. However, this isn't working.
So I've been running various options through my head. What follows is my ideal system, although I'm fairly convinced it won't work.
Players have the Attributes Physical, Social, Mental and Wyrd. They hold playing cards of assigned suits to represent these.
They have expendable stats Health, Glamour and Willpower. These should be easier to remember, so hopfully wouldn't need cards.
They have skills, merits and Contracts.
They also have advantages/flaws based on their kith etc.
A challenge involves a series of tests. Ideally these are 50/50, so beads work as does flipping a pack of cards. It might also be possible to use a pair of hand signs where matching signs=success for aggressor. (Oooh, just thought of that one!)
- Tests are always assigned an Attribute. Players can burn a point of attribute to force a retest (throw the card into a convenient bucket).
- After two retests (three in total), that's the end of the round. The contest resumes next round.
Here is the tricky bit: how do skills and other bonuses affect this?
- If using cards, you can get clever (so numbers 1 to skill level of the wrong colour count in your favour), but I think that would end up as too complicated.
- You could go rock-paper-scissors with skill determining the winner, but who wins ties? Plus it slows down the game.
- You can cancel a retest / get a free retest. This would have to be a static effect since otherwise that's a lot more variables to remember. How would that be balanced? This is where I worry since clearly this is the way to min-max.
- Increased effect if you win. That would mean establishing levels of success for everything, but might be workable.
- Something else.
The following would be standard regardless:
- XP is low. Players should not be able to pick up more than a couple of skills or contracts per year. This means that min-maxing can't be countered by fleshing out weak areas later.
- Combat is simultaneous. Players perform free actions together, then movement, then main actions. No multiple actions if possible (Celerity, I'm looking at you!).
What I really love about this system is that no matter how powerful characters are, they cannot take on all comers. Yes, the stronger character can hold out longer, but they are forced to burn attributes each time they lose. This also means that leaders really are dependent on their allies, and really must delegate properly else they will constantly have their attributes whittled down.
Where it fails is flexibility. This might not be a bad thing - you want the rules to be as streamlined as possible. But it does mean that bonuses from skills, merits, kiths and contracts will require lots of imagination to avoid becoming repetitive.
I'll try to post the other system tomorrow-ish.
- I don't like any of the Minds Eye Theatre systems created.
- I really wanted to update the bead system for it. However, this isn't working.
So I've been running various options through my head. What follows is my ideal system, although I'm fairly convinced it won't work.
Players have the Attributes Physical, Social, Mental and Wyrd. They hold playing cards of assigned suits to represent these.
They have expendable stats Health, Glamour and Willpower. These should be easier to remember, so hopfully wouldn't need cards.
They have skills, merits and Contracts.
They also have advantages/flaws based on their kith etc.
A challenge involves a series of tests. Ideally these are 50/50, so beads work as does flipping a pack of cards. It might also be possible to use a pair of hand signs where matching signs=success for aggressor. (Oooh, just thought of that one!)
- Tests are always assigned an Attribute. Players can burn a point of attribute to force a retest (throw the card into a convenient bucket).
- After two retests (three in total), that's the end of the round. The contest resumes next round.
Here is the tricky bit: how do skills and other bonuses affect this?
- If using cards, you can get clever (so numbers 1 to skill level of the wrong colour count in your favour), but I think that would end up as too complicated.
- You could go rock-paper-scissors with skill determining the winner, but who wins ties? Plus it slows down the game.
- You can cancel a retest / get a free retest. This would have to be a static effect since otherwise that's a lot more variables to remember. How would that be balanced? This is where I worry since clearly this is the way to min-max.
- Increased effect if you win. That would mean establishing levels of success for everything, but might be workable.
- Something else.
The following would be standard regardless:
- XP is low. Players should not be able to pick up more than a couple of skills or contracts per year. This means that min-maxing can't be countered by fleshing out weak areas later.
- Combat is simultaneous. Players perform free actions together, then movement, then main actions. No multiple actions if possible (Celerity, I'm looking at you!).
What I really love about this system is that no matter how powerful characters are, they cannot take on all comers. Yes, the stronger character can hold out longer, but they are forced to burn attributes each time they lose. This also means that leaders really are dependent on their allies, and really must delegate properly else they will constantly have their attributes whittled down.
Where it fails is flexibility. This might not be a bad thing - you want the rules to be as streamlined as possible. But it does mean that bonuses from skills, merits, kiths and contracts will require lots of imagination to avoid becoming repetitive.
I'll try to post the other system tomorrow-ish.