Unified Theory Games
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 General Discussion
 Introduction
 Vortex is hERE!!!
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author  Topic Next Topic  

steam_bucky

Australia
433 Posts

Posted - 06/12/2011 :  03:01:50 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Look what I found waiting for me at my front door!



First glance - Lots of detail! Just what I wanted.

ok ok - now I will read the thing!

Archimedes Brain



USA
729 Posts

Posted - 06/12/2011 :  03:54:22 AM  Show Profile  Visit Archimedes Brain's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Tada! We think you'll find it to be well worth the wait. Let us know what you think!
Go to Top of Page

steam_bucky

Australia
433 Posts

Posted - 06/14/2011 :  07:57:26 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Well, I am enjoyng the rules.

I am an "old skool" so its pretty easy to pick up. The possibilities are endless. I can imagine when I specify exactly what I need in my "world", i either create a list of abilities of approved or if I have time write a a small army book.

Because everything is laid bare its ripe for tweaking. For instance I may make a rule like this in my world. Any weapon with blast, must take the disadvantages of unreliable and volatile. That thats the sort of feel I want in the game. I might also make extra degrees of unreliable and volatile to help describe how ramshackle and experimental things are. Coupled with making certain things cheaper or more expensive in tiers. The weapon range is a bit to short for me, but I could double the ranges or make more tiers of range. Like I said ripe, for tweaking where you need it.

The next thing I'll do is run though some simple battle with the pre-constructed combatants.

The only thing that I would say is quite different from other systems is there seems to be no multiple life point or hit-points ( wounds ) for combatants. There are many abilities that make combatants tough, durable, hard to kill, re-roll casualty checks etc, but there is no hit points. You either kill a combatant or you don't. There is no wearing someone down - UNLESS i missed an ability? If it was a conscious decision, I really like to hear your thoughts behind it. Was it to reduce book keeping?



Go to Top of Page

Scott



USA
914 Posts

Posted - 06/14/2011 :  09:42:02 AM  Show Profile  Visit Scott's Homepage  Go to Scott's Twitter page  Reply with Quote
Yes, not using a wound system was a conscious decision. It was discussed and tested in the very early stages of development, but was dropped to facilitate quicker game play and eliminate the need for tracking damage counters.
We experimented with something like “the first wound reduces your speed by 2 and all attacks by 1 and the second wound reduces all traits by half”. The problem was that it was slowing the game down and many of the play testers were even forgetting to take the penalties into consideration.
Statistically, you can calculate what it would take to bring down a 3-wound miniature and, by using bonuses and re-rolls, we have incorporated the same statistics without the need of tracking damage. The speed of the game almost doubled when we eliminated the wound system.
We did go back and add event style damage, such as immobilizing, lingering, etc, but those are specialized damage events (not occurring every time) and we found that, since the attacker was in charge of announcing those attack, the players remembered to account for them better than a wound system.
So, yes, the reason there are no wounds was to make game play faster.



The fairness of unfairness is in everything's demise - [George Hrab]
Go to Top of Page

steam_bucky

Australia
433 Posts

Posted - 06/14/2011 :  09:57:42 AM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I have to play the game a few times before I really start messing around with the mechanic so I can play how it was intended, and get the feel of the system, BUT i still think there is scope for "wounds". I don't mind some book keeping in a game. Maybe 2 tiers or 3 tiers per wound...and all it does is stop you being a casualty that turn.... who knows...but if some one else is experimenting with wounds.

What did guys call them? Wounds? Or something else?
Go to Top of Page

Scott



USA
914 Posts

Posted - 06/14/2011 :  3:53:40 PM  Show Profile  Visit Scott's Homepage  Go to Scott's Twitter page  Reply with Quote
I don't think we ever game them a name. I think we just called them Hit Points.
However, the cost of such a wound would be greater than a 4-tier ability as a single (extra) damage capacity essentially provides immunity to casualty and, while re-rolls and additional defense bonuses make it difficult to take a combatant down, we don't offer anything that provides complete immunity to a casualty.


The fairness of unfairness is in everything's demise - [George Hrab]
Go to Top of Page

steam_bucky

Australia
433 Posts

Posted - 06/14/2011 :  5:15:48 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Ok, I'll implement them at 4 Tiers.

I can definitely see me me using them, for things that can take a real pounding.
Go to Top of Page

steam_bucky

Australia
433 Posts

Posted - 05/16/2013 :  2:55:35 PM  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Looking back, I can see the wisdom in not having wounds or hit points.. Close to playing it for 3 years now, and not once have I used this 4 Teir house rule.

Cheating - Its my signature move
Go to Top of Page
   Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Unified Theory Games © 2012 Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000