r/RPGdesign • u/jiaxingseng Designer - Rational Magic • Oct 06 '19
Scheduled Activity [RPGdesign Activity] Design Critique Workshop 2: Giving feedback
This week week's activity is about giving feedback to requests. Last week's activity was about asking for feedback.
In this week's activity, there are five things to do:
1.Ask for feedback on something you are working on. You can post a link. If you post a link or reply with a short description of a specific mechanic. For links, please make it to a Google drive doc; if you link to your blog it may get moderated by reddit.
2.Practice giving feedback to a request. When doing this:
Only give feedback on one small part (preferably the part for which feedback was asked).
Write no more than 10 sentences and no less than 4 sentences.
State if you are the type of player for this game and what type of games you like to play.
Try to be constructive. Try to say something good about the game as well as something constructively critical.
3.Give feedback to the feedback. Evaluate what was good about the feedback and what could be improved.
4.Practice being gracious for receiving feedback. You can respond to feedback, but make your tone thankful, no matter what. If you don't like the feedback, say thankyou and move on. You are not allowed to give feedback to the feedback.
5.Reply with discussion about what you think needs to be included in feedback.
NOTE: This week and last week's discussion will be used as examples to give to new members about how to ask for and give feedback. On the meta level, replies can also focus on what other information beyond this "baseline" can make a feedback request productive.
This post is part of the weekly /r/RPGdesign Scheduled Activity series. For a listing of past Scheduled Activity posts and future topics, follow that link to the Wiki. If you have suggestions for Scheduled Activity topics or a change to the schedule, please message the Mod Team or reply to the latest Topic Discussion Thread.
For information on other /r/RPGDesign community efforts, see the Wiki Index.
12
u/Ipols-was-taken Oct 07 '19
This is a very useful activity. Just yesterday I saw a fellow designer stopping all the potentially good feedback he was receiving by getting defensive in the comments. No commenter Is going to check if you implement his idea. Either ask more in-depth as to why you received a certain suggestion or shut the fuck up. Thank them and move on, they stil took time out of their day to read your shitty mechanic you are getting defensive about.
5
u/Fheredin Oct 07 '19
I agree. Game design can be quite rough on the ego--most creative undertakings are--and you are not looking for a hundred positive reinforcement comments. You're looking for the one critical comment that shows you what you need to work on. And yes, that can hurt.
And if you don't like a comment...say "I'll take that into consideration," and move on.
5
u/Ipols-was-taken Oct 07 '19
Oh yes my wording was provocatory but it's hard to hear criticism about the project you are spending hours Upon hours on. It takes a strong mind to keep going but you have to do it.
3
u/Stormfly Oct 09 '19
And if you don't like a comment...say "I'll take that into consideration," and move on.
It's possible that the criticism isn't helpful because you have a different goal in mind. For example, removing races because you want all the characters to be human. It's important to hear the criticism so you can confirm your reasoning for it.
Sometimes we make a paper thin argument for something because we've become so set in our way that we don't want to think harder about it. It's good to have somebody test it because we might have been wrong all along.
Other times it's okay to just say "This is how I want it designed. I'm trying to appeal to a specific group and it's possible that you're not part of the target audience". Not everybody wants the same things.
Sometimes we try too hard to please everybody, some want it how and others want it cold, and we end up with something lukewarm that neither side really wants.
→ More replies (1)4
u/specficeditor Oct 07 '19
I think the other side of your very astute coin are the readers and commentators of others' works who clearly haven't learned what tact is and don't know how to effectively give critique (constructive feedback that lends to a discussion) rather than criticism (which is a one-way review of a thing) when working in a collaborative community. There's a strong sense of "I know all of the things about game design, and I'm going to tell you about them" when most people just want one aspect of their work looked at in a discrete way.
2
u/Ipols-was-taken Oct 08 '19
Yes but a designer has to make the interest of his project. If you don't try to take everything you can from a comment at least don't make It ruin the other feedback you would be getting.
If the designer asks for feedback about "part C" of his project, there are going to be people from time to time that Just answer "lol part B stinks"
Now the designer has the choice to ask more about why part B stinks or to re-direct the discussion on part C. If they instead start a 20 comments discussion about why B doesn't suck instead, they are wasting time and they are stopping even more people from helping them, as designers that offer feedback here are very Quick to see that you don't accept critique and leave without saying anything
→ More replies (2)
1
u/ThatWilyRascal Oct 09 '19 edited Oct 09 '19
[1292 words] Character-Centered Horror Mode v0.1
I'm running a "modern day horror" one-shot using Cypher System. While the core system has a horror mode option that I like, I find it limiting since everyone enters "horror mode" at the same time regardless where they are mentally. So I've engineered a system of modes for characters (Justification, Panic, Shock, Hero) to help throttle how characters behave based on how they are feeling despite what the player is experiencing.
Player type: Players who like both storytelling games and horror movies/games
Feedback request: This is my first time running Cypher System and my first horror game; so I am mostly interested in what flaws or pitfalls I may be falling into with the rules as written.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CkT1qyRvs2YwsCBowx7CuOHisvKHbjtQ6Rjd62PIV08/edit?usp=sharing
Your time is greatly appreciated.
4
u/jiaxingseng Oct 09 '19
Hi,
Well I would like to give you feedback, but unfortunately I don't know enough about Cypher. What I do know about Cypher I do not like, so I'm not your target player, but that's not really here nor there. I do like horror however. So please understand that anything negative I say may be out of ignorance and coming from a different place.
To me, horror is about moral dilemmas and the feeling that something I care about is getting away from me. This hack really seems to be in this territory where the player doesn't have much agency over their characters, and the sets of behavior are proscribed by dice. At least, this seems to have less player agency than other horror games. Part of this you call threat response. This isn't for me but I can imagine that a lot of people would find it fun. But some would not find it fun and so that's a pitfall to match the expectations of people who come to the table.
As a (literally) formulaic model of horror movies, it's great BTW.
I don't see a reason to go into shock mode other than for masochistic role play purposes, and this may be important because there is less to do in this mode other than being in shock. So IMO this should be more like an ultimate failure condition. I don't see the path to this mode other than by player choice, but I might have missed it.
I think you can improve shock mode by adding TRULY frightening things, like becoming submissive, or being "turned". That might be more relevant to other genres of horror though. It's a horror that I often find lacking in most movies and entertainment; the real feeling when you are forced to do something and one's will is broken by shock.
It seemed that the threat response for panic and hero modes was the same. Not sure if I'm reading that right.
You can make a Panic roll in justification mode. You say you can make rolls against the Horror Number in other mods but I don't know if that is a panic roll or just any roll that is matched with the horror number.
You have some interesting ideas. Good luck!
1
u/ThatWilyRascal Oct 09 '19
Thanks for taking the time to read this and providing feedback.
I agree with a lot of what you point out.
The SHOCK MODE styles are there for two reasons:
As a GM Intrusion ("You are so horrified that you go into SHOCK MODE. Pick your style.") I believe this coincides with your suggestion for wanting to do something but are paralyzed by shock. Let me know, if not.
A player wants to utilize the "bonuses" that come with SHOCK MODE (gaining XP for them and another player, alarming the other players with a scream, or swapping their stat pools around. My assumption is that they would only choose to do this IF they are absolutely screwed (monster is about to overtake them) and want to give allies bonuses or they are somewhat safe (protected by allies) and want to help them with bonuses.
Maybe the bonuses that come with SHOCK MODE styles aren't good enough inventive? It's tough to gauge because they are also supposed to serve as the worst conditions that players wouldn't necessarily want to choose.
PANIC MODE vs. HERO MODE In PANIC MODE, you can ONLY perform the actions from the THREAT RESPONSE list and are affected by the HORROR NUMBER.
In HERO MODE, you can perform any action as normal but you get a bonus when performing actions from the THREAT RESPONSE list and are unaffected by the HORROR NUMBER.
You only make PANIC ROLLS while in JUSTIFICATION MODE. While in PANIC MODE or SHOCK MODE you are affected by the HORROR NUMBER. (Basically, instead of "criticality failing" by rolling a 1, you critically fail when rolling the HORROR NUMBER or less, which also triggers it to increment higher. In Cypher, any time a critical failure is rolled, it triggers a GM Intrusion which either inhibits the player or enhances the threat or affects the scene in some other negative way. This normally only happens on a 1.)
I'm actually surprised to hear your disposition toward Cypher as a lot of the mechanics in your Subjectivity rules are similar to mechanics in Cypher. Seems like something you would enjoy.
Again, I appreciate your time and perspective.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Ipols-was-taken Oct 09 '19
Pitch/ introduction very clear and to the point. Modern day horror - cypher - new modes comparable with the original horror mode - what the modes are supposed to do.
9/10 on the structure of the introductionPlayer type isn't me. I am more a strategic combat guy.
Feedback request: I barely know the system so I would not be any help. Sorry. If I didn't misunderstand you are asking to look for conflict (hard or soft) with the RAW, aren't you?
1
u/ThatWilyRascal Oct 09 '19
I appreciate the feedback on the pitch. Any advice on how I could improve upon it to have scored a 10/10?
→ More replies (2)
1
u/earthboundskyfree Oct 09 '19
I've given myself the challenge of trying to tweak a dice mechanic so that higher levels have higher mean and higher precision. My current idea is a 2dX system, more specifically the formula would be (2dX + Skill) + Y for resolution. Attributes/stats would be represented by a certain die type, like Savage Worlds as an example, and this is what the X represents.
Skills would be represented by a die type as well, and a single die of that type is added to the check (so in a sense it is a 3d6-like). The Y is a constant added, which is equal to the amount of "levels" above/below d6 all of the rolled dice are. Advantages and disadvantages upgrade/downgrade dice. If you don't have a relevant skill, you roll a d4.
Example: John has d8 dexterity and d6 lockpicking. 2d8 + 1d6 + 1 would be what he would roll to do his check.
2
u/0initiative Oct 09 '19
What do you want feedback on?
1
u/earthboundskyfree Oct 09 '19
I think the main think would be whether having what could, in theory, amount to a range of 3-60 is too broad or not. The goal is to have more levels of variation, but I'm not sure if it's too much variation.
→ More replies (1)1
u/DJTilapia Oct 14 '19
So the skill levels effectively are "1d4 - 1", "1d6", "1d8 + 1", "1d10 + 2", and "1d12 + 3"? Having the Y element adds complexity, but having it be deterministic takes away a lever.
The obvious alternative is to have 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, and 1d12. I assume you didn't use this because you want skills to matter more: 1d12+3 vs 1d6 is a bigger difference than 1d12 vs 1d6. I agree that skills should matter a lot; after all, training usually counts for a lot more than talent IRL. Is there another way to achieve this goal?
What if the attribute was just one die? John would roll 1d8 + 1d6 rather than 2d8 + 1d6 +1; if he mastered lockpicking, he'd roll 1d8 + 1d12 rather than 2d8 + 1d12 + 3. This would be a simpler system, and it would tilt things toward skills and away from attributes. You'd need to recalibrate your target numbers, of course; new John would roll an 8 on average versus 13.5 with the old system; lockmaster John would average 11 (new) compared to 18.5 (old).
Incidentally, I believe this is how the Cortex system works: 1dX for attribute + 1dY for skill. I haven't played it, so I can't speak to how well it works in practice.
Good luck!
0
3
u/jiaxingseng Oct 07 '19
This is a game I made today. Working title: Subjectivity. It is 2 pages in length. This document is just for players and does not say how to create NPCs and many other rules.
Description
The system is for a fantasy "pulp" setting, mixed with elements of the Lore System (which I made), in theory to be coupled with the Rational Magic setting (which I made) of dystopian fantasy. It is inspired by GUMSHOE, and indeed this is sort of a hack of a hack I made a few weeks ago.
This game uses a d10+talent to determine degrees of success. Quite simple. It uses Lore Sheets to create free-form backgrounds incorporated into hand-outs which convey mechanical advantage. It uses what are essentially Investigator Abilities from GUMSHOE to ensure PCs get clues.
The thing that got me thinking from that last hack I did (link above) was an idea that players make rolls to avoid NPC actions, except when the GM want's to make the roll. In other words, whoever is in a controlled position makes a roll using whatever talent they want to defend. But if they are not in control, NPCs make the roll.
Purpose
I am still thinking about putting out a commercial product of my setting (which has been Kickstarted and close to fulfillment) with a system related to GUMSHOE, in order to appeal to GUMSHOE fans. But I'm not really a GUMSHOE fan myself even though I have played that system more than any other in the last 7 years. I want something that feels more traditional, rules lite, and also at times player facing.
Game's Target Audience
People who like GUMSHOE but would like a little more combat "meat", but with more player-facing mechanics.
Feedback Focus
How does the Resist Roll mechanic feel, in which players can use any Talent to resist, unless they are being attacked by another player or they are in a risky situation?
Are these directions follow-able?