• Advertisement

JLW

Member
  • Content count

    257
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

303 Neutral

About JLW

  • Rank
    Member

Personal Information

  • Interests
    Art
    Design
  1. Yes, that's why using D&D terms was a mistake. A trianglular prism doesn't. It also sounds like garbage, so... "fan"?
  2. Yeah, I know. That not being there was just an oversight. No. I see where you might get confused with a term like "spread", and I probably shouldn't be using it. Maybe "sphere"? "Orb"? The reason it increases its cost by a cube is because it's expanding in all three dimensions. It's getting longer, wider *and* taller, so its volume is increasing by the cube of its radius. This has applications, such as hitting airborne opponents and aiming it over or under cover and still being able to hit a target on the other side. (Mostly that second one.) As that's something that *only* a spread/sphere/orb/three dimensional round thing can do, and it comes up frequently in a game with a strong cover mechanic (especially where AoE attacks are concerned), they remain useful despite their rapidly increasing cost and very small radii with very high damage are often preferable.
  3. We're making a hard magic system for our tabletop game. That is to say, the magic system has restrictions it can't circumvent. This is both important to the world and to the gameplay, since the players are also bound by these rules. It also means that we can allow custom spells without game-breaking consequences. So, here's the rules of the system in the game's lore, and the gameplay rules we have so far. Then I'm pretty sure I'm going to need help with the custom spell rules. How We Actually Need Help: Custom spell rules: We haven't written the custom spell rules. Jeremy's busy this week, and I want to get started. Since custom spells are the backbone of this system, firm rules need to be made for them fast before more work can be done. I don't need to get it well refined, that's Jeremy's job, but I want to get an outline done before he gets back on Monday. And personally, I'd appreciate any help I can get. I'm going to post the basic framework below, and then it's a matter of figuring out effects that can be achieved with this magic system and assigning reasonable-sounding values to them. Jeremy will fine-tune the numbers later. Spells have a level from 1-5, and cost a number of points to cast equal to their spell level squared. This is NOT equal to the number of points allowed to build a spell of this level, which is as of yet undetermined but will be linear. Spells can be targeted, affect a line of squares, a cone, or a spread. The longer the range or larger the area of effect, the higher the cost. Targeted spells have the lowest cost, and it grows linearly based on their range. Line spell cost increases linearly, cone spell cost grows by the square of their range, and spread spell cost grows by the cube of their range. Spells can also be concentration or fire-and-forget. Concentration spells drain points each round while active. They have no listed duration, and drain the given value per round. Fire and forget spells have a set duration, and do not require the caster's attention. They have a flat cost. Separate damage types face energy resistance separately, but each one gets a caster ability bonus separately. Spells that fire multiple shots should be a thing. So should spells that have effects like advantage (roll attack twice and use the higher one). Also, spells with increased save DC. And spells that are better or worse against specific targets, such as spells built to damage spirits specifically. Spells that provide a buff have a type, such as "area", "personal", or "weapon". You may only have ONE buff spell of each type active at any given time. I'm sure there's more things I haven't thought of I need to come up with rules for. That's part of why I'm posting this. That's literally all I have on these right now. I'll need to get details in the morning. Brainstorming on ideas for what effects to add for each ether type is also appreciated. I may have to clarify a bit more on how each ether actually affects the world, though, because a lot of things are either right out or would have to work in very specific ways. (IE: Teleportation is right out, which means summoning is too.)
  4. Tabletop Games

    That's because it was made to ask one question that was already answered in the first reply and its wheels are now spinning.
  5. Tabletop Games

    I'm sorry sir, I'm not trying to derail the conversation, I'm just complaining.
  6. Tabletop Games

    We're far, far past that being a thing. This isn't a project that started last week with an idea, we're a couple months in and we already have the core mechanics done, and a lot of content. I also do work on this stuff when I can at work, but that's not that often. I'm a bartender, I'm busy. I'm also not stupid, I'm not quitting my job. And all of this response could have been properly formatted, with the actual line I'm responding to quoted above each response, if it was still possible to break quotes in this thing. What happened to that?
  7. Tabletop Games

    Those are (hopelessly optimistic) goals for the year, not the first release. To clarify, I won't consider it done until the whole setting is available, but it will be playable before then.
  8. Tabletop Games

    Well, most of our issue comes down to time. I have a full-time job (and I find the shadow of overtime is upon me). Jeremy has... Whatever it is that keeps him busy for 6-8 hours each day. We want to get the game done by the end of the year, but we have to do all the skills, five more classes (we've already done five), fourteen more races (we've done six) and five spell lists, enough creatures and cultures to fill four continents, a bunch of islands and some less locational but still highly setting specific stuff, all the consumables of course, and I'm sure there's things I'm forgetting.* Oh, and we have to find time to playtest all of this. *EDIT: Like religions, specifically the abilities and restrictions of clerics of each deity. We've done exactly one deity so far, thankfully that religion is monotheistic but that leaves us with four polytheistic religions' worth of deity listings. One of those has exactly four, but we don't know how many will be in the other three and we're guessing that leaves us with a total of about thirty deities. And... Yeah, we're going to be there a while. We will need help, and while we do have a third friend who gives some feedback and has promised to help with the playtesting, it really is just the two of us actually making everything. I'll submit the core mechanics once all our notes are compiled and annotated, and then we'll see what we need help with. Probably skills first, because there's a huge, pressing question as to how we're going to get a decent number of useful skills to be modified by the faith stat. Because, you know, last time I checked faith wasn't super useful for most skill-based tasks.
  9. We've been gone from this site for quite a while, because we've decided to make a tabletop, pen and paper RPG and we haven't worked on a video game in quite a while. Jeremy suggested we could still turn to this community, in addition to ones more dedicated to tabletop RPGs (I've sort of made us not welcome on a few of them, though in my defence they will not be missed), if we needed any help (and with a setting this size, we could always use a least a little somewhere). I have my doubts, but I figured I'd ask here anyway. Is this site friendly to tabletop game design? If we need a little help here and there, can we find it here?
  10. How to save Call of Duty

    Yes, yes I have. And it's fantastic, but not what I'm looking for here.
  11. How to save Call of Duty

    I get that. I'm not saying Destiny is like CoD, or that it should be, or that the game I'd be interested in seeing even SHOULD be on the CoD end of gunplay (I'm more of a Halo guy myself on that), but having at least that *quality* of gun play, regardless of its exact form, and having CoD's signature game modes (wouldn't mind Halo's signature game modes as well) such as its non-story co-op mission modes, and especially having highly customizable loadouts like CoD has had since Modern Warfare 1, that's the parts of CoD that would be great to see in a good, fresh game. And if the combat is either super fast-paced and twitchy like CoD and Battlefield or slow-paced and tactical like Halo, I'm happy either way. I'll have to check out Titanfall again. I've got a friend who has it and Infinite Warfare, but unfortunately it's Titanfall I and I'm a little strapped for cash post-surgery. By which I mean over $35,000 in debt because of my friggin' appendix.
  12. How to save Call of Duty

    The very line you quoted there says I am exactly NOT doing that. As for why I don't play other, similar games that are close to what I'm looking for... Who says I don't? The closest I can find are Destiny and Prey (2017), and they're great. But they all lack huge parts of the CoD formula that are worth adding, such as their loadout system and all the customization that brings. And of course, the game modes as well. So I guess, a game with as good of gunplay as mid-late 2000s CoD, not necessarily the same gunplay, with the game modes of a dedicated shooter in addition to a story campaign, and highly customizable CoD-style loadouts, but something new and interesting added that interacts with the gunplay in an important manner and adds actual depth to the game without needing special circumstances rather than just being a throwaway gimmick. Something that has as much impact on the gameplay as the powers, suits and custom robots and such I listed above, though it doesn't have to be at all like that in its actual form, just how much it changes the game. I've seen some pretty good attempts at that, but nothing really ticks all the boxes, you know?
  13. How to save Call of Duty

    No, the not-campaign of the first Titanfall turned me off Titanfall 2 completely. I should probably have at least given it a look, I know, but I didn't. Especially since I really enjoyed the core gameplay of Titanfall, in particular how mobile the player character is. It's a great change of pace from the literal walking speed Call of Duty and Battlefield characters have slowed down so, and a "sprint" that's about as fast as a morbidly obese man, carrying an even more obese man, after taking a bullet through each kneecap. (Who on their dev team decided "I know how to improve our games, let's keep making our main characters slower with each iteration."? Please terminate that employee.) When I say they've refused to innovate, I mean the gameplay itself has remained almost entirely the same, just with a few added gimmicks that don't really shake up the gameplay much, and new rules and options for loadouts. Now, that's coming from somebody who stopped buying the games after Modern Warfare 3 was absolutely, disgustingly horrible, only borrowed Black Ops II and just today III, and has only seen gameplay of Ghosts and Advanced Warfare. But when I picked up Black Ops III today I can honestly say from my experience so far that the gameplay has not changed that much from Call of Duty 4, despite the decade of difference. The differences I've noted is that the auto-aim is MUCH stronger than it used to be to the point where I legitimately cannot tell what the point of even trying to aim is, the main character moves even slower than they used to (and they were already way too slow), you can now play a female character and it affects nothing at all, the game is now so easy I legitimately can't tell if it's even possible to die in the first mission, which makes sense as you don't even have control for most of it, and you get loadouts in campaign mode. I like that last one, but everything else is reducing the game to a super dumbed-down, banal slog. Yeah, I know. They sell well, so they can make garbage. Same goes to the films of Michael Bay, or the books of Stephanie Meyer. Each entry can be an absolute rolling dumpster fire, but they'll still sell well and that's all their creator gives a damn about. That's why I added the real purpose of this post as the bottom of the OP. That is, giving an example of what a completely different team would want to do to make a good game in that genre. And as super specific as it is, it's just an example. I'm not actually saying "Go out and do this! Exactly this, it'll sell well. It's the only way!". (Though I mean, if you did do exactly that, it should sell well. It's just not the only way.) I don't think anything will actually save Call of Duty from what it has become. Infinity Ward and Treyarch are lost causes at this point.
  14. How to save Call of Duty

    No, I did not. I entered with Call of Duty 4, and exited with Black Ops II. But I paid attention to reviews in hopes of re-enrering the franchise upon its recovery, once I got over how insufferably, intolerably, unacceptably bad MW3's campaign was. I even checked out gameplay footage of Advanced Warfare and Black Ops III, to see if the series recovered despite the critical lambasting, and it could not have been a more definitive no. (As a side note, I did try, and give up on in disgust, Black Ops III this morning. I am convinced you cannot die in the first mission. I never even fired my weapon once.) I heard absolurely nothing positive about Infinite Warfare. At all. At any point. Even a little bit. Your own source points to why, too. The series has a huge focus on competitive multiplayer, and IW's multiplayer was garbage, so the reviewers focused on the multiplayer and the campaign never came up. Now, I'm a single-player/co-op guy. I'm not bothered by garbage multiplayer, even though the reviewers I picked apparently were. I'll try it. In the mean time, this basic idea expressed here still stands on how to change it up in such a way that CoD could have good single-player *and* multi-player. Or how another series could, with similar core gameplay (or at least gunplay).
  15. How to save Call of Duty

    They've also completely lost the respect of the industry, the critics, the community, their fanbase, the core demographic, the casual demographic, and the entire rest of the planet. People continue to buy their games, and they have a decent number of super-devoted "whale" consumers who buy up every microtransation they throw out, and that insulates them from their ever-declining quality. It's certainly true that Activision isn't going to go bankrupt by 2020 making Call of Duty. It's also true that they're never going to regain the mainstream respect and appeal they had in 2006 if they keep making their games increasingly boring, dumbed down and unfun with each iteration. I happen to think a Call of Duty game that did something different from "generic modern/WWII shooter that outright plays itself and is 75% cutscene by length" would do better both in sales and especially in critical and public perception, and that's essential if Activision ever wants to regain the power it had at its peak.
  • Advertisement