clarence

Good to hear you’re still working on it : )

Very cool : )

19 hours ago, g33k said:

Ever since discovering UA's "Madness Meter" system, I have favored that over CoC-style "Sanity." 

Yes, I agree. It’s been a while since I used it, but now I will have to dig out my copy and give it a try. 

Yes, Noir has a good reputation around here. I’ve never played it though. For me, Comae Engine has worked really well out of the box for noir-ish scenarios. But some Talents would be a good addition. And Sanity. Have you come any further with your ideas?

I will look up Outland! It’s very tempting to go to Oslo for a weekend and check it out : ) With Comae Engine soon to be available in print, it might be a good time.  

17 hours ago, Crisippo said:

I enjoy a lot of different settings gaming wise, but i'd have to say that historical fantasy or mythological games are very close to my heart. Pendragon is one of the games I've played the most and certainly over the longest amount of time. I am also running two different Star Wars games atm so "space fantasy" or "sword and planet" is also great. Even the more terrestial "sword and sorcery" is something i quite enjoy.

I was actually thinking of a noir-style detective game or supernatural thriller when i first read Comae Engine which feels fitting since you mentioned detective stories. I'm going to a convention here in Norway in early october and i'm considering writing a con scenario and if i do i'm inclined to use Comae Engine. I think the rules are fairly easy to explain. Extended conflicts basically give all challenges (not just combatre challenges) "hit points" which most gamers grasp fairly easily.

This looks good of course, but i'm thinking of genres where dabbling in, say, magic is dangerous or comes with a personal cost. I think i can see using magic draining POW or INT (or any of the pools depending). I see that POW is also meant to rate magical affinity so that fits.

BTW; my local gaming store here in Oslo has a tuesday rpg salon where someone ran a Comae Engine adventure last tuesday. I was unable to attend anyway and didn't see the posting thursday or friday. The synchronicity of that with me finding out about the game and picking it up just made me laugh. So thought i'd share.

I’m in Göteborg, about 2-3 hours from Oslo! And I had no idea there was a game store in Oslo. Very cool that they ran Comae Engine. What’s the name of the shop?

Noir sounds like a perfect match. And, as you say, the rules should be easy enough for a con scenario. I would love to hear what you come up with. 

Fantasy sci-fi - or mythic sci-fi as I often think of it - is one of my favourite genres. But leaning more towards Star Wars than Buck Rogers and planetary romance. 

For magic, draining POW or INT is what I had in mind as well. A mechanic for corruption might be a good complement in some settings. 

I’ve also been working on Talents, a semi-magical system for low-power stuff like danger sense and animal whisperer. It might fit with a noir setting perhaps?

On 8/17/2023 at 12:19 PM, Crisippo said:

Hi Clarence

I picked up Comae Engine yesterday and have been reading it now. It looks amazing, and i really like the look of this game. Thank you for creating it and bringing it the community.

I'm really interested in trying to use the system for something, but i'm not sure what. Thinking of that (and since there is no setting in the game) I wondered if you had any ideas or examples of what the game has been used to run? I am aware of M-Space and Odd Soot which i suppose are examples - but beyond those?

Since i like adapting rule-systems and tinkering with them to adapt them i was also thinking of using the Conflict pools to power abilities, magics or the like. Probably quite obvious, but do you know if any has done something like that (even yourself maybe :-))

Thanks again for a great game 

Hi Crisippo, thank you for your kind words! I’m happy you enjoy Comae Engine.

Regarding settings, there is a bit of horror in the works and a few more where the setting is yet to be revealed. I have also test played Comae Engine in a sci-fi setting 70 years into the future and it’s been lots of fun.

And as always, I tinker with various detective stories that could take place almost any time during the 1900s - with or without paranormal ingredients. Often, they end up modelling Lovecraft, Magnum, Miami Vice and Silo (based on the cool Apple series). Or perhaps something along the lines of The Name of the Rose.

What genres do you enjoy in general?

Magic is one of the things I’ve been working on recently. And at least one more developer is looking into it as well.

The overarching idea is to add a #Paranormal Tag to all spell users and magical creatures. Magic will work as a skill, with individual spells as Focuses. So, it could look like this: Fantasy Magic //Fireball or Witchcraft //Curse. And so on. But you are of course free to come up with something completely different. 

15 hours ago, g33k said:

I'd drop the "absoluteness" of the overnight top-off; that's how it usually works, but not always..

Yes, you’ve got a point. The only constant in life is how messy and inconsistent it is. 

Hey Nick, good to hear your group liked it! Unfortunately, I can’t say yet when book 2 will be ready. Hopefully late autumn. 

1 hour ago, Greg said:

I have a structure for my rpg pdf's wherein each folder is by game or publisher. I used to keep M-Space stuff in the "Mythras" folder. But, with the release of the Comae Engine, I promoted your works to their own "Frostbyte" folder! That's high praise from me! 😆 You'll really know you've arrived when one of your games gets its own main folder. M-Space is close! 😁

Haha, I’m flattered! I will try my best to live up to the responsibilities that come with this : )

I also like the simple conflict resolution for hikes. It seems most intuitive. Regarding special cases, I meant that restoring pools every morning is ignored in this variant. But then, rules aren’t always logical. 

If it fits with the story I would reduce the same pool when several conflicts follow each other. It’s a bit like old-school D&D, where magicians (or clerics?) had to save spells and POW to make sure they had some left at the end of the scenario. 

This means the GM has to be careful with the number of Extended Conflicts being thrown at the PCs. So, picking the lock might be kept for the thrills. Being knocked around might be a simple opposed skill roll (with a straight -2 BODY for those who fail). And I would probably not use sanity for the stress of picking a lock, but keep that for the terror inside the crypt. 

Being chased by a ghost could probably be a POW or INT contest if you want, to illustrate the courage or wits needed to trick a ghost. Simply because outrunning it might not be possible. 

As for nested conflicts, there’s a sidebar in M-SPACE about that. It should be applicable in Comae Engine as well. In essance, a successful roll makes the dependent (or sub-conflict) roll more likely to succeed - or a failed roll might make the dependent roll impossible. 

Hey Greg, I’m so happy to hear you enjoy Comae Engine! And good questions : )

Let’s begin with the last one - restoring a Conflict Pool every night. For multi-day journeys, I’ve used a few different versions. My first instinct was that restoring pools every night is a “hard” rule that never changes. This results in more frequent rolls every day, forcing pools close to zero or below. Which means some PCs might need an extra days rest to get a full Conflict Pool again. This option requires more rolls, but keeps the rules consistent. 

Another option is to reduce the BODY pool as normal, but while in the wilderness (under not so comfortable circumstances) a good night’s sleep will only restore the pool to full BODY -2. So, for every day hiking, PCs get wearier, with an increased risk of real damage. The -2 penalty can probably be mitigated with //Survival or staying a night or two at a good inn. I like this version, but it brings in a special rule and that’s not very user friendly (or elegant).  

The simplest solution is to drop overnight pool top up. The entire hike is one long conflict, with a single roll every day. If pools drop to zero, extra rest will increase the pools. This is how I used to run multi-day conflicts. Very intuitive and quick, but it breaks the “pools restore overnight” rule. User friendly overall, but special cases are always problematic. 

Which option sounds best to you?

On 6/18/2023 at 5:46 PM, RosenMcStern said:

However, all of these points are addressed in Revolution D100's implementation of conflicts. And you can apply these solutions to M-Space, too, or even to core Mythras task rounds with a minimum of creativity. You don't need  much tweaking of the rules, given that the context is really generic and does not use complex variables.

Yes, Revolution D100 is a more complete take on extended conflicts. M-SPACE, Odd Soot and Comae Engine all go for a  more rules-lite approach. Combining elements from both sounds cool!

On 6/16/2023 at 2:51 PM, Old Man Henerson said:

As an unrelated question, does M-Space's weapon list include something light a lightsaber?

Yes, it does : )

M-SPACE follows Mythras regarding damage, Hit Points and Hit Locations. But the book also includes a simplified version of combat, dropping Hit Locations and using only 11 Special Effects. So, it’s quite easy to dial in the amount of crunch you need - from full Mythras, over Mythras Imperative, to M-SPACE’s simplified version. And there’s even a variant using Extended Conflicts to keep it really rules-lite. 

As for damage, I was under the impression that Mythras has lower weapon damage in general, to compensate for Hit Locations. But I could be wrong. 

4 minutes ago, g33k said:

Honestly, I'd be much much happier if "Extended Conflicts" reskinned the full-on Mythras combat system, specifically-including action-points and especially Special Effects.

It'd be a *LOT* of extra work, and you'd need a bunch of different SE's for a bunch of different sorts of Extended Conflicts.  You might even need a booklet filled with tables of SE's, I dunno...

But I think it would model those conflicts even better.

Check out the rules on Lenses in Comae Engine. They work a bit like Special Effects in Mythras combat, but turned into more generic and flexible forms. 

As for different outcomes, I fully agree. The GM and players should be clear on what losing/succeeding in a conflict means. In general, I ask myself “What is the worst possible outcome of this conflict?” Those are the consequences of a Conflict Pool at zero. In social conflicts, perhaps making an enemy, being thrown out from a party or getting arrested for bribery. For INT conflicts, you might break essential equipment or just feeling too mentally strained to continue. 

To keep this thread as focused and to the point as possible, here are the bullet points again - with some misunderstandings ironed out.

Does it matter if you got armor in a duel? Yes, Armour Points apply as normal. Weapon damage as well, if you want.

Does it matter if you got any good points that could be important when trying to persuade someone in an argument? Like in every other skill roll, skills in Extended Conflicts can get a bonus or penalty depending on the situation. This is a basic mechanic in most BRP/d100 games.

Does it matter if there is any background noise when you try to sneak past a guard? Same as above. 

Does it matter if you got one hundred times the chips as your opponent in a poker game? Same as above. Though I would recommend against joining a poker game with such imbalanced odds.

Does it matter if you are in a rowboat or USS Iowa when Boating Through a Storm? Yes, this comes down to the basic principle of skill bonuses and penalties again. Or you might simply not roll any dice at all in USS Iowa, because success is automatic. 

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

No it isn't Your still doing fighting, just another way. Conflict is conflict. It's also vitial to story telling and gaming. If your character don't have any sort of conflict the story is boring and people lose interest. 

I would say an argument, picking a lock or piloting a raft down a swift stream are much more acceptable types of conflict than a beating. As you say, conflict is necessary to create a story. Physical violence is not.

I don’t think we will agree on the usefulness (or not) of Extended Conflicts. But I always enjoy hearing your opinions.

Using Extended Conflicts for simple number crunching is possible, but not the intention. The players should always describe what they want to accomplish with an action, choose a skill and Conflict Pool, then roll against the opposing force. The narrative bits make the conflict possible to visualise, strike by strike. 

I like the example of a duel at some baroque court, in front of a small, exclusive crowd. The two opponents fight with swords - but insult and ridicule each other as well. In a round, combat proceeds as normal. But parallel to the sword play, a social conflict takes place, also per round. 

The players don’t have to act out the verbal conflict, but they should describe what they say and what they try to achieve. Just like in combat. 

The interesting part comes as the duel approaches a conclusion. Because the opponent who wins the sword fight might lose the social conflict - and as a consequence the sympathy of the court elite. And winning the hearts of the right people might be much more important in the long run, even with a few cuts and bruises to heal  

And what would happen if the social conflict ends first, with one of the opponents at zero CHA? It could mean a lot of things, depending on the situation and the characters involved, but the losing part might break down in tears, leave the duel in anger or even surrender because some juicy insult makes the crowd laugh at him.

To me, all this add new layers and meaning to game play, without introducing complex mechanics. I understand it’s not for everyone and that’s ok. But it’s a simple way to move roleplaying away from its violent roots. 

As for BRP vs. Mythras, I like both. They are similar enough to switch between or move various mechanics from one to the other. Having two rulesets to choose from, with slightly different flavours, is really cool. 

12 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Oh, as a side note, you might want to do up a game based entirely on the dice pool mechanic, and have everything work the same way. You could handle assaults, firefights, surgery, lock picking, diplomatic negotiations, races, computer hacking, engine repairs etc. will the same basic game mechanic and just swap out different abilities to the rolls and target values. 

I just did in December : ) Comae Engine is an ultra-lite version of Mythras, rebuilt on top of Extended Conflicts, in just 50 pages. It’s turned out to be the most popular book I’ve released so far.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/m/product/418884

In short, there are four characteristics - or Conflict Pools, really - and nine broad skills. Skills have a few //Focuses, mapping very closely to the Mythras skill list. Additionally, PCs have a few #Tags and Luck Points. All conflicts, including combat, are handled with Extended Conflicts. 

Yes, it’s not a bad idea! I actually dug out one of the four existing print copies of BRP Space last week. As you say, most of the work has already been done. I will look into it a bit more before making a decision. 

Reskinned Hit Points or not, Extended Conflicts fundamentally changed the way I play RPGs. No more throwing in combat to increase tension. There are so many more creative options now. 

I agree about alien creation, but my goal was to make it good enough within a tight GM timeframe. There is a trade-off between accuracy and time spent preparing stuff, both for aliens and starships. Finding an approach that suits every GM is not realistic, but squeezing as much as possible from the GM’s precious time is important to me.   

I would add a few more chapters as useful in M-SPACE.

Extended Conflicts allow you to run debates, fast talk, chases, research into alien tech and so on as a series of opposed rolls. Characteristics are used as Conflict Pools. 

Alien creation is less involved than for example GURPS, but more detailed than a bunch of rather abstract, random tables (like Classic Traveller). 

Vehicle design follows the same rules as starship design, but in a different scale. Works a bit like LEGO blocks, with modules combined into bespoke all-terrain vehicles, speeder bikes and so on. 

Organisations, big or small, in M-SPACE are called Circles. They have a few stats and “skills” to make them easier to use in play. 

If you need robots and cyborgs, the M-SPACE Companion covers them with enough detail to use for PCs. Like starships and vehicles, they are modular with a lot of flexibility. The Companion also has life path character creation as an add-on to regular PC creation. 

Beyond those tidbits, there’s not much to the book ; )

Hey Bytewright, good to hear you enjoy M-SPACE! And just to be clear, M-SPACE is alive and kicking. As others have already pointed out, both Odd Soot and Comae Engine share a lot of DNA with M-SPACE, so they are not really taking my focus away from it - I see them as extensions of the base rules. (And in many ways, Odd Soot is just a setting for M-SPACE).

More M-SPACE material is coming, I’m just a bit slow in my development work. There are new rules coming, as well as scenarios. You can also check out the conversion rules for Traveller —> M-SPACE if you need more material. Very quick and straightforward. 

As for Foundry VTT, I haven’t seen anything for M-SPACE. I rarely play online, but I would be more than happy to support anyone who wants to bring M-SPACE to Foundry. 

1 hour ago, Baron Wulfraed said:

Part of the charm, to me...

Though I will admit that one of the first major things I did with M$ Multiplan on a TRS-80 Model III/4 [upgraded] was incorporate to create a spreadsheet with all the design tables and look-ups. I could go down the core features (displacement, desired maneuver/jump, etc.) and the spreadsheet kept track of cost and space required.

Granted -- actually laying out a deck plan was not covered...

 

Haha, yes I know a lot of people enjoyed the tech aspects : ) And still do. That's cool. But it just didn't make sense to me, so I tried really hard to make it less complex, without turning it into an abstract ruleset.

1 hour ago, PoppySeed45 said:

From the man himself! Largely agree now that I've taken the plunge, especially on the careers (Mongoose Traveller is better, but in M-Space, it's a hundred times easier to come up with a new career if needed, since it's really only about skill choices; Traveller in most incarnations is harder thanks to the career system, and even the point-buy optional rules depend on the career system as the template).

Good to hear! And I agree, careers seem more flexible in Mythras/M-SPACE.

I’ve played quite some Traveller over the years - mainly the original version from 1977 - and it’s no secret that it inspired M-SPACE in many ways. But there were also things I never quite liked, things that I wanted to improve in my d100 take on sci-fi.

Starship Design. The rules in Traveller always felt like they required a degree in engineering. The modular approach in M-SPACE is more like playing with LEGO blocks. It’s easier to understand, faster and much more fun. You can make 10 ships in the time it takes to create a single ship in Traveller.

Starship Combat. Starship combat comes in many flavours and in various degrees of complexity. My design goal with M-SPACE was to give it about the same complexity as regular combatt, basing it on the well-regarded rules in Mythras. In Classic Traveller, regular combat is not very good, but starship combat is even clunkier.

Careers. I’m sure this has been updated in newer versions of Traveller, but the focus on military and trade never clicked for me. With a background in Call of Cthulhu and investigative games, I want my players to be journalists, archivists, lawyers, gamblers, burglars and so on. Unfortunately, much of the early material for Traveller was developed to cater for the militant/trading viewpoint. 

Aliens. The official aliens in Traveller never really worked for me. And I still remember the disappointment of creating my own species with the help of Classic Traveller. They were completely devoid of inspiration, wonder and life. Later, with GURPS Space v3, I was initially charmed by the attention to detail and realism - but soon got bogged down by the lengthy process. From these two extremes, I aimed for a middle road in M-SPACE. Quick enough to make the creative process enjoyable and detailed enough to inspire both the GM and players to actually be able to visualise the alien.