The struggle for freedom on every front.
Character creation rules and guidelines
- open up CoC generator
- Roll stats
- Edu has a minimum of 13
- You have 5 points that you may spread to any stat
- You receive 7 check-marks to place at your own free will.
- Rifle and Grapple are both checkmarked for free
- Add, (Knife/Bayonet: Base 25%)
- Add additional custom skills, discuss with keeper about the base stat (this is to encourage creativity, as the game unintentionally hinders)
- Distribute points and check-marks for skills
- Roll yearly income, times number by two, this is your level of conditioning, how “normal” is killing people in your mind, this will be any attempt to kill someone who is not a threat to you will be minuses from your attack roll. (this is why the starting stats are so high, to counterbalance this loss is something to be considered.)
- (edit character and add finishing touches.
Perfect, Ill have something closer to a final draft this Sunday or next week with photos demonstrating more about it.
Both of you were invaluable, glad you guys could get involved in my crazy ideas.
This is much more internally consistent, less confusing. You’re still pushing a heavier combat game and more powerful than average characters. As long as that’s what you’re aiming for these rules are not too bad.
I do agree with Jim here, rolling multiple dice (if you want to stick to a similar range try 3d4) would give you a better curve on conditioning. Still personally I would prefer, if I was running it, to stick to basic rules. I think the sanity system as it stands would work will to represent “battle hardening.” Though this achieves the effect of penalizing characters for performing certain types of actions, at least initially until they have grown numb to the horror through repeated exposure (which is just what you’re trying to mimic with the conditioning rules.)
Possibly adding an increasing penalty to performance as characters sanity drops would work too, than combat fatigue would also be represented. If you wanted an extra layer to mimic Vietnam then you could cover some types of drugs, alcohol, or other temporary but addictive way to reduce this combat fatigue penalty. Of course these should, just like it did for real soldiers, carry their own penalties and drawbacks.
CoC already has addiction rules. Modelling any penalties for combat fatigue off of this would probably work well too.
I do like where you’re going with skills here. Templates, or some other sort of guidance, to ensure we have the grouping of skills necessary to complete our objectives would be great. Again as Jim said ensuring that the group has all the necessary skills is something the military would have done, they never would take just random people and throw them together hoping for the best.
- This is better. The first pass seemed to me would result in characters will all 15+ stats. Edu=13 ensures the average for this stat, so that’s okay. But I have to ask the question: “why the extra 5 points” to add to the rolls? Essentially, you’re stating that our characters are better than the normal person (by 5 extra stat points). What is the goal; what are you trying to achieve? If it’s allowing the player to customize their stats, this would be better done by moving points between stats, not just by arbitrarily adding additional points. But you may need to think about cost, if you go this route. Changing a 12 to a 10 so you can change a 16 to an 18 is really powerful. You should research AD&D “point buy” system.
- Initially when we talked, you mentioned creating some base templates for the different “classes” that we would be playing. This would be to ensure that our group was well-rounded; as would be the case if we were being sent out on a mission. Have you abandoned this idea?
- I think trying to use “Income” for “battle hardness” is odd. It is a single d10 roll; but I believe that this trait would follow a typical bell curve, meaning it should be a multi-die roll. For example, when rolling 3d6, the majority of results land around 10.5 with rolls of 3 or 18 being rare. By the same token, I think a battle-hard 10 character would be rare, and not just as likely as any other hardness level.
That would seem to push your game into a very combat heavy game. You’re really encouraging there that we prepare to use violence as the answer to a lot of problems. It does seem a little counter to have this combat conditioning modifier to reflect how uncommon it is to be a stone cold killer but to set up such a high power level for stats and skills to off set this. What is the main focus you’re really trying to accomplish with this rules? If it’s to increase flexibility in character creation than most of them are not needed and a few of them even work against flexibility. Making combat stressful, fatiguing, and killing difficult is undermined by the amount of extras you’re throwing in there to compensate for penalties the base rules does have.
I’d look more into just giving a bonus or a penalty. Giving both is confusing and detrimental to any goal you may have.
These are just my first thoughts on looking through those rules, so don’t take things too personally. Mostly just be aware that you are pushing the game towards a certain type of play though any rules you do decide on and the current ones look to push heavy on combat.