Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Content

Hello Incredible Patrons,

It’s me, your James Introcaso. We had another playtest of the new MCDM RPG on Friday last week. This time I was the GM, and we had two players new to the RPG, Nick and Grace from our art team. It was my first time running anything longer than a single encounter in our system, and I was surprised at how well things went. It seems (fingers crossed) that the core of our game is pretty solid, at least for battling monsters!

By the way, if you haven’t read Matt’s excellent post on grayboxing yet, you should! It will give you a lot of context for the information presented in this post.

Cosmic Die and Surges

If you read my last post, then you know we were trying out some new rules involving our Cosmic Die being rolled for drama. I don’t have much to report at the moment. This group of players never rolled for drama! That itself is a good point of data. There were two reasons the Cosmic Die was never rolled for drama. First, I think the players felt pretty confident throughout most of the combat encounters, so they never wanted to take the risk. Some of the combat encounters were easy by design, and another was easier than intended because it was our first time testing a group of heroes against a single monster, in this case an enormous spider trained for war like the one in the Flee, Mortals! preview packet. Turns out solo creatures need a little tuning up to really give the heroes a challenge! More on that below.

The second reason I think the cosmic die wasn’t rolled: there was a lot for new players to learn (including for some, a new VTT since we are all in different places), so they were hesitant to complicate things by adding the drama when the risk may not have been worth it. Even the people who played the game before have only done so once, with the exception of Hannah, who has been in every playtest so far. And for all of us, it was our first time using THIS iteration of the rules.

All that said, I do think that there was too much to track in this iteration. The culprit was my implementation of some Surge-activated abilities. We currently have two special symbols you can roll while making an attack, save, or other attribute test. The first is a Critical Effect. This symbol only appears on the Proficiency Die and it represents when a character is really in the zone, doing what they were trained to do. When you roll a Critical Effect in combat on your turn, you get to take an extra action on your turn. It’s a big reliable mechanical bonus that any creature can benefit from. Our other symbol, the Surge, comes up more frequently and because they’re tied to Attribute Dice, you can roll multiple surges at once. These represent burst of adrenaline, magic boosts from a magic item, or quick flashes of inspiration.

Each Surge effect is unique and tied to the ability and equipment you are using in that very moment. For instance, a magic vampiric sword that steals vitality from your foes and gives it to you might heal you 1 hit point for each Surge you roll when you make an attack with it. Since you can roll multiple Surges at once, they need to provide incremental boosts of power that can stack. We don’t want folks to have leftover Surges. For more on Critical Effects and Surges, see my last Patreon post.

There are loads of Surge abilities that worked super well. When the Talent uses the Concussive Slam power to grab a goblin in a telekinetic grip and slide them all over the battlefield, each Surge the Talent rolls lets them move their flailing target another square. When the Conduit uses Angelfire to rain down burning light on a giant spider and heal the Beastheart heroically standing toe-to-toe with the horse-sized arachnid, each Surge restores more of the Beastheart’s hit points. Those effects are instant and satisfying.

The problem is that I got too fancy and created incremental bonuses and penalties that lasted basically a round. I gave the Tactician a Surge ability that allowed them to parry incoming blows with their longsword, giving them 1 bonus Armor Point that lasts until the start of the next hero turn for each Surge rolled. Cool on paper and makes sense. (Swords are good for parrying.) But it was too difficult to track, especially when you had just rolled a single Surge. In my eagerness to give a lot of options for players to spend Surges, I forgot that temporary +1 bonuses and -1 penalties easily fall by the wayside. They seem inconsequential and just aren’t worth tracking to most players. Moving forward, we’re going to leave many of those little bonuses that last a round behind in favor of instant effects that can resolve immediately.

That’s not to say that we won’t have ANY bonuses that last a round. As a group, we never forgot the bonus Impact Die the Tactician granted to allies when they hit an enemy with Leading Strike. That’s a big bonus worth tracking! But big bonuses like that probably won’t come from Surges, since you can roll multiple at once.

Interleaving Actions and Side Initiative

I also talked about interleaving actions in my last post. It worked smoothly for my goblins and for the player characters. It was surprisingly easy to track!

However, we are rethinking side initiative. Our test against the giant spider revealed that side initiative allows a solo creature to get trounced. At first, I thought Marrowgnaw the Many-Legged might really give the players a run for their money as she skittered over to the Beastheart’s Sporeling companion, sunk her mandibles into his fungi flesh, and carried him off to the other side of her web-filled den. But then the heroes took their turn and strategized the best way to spend their hard-won resources and pile on the pain. Before I knew it, my poor, sweet Marrowgnaw was dazed, frightened, and restrained. She couldn’t reach anything to attack on her turn.

After seeing this, we realized that side initiative could create some issues in other types of encounters. Matt pointed out that while side initiative worked fine with low-level goblins, in a fight against a highly competent group of evil NPCs, like the Black Iron Pact, it could be devastating. Each member of the Black Iron Pact can change the battlefield dramatically in a single turn, just like a high-level character. All of them acting at once would be destructive chaos, and if they win initiative it could spell doom for the characters.

We’re kicking around some ideas for how side initiative might change. We want players to be able to strategize, but we also want there to be surprises that keep people on their toes and force those plans to be adjusted. We still want players and the GM to choose the order in which their characters act so they can plan and work together as a team. We don’t want to lock one side into an initiative order that is the same each round. But we also want each side to be able to disrupt the tactics of the other while rolling out their own strategy and avoid one group piling on the other.

So the next thing I’d like to try is actually rather straightforward. Without locking anyone into a specific order, one player character takes a turn, then one enemy NPC takes a turn (or vice versa, depending on a start of combat initiative roll where the winning side chooses if they or the other side act first). This continues until all creatures have acted in a round. Each round, you can pick a new order for your creatures to act in, but you know that you’ll always have an enemy acting between those your side’s turns. If one side has more creatures than the other, they get extra turns at the end of the round so all their creatures can act. Creatures meant to be fought alone, like Marrowgnaw, get to take three or four turns each round. Other creatures, like minions or the Beastheart and their companion, act on the same turn and can interleave their actions and moves.

This new system should be easy to track, allow for tactical teamwork, and give each side a chance to promptly react to a changing battlefield. We’ll see if it actually works that way and if the rest of the dev team likes it.

Custom Ally Reactions

After our last test, I wanted to give players a reason to pay attention during the turns of other creatures. I gave the Conduit, Talent, and Tactician each a custom reaction they could use to aid their friends. The Conduit could pray for her friends, adding an extra Impact Die to any roll. The Talent could yank a friend out harm’s way with her mind! The Tactician could parry incoming blows, giving extra armor points to themself or an adjacent ally. All of these reactions were used regularly and praised by the players as elements that helped them feel heroic and stay engaged when it wasn’t their turn. The reactions also didn’t slow down play because they didn’t involve extra die rolls. Nor did they require tracking anything, because they were immediate effects. For now, we’re going to keep the idea and implementation of these custom reactions, though their exact details could change.

Heroic Fantasy

Whenever we make something at MCDM, we’re always asking, “What is the fantasy we’re trying to emulate with this product?” The answer to that question is our northstar. Every decision we make about the rules and narrative for that product are in service to the fantasy.

The fantasy we’re trying to support in this RPG is that the player characters are heroic. From 1st level, they can do incredible things beyond the means of ordinary folks in the world, be it igniting their fists into fire with magic, hurling a goblin through the air with telekinetic powers, or swinging a greataxe in an arc so wide it cuts down every bandit within 10 feet.

After our test Nick said, “I’ve never played a game like this. My character was so cool. I loved that I had options and that I could do so much more than swing my sword. I felt like a real hero.” I knew we were on the right track. Nick is a member of our incredible and hardworking art team, so he didn’t know about the conversations Matt, Hannah, and I had about what this game’s fantasy should be. Grace agreed that having a lot of options for problem solving, helping your friends, and kicking butt made her character feel like a big darn hero. We’re going to keep anything that reinforces that feeling in the game.

What’s Next?

We need to try a new initiative system, but combat is starting to feel great. We also need to figure out how weapons and spells work. Once we nail those things, it’s time to start working on the other pillars of the game: politics and negotiation.

—James

Files

Comments

Zachary Durst

I think reactions really give a nice place for a sword and board tanky character to shine, as well as a protective spell caster. I feel like 5e has a total of one tank I really like - the cavalier - and otherwise it just doesn’t do a protector all that well.

Jacob Montague

Sounds awesome! The Talent is starting to sound like quite the people-mover!

Thomas Bahrman

James, thanks for sharing these updates and discussion of the game design process. At some point, I'd love to hear a comparative discussion of alternative RPGs. You aren't designing in a vacuum, and part of the creative process is taking the good ideas of others and expanding, accentuating them. Clearly you're leveraging a deep history of DND mechanics over numerous versions. It seems that much of the heavy narrative element, and perhaps even the dice mechanic (in terms of every role must mean something to the story) are derivative of elements from PbtA. I'd love to hear about that part of the process and where you think what you're designing will fall in the competitive landscape. Thanks again!!

Claude Guay

I think a way to make Individual Initiative closer strategically to Side Initiative, would be to make the "Ready Action" Free and not circumstance dependant. I move in and take an advantageous position but decide to hold my attack until some or all of my party members have also acted. During their turn one of my comrades downs an enemy and cause another one to flee. Now I tell the GM I want to jump in and fire at the fleeing foe.

Sean Westberg

Action economy is important and it seems to me that your two options for solo monsters is to either have them hit harder and resist better, which goes against the design philosophy it seems like of avoiding "nothing happens" or you give the mob multiple turns a round. If you're interleaving or using team based initiative where everyone rolls but anyone can take up any of the initiative slots rolled in any order, then you have the opportunity to add additional actions for particularly big, solo baddies.

Daniel Quaresma

Those reactions sound like the Group Maneuvers from Arcadia 13. Those have been a huge hit with my players. Probably more than any Arcadia content. I’m pumped for this RPG! Also really looking forward to how you all figure out initiative. I want my players to be able to plan more and an initiative that reinforces that would be amazing.

Nick Asselberghs

Updates from you wonderful people on this game is now what I look forward to seeing most on Patreon across all the creators I follow, and I really like what I am reading, it feels like you MCDM are all having fun and there’s always improvement, tweaks and progress. Keep up the great work, I am very excited to follow along and see what this will become.

Musical Coder

First off - Thanks for the update. I love hearing your excitement in the progress that's been made, and also how easy others have been able to just jump in and play! In regards to Side Initiative - One of the things I have been doing is letting my players decide their initiative order and then rolling a d8 (6 players, so a d8 would be easy to slide in) on my side and having my group go then... so if I rolled a 1, my group went first, but otherwise my group would go on the die (2 for 2nd, 3 for 3rd, etc) which could break up a potential work together, but I also allowed those not having already gone to re-adjust themselves with the change of the battlefield!

Drew Hilliard

The custom ally reactions sound very cool! I’m super interested to see what y’all do with politics and negotiation.

Tim Sassone

Blood Bowl has an interesting mechanic where failing certain rolls hands the initiative back to the other team. Probably not ideal for a TTRPG, since it could occasionally mean players not getting to do anything on a turn. But maybe something in the middle, failing certain rolls (contested?) lets the other side interject one or more characters into the middle of your initiative. E.G. A Goblin tries to shove the Beastheart off a cliff, but fails, and when they stagger back it creates an opportunity for the players to act before the rest of the monsters finish.

Triglav Games

Awesome, I want to play this so bad!

Mika Thorn

I've implemented the "alternating initiative" before to good effect. I was running a Megadungeon with 8 PCs plus a lot of powerful monsters. If one side won initiative they would sweep and make the combat trivial. I basically had each side roll initiative and sort them into order against each other. Whichever side had the highest roll (almost always the PCs) went first, and I'd just alternate the monsters in there. There was some griping from the players at first, but they quickly got into the rhythm of it. The whole time you've been talking about side initiative all I could think of was these nightmare scenarios where one side just sweeps the other. Letting the two sides roll to see who goes first and then letting them decide who to slot into each initiative spot could be part of the strategizing! I think that’s going to get you closest to where you want to be.

Rob Dobster

I like that idea with initiative, there are some games I really like that do it like that!

Nicholas Klagge

The "interleaved initiative" is how combat works in Divinity: Original Sin 2, which is a very tactical game. (Though it doesn't allow you to change your order.) So it's definitely compatible with what you're going for!

Bicarb

I love that you are also testing with larger groups. Sometimes running d&d feels like it was designed for 2 players & all the problems that come up with larger groups are just seenoevilhearnoevilspeaknoevil problem for the GM to resolve without even acknowledging them as problems th GM should feel entitled to address.

Darcy Black

My DM has been tinkering with initiative recently and has set it up so when players have turns next to each other they act at the same time - which has allowed for teamwork and awesome combos. Excited to see how your alternating initiative goes!

Roman Penna

This is awesome, love seeing how initiative is slowly changing, as it seems one of the hardest things to tune as the rest of the system changes.

Richard Moss

The new initiative idea sounds cool.

Tristan Arnold

That could work well with the back-and-forth system that James was talking about! Have it normally be one side's character then the other side's, but when an attack deals no damage (or they fail a contest) the other team gets to inject another player to the next turn. (or you could look at it as the team that failed shifting down one in the initiative order.)

Chris Dowdell

James, I'm excited the play test went so well. Finding means to help solo monsters stand up to a group of PCs would be immensely helpful. love the idea that your going to come up with something to disrupt PC and NPC tactics. And, I also love that idea of the PCs and NPCs taking turns after initiative is decided. Plus, peeps felt like heroes who still had a reason to pay attention, when it wasn't their turn. Nice! The dice kind of confuse me, because I'm accustomed to numbers, rather than symbols. But, I'm sure I'll comprehend it, with practice. One suggestion, please forego healing surges. Thanks for another great post!

Graham Schofield

I really like the initiative idea. Different 'scale' of NPCs can get traits to allow them to take multiple actions in a round, or bunches of minions. Perhaps in the case of enemies that act multiple times in a round make the number of times they act affect things? The final blow is the strongest for example, leading to a self 'setup-payoff' similar to the PC's leading strike? I do remember minis games like heroclix using tokens to identify which characters have moved and which havent, so I can see the system proposed having some tracking involved.

Rambo Schutz

I really think all of this sounds amazing and am excited to hear how things continue to develop along the process. One thing I am curious about is if there will be room for critical failure in the non-combat pillars of play. While I agree and appreciate the concept of players being able to do cool things on there turns in combat, one of my favorite things in RPGs is failing in comical ways on some of the more low stakes events. While it is awesome to see a character leap and bound up a wall in combat, it is equally fun to watch someone fall flat while trying to leap and bound up the same wall to impress a potential love interest... Just a thought as development goes along.

Aphrodyte

I feel like this is getting ahead of itself and becoming too complicated too fast? Why would a dazed creature be frightened of anything? If they are restrained why would daze need to have any effect? The issue is one mechanic can upset the whole rest of the design. What I mean is something should be decided and locked in ( initiative as an example) THEN you build skills and monsters around it. Because the way feats would trigger would change since you would have to consider reasonable balance within the confines of when actions can take place. One side vs alternate vs individual are all completely different core mechanics. The alternate idea is sound. But make it so you do not chose ahead of time who goes when. It is decided at that moment. It allows a more fluid combat. THEN you tailor combat and feats and rolls around that core mechanic. Right now you are chasing your tail. add this, add this, tweak this, fix this, now we have to fix that, add this. Oh now we have to fix these things.

Aphrodyte

I loved Heroclix!

Aphrodyte

The issue is it upends every other part of the game so I feel like that should have been one of the core mechanics resolved long ago.

BasCB

Good point about those group manoeuvrers, that could be nice way to tie together the actions of characters. They are really fun to work with.

Mal

What I would suggest is when one side has less combatants than the rest, that they keep alternating. 6 Heroes versus the dragon? the dragon goes between each. This would also apply to the heroes: they're outnumbered and outgunned but they're too heroic to care about action economy disparity.

RocketBird

What I like about this is how you're putting everything into question. Rolling to hit: what if it's too tedious? Initiative: what if it bogs down the excitement of the start of a battle? I sense that with the new Initiative method you have in mind, you could elegantly solve two complex problems with one solution: the first being the 5-minute long rolling for initiative for EVERY character and EVERY enemy and putting them into a stack in the right order; the second is creating a straightforward way to have "Legendary Actions" for boss monsters. A hero. An enemy. A hero, an enemy, ha! Fancy dice roll! Now the enemy takes another turn! That feels dramatic, rythmic, creates a base of tension that can get broken with Crits, Surges and Cosmic rolls. Maybe a way of disrupting the enemy's strategy could simply mean having abilities that change the initiative, "intruding" yourself or an ally just before the enemy with a reaction or a Surge effect, possibly with a contested Agility roll (would it be slow?). Of course, the test will tell if it is actually balanced, or hell, if it's TOO balanced! What I love the most is the comraderie that could potentially arise and strengthen every time a new round begins and you and your friends have to strategize again, "who goes first? you should go! we should go tohether!", changing, adapting, and finally overcoming. I can only imagine the thrill of playing against a DM with opposite team of intelligent NPCs doing the same. Oh boy, this sounds good.

RocketBird

In programming, there is a principle called "the Last Responsible Moment" (LRM). It is fairly simple: you delay a decision until the moment when the cost of not making the decision is greater than the cost of making it. This allows you to write a way more flexible code and be open to new ideas, better solutions and more organic developing. I believe they are taking this precise approach with their game. I understand what you describe is the safest and more straightforward way, and LRM looks risky because it requires, most of all, skill and experience. However, I have to say it's exciting watching them take the bolder strategy, and by the looks of it seems to be working just fine!

Beren1h

We've used a modified active initiative (credit Darker Dungeons) at our table and it's worked pretty well. In a nutshell, the character (player or NPC) that went last gets to pick who goes next but those that take damage can choose to steal the turn. It allows for strategizing (e.g., pick me after you go so I can melee him after you knocked him prone), keeps the players engaged (because you don't know exactly when your turn will happen), and can give the combat a nice dynamic ebb and flow feeling. Only downside is you have to keep track of who has already gone.

Dayten Rose

This finally made me realize why Banner Saga does initiative how it does! It's turn based like normal, then when it's down to one enemy they get their own turn at the end of each player turn. Which makes it feel like you're fighting a caged animal. (It also incentivizes leaving a level 1 gobbo as the last thing alive, which is unideal.)

brownriggy

I run a couple of games in play-by-post, and initiative is a real bear in that format. How we handle it is this: anyone who gets higher than the highest bad guy gets to go before the bad guys in any order they chooose. Then the bad guys go in a group. And then any remaining heroes go. It is not perfect, but it does make initiative pretty fun and meaningful while still allowing for some tactics. For larger groups of bad guys, I will break initiative down a little more and maybe separate all the bad guys of one type and have them go together. So some players might go, and then a group of orcs, and then the rest of the PCs, and then a group of goblins.

Temple Pate

I have a question, apologies if it's already been answered but I haven't found it if so. The game thus far sounds incredible. However, as amazing as Ordin sounds, I do already have my own world that is a bit more Wuxian/Cultivation driven narrative. Now while I think the rules youve displayed already does a better job than exalted, however I am worried that I might not be able to use my world with these mechanics. The TlDr is, is it possible to use our own settings with these new mechanics?

mcdm

Hey Temple! You should be able to set the game in any heroic fantasy world by ignoring the default lore and replacing it with your own. -James

Temple Pate

That's a great relief! I'm very excited and the thought kept worrying me. I'm excited for the tests and Kickstarter!

gm_naahz

While your class/archetype names may be just as greybox as other elements I find it hard to get excited reading them or thinking about pitching my friends to play test some future playtest packet with these. Mentat, Sadaukar, Reverend Mother are more interesting and captivating than Genius, Convict, Manipulator. Your current class/archetype names IMO are too much of a descriptor rather than a name or title. My players would say "talent for what?" but if it was Kin'eom they'd say "who whats that?!... a telekinetic? sweet! a conduit ? of electricity?... no deities... you mean a priest? vs. Dios'min ... tactician is IMO the best of the bunch so far, but again a descriptor not a title or personality. Maybe you are going for a numenera thing where one word gives us the archetype and the second word the power kit?.... anyhoo just two bits on that in case any one reads these. I think SWRPG by FFG (now Edge) has a good intiative system if you want players to control who goes when. Since you guys seem to be using some 4e inspirations I'd kind of be interested in more of a resource mechanic for who goes when rather than a D&D round based system.

Vundal

James have you looked into Lancer's initiative? Its player -> enemy , however anyone on each side can be chosen (so you still get to set up interesting strategic movements ) Also when fighting one enemy, they are able to act on every enemy turn, which makes them very deadly.

ConchobharDM

Respectfully, I cannot disagree more with you. Simple and straightforward names like Conduit, Talent, Genius, etc quickly and effectively communicate to players what an archetype is about. I also don't think there is any difference between someone reading "Conduit" and looking up what that is against reading something like Dios'min and having to look that up. At least with Conduit there is an understanding that their character will be channeling something else (in this case a deity). If my players were to open up a new RPG and have all the archetypes have names like Kin'eom or Dios'min they'd roll their eyes. Trying to stray away from the traditional archetype names is good, but there is such thing as going too far in my opinion. MCDM's current naming convention is primarily a no-nonsense straight to the point descriptor and I find that refreshing.

Gavin

Yeah, I never understood why bigbads and solo challenges weren't given interruptions/reactions. The "Legendary Actions" were cool, but I honestly don't know why a dynamic/responsive adversary needed to be limited to just a legendary few.

Robert Johnson

I thought the playtests were recorded. If this is true, where can I find the videos?

mcdm

Nope, the playtests are not recorded and posted as videos! At some point down the line we might stream one, but not yet. –Hannah

Mark Renoden

Have you thought about how the environment might influence combat?

Micah Sanders

Hey Mark! I noticed that they did have a comment in “The Delian Test” post under “Movement Matters” about environmental wall damage. Looks like they’re considering implementing it!

Mark Renoden

I'm more interested in whether terrain will impact movement. Whether darkness and fog will impact visibility.

Saitama sama

I think that is pretty safe to assume, but probably not their priority right now. It seems that they want to get the characters themselves right, first. After that they move on to stuff like the environment.

Joshua Melton

There may be room to continue the side initiative but perhaps there is a dice size, maybe equal to the party size, and that is rolled at the start of each round by the DM in secret. When that many PC's have gone it suddenly becomes the NPC's turn. This would seemingly add a good amount of drama as the group could plan cool maneuvers but then mid tactics the NPC's turn the tide for a moment and the PC's need to regroup the remainder of that round.

Macade Vineyard

What if creatures just have a value that indicates how many times they can act in a round. I.E. the super fast elf acts, other creatures act then the super fast elf can act again at some point? This codifies the big monster acts more often, and slows for speed or time effects to be tracked easier.

Antonio Pomposini

I'm catching up with all the dev updates and darn does this porcess sound so exciting. I'm loving the direction the design is going in. I know a lot will probably change but seeing the process and the analysis behind those changes only makes me believe in each itteration more than the last.