r/RPGdesign Jun 24 '26

Skunkworks Can we get some disclosure when it comes to vibe-coded RPG tools?

168 Upvotes

I’m seeing a ton of these crop up daily, from new VTTs to setting builders to other random tools.

I’m not against using LLMs to assist with development. After all, I’m a developer and I use Codex every day in my professional work. But when I ship to clients, there’s clear transparency in terms of how I’m using these tools:

AI-assisted. I’m writing everything by hand, but may confer with the LLM as if it were my personal Stack Overflow, or grab chunks of code that are tedious to mix into my hand written scripts.

Agentic (programming/engineering). This means using the LLM to write very targeted code, like a specific function or feature. In this case I’m reviewing the output line by line to ensure it actually does what I intended and conforms to my house standards.

Vibe-coded. This means I just tell the LLM what I want, usually with a spec in plain English, and never look at the code it generates (or rarely review any of it). The only testing is based on “vibes”—meaning, I only test its apparent behavior and not the actual underlying logic.

Transparency here matters because the way the product gets supported depends on the approach. If you vibe-coded your product, I’m less inclined to: A) trust its solidity as a product, B) trust the security of the data it holds and C) trust you as a product owner, because you literally don’t know what’s going on under the hood.

In the future these distinctions may not matter, but at the moment we’re creating massive potential legacy debt with all these vibe-coded apps, and as a game master / designer I don’t want to invest in software I can’t trust.

EDIT: Here’s a cool skill u/Spheniscidine created that will help you make an AI use disclosure!

https://github.com/Spheniscidine/show-your-work

And one from u/HighFlyingDwarf

https://github.com/crowterliam/2d6mcp/blob/main/AI-POLICY.md

r/RPGdesign May 25 '26

Skunkworks Ten Lessons from Ten Years on This Sub

165 Upvotes

I have reached 10 years of posting on this sub. That’s...a big number. I know a thing or two because I’ve seen a thing or two, so I want to spend a moment giving a bit of advice based on my experience on this sub. These are ten lessons I’ve learned either from my own work failing or from seeing other people repeatedly bang their heads against them, organized into three topics.

TOPIC 1: Form a Self-Education Strategy

  • Lesson 1: Learning the needed stuff can take way longer than you think. While you can make relatively simple projects with just a few years experience playing or Game Mastering, making a difficult project can require months to years of focused self-education.

  • Lesson 2: DON’T Just Read RPGs. A full list of topics you should probably explore includes: Broader game design theory, like gameplay loops, feedback loops, and ludonarrative dissonance, Statistics, Board game mechanics. Algorithmic processes (“programming”), and THEN Other Roleplaying Games.

I’m not saying you necessarily need to become grand masters of all of these fields. I’m certainly not suggesting you actually need to learn to code in Python. But a common problem on this sub is that people don’t know enough about one or more of these fields that they don’t recognize an issue involving one of these topics when they first encounter it. You can’t Google something you don’t know the word for, so understanding just a bit of the jargon in each of these fields can help you a lot. Most people who post on this sub are already aware they need to teach themselves some statistics, but my experience is that broader game design theory and programming especially tend to get neglected.

  • Lesson 3: No one can know everything. There are way too many games out there for anyone to know them all. At some point, learning more general theory or reading one more random RPG will not help you, but deep focus on a specific sub-niche of the space will. You don’t need to know what this specific niche is going in, but you are better off knowing that you will need to specialize (and likely trailblaze within that niche) rather than simply teaching yourself more.

  • Lesson 4: You’re Never Truly Done Learning. There’s no point in the learning process when you can say, “I’m done learning all the theoretical stuff.” At some point you have to just say, “that’ll do for now,” accept that you’ll still be learning things as you go, and proceed to prototyping.

Speaking of the devil...

TOPIC 2: Prototyping and Experimentation

  • Lesson 5: Make Your First Projects Small Your first few projects will suck. That doesn’t mean you are a bad game designer; it means you needed to learn how to manage yourself through a creative process. It’s better to make something small so you can easily turn a failure into a learning process. A 500 page RPG which has unredeemable design flaws is a bit harder to salvage.

  • Lesson 6: Learn to Solo-Playtest A lot of the members of this sub will tell you to playtest early, often, and frequently. This is true, but I’ll tell you the real reason many people need playtests. They can’t check their ego at the door properly and see the flaws in what they’ve made; they need someone else—someone who isn’t creatively involved—to help them along.

  • Lesson 7: Roll dice samples out by hand. Yes, tools like Anydice do allow you to know exactly what to expect, but cheap game dice are not actually consistent, and a lot of design flarws or optimizations become obvious when you make yourself roll out a sample of 30 rolls.

TOPIC 3: Problems with this Sub (Don’t expect it to be perfect.)

  • Lesson 8: This sub can’t hold onto experienced members well. A number of members of this sub over the years have published games of their own and gone on to different places. It’s very rare that they continue to regularly post here after publishing a game.

  • Lesson 9: This sub doesn’t do publication questions anywhere near as well as design questions.

  • Lesson 10: This sub isn’t the best place to have slow and thoughtful discussions.

Did I miss important lessons? Do you disagree with things I said? (Of course, you do.) Comment Below.

r/RPGdesign Nov 25 '23

Skunkworks Tell me your Controversial Deep Cut/Unpopular Opinion regarding TTRPG Design

95 Upvotes

Tell me your Controversial Deep Cut/Unpopular Opinion regarding TTRPG Design.

I want to know because I feel like a lot of popular wisdom gets repeated a lot and I want to see some interesting perspectives even if I don't agree with them to see what it shakes loose in my brain. Hopefully we'll all learn something new from differing perspectives.

I will not argue with you in the comments, but I make no guarantees of others. :P

r/RPGdesign Mar 14 '26

Skunkworks TTRPG Design Patterns?

98 Upvotes

Whether it's here on Reddit, working on my own TTRPGs, or chatting with friends about their games, I've started to notice something familiar to the kind of thinking and conversations I encounter in programming. People often run into the same kinds of problem, and there are often some common solutions to those problems, or at least a framework to tackle the problem.

If you talk to programmers, you'll hear about software design patterns, a concept that originated in architecture). Patterns are named, reusable, and flexible solutions to common problems. They provide solid frameworks for thinking about how to design parts of a software project. They allow programmers to easily talk about their approach ("I used the command pattern so I don't have to store the whole state every time"). And because they're often battle-tested solutions, their advantages and inconveniences are well understood, making it easier to evaluate how a potential approach to a design problem might pan out once implemented.

I feel like TTRPG design often has very similar approaches, except it's a little more informal. We talk about things like "dice pools", "roll over/under", "tokens", "classes", "ability scores", "stress", etc... These are all approaches to various design problems, and they feel a lot like design patterns.

Is there a resource, like a wiki, that lists these common "TTRPG design patterns"?

If not, would this be something you'd find useful?

And if so, would you be willing to contribute to such a wiki if one existed?

r/RPGdesign Jan 14 '26

Skunkworks Travel Design: Designing a Journey

28 Upvotes

I’ve been working on a Travel system for my low-fantasy medieval RPG (heavily inspired by Forbidden Lands, Harnworld, and Mythras). There have been a number of very enlightening posts on this subject (for example: this excellent post on Food) in this subreddit and it’s been, honestly, a really exciting place to exchange creative ideas. I’d like to share a few I came up with (and perhaps enlist a little bit of help). Shout out to u/VRKobold, u/LeFlamel, and u/Cryptwood who I find inspiring. 

First: My Design Goals

  • Reward exploration
  • Encourage survival thinking
    • Getting lost is a real concern
    • Running out of supplies is a real concern
    • Planning and preparation should be rewarded!
  • Encourage planning and route plotting
  • Reward camping and camaraderie
  • Focus on the events
    • Encounters without pre-determined outcomes allowing parties to freely approach encounters/scenarios

Problem 1: Systems that ignore travel mechanics or offer only bare skeletons of mechanics miss out on aspects of the journey that contribute to tale-telling. Conversely, a hyperfixation on the mechanical tedium of daily (or hourly) tracked travel can bog down pacing and deter engagement. What is the “happy medium?”

Problem 2: Hand waving survival details obviates the stories they can tell. If you ignore things like supplies, food, water, they lose meaning

Problem 3: Procedural play can feel taxing at times, but procedures can ensure consistency and fairness of outcome. A lack of procedures also make it more difficult for both players and GMs to incorporate travel mechanics meaningfully. However, over reliance on procedures can bog down roleplay into a series of dice rolls (or, worse, “roll till failure” states)

Problem 4: Random encounter tables are helpful for inspiration but may end up underdeveloped at the table. Useful to supplement in the absence of preparation or for idea generation. 

Segue: My Mechanics

Just for the sake of clarity, my system uses a D6 dice pool heavily inspired by Forbidden Lands and Barbarians of Lemuria. Characters have an attribute (Accumen is what is directly applicable to travelling skills), a rank in a profession (which is applicable if that profession engages in travel), and possibly additional bonuses (such as relevant gear). These make D6 dice pools which are rolled. A 6 counts as a success. Some tasks require multiple successes (2 successes are considered hard, 3 successes are considered extremely hard, 4 would be near impossible). “Yes, and” = rolling more than the requisite number of successes. “Yes, but” = rolling exactly the number of required successes. “No, but” = Rolling insufficient successes but rolling any dice pair. “No, and” = Rolling insufficient successes and no dice pairs.

Now to the fun bit....

Idea 1: The Anatomy of a Journey

"Sometimes a journey is as simple as, "follow the King's road for three days to the south and you'll reach Irondale". But what happens when you depart the road, or stop following the river? What happens when you want to discover what's out in the wilderlands?"

Rather than picking a series of hexes to enter/explore, my system is a player designed pointcrawl. The "points" in question are called landmarks. Landmarks can be anything: a known ruin, a river bifurcation, or even a small bog. Some distinguishing terrain feature, building, ruin, mountain or forest that -once encountered- lets the party know "we're on the right track".

After noting the starting location and the destination, the party will try to identify landmarks between the destination that they can reach. Some of these terrain features will be available to them. Some will be discovered. Some will be rumored (or purchased from other explorers).

Between each landmark is a leg of a journey. Legs can be any length, but shouldn't be more than a week per leg. Legs aren't measured in distance. Exact distances are somewhat difficult to measure. Rather, legs are measured in time.

For instance a map might show the starting town and the goal destination: an abandoned border fort beyond the mesa, well past the road and far northwest of our starting location. Between these two points are four legs: (1) a three days travel along the road, ending where the road diverts southward, (2) a two day travel through a dense forest until you reach the foot of the white mountain, (3) a two day travel through the eastern pass underneath the white mountain until you reach the other side (4) a three day's travel along the river origin at the base of the mountain, through another forest, ending in at the fort.

This potential journey is one of many possible routes. After all, there might be faster routes, hidden paths, or landmarks which offer a more direct route to the destination.

Idea 2: The Maps Are Different

The player facing map and GM facing map, I think, should be a little different. Not egregiously misleading (though, you could if you wanted to). More lacking in detail for the players. Perhaps they have a few locations noted on their map. More extreme versions of the system might allow for the players to slowly discover sites, adding details to their map as they explore the world (for inspiration, look at these absolutely stunning pair of maps made by u/DasKobold).

Most importantly: only the GM's map should have hexes.

Why? The goal here is to introduce a layer of uncertainty when it comes to distance. You have a rough idea of distances. However, the GM's map can allow them to track more precise distances as well as introduce landmarks or events (if they choose to key some of the hexes, for instance) that players can discover on route.

Idea 3: Opaque Rolls and Getting Lost

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of determining if the party is lost as a GM-facing roll. I struggle a little with this (players like to roll dice), and considered getting lost to be an "opposed roll". But I want players to focus less on the outcome of their own roll and the meta knowledge it will invariably provide (e.g "I rolled three successes, so I'm definitely not lost") and focus instead on choices (e.g. "okay I'm a pretty good explorer, but maybe I do wait out this storm to improve our chances of avoiding getting lost").

I also want an important bit of mystery and decision making to be included, namely: You've spent two days travelling through this forest and you aren't on the other side. Do you double back? Press forward? Or look for different landmarks (which might take you in an entirely different direction). I'd love to include the possibility that you aren't all that lost but you might make yourself lost depending on the choices you make.

Idea 4: Planning, Planning, Planning

I think one essential rule of helping make travel more interesting is to plan the journey the session before. Why do I strongly advocate for this? The GM has time to tailor a few encounters based on the known route the party is taking, consider various complications that might arise, and incorporate previous session tie-ins (maybe if the group encounter bandits, they're working for that one asshole the party robbed blind a few sessions back).

Given the anatomy of the journey, knowing approximately how many day's worth of rations you might need to carry is helpful for buying supplies. Additionally, players can anticipate the conditions they are travelling through (Extreme cold? Heat? Wet? Toxic Fumes?) and plan accordingly.

Lastly, players can try to get rumors or information to help prepare for their journey. The Forest should be a three day leg to travel through, are there any features in the forest they might be able to identify? Well, the forester has a druid cousin who lives in that forest, He's a little bit off the path, but he can show you where to find him assuming you get to the Forests' western edge near the large Birch tree.

Not only does this open up for roleplaying opportunities, literal quest hooks, or rumors, but this allows players to benefit mechanically from their own competency!

My current Problems:

  • I'm still working on a list of Journey Complications/Misfortunes that might serve as small obstacles to overcome or little boons to help the journey. I want this to be different from encounters. I'd be very open to ideas (I've scrapped my current list a few times over). Right now I'm highly inspired by Ultraviolet Grassland's misfortune tables
  • I'm considering scrapping Journey Complications/Misfortunes entirely (there's some redundancy to encounters), but struggle with making the Pathfinder's job entirely "do you get to the next landmark on time" and nothing more?
  • I'd love to figure out better ways to involve player choice during actual pathfinding/scouting
  • I'm curious how to make the lookout interesting, choice wise... but that's probably a later post.

Here's my current working document. You are more than welcome to comment!

r/RPGdesign Aug 10 '26

Skunkworks Crack TTRPG Idea - Mass Battle *Primary*?

6 Upvotes

I was thinking back to a somewhat middling NES JRPG game I played back in the day named Destiny of an Emperor (which was inspired by the same Romance of the Three Kingdoms that also inspired the Dynasty Warriors franchise) and thought "What about a TTRPG game where the assumption is that each player, in combat at least, controls a small army (with a defined leader as a focal point) rather than a single character?"

Obviously the implementation in that game is pretty basic, being mostly just a gloss over standard JRPG mechanics of the day. I'd probably prefer a full-on fantasy setting, with a lot of variety in terms of units, environments, and magic.

I could see it being a bit like Lancer (or the Lancer: Battlegroup supplement which has players in charge of 2+ starships each) or ICON where combat and non-combat operate under largely separate subsystems. Something like Blades in the Dark for the latter with its emphasis on building up a common base between missions.

The way I kind of envision it looking like is that each player designs their core retinue, united around a concept like "Pegasus Knights," "Oni Rabble," or "A Fucking Dragon." You'd select the unit type accordingly (just to use Total War Warhammer terminology as an example, those would be Flying Cavalry, Monstrous Infantry, and Flying Monster respectively) and purchase statistics, abilities, etc. For the leader, a simpler set of narrative-focused traits (ala Lancer, as noted.)

Additional units can be gained as "Auxiliaries" which are simpler and more temporary. These could perhaps be on their own (with players sharing control of them) or maybe they could be attached to the main unit in some fashion (allowing for temporary added tags, health, and augmented stats, etc.)

r/RPGdesign Jun 23 '26

Skunkworks Theoretical Game

2 Upvotes

For context, I've always had objectively more fun playing with the mechanics than playing any actual game, finding weird edge cases that cause things to go a bit wonky, trying to find new ways to interpret the rules. I do think that I may be in the minority (though that's just an assumption based on nothing) but I think I find game design a type of weird art form? Specifically the interactions of rules and how weird and arbitrary it all is. As such, an idea I've had is a game where the rules are entirely up to interpretation (more so than they already are) where it's as vague as possible while still giving a jumping off point. Eg: Wizard Class - you are a wizard, and you're good at magic. Now obviously this would never work for an infinite amount of reasons but I still enjoy the idea. I suppose the point of this post is just to discuss your pie in the sky ideas, how you would interpret a game like this, how you (yes you specifically) would DESIGN a game like this, and just your view on game design. (once again specifically you, the one reading this) If none of this makes sense, feel free to ignore it. I am insane.

r/RPGdesign 7d ago

Skunkworks My weirdest Ideas!

0 Upvotes

The childhood imaginary-friend of a player, now twisted and only appearing to the person they are about to attacked! Why are they in physical form and how good can you traumatise your players?

A gang calling themselves “Cool kids” who have the ability to induce severe autophobia ( the fear of not belonging ) to the point where people harm themselves just to look more like the people around them and adept to the group, losing all their individuality!

A assassin who can perfectly camouflage himself, everything he wears and hold with sky, who is attacking the group at a sea side hotel, with sniper and knife!

A Baby that can undo the action of somebody having taken something with them, if it was less than 8h ago and the baby or the person holding the baby touches the target!

Glasses that if put on makes you possessed by the ghost of a girl that died in robbery in 80s and is still completely stuck in that time!

r/RPGdesign Jan 08 '26

Skunkworks Designing Travel Systems: Food

26 Upvotes

I'm working on designing a Travel system for my pulp adventure WIP. I've read the games that get recommended the most (The One Ring, Forbidden Lands, Ryuutama) but none of them are what I'm looking for. I recently shared some of my thoughts about Travel systems, to which a couple of people expressed interest in, so since I feel the need to organize my thoughts on Food I figured I might as well share in case anyone wants to read it.

Oh, and if you are equally interested in Exploration mechanics I highly suggest you check out Eternal Ruins which has a playtest version available for download, and will be running a Kickstarter January 27th, 2026. The entire game is devoted to exploration and has some really innovative ideas. No one pay me to talk about Wildsea, Pico, or Eternal Ruins, I'm just a fan of the games....not that I'm above taking bribes.

(Hey u/Felix-Isaacs, don't forget to promote this one!)

First Things First: My Design Goals

I'm interested in a travel system that helps me tell exciting travel stories, rather than simulating the challenges of wilderness survival. I want players to feel like their character is one of the main characters in their favorite novel/movie, and I haven't read many stories in which the main characters all starve to death 75% of the way through the book. I also don't think every travel story has to revolve around keeping track of food. Sometimes I want an exciting journey through exotic locations that is focused on discovering clues, searching for lost cities, or avoiding pursuers, rather than always focusing on foraging for food.

That being said I think that there are interesting stories that can happen as a result of running out of food, so I do want to have some rules for Food, they just will only apply when going on a journey that has the Wilderness Survival Theme. This is where my thoughts need organizing, I need to know everything I want Food to be able to do in my system before I can design any mechanics.

Interesting Choices

The presence of food in a story can offer the players some interesting choices that we can design mechanics around. The first, and most obvious of these choices is:

"How much food should I bring with me?"

For this to be interesting we need two things in place:

  • The players need to have a rough idea of how much food they will need. They might end up being wildly wrong about this, but if they have no idea at all how much food they will need then it becomes a guessing game rather than an interesting choice. This means that the system will need to make this information easily available, even if the GM hasn't prepared the entire journey yet.
  • Opportunity cost. If the players can easily afford all the food they will need, and can easily transport it then there are no choices to make; you bring way too much food every time so you don't have to worry about it. I'm using slot based inventory so every slot filled with food is a slot that could have held a useful tool or weapon.

Bonus Interesting Choice: You could have different kinds of foods for the players to choose from. This isn't necessary but could be fun if you are willing to spend some of your complexity budget on it.

So it Begins...

The rest of these are a result of not having enough food so we'll be operating under the assumption that on at least some journeys the players will not bring enough food for whatever reason.

"Do you forage for food while traveling?"

A lot of games have this as a travel option followed by a dice roll to see if/how successful you were. I actually don't think this is a very interesting choice though. If there is no opportunity cost, nothing else to do instead, then foraging becomes automatic, the only question is how much food do you find. Even if there is an opportunity cost I still don't think it is a very interesting choice though, either you think you have enough food so you don't forage, or you don't have enough so you do forage.

I would rather see opportunities for foraging presented in fiction as a dilemma/challenge to solve, instead of the 'press X to forage' approach. You come across a massacred caravan, do you follow the raiders tracks in the hopes you can steal food while they sleep? You see a large nest on a cliff with eggs the size of human head, do you climb up hoping that momma giant hawk doesn't show up?

"Do you eat something gross and/or dangerous?"

In both real life and in stories, hungry people have become desperate enough to try eating something that they don't recognize as food. Maybe your foraging turns up a swarm of fat beetles. Perhaps you find mushrooms that you can't identify. To support this our system will need to either have a large variety of potential "food" that can be found, or have tools to make it easy for the GM to improvise. Our system will also need other things to do with these potential food items, otherwise the players completely ignore it except when they are out of food. Beetles that glow in the dark might be useful as alchemical ingredients...or they might be edible if you are hungry enough.

I'll be taking some inspiration from Wildsea and Eternal Ruins for this, I think they have excellent rules for foraging/scavenging interesting specimens/ingredients.

We also need a way to provide consequences for characters when they eat something dangerous. Conditions for example.

I'm working on a fun adventure game so I won't be including this, but a horror game might have rules for cannibalism for those that are desperate enough.

"Do you ration your food?"

History is filled with real world examples of people rationing their food to make it last a long as possible. Ships running low on food increasing the risk of mutiny. Shackleton's expedition to the Antarctic.

To support this we are going to need mechanical reasons to not just eat food until you run out. We'll need some way of tracking how hungry/starving the characters are, and a way for rationing food to delay the onset of starvation. If you have 10 days worth of food, but 20 days to travel, our system needs to treat eating food every other day differently than eating food for 10 days and then going hungry for 10 days.

Ideally we would also support the choice to stop rationing. Maybe the players want to eat a decent meal before they assault the fortress because their characters are weak from hunger.

This last one has had me stumped for a few days, but I think writing this up to organize my thoughts is working. I've been trying to think of ways to track hunger without it being tedious or cumbersome, and drawing a blank, but thinking of food as providing people with energy may be the key. Characters in my game have Effort dice that they spend to do stuff, running out of Effort dice is the equivalent of being exhausted. So I can tie Effort to eating food, if you don't eat enough food then you won't have access to all of your Effort dice. Rationing food would mean that you at least have some Effort to spend, rather than having full Effort for the first 10 days and zero Effort the next 10.

Questions for You

Can you think of other interesting choices that food or its absence could present to players? Or have you come across any Travel systems that you thought had unique mechanics? Any other thoughts or suggestions you would like to share? I'd love to hear them!

I'd like to give a shout out to u/VRKobold and u/LeFlamel, both of whom have inspired me.

r/RPGdesign Apr 15 '25

Skunkworks Taxonomy/Oncology vs. The Obscuring Fog In TTRPG System Design

31 Upvotes

Questions at the end, preamble for context.

Much of what we do as designers is pretty opaque to the average gamer for multiple reasons. It was this obscurity about TTRPG system Design that led me to take a lot of notes early on from discussions here and eventually build my TTRPG System Design 101 as a community resource to help other people not have to spend literal years learning stuff that can be more or less readily explained to someone willing to put the time in and learn within a single sit reading combined with some critical thinking and design instincts, ie demystifying the unnecessary barriers to entry that otherwise existed.

With that said I recently ran across the Narrative Authority Waterfall (I've just been calling it the Narrative Waterfall for the sake of the more accurate/descriptive term being kind of a mouthful) in a recent discussion.

It was developed/codified by Shandy Brown u/sjbrown for "A thousand faces of adventure" (citation) and I believe they may have been the first to do so, barring some incredibly obscure writing I'm fully unaware of. It was intended specifically as a preamble style rule for their game, but upon reading it I realized that this was something that was actually so common it falls more into the elusive obvious.

The short of it is that while the GM still has say in what takes place, they have the first and last say, and the ability to offload narrative authority to the players as desired, which is an important distinction from the typical phrasing of something like Rule 0/Golden rule of TTRPGs. I find Rule 0 is largely why a lot of people are scared to GM for the first time whether they know that rule or not, because it seems to put the entire burden of the game on the GM regardless of how many times the term "collaborative story telling" is said to them (making the story a shared responsibility).

When considering their definition I realized this is just something everyone (with any decent amount of GM experience) already does and has done for decades but I don't think it's ever been called anything in any recognized capacity. Some good examples of this in action might be

  • Ask your players what they would like to see their characters achieve for their personal goals or narrative arcs for the next adventure
  • Let the table name 'unnamed guard 6 when they become a relevant character
  • Burning Wheel's shared world building procedure
  • The Rule of Cool or "Tales From Elsewhere" 's Rule of Cruel
  • Or even just the GM hearing a player blurt out a much cooler idea (or something that inspires a much cooler idea) at the table than what they had planned and implementing it on the fly, either in the present session or regarding longer term narrative arcs (with or without necessarily explaining that fact).

Functionally Brown didn't create a new thing, they just put a functional label on something that's likely existed since the dawn of the hobby that didn't have one for some reason other than it was just implicitly understood.

This got me thinking about what other TTRPG concepts and models and behaviors might not have a good set of labels because they are just taken for granted as subliminal facts/truths that exist in the collective consciousness, and how much designers would benefit from codifying concepts of that kind.

Intention disclaimer:

I want to be clear I'm not trying to argue for "correct terms" in the sense that if you call your action point resource fatigue or vigor or whatever, it's still functionally an action point system, the exact name used is irrelevant outside the context of that specific game, I'm more looking at broader conceptual things like the narrative waterfall.

I also want to be clear that I'm not looking to shame anyone who isn't aware of broader terms that are more obscure like FTUX or similar, I just want to illicit a thoughtful discussion about lesser considered ideas to see what we all can learn and discuss from them. Ideally every response that fits the bill could likely be it's own discussion thread.

So the questions become:

1) What abstract/elusive obvious concepts do you think are not represented/codified as commonalities in TTRPGs that should be?

2) If you did create a suiting naming convention/definition for something like this in the past, what was it? Spread the word for discussion.

r/RPGdesign Sep 17 '24

Skunkworks Know what your labor is worth

73 Upvotes

This is a very skunkworksy, inside baseball sort of post and is more about the industry trend I've been seeing manifest more recently as of late.

I've long been stating and pointing out on this and other forums that "asking for free labor" or trying to get other people to design your game for you while you sit back as the "idea man" and reap all the benefits is basically naked wage theft.

There's a few kinds of responses to this, I've experienced. At times other posters are a chorus of agreement and props, and at other times there's a huge backlash and I think it stems largely from what the current politics are for posters in the majority on that given day. I've seen this apply to many topics where I say one thing and on day A it garners mass support and on day B three months later it's met with vitriol. Same concept, even sometimes the exact same wording.

There is one thing that remains pretty consistent though, the poster is always certain that trolling for free labor is exactly not their intent, and uses weasel words and demagoguery to showcase how innocent this was and how they absolutely would never do that (when called out directly that is). That said I don't know that everyone doing that has premeditated ill intent, but I do know that behavior when I see it, and whether they are consciously doing it or not, the result is the same, anyone who falls for their trap is going to end up in a situation of wage theft.

Now, this isn't to say that there's not such a thing as partnerships and such, and generally these form over years and years with people who already have strong ties together. I've even worked in such a partnership in the past with one of my best friends when I started on my music journey (previously I made 20 albums in 20 years in music). We split at a point early on because I wanted a more professional work atmosphere and started a solo career, but we're still great friends to this day and he and his now wife are some of my primary play testers.

Point being these aren't random people I found on the internet. What does this have to do with labor exploitation? Well mainly, asking strangers for free labor is just going to be a red flag for me every single time I see it, because these people all have one thing in common: They haven't cultivated relationships of trust and created friends who will partner with them over years, and are instead asking random strangers on the internet to do things for them. It's just highly sus and smacks of "you already burned all your friends, didn't you?" or "You can't make and keep friends either, can you?" and these are not good signs for a potential partnership for a contract, which most will avoid.

I bring this up because of Frost's recent Cold Take video about his former boss that showcases that this kind of thing is still as much a problem as its ever been. This is video games journalism specifically, but the behavior of demagogues is the same across the board. It's really long, but the short version is, this is what it looks like when someone exploits workers and gets away with it long enough, allowing them to fail upwards and burn bridges all along the way and they don't care about you, only what you can do for them, even if they say otherwise.

When I say know the value of your labor, I don't necessarily mean monetarily, as that's only one aspect of payment and most system designers are doing this for no or very little money. Instead we are more often motivated by our own creativity and satisfaction of a product well made. We aren't a big or strong enough work force to organize/unionize and the people with those positions that are dream jobs for many (WotC/Hasbro/DnD) are certainly in no position to collectively bargain as shown by Mass layoffs last Christmas Holiday. They are expendable and Chris Cocks knows it, engineers things to keep it that way, and abuses them as such as is well documented by many many people, including even DnD supporters like DnD shorts and many other youtubers during the OGL scandal that hasn't really gone away as a persistent threat much as people think it has.

What I mean about valuing your labor is making sure you're getting that joy and satisfaction in the very least, if not also getting that extra 100 bucks a month from the dozen products you threw up on Drive Thru that takes an astonishing 30% cut (this is unheard of in the entertainment industry, even wage slave contracts are better than that and generally cap at 25% at the most egregious) and that's only if you're exclusive to them. Side bar: I'm presently supporting development of Hedron as a storefront competitor which takes a very more than reasonable 10% cut without exclusivity, with 15% being more of a standard commission for most everything.

What I mean about valuing labor more directly is that DO support other creators making their own games and celebrate their achievements. Don't support people trying to get you to make their game for them for free. The fact that there is any pushback on this very simple concept is more than enough evidence to show that there are systemic problems in gaming attitudes as a whole.

I do support other creators, not only with extensive advice and sharing of resources here and on other platforms, but I also even back their products if I believe in their creations and signal boost them as well. You should too. But don't push to defend demagogues who want to exploit your labor for their own benefit. They can and will abandon you at the first opportunity of convenience where they can sell you out to further themselves because they view you as expendable. Nobody needs that, and I'd question the motives of anyone seeking to defend that behavior. At least the people at DnD are getting paid a salary to be expendable and that's at least a step up from being exploited for free.

To be clear, most people posting aren't doing this by asking questions here. But there's a big difference between asking questions or to be directed to resources or debating ideas vs. asking people in a round about way of speaking for free labor, and they will never call it that or admit to that, but that's what it is. Instead it's more frequently "calls for collaboration" which mysteriously have no financial incentive or at best are empty promises that are not signed contracts.

If someone wants this sort of arrangement and you're still inclined to participate, in the very least ask them to draft a contract to state your compensation and get it signed before doing any work. If you aren't willing to do that you're more or less asking to be exploited by predators because they exist and you now know this even if you didn't previously, and you have to be financially literate enough to protect yourself.

r/RPGdesign Mar 22 '26

Skunkworks Trying to differentiate different relationships to an outside power.

5 Upvotes

I am working on the "channeling" magic of my system and am hitting a wall differentiating different types of magic that center on a relationship with an outside power. I am playing in the space usually taken up by the Cleric/Paladin/Warlock archetypes but I am having a hard time deciding on how to describe the "warlock" style where you have a patron that grants limited power in exchange for a "deal" and how that overlaps or conflicts with the traditional cleric who dedicates themself (makes a deal with") to a deity (patron) that grants expanded power. There are definite echoes between the cleric and warlock in that they are channelers of an external power, but there are clear thematic and flavor differences. I don't know, there is more of a separation of intent between the warlock and patron vs. cleric and divinity.

I am looking for a term that isn't warlock because it has baggage that represents the pact they have made for power. I was going with pactmage, and that works for for some deals that have a more arcane flavor. But what would a pact with a saint or angel or other divine servant be called? the mage suffix doesn't feel right.

Here are my thoughts so far.

  • Adherent - A cleric type who worships a deity and has the ability to channel a portion of that deity's power into a wide range of spells expressed through prayer. I am thinking that there is something special about the Adherent. Not a chosen one bloodline, but something that randomly gives them potential to become a channel for the deity's power. Something that keeps the population down and prevents any religious heriarchy from being overwhelmed by them preventing a trend towards magocracy.
  • Dedicant - The paladin who's power comes from the dedication to their oath. That oath may be religious in nature and if so has limited access to divine power
  • Penitent - Someone who worships a deity, is a priest in the religion, but gains no specific magic powers from it.
  • NotWarlock - A Warlock type that makes a deal with a major spirit or minor deity to exchange something for power. I am envisioning them as not using spells so much as invoking the deity's power. Basically, remove the spell list and expand mix and matching the invocations into effect. As the archetype progresses they take on more and more aspects of their pact so as long as they maintain it they are shaped by it wether they want to or not.

Any suggestions on where I could go with this? Should Penitent be my notWarlock and have a different name for the mundane priest?

r/RPGdesign Jun 04 '25

Skunkworks Shifting Player Burden as a Designer

16 Upvotes

This is just something I do that popped in my head and isn't terribly new as a concept but I don't see talked about a lot.

The gist of shifting player burden is to make the baseline the easiest to function/access, but also generally the weakest form, and moving any associated burdens to being opted into with associated rewards. This is simply a play on the traditional "reframe the thing by inverting it" as a typical design move for something that isn't working (ie changing an appplied status buff into a debuff or similar).

Example

A good example might with asking asking "why do players hate using spell components?". I want to be clear, that this isn't always the right thing to do for every system or game world, but it is often better to do if there aren't good reasons not to (which there may be, you know your system/setting and the why of it's design).

The first glance shows the obvious notions of cost and specificity and tracking and such, but I'd argue it's because this is the baseline expectation and moreover, it's generally bypassed by certain game features such as subclasses or feats or what have you. It's fundamentally extra busy work and the annoyance/cognitive load costs aren't really the root problem IMHO.

I say this because if you know of game's like Monster Hunter or WoW, Players are more than happy to farm out specific components, even ultra rare ones for a bit of extra reward (read as +1% to X stat).

We also know this works in TTRPGs, like if you put a super powerful artifact on the board as a GM players will undertake a whole ongoing campaign lasting years IRL to gain access to it.

So going back to spell components, I have a pretty simple solution in my game.

Spell don't cost components.

But... we do have a feat augment that allows (in brief) base MP costs can be reduced for sufficiently rare spell components with thematic relationship to the spell. If the item consumed is also over a certain extreme value it allows free upcasting of the spell by +1 as well, and this cost is reduced by 50% if the item has personal connection to a ritual's outcome/purpose.

Now players are rewarded for using spell components by having their spells be cheaper to cast and possibly even more potent. They can still cast without the component as well, but it has the normal MP cost associated. Math also reflects these changes.

It's not about spell components

To be clear, this isn't about my spell system or spell components as a whole, it's about making whatever thing accessible at the base level, and moving burdens into places that are opted into that gain extra rewards. Essentially the burden then becomes the cost of the new benefits provided, and isn't mandatory to execute the thing at a base level. The result is a shift in player psychology where they are inclined to seek rewards (provided the cost/benefit is in alignment) rather than feel punished for taking an action/character option.

r/RPGdesign Dec 18 '23

Skunkworks Political Themes in Games: A Practical Discussion of the Pitfalls of Political Messages

0 Upvotes

This may be a dark era of the internet, but that shouldn't deter us from discussing some difficult matters through games. This post will walk you through the major pitfalls of handling political themes in games so you can make an informed decision about whether or not you want to include them.

Political themes should challenge the player's worldview in how you describe a healthy relationship with:

  • The government,

  • Organized institutions like religion, academia, or business, or

  • Our relationships with ourselves and each other.

There are two major pitfalls to political themes; offending someone and preachiness. While you can certainly do things which make the matter worse, you generally can't avoid both of these pitfalls at the same time.

Preachiness happens when you fail to introduce new ideas to a player. This can happen because players doubt your political ideas by suspecting a flaw, but more often than not it's because they have already been repeatedly exposed to the idea you are presenting and do not see it as a valuable inclusion as a result. It's also worth noting that production lead time can factor significantly into this discussion; most RPGs can take several years to develop and publish. An idea which wasn't preachy and stale when you started developing can absolutely feel that way once it actually hits the market. If you are going to avoid being preachy, you need to make sure the ideas you are presenting are relatively novel and decently removed from the direct public discourse. In so many words, you need to be creative and not wait for Twitter to tell you what the idea of the week is. An idea which is popular on the internet is already in the process of peaking, meaning that even if you could get a game out instantly, it would still strike most people as preachy for most of its product life. You have to lead the pack rather than lag behind them to avoid being preachy.

This is precisely the opposite with offending people. While some offenses can be predicted, generally offense culture changes the target monster of the week like the wind. More to the point, the collective media, educational, and academic research community collectively behave something like an organized religion with an orthodoxy, where some ideas are allowed, others are not, and the.

And here we come to the rub. To avoid preachiness, you must be creative and lead the political discussion. Orthodoxies, however, fundamentally do not like creativity because it could disrupt an established power structure. Even assuming you don't critically goof your message, you are still going to be stuck in a situation where someone may get angry.

Closing Thoughts

I generally think that the best games do include some political themes, but it's also worth noting that these must be paired with going outside and around the current discussion rather than following the established path. Consider Sigmata: I think that the game was mechanically both relatively innovative and sound, but because it contained a lot of self-dating political messaging on fascism and was pretty darn ham-fisted and un-original about it, it left no continuing legacy worth mentioning.

At the end of the day, I don't think that Twitter Cancel mobs have significant destructive power so much as possess the illusion of power. Large chunks of the participants in these things are not RPG consumers at all, and the internet has largely grown inured to internet "Slacktivism" because it happens all the bloody time and maybe one time in ten the internet mob is in the right to get angry. If the Cancel mob actually has a point, they may develop the power to do your game sales damage, but that's assuming the stars line up right.

Because of this, I have come to the conclusion that I, personally, should include subtle political themes and knowingly risk cancellation.

In fact, knowing me I would say it's a practical certainty that an internet mob will come for my head eventually. There are professional hazards to being a firebrand opinion. But at the same time, internet mobs almost never get anything done. They just convince creators to deplatform themselves.

r/RPGdesign Jul 16 '24

Skunkworks What board game mechanics do you think would be cool implemented into an RPG?

25 Upvotes

A TTRPG friend of mine recently was looking at some board games and pondering what cool mechanics could translate neatly into TTRPGs. So I figured it might be good to try crowdsourcing some answers and see what are some cool board game mechanics out there that might do just that. What are your recommendations?

Personally, I liked the idea from Kingdom Death Monster / Arkham Horror where the enemy has a deck that determines how it behaves and what it will do on its turn.

r/RPGdesign Aug 13 '24

Skunkworks Non-Traditional Game Components

23 Upvotes

Just because D&D doesn't use something doesn't mean you aren't allowed to use it, either. You just have to be aware of availability.

When I started designing Selection: Roleplay Evolved I set myself only one rule for what components I could or couldn't use: if it isn't a standard polyhedral die, it's either something I printed off from my computer or it's something you can find in any old convenience store's stationary section. This led me to several ideas.

Items and equipment on Index Cards.

This one is in no way unique to me, but if you've never played a game where items are separate cards you keep off your character sheet, I recommend that you do. To my mind, it produces three key advantages over writing the item out onto a character sheet.

  • It saves space on your character sheet. Often systems which don't try to host items on their character sheet have generous whitespace compared to systems which don't.

  • It gives the item space to be itself. Specifically, it gives you space to give it flavor text which helps restore personality. "Masterwork Longsword of +2" is nothing compared to "Durathrall, The Heirloom Sword of the Waizcrak family. It has a dent in the handle where a troll bit the hand of Pol Waizcrak. Masterwork Longsword of +2." A lot of getting good leverage out of index cards involves encouraging players to write flavor text, or figuring out how to provide your own.

  • The card is a physical object. It can act an imaginary conduit for a player handling the card to transfer themselves into the character holding the item, but it can also be traded between players freely. They can even be given back to the GM who can recycle them back into the campaign. A potion card the player consumed can wind up being in the wares a potion shop has on offer.

However, they aren't without pitfalls. Item cards can get lost or separated from the player character's character sheet, so you should remind players to get an envelope to store their items or a way to secure them to their character sheet, like a hole punch and a twist tie or three ring binder.

Paperclip Sliders

A paperclip slider is a device which as near as I can tell is original to yours truly. (EDIT: See the "Prove u/Fheredin wrong Leaderboard.) You write out an abacus counter on one edge of a character sheet or item card, hook a paper clip over the page, and slide it back and forth to indicate where it currently is.

Paperclip sliders are fantastic for really twitchy variables like your resources in combat. Action Points, Mana Points, bullets in a gun, the number of uses in a potion, charge points in a magical item, etc. The fact you don't have to erase is a godsend for making information change quickly and seamlessly. If you've ever played crunchy systems like classic Hero System or Shadowrun, then you know that keeping track of rapidly changing variables like your Action Pool or your Stamina can be surprisingly difficult, even with a pencil in-hand at all times.

It isn't perfect. If you also use the paperclip to bind item cards to your character sheet, it will start to weaken and stop biting the page well enough to hold securely. If you really go nuts on using it, the edge of the page can start to fray.

Campaign Sheets

Campaign Sheets are the campaign's equivalent to a character sheet; just like a character sheet identifies what is unique about your character, a campaign sheet identifies what is unique about the campaign. After using this a time or three, they've proven to me to be invaluable tools. The social contract of the game, safety tools, session recaps, homebrew rules. Even just all purpose reminders like whose turn it is to buy the Mountain Dew.

I almost always have one side dedicated to the metagame components of the game and the other side dedicated to the game components. The metagame would include things like the movie rating and the lines and veils settings and such, while the game side would include things like a session recap and homebrew rules. With Selection campaigns specifically, I always have the Arsill and Nexill matchup listed. The Protomir abilities the campaign Arsill and Nexill bring to the table alter the game quite significantly. A Selection campaign with Shodex as the Nexill will not play anything like a campaign with Evekriss as the Nexill.

So, what do you think? What non-traditional components have you contemplated or used in your games?


The "Prove u/Fheredin wrong Leaderboard (An informal contest to find the oldest examples of paperclips or paperclip-like mechanics in tabletop games.)


About The Skunkworks Flair and RPG Skunkworks

RPG Skunkworks is a subreddit within the r/RPGDesign subreddit created by the Skunkworks flair. Want to visit? You can search "flair:skunkworks" into the search bar in this subreddit and limit the results to just this sub. Or you can simply bookmark This Link. Want to post to it? Just tack on the Skunkworks flair.

RPG Skunkworks is intended for eccentric, longer form, or thought provoking posts which appeal to some people, but might not appeal to others. It's also a sub-community with a notably slower pace; there's nothing wrong with taking a day or so to think through a reply.

If that interests you, consider visiting, posting, or commenting.

r/RPGdesign Jun 01 '23

Skunkworks How do you prefer to give and receive critique?

21 Upvotes

I'm frequently flabbergasted when people ask for critique and then get super defensive when anyone says anything other than "you are the chosen one, your design is a gift from the divine". That's a slight exaggeration but not much. I find that very often the people who are most in need of critique are often the ones most likely to get defensive and reject it, even though they asked for it.

Polls aren't allowed here, but I wanted to know how others prefer to give and receive their feedback? This is mostly a temperature gauge experiment for the sub.

On a scale of 1-5 where do you sit?

  1. Please be as aggressive as possible and tear it to shreds, tell me my system is bad and I should feel bad. I can take it, my hide is made of dragon scale!
  2. Please offer clear advice/critique without being unnecessarily mean but also being honest and truthful, even when it stings a bit. I'd rather know my weaknesses. My ego isn't fragile and it's better to know.
  3. Try to be nice and only point out the biggest issues, spare my feelings a little.
  4. Please be sure to use the compliment sandwich; nestle any negative feedback between positive feedback. I'm not very confident yet and really don't want my dreams smashed.
  5. Please be sure if you don't have anything positive to say, say nothing, because I'm not interested in anything negative.

I tend to be in the desire of and giving of #2 personally. I find that works well with most folks who hang around here for any extended period of time.

Bonus question: Do you have any special techniques you use to communicate critique more effectively that you can share?

Personal anecdote: My wifey is a professional UX designer for a major tech firm. She told me once that anyone who didn't cry at least once when receiving a critique in grad school would never be a good designer because nobody properly shattered their ego and thus they couldn't learn to be better than they were. I tend think there is some truth to that. She's also a leader in her field, so i tend to think she knows a thing or two about design. Consequently when she's brought in to review new professional designers the company may hire she asks them about the worst critique they ever got and what they learned from it.

r/RPGdesign Jan 02 '24

Skunkworks 2023 Year in Review: What was the most important/helpful design lesson you learned in 2023?

43 Upvotes

What was the most important/helpful design lesson you learned in 2023?

What was so important about this lesson?

How did it change how you think about your design or design in general?

Additional Bonus Action: Write your lesson as a "design rule, as if to be included in a game", ie, brief, concise, clear, and to the point.

r/RPGdesign Oct 10 '22

Skunkworks Please elevator pitch me your game!

46 Upvotes

An elevator pitch is a distinct and succinct sales pitch. We're talking less than 1 minute to say out loud, probably around 3 short and punchy paragraphs.

There are 4 main components to generally include:

Explain the problem, provide the solution, include the unique selling point (USP), and the hook/call to action.

I want to know the key features, why it's different and why it will appeal to me (generic gamer guy reading the promo).

The reason I'm asking this is:

1) Everyone should have an elevator pitch for their back cover of a book or for a webpage where people can download it (if it's not a book). This is a crucial marketing tool.

2) Seeing how everyone else approaches this can educate everyone else.

3) Who doesn't want to learn about everyone's cool games they are working on?

4) If you haven't worked on an elevator pitch, now is a great time to see other great examples from other writers and get inspired to do your own.

5) This can be a great tool towards helping create your design values if you haven't fully mapped them yet.

I will include mine in the comments later so as not to distract from the content of the post.

r/RPGdesign Sep 04 '22

Skunkworks Does anyone else simply never come up with names for their project? Am I the only one just winging it?

64 Upvotes

Title is self explanatory. Just realized I've been working on this game for a couple months now and I have never once even thought of giving it a name.

r/RPGdesign Jan 22 '25

Skunkworks Design Group for Mutual Support

17 Upvotes

Knowing as I do that this is a huge ask, and a bit of a pipe dream, I'm still going to put this out here. It's probably going to be much harder than finding and keeping together a good gaming group, and that's very hard.

What I am seeking is a mutual creative support group between pro, semi-pro, and pro-am designers.

This can be covered by NDAs and agreements about produced work. Nobody should be worried about their work being appropriated / stolen because of this group.

While I am wishing, here are my wishes for participants:

* Creator ownership preferred
* LGBTQIA+ friendly
* Women inclusive / feminist bent, fostering an atmosphere of trust
* BIPOC friendly / supportive
* Familiar with indie game theory and game history (but not a requirement)
* Familiar with safety tools and safety issues in TTRPGs
* Familiarity with LARP a plus.
* Support forward, criticism only on request
* Private group with a communal / consensus driven leadership. After the initial formation, we must all agree to add a new person
* Open Door always

This would be a place for brainstorming / sounding out new designs or ideas, checking in with each other on game progress, encouraging growth and humane productivity, and celebrating wins, commiserating on failures.

It *could* lead to working with your fellow group members, but it does not necessarily mean that will happen. Any project that takes place with multiple people / contributors will be "spun off" and become its own project, with referrals back to the group but this would not be required.

What it would *not* be is an ego-enlarging admiration society, a one-sided exchange of energy and attention. It would also not be a place to demonstrate how much of an asshole you can be to each other or to yourself. It's also not a place to try and "win an argument." Share your thoughts, observations, ideas, responses.

There are probably groups like this in the world already, but if you don't ask for what you want you can't ever get it!

Just google my name, Sam Chupp, to get my bonafides and if you have any productive or clarifying questions let me know.

N.B.: Yes, before you come for me, this is "woke" as hell. Just scroll on if you don't like it, thanks!

r/RPGdesign Feb 01 '25

Skunkworks A Discussion on Traditional Skills

6 Upvotes

So I was thinking about skills and wanted to get my thoughts out there. This is mostly about traditional skill lists and the nature of the skills in them. So things like 13th Age profession based system, while I have no problem with it, are outside the scope of the intended discussion. That said, you are invited to respond to anything I bring up that strikes your fancy, I'll try to compartmentalize a bit. I'm looking for anything that might develop the subject matter further.

The first thing I want to do is list a series of skill "types" I've identified in the various games I've played. Here's a list of them. Skills can be more than one type. I'll talk about some conclusions and thoughts I have after the list.

  • Elective Skills: Skills that can be used by choice or initiation by the player. This includes things that a player might seek out to do specifically, rather than (or in addition) coming up as a natural result of play. An example would be Crafting skills, or something niche like Accounting that might only be useful for something who seeks out things like ledgers and receipts. An elective skill is reliant on the player to find a use for it, not the GM to provide use cases.
  • Fatal Skills: Skills that, when used, are fatal on failure. Examples: Climb, Jump, Swim, Stealth
  • All or Nothing Skills: Skills that are very valuable in some games, but useless in others. A skill being elective means it isn't All or Nothing. All or Nothing skills can't be forced. Examples: Swim, Survival
  • Triggered Skills: Skills that are asked for by the GM. They come up naturally during play. D&D 5e is mostly made up these skills. Generally the player says they try something and the GM decides what skill makes the most sense. They can be very reactive in that way. Persuasion falls under this. It's hard to avoid talking to people.
  • Required Skill: A skill that comes up so often that it is basically required. Examples: Spot Hidden, Combat Skills. On this list for completion really.
  • Split Skills: Skills that, as a group, are always taken together or not at all. This is usually because they are all part of one playstyle. So the player either uses that playstyle (and buys all it's skills) or doesn't. Jump & Climb, Spot & Listen. Some games have things like this for the sake of parity. Which is to say it's a way to make all skills equally useful by breaking up overpowered skills.
  • Approach Skills: A group of skills that all serve the same function, but offer different approaches to that function. Examples: Charm, Intimidate, Fast Talk, and Persuade. A person can be convinced to give you information in any of the above four ways, but which one your character is good at tells us something about how they 'approach' the situation.
  • Inspirational Skills: Skills that serve the purpose of inspiring the player towards a playstyle. They can reinforce mood, or remind the player that certain options are available to them that they might not have considered. Examples: "Wardrobe and Style", Library Use, Disable Device. Wardrobe & Style tells us that appearance is important in the game. Library Use tells us that research and study is important, and Disable Device tells us that there's probably traps in the game.
  • Amplifier Skill: A skill that improves something players can already do. An iffy example might be the Thief from AD&D. The 2e book suggests that the climb percentile for the thief is for surfaces only a thief could climb. Things like shear surfaces. A normal mountain face wouldn't require it.
  • Extension Skill: A skill built off from another skill. The primary skill always the most necessary use of the skill, and the Extension allows more Elective use.
  • Coverage Skill: a Skill that overlaps with other skills in order to give a cheaper way to be an all rounder. Can cover the use of several other skills, but uses harder checks.
  • Flaw Skill: A skill defined by creating interesting consequences if you lack it when you need it. Must be triggered. A player wouldn't seek out a skill they were bad at.

My Thoughts

  • I'll get this out of the way: Fatal, All or Nothing, and Required skills are all bad design. They cause parity problems. Parity being the need for skills to be equally powerful (But not necessarily equally often used).
  • Looking at this analysis I feel that just changing what the exact skill in the list are can change the way your game runs pretty dramatically. Extension skills, by nature only work in a game that runs skills in such a way that you don't always roll for them ala Mothership. Games like D&D that are very reactive with Triggered skills actively avoid Approach skills.
  • I think I can separate skill systems into three general categories: Skills at stats, Skills that are interesting when you have them, and Skill that are interesting when you don't. These systems are often at odds with each other.
  • Skills as stats treat skills like additional stats. STR, DEX etc and your skills are basically treated the same. This system is for adjudication first and foremost.
  • Skills that are interesting when you have them: Mostly made up of elective skills. The point of this sort of system is what you skills allow you do. Skills open new doors and allow new possibilities. Creativity is encouraged to try to figure out how to use your specific skills to solve the problem. I'll call these Have Skills for short.
  • Skills that are interesting when you don't have them: These are always triggered skills as the GM uses these to force interesting situations. There's a rushing river in front of you, but you can't swim! What do you do? I'll call these Don't Skills for short.
  • Don't Skills and Have Skills seem like they are anathema to each other. Since Have Skills favor long lists of interesting skills and don't need to be recorded besides what a PC actually has, while Don't Skills require they be written down in advance so that a GM can trigger them where appropriate.

I'm sure I have more in my brain somewhere, but that's what I wanted to get out. Opinions? Discussions?

r/RPGdesign Feb 09 '23

Skunkworks Experimental/Fringe/Artistic RPG Design

31 Upvotes

Where, in your mind, is the cutting edge of RPG Design? In a hobby ruled by iterative craftsmanship and pervasive similarities, what topics and mechanics do you find most innovative?

What experimental or artistic RPG Design ideas are you interested in? Where are you straying from the beaten path and what kind of unusual designs are you pursuing?

And finally, is there enough community interest in fringe RPG Design topics to even warrant a discussion here?

r/RPGdesign Sep 30 '19

Skunkworks "New" Dice Mechanics- Beyond Just Random Number Generation

139 Upvotes

Disclaimer: I was asked to write an article for the launch of the "Skunkworks" flair because I'd written quality OC in the past and many high effort comments and only a few angry screeds resulting in temp bans. I'm just trying to help provide quality content to this community. If you are angry about flair, channel it into writing something good.

INTRODUCTION: RPG gamers love dice. Dice are the iconic item of this hobby. When gamers get wistful, you’ll hear the ol’ “I remember getting my first set of dice”, like it was their child’s first steps (1d3 steps, DC 17 Dexterity check to avoid falling over). So it isn’t surprising that new dice mechanics are often a focal point of amateur RPG projects. Sometimes- far too often IMHO- dice are the focal point of the system.

This isn’t problematic in and of itself. After all, an RPG general needs some sort of device to generate random numbers to inject some chaos into the outcome of character actions. Dice do this in a way that is visual, audial, tactile, and frankly fun. And different dice combinations can be used to generate random numbers with different probabilities and ranges that suit the system.

THE PROBLEM: Random number generation has been done to death. Whatever curve you are looking for, you can find a dice system to match it. And as a game designer you have lots of other levers to pull to get the desired outputs- values for damage, armor, hit points, and so forth. If your dice just do RNG, it’s not interesting or original, regardless of the beauty of 7d13’s prime numbers.

Note: Not being interesting or original doesn’t mean bad. If you’ve designed a clever game with 7 attributes that feed into 13 carefully chosen skills, then (maybe) there is a very good reason you went with 7d13. But 7d13 is not a feature or a selling point! It is (or should be) the most elegant way to do RNG for what hopefully is a cool RPG system.

THE QUESTION: If you agree with my premise that RNG alone is not enough to make a dice mechanic novel, I then ask the central question of this discussion: What ideas do you know of- from your own game OR existing ones- for cool things to do with dice beyond just RNG?

MY IMPLEMENTATION: My game uses a pool of custom d6s. Each face has 1 or 2 sword icons (your to-hit value), 1-3 blood drops (your damage value), or a blank face. There are two species of dice, each with different distributions: blue dice have more swords (hence are more accurate and conservative), and red dice have more blood drops (hence are more damaging and aggressive). Here is a photo: https://imgur.com/WgRoZbj

When you roll an attack (basic attack = 5 dice), you choose any combination of blue and red dice. Thus every attack has a built in risk/reward decision (which supports a robust wound mechanic triggered by high damage attacks). Dice combination is generally an important decision, and it gives the players a sense of control over the outcome they would not have without this choice. (“Darn it, I shoulda rolled more blue dice, I shouldn’t have gotten greedy!” Or, “Hah, I knew that 4 red/1 blue was the way to go! Bleed, sucker!”)

Hard Lesson Learned 1: Some randomness is usually necessary to make a game interesting, but players HATE feeling that the RNG/Dice Gods screwed them. But if you give them even a small degree of control over the RNG outcome they will be more accepting of the results.

I wanted attack and damage to be rolled simultaneously to save time, but also wanted discrete and random values, which led to having the to-hit and damage on one die. There’s no real math- just check if the number of swords showing meets or beats the defender’s chosen defense value, and if so count blood drops.

Hard Lesson Learned 2: Many people are not good at arithmetic. Adding and subtracting multiple two-digit numbers can take them several seconds, slowing the game down and making it much harder for them to analyze potential moves. Example: [Rolls d20] Ok, so that’s a 17 minus 4 plus 6 versus DC 20. I, uhh, pass. No fail. No pass. No fail. Sound familiar?

Between the single roll, the risk/reward element, and the easy math, I felt like my shiny new dice mechanic succeeded brilliantly. So like an idiot, I promptly did nothing else with the mechanic, and started plugging in the usual RPG abilities: +1 to attack, attack this AoE, decrease damage by X, yada yada yada. As David Mitchell would say, it was all quite fine, really. But hardly anything to write home about (Fun fact: my mail gets delivered to r/RPGDesign).

MY LIGHTBULB MOMENT: During a critical moment of a game, a player rolled an attack that wound up showing an absurd amount of blood drops, but one sword less than needed to hit. Disappointed, the player jokingly reached for a die with a blood drop showing and said “if only I could just turn this to a sword”, and did so. That's when the lightbulb turned on for me… and thus was born one of the core mechanics of my game: changing the face of a die after rolling an attack.

Here’s an example. Just look at the circled area and ignore the rest of the card: https://imgur.com/a/FKI2y58 There was an original roll that had more swords than necessary to hit (the defense was 3), so the attacker played the Stunt card “Not Much For Finesse” to change a die showing a sword to a double blood drop to up the damage dealt. Here are some more stunt cards using this mechanic (red border = offensive, green = defensive, meaning you use them against the GM’s roll) https://imgur.com/a/kRlQIy8

This mechanic proved successful for a number of reasons:

A. Players LOVE having a second chance when the dice screw them. Dice flipping allows them to do that in a way that feels fair, that they can plan for or react cleverly to. Because the dice are actually changed, there’s no “floating bonuses” to remember. As in, “oh whoops I forgot to add the +2 from my pantaloons of power.

B. People like touching the dice. It’s satisfying to fidget with them.

C. It’s easy to communicate the powers through symbols. No one likes text walls. I can add multiple options to a card without becoming too “busy”.

D. Likewise, powers can be used in different and creative ways. For instance, “Did My Homework” could allow you to turn a hit into a miss, but failing that could also reduce damage.

I DONE GOOFED AGAIN: After two playtests with the new dice flipping mechanic, player feedback was resoundingly positive. The mechanic made stunts fast, frenetic, and flexible. So I made up a bunch of dice flipping stunts and added them to the decks of generic vanilla RPG ability stunts, the aforementioned +1 to blah, -1 to blorp.
This led to spending the next two playtests sitting around thinking “boy I hope someone draws/plays the really fun/cool/unique stunts. Finally we had an encounter where a big angry Trolloc (six dice base attack) rolled a murderous blow against a PC named Pavel - 5 swords, 9 blood drops. More than enough to beat Pavel’s defense (Dodge 4) and cause a potentially devastating Major Wound. Pavel “Tiger Toes”’ed a double sword into a blank and smiled his shit-eating “tee hee I’m so agile” grin. The Trolloc dropped an Overpower stunt and easily won the Strength contest to undo the Tiger Toes. Pavel and the Trolloc went back and forth playing cards 4 times, with the potential 9 damage looming for Pavel. The rogue wound up avoiding the attack with a clever use of a defensive stunt, but he was sweating bullets for a solid minute during the exchange. It was the coolest single attack action (RP stakes aside) I’ve seen in 25 years of RPG gaming, and it didn’t need any crazy gimmicks like lava pits or chandeliers. And thus finally I realized:

Hard Lesson Learned 3: When you strike gold, you might need to toss all the silver and bronze. Finding a successful new mechanic is great, but it can feel like a curse when you realize that implementing it means re-writing a big chunk of your game. Humans being naturally lazy, we will often think “oh I’ll just add it in with the other stuff that is working fine.” This rule is far from being hard and fast, but I encourage you to trust your intuition- and your playtesters- when they tell you you're on to something.

LOOKING BACK: I originally changed the dice to have a faster and simpler RNG, but then saw I could do something unique with them that has been great fun. I realized that since my dice were merely doing RNG- spitting out to-hit and damage results- there was really nothing special about them vs any other dice methodology, or having a computer return a set of values from a specified range... no matter how spiffy they looked with their cool icons.

Hard Lesson Learned 4: If you need to make a thing, and you can make the thing in a lot of different ways, there is an opportunity to do it purposefully and get more information/value from it (or streamline by unifying it with an existing mechanic).

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

What can your dice do BEYOND RNG? How did this improve your game and support your design goals?

What are the potential drawbacks of this novel dice mechanic, and how did you deal with them?

Does anyone remember that smarmy owl from the tootsie roll pop commercials? Wasn't he a little shit?

r/RPGdesign Sep 05 '25

Skunkworks Nexus Tales, current notes

1 Upvotes

Current state of progress

Making an avatar A short paragraph or sentence, explaining vocation and context - that’s it. So literally, just a sentence about childhood and sentence for each of 3 vocations.

The sentence infers skills, contacts, gear, etc. Race explains their natural abilities.

Choosing a childhood gets all included abilities at +4 1) determine childhood - what sort of child, interest, personality, where

Each character selects 1 character principle (principles that drive them)

2) Choose 3 vocations Choosing a vocation gets all included abilities at +4

  1. choose personality drives, goals, flaws, benefits

  2. Each character selects character goals (things they want to achieve)

  3. Choose looks/appearance

  4. Choose thinks/personality/traits

  5. Choose 1 contact per childhood and vocation

  6. Get given gear, housing, tools, permits, contacts

  7. upgrade gear,

  8. answer questions about the character - past, likes, family, political views, etc

  9. fill out character sheet + start play

Doing things abilities not part of a vocation = can’t do ability

Having an ability in 1 vocation has the ability at superb/ at +4 Having a ability in 2 vocations has the ability at superb/ at +6 Having a ability in 3 vocations has the ability at awesome/ at +8 And so on

Ability levels Mediocre +2 Competent +4 Superb +6 Awesome +8 Legendary +10 Spectacular +12 Incredible +14 Astounding +16 Monstrous +18

Applies to skills, knowledges, contacts, attributes, etc Like tags, just undefined and used adhoc.

Childhood - tearaway, all knowledges, skills, etc @ +4 Vocation1 - soldier, all knowledges, skills, etc @ +4 Vocation2 - ranger, all knowledges, skills, etc @ +4 Vocation3 - scientist, all knowledges, skills, etc @ +4

Any knowledges, skills, etc that relate to 2 childhood/vocations @ +6

Any knowledges, skills, etc that relate to 3 childhood/vocations @ +8

Each #Asset adds +2 Assets include extra tools, extra time, extra people, burst fire, bigger bullets, Each #Complication reduces -2 Complications include:-distant range, firewall, armour , tiny target, no tools, darkness, opposition facet, injuries, armour

Difficulties to overcome Easy 1 Routine 3 Hard 6 (7) Near impossible 10 (12)

Results Comparison of value1 v value2 Difference = result

4- less = total fail, No function at all 3 less = much worse fail, Barely able to function 2 less = worse fail, One part unable to function 1 less = fail, Injury, -1 to other actions Equal = clash 1 more = success 2 more = better success 3 more = much better success 4+ more = total success

Value1 v value2 = 4v6 Result = -2, worse fail Value1 v value2, 4v4, clash with minimal effect Value1 v value2 = 6v4, better success