Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dbm_

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Preston, Lancashire, United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. What subsystems are we anticipating? Beefed up hacking? The favours system mentioned up thread? I was interested / slightly disappointed to see no ‘custom skills’ on the example character sheets doing the rounds. This suggests nothing radical in terms of rules support?
  2. dbm_

    How to handle traps?

    Thanks all, some good and extensive suggestions, there.
  3. Hi all, If I have missed this somewhere please feel free to direct me... How do people handle traps in Genesys? I can’t find any guidance or suggestions on this in either the core book or Realms of Terrinoth. I never GMed Star Wars so if it’s in there I would never have seen it. I have two thoughts on this: The first is to rate the trap simply as a self-firing weapon and use the rules for a normal attack The second is to effectively implement a ‘saving throw’ by giving a skill check to avoid the effect. Both are similar and clearly the first is easiest to implement but makes it quite passive for the player as the GM is simply rolling an attack. In terms of implementing a saving throw type mechanism it seemed to me that Vigilance might be appropriate, as may Athletics if we are talking about getting out of the way? Maybe allow the character to use the better of the two skills? For poisons it is clearly Resistance and for mental effects Discipline. What do people think?
  4. I haz it now... [happy dance]
  5. Anyone know when this will make it across the water to the old world? I have a book on pre-order and spoke to the shop (Leisure Games) a few weeks back but they didn’t have any information at the time. It’s been out a month in the US now...
  6. WFRP 3e basically had what you are asking for. There were ‘stance dice’ and you could choose to adopt varying degrees of cautious and reckless stances. What type of stance you could adopt, and by how much, was defined by your career(s) and the dice replaced skill dice IIRC. The dice had extra symbols, for example the cautious dice had a ‘delay’ symbol that reduced initiative if it came up. I’m pretty sure they were ten sided, as it happens. It sounds to me like you want a ‘push your luck’ mechanism. Maybe allow a player to chose to add an ability dice in exchange for stepping up difficulty? Or maybe allow the player to add one success to their total in exchange for adding two threat prior to the roll?
  7. Because magic is not ‘real’ it is one of the most variable parts of any fantasy world. Magic works very differently in Lord of the Rings, Dying Earth and Harry Potter to pick just three at random... Consequently, it’s one of the hardest things to address ‘generically’ and so games like GURPS have multiple magic systems you can chose from, and guidance on how to tweak them further. That’s after over 30 years of publishing, however, so naturally Genesys doesn’t have all that diversity available. But the system it does have is very flexible, which gives you a good start. To my mind it is important that magic be balanced as much as possible against purely physical and skill based capability, or it becomes the default choice for many players. The core magic system in Genesys is very flexible: you can attempt any spell available to your magic skill and each magic skill can do five or six of the eight possible actions. It is balanced by three things as default: only allowing people with a magic skill as a class skill to cast, a Strain cost to attempt a spell and the fact that threat / dispair results are generally more impacting. If you switch to defined spells you take away a big chunk of the flexibility (in terms of what you can attempt) and if you specifically go to Vancian casting then you take away even more flexibility as the character has to decide exactly what spells they want access to each day (and how many of each...). Consequently, I would dial back the other limits on magic if I was introducing defined spell lists or Vancian casting. If I wanted true-to-the-books Vancian magic I would probably implement spell slots as a tiered advantage. In the original books even mighty archmages could only prepare a small number of spells for a given day. For defined-spells only I might just lessen then impact of threat and dispair.
  8. I didn’t play much Star Wars so I’m mostly dependent on the Genesys book to understand how the bits of the system fit together. When thinking about big monsters, discussion often touches on how it’s hard to make a big monster significantly stronger than a (typically human sized) PC. Sometimes people have mentioned that Silhouette is what makes the difference. Looking at the core rule book, I only see two significant effects of Silhouette: It governs what you can carry like a mount would It makes you easier to hit if you are significantly bigger than your enemy (and vice versa). Neither of these would make an enemy more dangerous or mechanically impact damage or Brawn rolls to (for example) open a stuck door. Am I missing something?
  9. If I was going to do supers with Genesys I would create a number of archetypes to represent different common types of super like brick, speedster, gadgeteer and so on. I would give them a thematic ability from the races section to synergies with that and possibly even create a specific heroic power based on what we see in RoT, also designed to maximise genre tropes. One of the challenges I see for Genesys in general is that the spread of stats is quite small, so it would be relatively easy to be strong as the hulk, an elephant, a dragon (at least in terms of Brawn). By fixing the super stat, archetype ability and heroic power for a given super-concept this should help differentiate. So Captain America and the Hulk may both be Brawn 5 but Cap would be a ‘super soldier’ whilst the Hulk would be a ‘brick’ or some such.
  10. Given how stats are costed it is irrelevant whether you get Int from race or just character build, so CMink is on the money
  11. On the subject of dragons and wyrms, in RoT the Ice Wyrm seems to be the only one that doesn’t inspire fear to one degree or another. Do we think that is an error?
  12. I’m still reading through the crunch and have skimmed the fluff as I’m not planning on playing in Terrinoth (yet...). I really like the book. It confirms all the good feelings I had about the core book as something with strong potential. Re concept books (eg ‘Genesys Magic’) versus world books (eg RoT): when you ask people why they prefer game X over generic system Y it is (in my experience) almost always the fluff or lack of it that they talk about. I reckon the 80% or RPers are attracted by fluff whilst only 20% are attracted by rules (made up numbers, you get the idea...). So I think creating world books that can be used with a small amount of effort as a source of new crunch is probably a pretty smart approach from a business point of view.
  13. Nice! I was just thinking how a list of all the monsters would be really useful.
  14. I make no value judgements, just thought it would be good to get an affirmative answer if appropriate. Better to let it lie otherwise...
  • Create New...