Barf Forth Apocalyptica

barf forth apocalyptica => brainstorming & development => Topic started by: Archangel3d on August 03, 2013, 08:00:45 PM

Title: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on August 03, 2013, 08:00:45 PM
I've been wanting to make/run a Space Opera style game for quite a while, but I've grown quite fond of the AW and DW mechanics. Considering how open to hacking the system is, I finally decided to buckle down and work on a Space Opera hack. The game has a lot of different inspirations, though it started mainly with Traveller. I quickly realized that rather than limit myself to the fiction of another, I'd rather approach it on a broader scope, with my own fiction. That said, Mass Effect, Traveller and Lois McMaster Bjould's amazing Vorkosigan series (and obviously Star Trek, Star Wars Dune, etc) all inspired me greatly.

I've gone through a few iterations already with friends from another forum, and I feel that I have something quite solid to show. You guys are the veterans of the system, so I greatly appreciate your Yoda like wisdom (that Google Hangout you guys did on hacking a while back was stellar, it really helped!). This hack is growing way bigger than I intended, and it's turning into a full-blown production, rather than a "skin". I'm cautiously optimistic about the whole thing becoming a solid product.

That said... I'm kinda new to these forums, and I especially have no idea how one goes about "starting" a hack here. Do I just... post stuff in this thread? Is to kosher to ask for one of those neat subforums, or should I stick to the more general forum for the moment?

[Edit] Here's what I have so far (http://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4ky16XZasoPbUJDdjEyV2hSU3M/edit?usp=sharing). There's still TONS to do, but I feel it's off to a good start. The GM Principles took a long while to come together, but they have since been SUPER helpful in designing the rest.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on August 03, 2013, 08:52:47 PM
I guess a bit of information about the game is in order, eh?

Uncharted Worlds is a roleplaying game about interstellar exploration and discovery. It's about the larger-than-life adventures and perils that lie just beyond the next event horizon.

Features:
- Create your own class: Create your own unique character class/playbook with the Origin/Career character creation system.
- Debt and Favor: Uncharted World is all about balancing your debt to various factions while leveraging the favors they owe you.
- Spaceship Life: The spaceship is the final member of the team. The players build and outfit it together. It's their home, and the crew are their dysfunctional family.

GM Principles:
- The ship is a home, the crew a dysfunctional family
- Make each and every new planet unique and full of interest
- Embrace the deadly beauty of the galaxy
- Leave room for new discoveries
- Paint in primary colors
- Local actions, global events, galactic repercussions
- Debt makes the galaxy go ‘round
- Everyone has someone pulling their strings
- Weave your Moves into the narrative
- Be a fan of the player characters
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Phaedrus on August 05, 2013, 05:05:36 PM
- Scapegoat seems ripe for abuse. Probably be better to make it an +Ing roll triggered by a 6-, rather than an automatic success

- You get followers, you get followers, you get followers! EVERYBODY GETS FOLLOWERS! When one person can roll up 12 followers, you've got the makings of a bookkeeping nightmare and a huge ensemble cast. I would at least make the followers skill only takable once.

- With your current very strict debt/favor mechanic, "Investments" seems way overpowered. Get an additional +3 favor when most others get only 1 +1, and replace a crushing, inescapable debt with one that can be worked off fairly easily? Win.

- On the same idea, equalize Authority/Diplomacy. Either +/-3 or +/-2 would work, but +4 favor means you can ask for about anything and get it without penalty. That should have a bit of cost.

-Ice Cold doesn't make any sense without +cool. I'd replace Mettle with Ingenuity and call it something like "schemer."

-Why does changing a melee weapon into an energy weapon add +Reload, but turning a missile weapon into an energy/laser weapon remove -Reload?

-What does 2x Loud do? (Pistol/Rifle+explosive)
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on August 06, 2013, 12:01:38 AM
Good questions/comments, Phaed, thanks for crossposting them (for those wondering, Phaedrus has been providing me feedback for a bit, so I asked him to hop on these forums to post his feedback here, seems like the right place for it)

I'll try to address them here:

Quote from: Phaedrus;4216179
- Scapegoat seems ripe for abuse.  Probably be better to make it an +Ing roll triggered by a 6-, rather than an automatic success
Note that it's the GM that chooses who your potential new targets are, and the player has to choose one from among them. In a game where the crew is your (dysfunctional) family and everyone has a faction behind them, inelegant use of this skill will trade short term ass-saving for long-term trouble. That said, it'll be something to keep an eye on in play.

Quote from: Phaedrus;4216179
- You get followers, you get followers, you get followers!  EVERYBODY GETS FOLLOWERS!  When one person can roll up 12 followers, you've got the makings of a bookkeeping nightmare and a huge ensemble cast.  I would at least make the followers skill only takable once.
Actually that's a conscious design decision. I wanted to capture the gang/holding mechanics from Apocalypse World, which I feel were missing from Dungeon World. It plays heavily into the idea of "crew as family", and gives a lot more opportunities for PC-NPC-PC relationships. Having people bound to your through duty or employment fits a number of the Principles of the game.

Quote from: Phaedrus;4216179
- With your current very strict debt/favor mechanic, "Investments" seems way overpowered.  Get an additional +3 favor when most others get only 1 +1, and replace a crushing, inescapable debt with one that can be worked off fairly easily?  Win.
Duly noted. Tweaking is undoubtedly in order

Quote from: Phaedrus;4216179
- On the same idea, equalize Authority/Diplomacy.  Either +/-3 or +/-2 would work, but +4 favor means you can ask for about anything and get it without penalty.  That should have a bit of cost.
Note that even on a 10+ with Acquisition, you still gain Debt. So far the only way to not gain Debt to someone on an Acquisition is to be a Criminal, Roll 10+ on your crime, and then roll 10+ on your Acquisition.

Quote from: Phaedrus;4216179
-Ice Cold doesn't make any sense without +cool.  I'd replace Mettle with Ingenuity and call it something like "schemer."
Hm, true. That definitely is a throwback to when Hot was the primary interaction stat. I'll look at "Outwit" or "Scheme" as a stat replacement, I just have to make sure there's an even distribution of stat replacements.

Quote from: Phaedrus;4216179
-Why does changing a melee weapon into an energy weapon add +Reload, but turning a missile weapon into an energy/laser weapon remove -Reload?
Laser ranged weapons have high-capacity batteries that you can fire hundreds of times before losing their charge, and can be easily plugged in to recharge. They don't have physical projectiles that need to be reloaded. While it's possible they may run out of charge during a prolonged fight (as a result of a 7-9 or 6-), they don't need to be reloaded regularly.
Energy melee weapons discharge their entire cell into a strike, and have to power up again after each contact. From a design standpoint, melee weapons do less damage than ranged weapons, but don't require reloading, while guns deal more damage but do require reloading. You can alter your melee weapon to hurt more, but at a cost (making large and 2-handed or making it require recharge time between strikes).

Quote from: Phaedrus;4216179
-What does 2x Loud do?  (Pistol/Rifle+explosive)
It's very, very loud. Like really loud.
[edit] also it means you can't have a Silenced Explosive gun.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on August 07, 2013, 11:21:51 PM
So a bit of a "vote" topic, because I'm of two minds on the subject

Shields and Tractor Beams in Space Opera settings: Yea or Nay?

I'm wondering what people think would feel better, as a system, and whether the game should be designed around the existence of these things or not. Spaceship combat is still in very early design, but I'm having trouble committing one way or the other. So what do you guys think? If you were playing a space opera game, what would you expect? Would it add anything to *not* have them?
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Jeremy on August 10, 2013, 08:47:45 PM
I cannot imagine a Space Opera game without shields!  They provide all the benefits of hit points (pacing, increasing tension, plot armor, difficult decicisions) without having to wrestle with the handwavy nonsense of "what do hit points represent."

Similar: tractor beams (at least in the hands of big, terrible bad guy ships and space stations) open such wonderful opportunities for plot escalation. They lead naturally to GM moves like "capture someone" or "tell them the requirements and then ask."   

The only downside to tractor beams is that they're obvious & somewhat cliched, right?  Like, what would you do with tractor beams that wasn't done in Star Wars Episode 4?  I guess the other downside is that they introduce some problematic science (how the hell does one work? what does that imply about technology and warfare in your universe?). But if you're really going for "space opera," I'd totally keep them.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on August 12, 2013, 10:00:51 PM
Thanks for the reply. I find the whole "what do tractor beams imply about warfare" angle super interesting! In a way, tractor beams are the melee combat and grapple to ranged combat of rockets and lasers. I can see focused tractor beams being used to tear hulls apart (which would also have uses in the asteroid mining and salvaging sectors). What's more, tractor beam and shield technology seem to come from similar ideas; creating fields to affect matter.

I also realize that with tractor beams comes much easier access boarding parties and raids, which is just too good to pass up.

Now to come up with a name for this technology. I was thinking just "kinetic", as in "Kinetic Shield", "Kinetic Net", "Kinetic Lance", because it makes close ship combat feel somewhat... gladiatorial? However, it being kinetic makes it rather useless against laser weaponry, yes?
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Jeremy on August 12, 2013, 10:35:17 PM
Ever read Schlock Mercenary? The have gravitational shields, gravitational beams. They call them "gravy guns," etc.

Again, though: taking that route puts you more down the lines of hard sci-fi rather than space opera. It might be best to just call them "shields" and "tractor beams" to avoid drawing attention to the sciencey explanation and all that comes with it. Do you really want players thinking about whether a planet has earth-like gravity and, if not, how that affects life and combat and so forth? Or thinking about droid sapience, free will, and slavery? Or transhumanism? I mean, maybe you do, but that much more a "speculative fiction" game than a "high adventure across the galaxy" game.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on August 12, 2013, 10:58:54 PM
Fair point, and well made. "The ship travels at the speed of plot" kinda deal.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on August 25, 2013, 12:11:17 AM
Uncharted Worlds v 0.5.3 is up! (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4ky16XZasoPOWJiVzNnSU8teXM/edit?usp=sharing) As usual, I’d appreciate any comments, questions or suggestions! A huge thank you goes out to all those who have taken the time to playtest the game or read through and comment about it; your efforts have greatly improved the game.

Patch Notes
•   Overhauled the Debt system
•   Changed the way initial factions are created
•   Added “Role on the ship” to character creation
•   Changed a number of abilities to leverage new Debt system
•   Fixed many small inconsistencies
•   Now published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
•   Cooldown of Survivalist skill reduced to 45/55/65, down from 50/60/70.

Download Uncharted Worlds v0.5.3 here (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4ky16XZasoPOWJiVzNnSU8teXM/edit?usp=sharing)
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Tiurabo on October 09, 2013, 07:11:58 PM
Well, it all looks pretty good to me so far. I'm going to be running a session on this system in a couple of hours, and I'll let you know how it goes. The only thing I'd really like to see is the ship creation rules, since those are kinda... important.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Tiurabo on October 10, 2013, 07:28:49 AM
So, in short, we had a fuckin' blast with it. I think a large part of it for the group was just being able to play something that wasn't DnD, and particularly something that was kind of Firefly-ish.

We had:

An Artificial Military/Personality who was a mercenary with a Squad, who was the original owner of the ship itself.

An Artificial Scoundrel/Cybernetic on the run from the Imperial Navy R&D project that created him.

And a Spacer Clandestine/Starfarer, who was a little more amorphous, but had a background with the Silver Syndicate, a galactic trade cartel/migrant fleet. Kind of a schmoozer and a blockade runner, the kind of guy who can talk his way past a roadblock or a star-system interdiction with equal ease.

We kind of skimmed over the crunchy mechanics of the ship and stuck to the feel of it. Ship-to-ship combat was avoided when the Captain used his Gadget for a decoy system and maxed his Avert Disaster roll, thus escaping the Imperial Naval Intelligence ship that was trying to run them down. Looking back, I probably would have made him take a debt and then fight a boarding action; he should have won it easily, since the Agents wouldn't have been expecting six highly trained Marines and a couple of supersoldiers to be their adversaries.

Character creation took about two hours between three players, which I didn't find surprising since we were handing off between two computers and two of the guys had never played an AW type game. That done, we spent at least as long on actual gameplay, in which we did a lot of world-building and fleshing out of our characters.

This was my third time GMing, and the first two were using straight AW. Third time was the charm for a successful and fun session on my watch, since the last two kind of flopped due to group chemistry and some lack of understanding on everyone's part. I think it might be the comparability of settings; when you compare AW to Mad Max, people look for the Humongous or Barter Town. When you say Firefly and Mass Effect, people want to walk around, meet people, and pull of a heist or two.

Seeing as how it was my third game ever as a GM, it was nice for my players, instead of asking what other systems I could pitch, to say "We're doing this again next week, right?" Really glad I went with this over the FFG Rogue Trader.

tl;dr It's solid, newb friendly, just needs the finishing touches put on it. Character advancement, ships and ship combat, and a sheet is all it needs. Moves need a few tweaks, or maybe some adds. There's no equivalent to either Go Aggro or Seize By Force, which my players needed a few times. Also, maybe an Interrogate move? But as I said, there's no reason it can't be played as is, unless you really need the stats on that ship.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: AlHazred on October 14, 2013, 03:46:07 PM
From a purely visual standpoint, I like the Origin cards, but it would be fantastic if you repeated the origin blurb on each. Speaking as a GM who runs a lot at Cons, that would be handy for quickee character generation.

EDIT - Nevermind. I realized you'd put the pages under CC licensing, so I went ahead and redid the Origin cards, which are here (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1gbLqXS723cbnFPWEJud1JjSzg/edit?usp=sharing). I could see using Uncharted Worlds for a convention sci-fi horror game I'd created years ago under another system -- I'd already had homeworld and profession separated, this just continues and expands that idea.

I should port the convention scenario to UW and release it under CC licensing so that others can benefit.

EDIT2 - The way I'd use the cards is to print the Origins and Professions on differently-colored paper, cut them out, and then allow players to mix and match.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on October 16, 2013, 12:20:09 AM
So, in short, we had a fuckin' blast with it. I think a large part of it for the group was just being able to play something that wasn't DnD, and particularly something that was kind of Firefly-ish.

We had:

An Artificial Military/Personality who was a mercenary with a Squad, who was the original owner of the ship itself.

An Artificial Scoundrel/Cybernetic on the run from the Imperial Navy R&D project that created him.

And a Spacer Clandestine/Starfarer, who was a little more amorphous, but had a background with the Silver Syndicate, a galactic trade cartel/migrant fleet. Kind of a schmoozer and a blockade runner, the kind of guy who can talk his way past a roadblock or a star-system interdiction with equal ease.

We kind of skimmed over the crunchy mechanics of the ship and stuck to the feel of it. Ship-to-ship combat was avoided when the Captain used his Gadget for a decoy system and maxed his Avert Disaster roll, thus escaping the Imperial Naval Intelligence ship that was trying to run them down. Looking back, I probably would have made him take a debt and then fight a boarding action; he should have won it easily, since the Agents wouldn't have been expecting six highly trained Marines and a couple of supersoldiers to be their adversaries.

Character creation took about two hours between three players, which I didn't find surprising since we were handing off between two computers and two of the guys had never played an AW type game. That done, we spent at least as long on actual gameplay, in which we did a lot of world-building and fleshing out of our characters.

This was my third time GMing, and the first two were using straight AW. Third time was the charm for a successful and fun session on my watch, since the last two kind of flopped due to group chemistry and some lack of understanding on everyone's part. I think it might be the comparability of settings; when you compare AW to Mad Max, people look for the Humongous or Barter Town. When you say Firefly and Mass Effect, people want to walk around, meet people, and pull of a heist or two.

Seeing as how it was my third game ever as a GM, it was nice for my players, instead of asking what other systems I could pitch, to say "We're doing this again next week, right?" Really glad I went with this over the FFG Rogue Trader.

tl;dr It's solid, newb friendly, just needs the finishing touches put on it. Character advancement, ships and ship combat, and a sheet is all it needs. Moves need a few tweaks, or maybe some adds. There's no equivalent to either Go Aggro or Seize By Force, which my players needed a few times. Also, maybe an Interrogate move? But as I said, there's no reason it can't be played as is, unless you really need the stats on that ship.

Fantastic, I'm super happy it worked well. Thanks so much for playtesting and giving feedback, it does my poor, fragile ego good to know that people are having fun with it. I've done a pretty major pass over some rules, Weapons, Armor and Harm, making combat more narrative, descriptive and fast-paced, and less numerical. Ship creation and combat is coming soon, I hope to deploy that at the end of the month along with a revamped crew/squad rules.

In the meantime, here's a link to Uncharted Worlds v 0.5.4 (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4ky16XZasoPY24tdUFLODJ3cVE/edit?usp=sharing) with the new combat rules.

0.5.4 Changelist
  • Changed Step 1 of Faction creation
    Changed Open Fire move
    Changed Launch Assault move
    Added Suffer Harm move
    Changed Harm rules
    Removed Health/Wounds rules
    Changed Armor rules
    Changed Weapons rules
    Changed following skills:
    • Hacking (Scientific, High-Tech) - Replaces "Calibrations"
      Calibrations (Starfarer) - Replaces "Spaceworthy"
      Heavy Lifting (Military, Spacer) - Replaces "Armored"
      Special Ammo (Military) - Replaces "Weaponry"
      Toughness (Military, Frontier)
      Scrappy (Scoundrel, Frontier)
      Survivalist (Explorer, Frontier)
      Harder (Cybernetic)
      Faster (Cybernetic)
      Stronger (Cybernetic)
      Interrogate (Clandestine)
    Fixed numerous tpyos

As for Seize by Force, that's handled by the new Open Fire and Launch Assault moves. Take a look and tell me what you think. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of "behavior control" Moves, though, so I'm still iffy about Go Aggro-style moves and even the current Manipulate. Those remains to be seen. I'm thinking that Avert Disaster using Influence might just cover cases where the dice are needed.

Thanks again for the feedback, really enjoyed your synopsis, and I'm looking forward to getting v0.6 (launch of the spaceship rules!) out the door airlock asap. If you have any questions about 0.5.4 (it's a pretty big change, combat-wise) please don't hesitate to ask. I'm afraid this site is blocked at work so I don't check it as often as I should, but if you want to get in touch with me, I'm also active over at Story Games (http://www.story-games.com/forums/discussion/18726/uncharted-worlds-a-space-opera-game-of-exploration-and-debt/p1). Heck, I'd be much obliged if you could repost your post there, too :)
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on October 16, 2013, 12:37:53 AM
From a purely visual standpoint, I like the Origin cards, but it would be fantastic if you repeated the origin blurb on each. Speaking as a GM who runs a lot at Cons, that would be handy for quickee character generation.

EDIT - Nevermind. I realized you'd put the pages under CC licensing, so I went ahead and redid the Origin cards, which are here (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1gbLqXS723cbnFPWEJud1JjSzg/edit?usp=sharing). I could see using Uncharted Worlds for a convention sci-fi horror game I'd created years ago under another system -- I'd already had homeworld and profession separated, this just continues and expands that idea.

I should port the convention scenario to UW and release it under CC licensing so that others can benefit.

EDIT2 - The way I'd use the cards is to print the Origins and Professions on differently-colored paper, cut them out, and then allow players to mix and match.

Hmmm! A very good idea, I'll make a note to do that for the next version (maybe 0.6.1, 'cause if I keep delaying 0.6 my regular G+ Hangout group is gonna get someone to drive up to Canada and club me with a lead pipe.) Same for the colors. I like the "mix-and-match" card approach! Could be a fun design to have pop-out cardboard at the back of the book, if/when I get this published and printed. I'll admit, I have never GMed a con, and I hear it's completely different animal to 'at home' style games. I'd love for your feedback/opinion of how UW could be made more con-friendly, what things might get in the way or just quality-of-life changes.

Also, it would be a blast to see a UW conversion of your con game :)
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on October 20, 2013, 11:17:55 PM
It's here! Version 0.6 is out, with Ship rules, Crew rules and a whole bunch of changes.

Get Uncharted Worlds 0.6 here (https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4ky16XZasoPUDd3OVFmY3pEbGc/edit?usp=sharing).

I'm quite excited because the actual design are almost complete! There's still the vehicle rules which need to be done, but other than that, it's down to "filling out" the descriptions and such. A pretty big milestone!

I want to thank everyone for their feedback and input so far. I'll be organizing playtests in the coming month, so keep an eye out. Also, even though the GM rules are still fuzzy-to-non-existent, if anyone would be brave enough to give GMing Uncharted Worlds a whirl with their gang (or another whirl, in the case of the exceptionally courageous Tiurabo), I'd be super interested to know how it turns out!

Change Log v0.6:
•   Altered Summary (p4)
•   Added Spaceship rules (p23-24)
•   Added Crew rules (p25)
•   Reworked weapons and armor (p21-22)
•   Basic Moves (p7-8)
o o   Altered Open Fire
o o   Altered Launch Assault
o o   Altered Patch Up
o o   Removed Manipulate
o o   Added Take Cover
o o   Added Command
o o   Fixed crash when using Avert Disaster during a cutscene
•   Origins/Careers (p10-17)
o o   Changed the “ship component” aspect of all skills
o o   Altered Crew: Soldiers
o o   Altered Crew: Followers
o o   Altered Crew: Scientists
o o   Altered Crew: Engineers
o o   Altered Crew: Gang
o o   Altered Schemer
o o   Removed Zero-G Training with Traveller

To Do:
•   Vehicle rules
•   Revise Faction Creation
•   In-depth Career section
•   Getting started guide
•   How to GM + GM Moves
•   Overall layout
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: mutants4life on January 15, 2014, 10:43:28 PM
Hi!  I just joined up to ask if there's been any progress with the game?  I'm going to use it for playing Firefly with a dash of Rogue Trader.  It looks great!
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on January 17, 2014, 01:30:07 AM
Hi there Mutants! Your interest in the game is super appreciated (my poor, fragile ego needs that sometimes :P)

The game has been going through some heavy development lately. I've reworked the core Moves, and drastically changed combat (much more narrative driven, now). I'm in the process of running a playtest with my group, using the latest rules.

I invite you to give the current playtest rules a shot, you can grab them here: Uncharted Worlds v0.7 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4ky16XZasoPSWRERHRlV1VzcG8/edit?usp=sharing). I'd be stoked to read about your experiences, what hangups you had, where you felt you were forced to ad-lib, etc. Obviously, I haven't started writing the "verbose" version of the rules, with all the explanations and the 'whys' and such. That's coming soon.

Again, thanks for the interest! Hope you have fun with it.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Jeremy on January 26, 2014, 01:15:24 PM
How are finding the harm rules work? I'm very interested in whether the various injuries types are compelling enough.

Also, how does enemy armor or shields play out, or other force disparities? As written, I don't see anything that would account for that. I seem to be just as likely to "take out" a heavily armored foe with a stick as I am to take out a nekked dude with a las cannon. 
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Jeremy on January 28, 2014, 10:56:11 AM
Another observation/question:  both of your basic moves for violence work like this...

Roll +stat.  On 10+ succeed but pick 1; 7-9 succeed if you let the GM pick 2.
 - There are a number of surviving enemies
 - The attack causes unwanted collateral damage
 - Your side suffers harm during the attack
 - Your side ends up in a dangerous/costly position

Overall I really like this, but I'm concerned that there's never any "clean" success.  Say it's just me and another guy in a gun fight on the ship.  I can never just take him out, right?  On a 10+, I have to pick something.  So I either pick "there are a number of surviving enemies" (meaning he's still up and--I assume--fighting) or one of the other options that escalates the situation.  I roll 10+ again, same situation.  Etc., etc.  The fight can't end unless I accept some cost or escalation.

How does that work in play?  Is that what you want?
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on February 01, 2014, 01:52:16 AM
Thanks for the questions! I'll try to address them as best I can :)

How are finding the harm rules work? I'm very interested in whether the various injuries types are compelling enough.
So far the injuries have been a great boon for myself as a GM to raise the stakes. I had a character who took a pretty big fall, and ended up with a mangled arm and bleeding wound in his helmet. From that point on, he was forced to Face Adversity for a couple of pivotal actions; Once using Physique to overcome the pain of his twisted arm to climb a ladder (partial success; ended up tearing more muscles and doing further damage. Hope he has enough Favor to request a surgeon). The other using Mettle, to take a shot with his pistol despite the blood that was leaking from his forehead into his eye. In this way, the injuries play like the Fate System's 'Tags'; something to compel at just the right (i.e.: most disastrous) moment.

Personally, I really enjoyed it. "Seeing" the state of the players after a particularly action-packed session felt nice. Heck, more than one player took pride in their scars and bruises, and it added a lot of flavor when interacting with NPCs.

Also, how does enemy armor or shields play out, or other force disparities? As written, I don't see anything that would account for that. I seem to be just as likely to "take out" a heavily armored foe with a stick as I am to take out a nekked dude with a las cannon.
In theory, yes. This is my "16 hp dragon"; there's a very nice article about how in Dungeon World, the dragon only has 16 hp; in theory it could get one-shot by a level 1 character with a lucky hit. BUT what's important is not its stats, but the puzzle and danger and unapproachable aura it has. Just because they can mechanically, doesn't mean they should be able to narratively. In the same way in Uncharted Worlds, armor on enemies is a purely narrative convention. It's there to add color, and/or to add an extra component to the "puzzle" of overcoming the current situation. If a player would go after a Titan Suit -wearing space marine with a stick, he wouldn't roll anything; there's no way he's going to succeed. What does he think he is, an Ewok? In more questionable situations (conventional weapons vs heavy armor, or enemies with superior cover, etc), my question would be "how are you overcoming their armor?" or "they're really well entrenched behind cover, how are you going to get a good shot at them?".

As for the nekkid dude v. las cannon... well, I probably wouldn't even ask for a roll either. Dude be dead, yo.

Another observation/question:  both of your basic moves for violence work like this...

Roll +stat.  On 10+ succeed but pick 1; 7-9 succeed if you let the GM pick 2.
 - There are a number of surviving enemies
 - The attack causes unwanted collateral damage
 - Your side suffers harm during the attack
 - Your side ends up in a dangerous/costly position

Overall I really like this, but I'm concerned that there's never any "clean" success.  Say it's just me and another guy in a gun fight on the ship.  I can never just take him out, right?  On a 10+, I have to pick something.  So I either pick "there are a number of surviving enemies" (meaning he's still up and--I assume--fighting) or one of the other options that escalates the situation.  I roll 10+ again, same situation.  Etc., etc.  The fight can't end unless I accept some cost or escalation.

How does that work in play?  Is that what you want?

That is indeed part of the design. The thing is, the violence moves are very "big picture", compared to more traditional combat rolls. They represent a phase or possibly the entirety of an exchange of violence. A single roll of "Open Fire" could translate into multiple exchanges of small arms fire while dodging and moving from cover to cover. I encourage my players to play out/describe the results of the roll as a series of action sequences without further rolling; we know the results, now we want to see how we're going to get there. It allows for some fun action without worrying about rolls or outcomes (since we know how it's going to end), and we collectively try to steer the unfolding events towards that conclusion. Don't know if you saw that Elevator Scene from Captain America 2: Winter Soldier previews in theaters? I see that as a single "Launch Assault" roll, telling us that he's going to succeed, but will take some damage. Then the whole sequence plays out, he gets bashed a couple of times, but ultimately he gets to be a badass.

I definitely didn't want "clean" fights. A gun fight between two people ending in one dead and the other completely unscathed and with no consequences doesn't move a story forward. "Your side ends up in a dangerous/costly position" could happen a LOT later, when your opponent's family/clan/Faction/lawyers show up to dismantle you. Or heck, maybe you'll just get arrested by local authorities. Or maybe one of your NPC crew members greatly disaproves of your use of deadly force.

As for "surviving enemies", that one is a bit two-edged. It's probably the cleanest, if you think about it. Surviving doesn't necessarily mean able-bodied or actively violent. When summarizing, you omitted the most important part of the violence Moves: "Describe your goals and tactics". You can't succeed if you don't state what you want to accomplish. Now, obviously if you just want the guy dead, then taking "he survives" kinda goes against your stated goal. But, again, these moves are representative of an extended encounter; surviving enemies could be fleeing or withdrawing, or they could be surrendering, or injured, or incapacitated. But they're still alive, and now you have to deal with that situation.

Ultimately, if the fight is one-sided/simple enough that you can take out the enemy without cost or consequence, then it's probably not an Open Fire or Launch Assault; it would be a simple Face Adversity.

Hope that answers your questions! If you have any more, shoot them my way; I try to check these forums at least once a week (busy busy!). I appreciate the interest! :D
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Tsenn on February 02, 2014, 06:09:58 PM
Another observation/question:  both of your basic moves for violence work like this...

Roll +stat.  On 10+ succeed but pick 1; 7-9 succeed if you let the GM pick 2.
 - There are a number of surviving enemies
 - The attack causes unwanted collateral damage
 - Your side suffers harm during the attack
 - Your side ends up in a dangerous/costly position

Overall I really like this, but I'm concerned that there's never any "clean" success.  Say it's just me and another guy in a gun fight on the ship.  I can never just take him out, right?

I see it as a reflection of the inherent randomness of a violent situation.  If you try to solve your problems with violence by adding violence, there are going to be consequences.  If it's just you and another guy on your ship, and you're running around guns blazing, something's going to happen.  If you figure a way to use the setting to your advantage, or you can wrangle the situation so that you don't need to make a roll, you just flat-out shoot the guy, then you can have your consequence-free victory.

You lock down the bulkheads to funnel him, bait him to chase you, wait until the right moment to open a discharge valve and blast him, then when the steam clears he's unarmed, disoriented, scalded and you have him in your sights.  Bang.  You've used, oh, Assessment, Face Adversity and Execute Program, I would say.  Or you could, as above, go straight ahead with Open Fire and risk having a bullet someone you don't want, but solve it with a single roll.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: MacLeod on March 04, 2014, 10:38:23 AM
This is almost what I was looking for - sci-fi powered by the apocalypse. I really like what you've written... but for me personally I was hoping for a core system more similar to Dungeon World. That said, I really like the way your character creation works.

I was working on a hack of my own for a science-fiction Dungeon World (as opposed to a sci-fi AW) but I didn't make it quite as far as you did. Would it be in bad taste if I borrowed some of your excellent work to use in my own?
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: aerothopter on March 19, 2014, 12:03:58 AM
Hey, I just posted my space opera hack here in the brainstorming & development board. Comparing our two hacks, there's a lot in common but (gah!) you beat me to the punch. Still, I'm happy to mix sauces if you see something cool and want to snag it from me--I'm definitely gonna keep a close eye on yours.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on March 20, 2014, 08:08:49 PM
Sorry about not responding, guys, busy times! I've been head-down working on UW , running a bunch of playtests and rebuilding and improving mechanics in preparation for the 'verbosity phase' (where I make it playable for folks who are just picking up the *World system). I'll be posting a link to v0.75 very soon, I'd be super interested in your impressions, what you like and what you feel misses the mark. Chances are you guys will see a Kickstarter for the printing run/editing/art coming soon, and this can become a true product (eeeeee!)

This is almost what I was looking for - sci-fi powered by the apocalypse. I really like what you've written... but for me personally I was hoping for a core system more similar to Dungeon World. That said, I really like the way your character creation works.

I was working on a hack of my own for a science-fiction Dungeon World (as opposed to a sci-fi AW) but I didn't make it quite as far as you did. Would it be in bad taste if I borrowed some of your excellent work to use in my own?

Of course not MacLeod, I'd be delighted to have my design be a part of your design. Creative Common License and all that jazz! :) If you feel like giving me a mention/attribution I'd appreciate it, but it's totally up to you. I'm very curious; what aspects do you feel most differentiates the game from Dungeon World? DW is the only *World game I've played, so I always figured I would have too many similarities; it came as a surprise to see that I apparently have too few! Obviously, I've been working hard at making it as distinct and self-contained as possible, but still.

Hey, I just posted my space opera hack here in the brainstorming & development board. Comparing our two hacks, there's a lot in common but (gah!) you beat me to the punch. Still, I'm happy to mix sauces if you see something cool and want to snag it from me--I'm definitely gonna keep a close eye on yours.

Don't you just hate when someone beats you too the punch!? Uncharted World was supposed to be a Mass Effect hack, then I heard the Dungeon World guy was working on one, hahaha. So yeah, Uncharted Worlds evolved a LOT since its original concept over a year ago. I'll be certain to give yours a look, it's always a great inspiration to see where others have deviated tackling the same problem (I'm interested to check your ship mechanics, for example). That said, with v 0.75, I feel I've gotten to a solid position, and my design 'phase' is done. Obviously, more testing and community feedback will be super important going forward, but now I have to focus on the usability/flesh of the rules themselves, rather than rules short-hand (i.e. "I know what I mean"). Also I need to pull the trigger and not keep doing fun redesigns all the time.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on March 20, 2014, 08:55:21 PM
Uncharted Worlds v0.75 available here (http://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4ky16XZasoPODl5VDJqRGU5Tjg/edit?usp=sharing)

Couple of big changes;

- Open Fire and Launch Assault are now "10+ you succeed, 7-9 you succeed but the GM chooses 1 or more consequences" like other moves. I know I explained my reasoning for having a player-chosen consequence even on a 10+, and I still feel that it was sound reasoning, BUT I received the question so often from various sources, that I grudgingly accepted that it doesn't feel right. Players weren't grokking it. So I changed it; 10+ is a lot nicer, 7-9 is considerably harsher.

- Faction reputation descriptors. Debt and Favor are still in the game, but players now have a semi-fixed word that describes what a Faction thinks of them. This descriptor is used by the GM to give them a cue when they play as the Faction. Descriptors come in five varieties; great, good, neutral, bad and terrible; earn enough Favor with a Faction, and you can choose a new, better descriptor (example: you were considered 'Mistrusted (Bad)' or 'Dangerous (Bad)' by the Galactic Police, but after earning enough Favor with them, you can go from Bad to Neutral; maybe you'll choose to be 'Useful (Neutral)' or 'Cautious (Neutral)'. Check out page 18 for more info.

Plus there are a bunch of smaller changes, like shuffling around the career skills, having a fixed amount of 'Narrative Wounds' (wounds defined by words rather than numbers), adding Codex Entries (a permanent information-based +1 that you gain through the Assessment move, to reward curiosity)  and changing the way Get Involved works (it now upgrades a roll from 6- to 7-9, or 7-9 to 10+, rather than just giving a +1).

If folks have the chance, I invite any of you to give the rules a read-through; I'd sincerely appreciate any and all feedback, suggestions or questions. I'll be popping in regularly to answer any queries while I prepare myself for the next phase of development (seriously, it surprises me just how much anxiety the whole Kickstarter/publishing causes me. If anyone has any experience or advice about <i>that</i>...)
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: MacLeod on March 21, 2014, 12:49:52 AM
I think your link is borked, sir!

But hey! I didn't know you were going full juice on this project with a kickstarter and everything! That is awesome. :)

The main difference between DW and Uncharted Worlds that bugs me specifically is the level of "zoom" on combat. Unless I'm reading it wrong, which wouldn't surprise me, the combat moves are pretty big picture whereas DW gets you down to each and every sword blow.

I'm not saying that your way is wrong either. I haven't played AW myself but from what I understand your way matches up with the one found in AW. All that said, I should definitely give it a shot at least once. :P
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on March 21, 2014, 08:13:35 AM
Whoops! Thanks for the heads up,  the link was indeed borked. Fixed.

And yeah, that is indeed the way larger combats work in Uncharted Worlds; the camera is 'pulled out', and the roll determines the result of that encounter, not the granularity. This allows the participants and the GM to describe the combat the way they see fit. It was a pretty big philosophical decision that happened a few months ago. I grew less enamored with the 'whittle down hitpoints' style system, and felt that narrative should definitely trump numbers. That's why enemies don't have hitpoints at all; (to swipe a line from J M Straczynski) they die at the speed of plot.

So far, it's worked well to keep the story flowing; that said, combats have never been the most exciting part of RPing for me, and I totally get that some prefer a bit more granularity.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Gornul on March 21, 2014, 03:10:22 PM
I have developed a set of character sheets for use in running Uncharted Worlds, whether online or in person.  They are in a GDrive shared folder, reachable at  http://www.tinyurl.com/unchartedworlds (http://www.tinyurl.com/unchartedworlds).  I also keep the latest version of the rules, updated whenever Arch publishes it.

The Sheets version is explicitly designed for for play-by-post and Hangouts play, and the Docs are printable for ease of use.  There's one 2-pager (I recommend double-sided) for characters, and a single page for the "Group" sheet.  I may add a second page for NPCs/planets on the Group sheet, as well.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on March 25, 2014, 08:29:42 AM
Working on adding a lot of description/explanation to the Moves and the careers. One thing that comes up; the 'Artificial' Origin is... kinda boring. It doesn't have any flavor inherent, and the +Stat skills are equally 'neutral'. On the other hand, I can't help thinking that it might have its niche; maybe a neutral, non-committal background with no extra bells and whistles is something that a certain kind of player would want.

Is there anyone that actually thinks the Artificial Origin is worth keeping in its current incarnation? Should I trash it for something else? There seems to be a strong push towards a Robotic Origin; perhaps I could replace it.

Side note: I'd be super interested to see what kind of characters people can come up with using the character creation. Post them here! Heck, I may use them as example characters (with credit, natch)
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: doc_cthulhu on March 25, 2014, 01:16:15 PM
How about changing it a bit. Something more genetically engineered perfection? The stat boosts are nice but they do not actually add anything to the game as a story. I wouldn't pick that to start with and I have some doubts about the kind of players who would...
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: doc_cthulhu on March 29, 2014, 01:28:33 AM
If folks have the chance, I invite any of you to give the rules a read-through; I'd sincerely appreciate any and all feedback, suggestions or questions. I'll be popping in regularly to answer any queries while I prepare myself for the next phase of development (seriously, it surprises me just how much anxiety the whole Kickstarter/publishing causes me. If anyone has any experience or advice about <i>that</i>...)

I really like this hack and have been reading through it a couple of times. But since I haven't added anything concrete to this thread (and I know that each hack needs comments/criticism) what follows is a simple list of things I thought of. This list is in no way a list of things that need to be fixed. Just thing I would reconsider and thus would like to point out.

Basic Moves
- Get Involved-move: Though I understand the idea Baker has with the change of order of things I really don't like this approach where help only comes in after you fail. My main reasoning behind this is "the feeling". It just doesn't seem right. When someone helps you they are tied to your result. But if you help them only after they have already failed, they become tied in to your result. This is really just a matter of opinion though.
- Assessment-move: Someone pointed out to me that players really like the lists of questions they may ask. It also helps you to build in the feeling you might want to enhance in a hack.
- Patch up-move: You might want to consider giving a more precise amount of time than "a moment" or remove this part. "you’ve reached the limit of what you can do" reads more like a partial success than allowing the character to try again after eating a Snickers.
- You have given each stat one basic move but this removes the option for players to influence other characters. Command-move targets a group of people so RAW it cannot be directed against other characters. As you have established that the characters area dysfunctional family I would expect the players to search ways to manipulate each other and gain power position by influence. Is this considered to be a Face Adversity-move? If so you should probably indicate it somehow.

Backgrounds
- The Criminal-move from Poverty-background allows you to gain a favor from a criminal faction. Though this is simple to establish given the description of the factions have you considered [tag]s for the factions? Something like "choose a faction and give it 2 tags from the following list".
- You raised a point of Artificial background being problematic. How about replacing it with Transhuman background? Something like Eclipse Phase and various scifi-books offer. Possible moves could include "at the beginning of session re-arrange your stats (a stock of clone bodies you could install your mind into), changing skills on the fly (maybe giving some major drawbacks with them like treating 10+ as 7-9 etc.).
- Frontier-background: Tenacious-move is pure gold but Toughness is a bit over the top in comparison to moves from other backgrounds.
- High Tech-background: Please, pretty please, do not use the word "slot" in Techonphile-move. With Calibrations-move I would re-consider this kind of "auto-success". How about allowing to re-roll any failed check (the second roll stands). Artificial intelligence -move " 2-4 word description of its personality" is a bit restricting. Maybe removing the constrains or offering a list for the players to choose from.

Other stuff
- Heroes of Might and Magic 4 had a cool table of classes (http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/heroes4/heroclasses.shtml) depending on the skills your characters starts with. As you are considering Kickstarting this hack it might be a good idea to include something similar as an optional rule. It would allow those who want to get playing asap to simply pick up a cool sounding career and check what background they would need to become one. This would also allow you to add a complete (maybe optional/additional) list of moves that would be specific for that particular mix of background careers. (FYI I'm already considering of writing this kind of table.)
- A pdf with drop-down menus for each skill and background option would come in superhandy.

 I'll pick up my commenting from the careers and carry on when I have the time.

Thanks for a great hack!
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on March 29, 2014, 08:02:23 PM
Hoooooly crap that is some stellar feedback! Thank you so much! I'll try to write up my thoughts on it once I've given it the consideration it deserves, but right off the bat: fantastic stuff.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on March 30, 2014, 11:22:27 PM
First off, let me say that your list was very useful because it made me stop and consider why I chose to do things a certain way, and whether I still agreed with the philosophies that drove those decisions.

Basic Moves
- Get Involved-move: Though I understand the idea Baker has with the change of order of things I really don't like this approach where help only comes in after you fail. My main reasoning behind this is "the feeling". It just doesn't seem right. When someone helps you they are tied to your result. But if you help them only after they have already failed, they become tied in to your result. This is really just a matter of opinion though.
- Assessment-move: Someone pointed out to me that players really like the lists of questions they may ask. It also helps you to build in the feeling you might want to enhance in a hack.
- Patch up-move: You might want to consider giving a more precise amount of time than "a moment" or remove this part. "you’ve reached the limit of what you can do" reads more like a partial success than allowing the character to try again after eating a Snickers.
- You have given each stat one basic move but this removes the option for players to influence other characters. Command-move targets a group of people so RAW it cannot be directed against other characters. As you have established that the characters area dysfunctional family I would expect the players to search ways to manipulate each other and gain power position by influence. Is this considered to be a Face Adversity-move? If so you should probably indicate it somehow.

Get Involved: I totally get what you're saying here, and it's something I wrestled with for a long time. I too prefer the players to commit to helping before a roll is made, it just feels better. That said, 'arriving to save the day' is also a legitimate way to Get Involved, so I wouldn't want to remove that. And, honestly, committing yourself to assist a roll that turns out to be completely successful is not super fun. As it stands, the Get Involved After The Fact is just a simpler, cleaner way of doing things. That said, in my more verbose detailed explanation of the Move (which I am currently writing), I'll definitely mention that it's the GM's prerogative to require that a character narratively commit to assist before the action is undertaken.

Assessment: I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable putting restrictions on this. In my playtesting, Assessment has been quite a wide Move, both in the information they gathered and how they went about gathering it. I really couldn't even begin to collate a simple list to accurately capture the wide range of subjects that the players have asked about, without being super vague. Assessment has definitely been more of a 'GM makes you roll' rather than a 'Player opts to roll' kind of Move; the GM feels that the information the player has naturally requested during the flow of the story requires an Assessment.

Patch Up: Noted.

Influencing Players: It so rarely comes up, since my regular players are usually super non-confrontational. A lot of the power/decision balance happens narratively with player consent. That said, I'll be adding a negative version of Get Involved, where you can lower the success margin (and influence the consequences on a 10+). So you can Influence to pull rank or cajole/bribe/plead, Physique to restrain, etc. Note also the Sabotage custom Move in Clandestine. You do NOT want them to pull that on you. Mwahahaah.

Backgrounds
- The Criminal-move from Poverty-background allows you to gain a favor from a criminal faction. Though this is simple to establish given the description of the factions have you considered [tag]s for the factions? Something like "choose a faction and give it 2 tags from the following list".
- You raised a point of Artificial background being problematic. How about replacing it with Transhuman background? Something like Eclipse Phase and various scifi-books offer. Possible moves could include "at the beginning of session re-arrange your stats (a stock of clone bodies you could install your mind into), changing skills on the fly (maybe giving some major drawbacks with them like treating 10+ as 7-9 etc.).
- Frontier-background: Tenacious-move is pure gold but Toughness is a bit over the top in comparison to moves from other backgrounds.
- High Tech-background: Please, pretty please, do not use the word "slot" in Techonphile-move. With Calibrations-move I would re-consider this kind of "auto-success". How about allowing to re-roll any failed check (the second roll stands). Artificial intelligence -move " 2-4 word description of its personality" is a bit restricting. Maybe removing the constrains or offering a list for the players to choose from.

Other stuff
- Heroes of Might and Magic 4 had a cool table of classes (http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com/heroes4/heroclasses.shtml) depending on the skills your characters starts with. As you are considering Kickstarting this hack it might be a good idea to include something similar as an optional rule. It would allow those who want to get playing asap to simply pick up a cool sounding career and check what background they would need to become one. This would also allow you to add a complete (maybe optional/additional) list of moves that would be specific for that particular mix of background careers. (FYI I'm already considering of writing this kind of table.)
- A pdf with drop-down menus for each skill and background option would come in superhandy.

 I'll pick up my commenting from the careers and carry on when I have the time.

Thanks for a great hack!

Criminal Skill: I've changed it to read 'appropriate local faction' rather than 'criminal faction'. I'll leave it to the GM and players to decide which local faction would grant Favor for the crime the player described.

Toughness Skill: Toughness is no longer part of Frontier, but is instead part of Artificial (more on that later). I also removed the +1 Critical wound. I like infinite Minor Wounds but it might not be all that amazing. Or maybe it will? So far most injuries have been Major or Critical.

Technophile Skill: Hehe Fair enough. I'm considering changing up the Technophile move anyway. TBD

Calibrations Skill: The reroll is do-able. I'd have to run the numbers on it. Also, possibly have it be Codex Entry -driven: "When you spend significant time calibrating a computer, vehicle or other piece of technology, you can gain a Codex Entry about it. You can expend a Codex Entry about a piece of technology you are currently using in order to reroll a failure or partial success. You keep the new roll." Allows you to make an Assessment (Tech) as well to activate the reroll, and has a nice synergy with Dismantle and such.

Artificial Intelligence: "give a short 2-4 word description of personality" is a common line I use for all player-defined NPCs. It doesn't mean you can't have a more detailed idea for them; those 2-4 words are a very bright primary color view of the NPC so the GM can play it easily. (Principle: Paint in Primary Colors)

HoMM4 chart: Nice! Mine will have to be a bit bigger (10x10), but that's real cool! The main thing is that because of the skill choices and the Origin, the same Career combination can have a good 4-5 'archetypes' within it. But still it would make a cool jumping point in character creation for those seeking a bit of inspiration.

PDF: I'm actually considering making a character builder program for the release, maybe as a Kickstarter goal or something. For the moment, however, I believe Gornul (who posted on the previous page a few days ago) is building up an online Excel-style character sheet. Obviously, since the skills have been swapping around like crazy, he hasn't really written them in as drop-downs :)
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: doc_cthulhu on March 31, 2014, 01:31:19 PM
Outsider view always helps to get things moving again and usually points out something that might have been otherwise missed. I'll go through the remaining part of the hack during this week).
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: doc_cthulhu on April 04, 2014, 04:38:25 AM
Ok. Let's start with those

Careers
All - How much is a "handful" with Crew: X? And are you sure you want to allow the characters to choose same moves, there are a couple of duplicate moves and at least Baker was really strongly against this kind of thing (iirc).
Personality - You are deliberately leaving out a basic move for seduction/charm but Subversion kind of demands it. Leaving it in the open like this might cause some serious "negotiations" between players and GM. I know that many players like to just roleplay conversations. But when you are making a hack/game for a broader public you need to consider what you think is relevant and what your readers would like to have. Social moves are in most hacks for a reason. If not as a basic move, then a peripheral move to be used for those groups that enjoy them (Also: the Performance move is superb.)
Commercial also has those "gadget slots". :D
Scoundrel: Getting me to play some other career than Scoundrel/- would be facing adversary. I also imagine that most players would agree with that. Maybe you should add some kind of limit how many players may choose the same career? Or the same moves? I have always favoured bidding during character generation if there are conflicting interests.
Academic: While I understand the principless behind Experiment-move it is way too overpowered as it is. If you dedicate your character into something with AWengine failure can be pretty rare. Thus this move would allow the character to build universes and Green Lantern-rings aboard the space ship. Adding [experimental], [dangerous] etc. tags could help. Check out tremulus playbooks "The Inventor" (playbook set III) or The Scientist (playbook set I) for ideas?
Engineering: Some goes for the Tinkering move as for the Experiment-move above. Do not underestimate the power of players screwing around with these kind of free options.
Starfarer: Again I would suggest the opportunity to get involved with their own roll or re-roll it for Calibrations.
Cybernetic: Did I totally miss that you need to face adversity when attacking opponents with ranged weapons or is it written only here?
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on April 07, 2014, 12:05:09 AM
The “handful” of Crew is left specifically vague. Consider them to be extras in a movie/show. You get a few named secondary characters (the 3 ones you name/define at the start) and there may be others who are tertiary. It leaves both the GM and the player a bit of leeway. I’m a fan of not getting too bogged down in hard rules, being just vague enough to allow the GM to stretch to their most comfortable position.

From playtest experience, while it is a bit odd when more than one player picks the same Skill, it doesn’t overly impact the quality of the game. That said, the main duplicate skills are because Origins are entirely composed of duplicates from the careers (well, except for the individual Stat boost). I feel it would be more detrimental to limit who can take what skill. If two players feel that their character concepts benefit from the Reputation skill, then so be it.

Subversion: Technically, the first part of subversion is rather redundant with the changes to Assessment; I’ll be sure to change that. A Seduction/Charm basic move exists already; it’s one of the ways you can make an Assessment of a person using your Influence or Physique, or how you can Face Adversity using your Influence or Physique. It’s not a Move in and of itself, it’s a way that you can accomplish a Move. Subversion allows you to use a Codex Entry about someone (gained through making an Assessment) to manipulate/control them.

Performance: Thanks! That one went through a few revisions until I found something I liked. Glad it works for you.

Gadgets Slot: :P Already changed in the next version.

Scoundrel: That’s interesting! In the dozen+ playtests I’ve done, Scoundrel hasn’t been selected all that often (the lowest being Military, the highest being Explorer). Though obviously that’s just personal experience, it would be cool to track that. Maybe a poll or something :P Is it the theme of Scoundrel or a particular skill that attracts you to it?

Experiment/Tinker: This one is a bit risky if the GM plays with Rules-As-Written. However, the limiting factor will be the setting itself, and it is definitely constrained by GM approval. Creating Green Lantern rings should not be an acceptable goal unless the table agrees that it fits with the setting. The implicit requirement of all the Moves is acceptable, reasonable goals and methods. Previously mentioned was using Launch Assault to take on a mech with a stick. That kind of stuff is disingenuous, following the letter of the rules rather than the spirit. I’m of the opinion that insulating the Moves in layers of caveats and restrictions greatly limits their flexibility, making the system as a whole far too rule-heavy.

Faster: Ah good catch, that’s a throwback to when combat was more detailed/crunchy. I’ve already rewritten it, but I forgot to paste it over the old one. The new ‘Faster’ is a lot less mechanics driven and a lot more narrative/descriptive; it allows you to describe yourself doing things a normal human couldn’t accomplish; catch bullets, run up walls, jump super far. Basically cyber-ninja.

Again, thanks for your feedback. The big thing I’ve taken away from these is what I need to cover in the more in-depth description of the moves and the overall philosophy of the game. Stuff like the implied rather than explicit social Moves and the table-approval of ‘freeform’ moves need guidelines how to adjudicate them.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: DarkLanternZBT on April 22, 2014, 11:48:19 PM
Hey Arch, new to boards and your hack is right up the alley of something that's been banging around in my head. Very excited to take a look at this while working on my own homebrew hack; will share anything that seems like it'd help you out! Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Uncharted Worlds - Space opera hack
Post by: Archangel3d on April 23, 2014, 07:11:05 PM
Heya DarkLantern, glad you like the stuff. Right now I'm working on a v0.8 that should be my 'final' mechanics version before I start the tedious/fun job of filling in the rules.

By the by, for anyone interested in Uncharted Worlds stuff, the hack has been granted its own sub-forum! Check it out (http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?board=49.0). It's a little empty just now, but feel free to post stuff! (Relevant stuff, if possible :P)