Cyberpunk roleplaying

I gave up on OGL Cybernet, after getting to the second last chapter. As I mentioned below, there were a couple of issues that were really bugging me, and that I'd rant on later. In fact, that list grew, and grew, and eventually overwhelmed me.

Reinventing the Wheel

If there's one thing that pisses me off about d20 (and, incidentally, Storyteller) is core rulebooks that repeat huge swathes of the rules verbatim, and make a handful of small changes. So, you have to read hundreds of pages of the same old stuff in order to get to a handful of changes.

Frankly, if you're going to do a core rulebook, you really should provide clear guidance on what's different, for the benefit of players familiar with the system. This doesn't apply if there are huge changes, as is the case in Mutants & Masterminds, for instance, but does apply here.

Better still, if you don't need to produce a new core book, don't. Chances are most people interested in your game have the D&D Player's Handbook already. If it's d20 Modern based, it's likely that that book has well outsold your effort anyway. We have these resouces available. Use them, please.

Incomplete Games

If you are going to do a core rulebook, it better damn well be complete. You need to include rules for non-lethal damage if it's going to be a part of the game. Just because I can fill in the gaps doesn't mean that I should have to - and I resent carrying two books to the game when I should only need one.

General Editing

I've ranted about this before (although perhaps not here), but since the previous point is a symptom of general problems with editing, allow me to say it here: if your book doesn't read well, I'm going to be predisposed to hate it. Sorry, I don't care how good your ideas are, if you can't express them well I'm almost certainly nor interested.

Editors are worth their weight in gold. Find a good one, and never let her go.

Hit Points

Right, on to the specifics of OGL Cybernet. This game uses the standard hit point system as found in D&D and d20 Modern. Now, in the past I've defended hit points as being a good system. Granted, it's a very simple system, and not at all realistic, but it is a system that works, and can help build the exact feeling you're looking for in some games. Specifically, in D&D and Star Wars d20, hit points are the way to go.

However, cyberpunk should be dark, gritty, and very lethal. Although there's likely to be a lot of gunfire in such a game, there should be a strong incentive on the parts of the players to keep their characters out of it. And, there's absolutely no way to get that sort of a feel when moderate-level heroes can easily take multiple hits from heavy calibre firearms and keep on coming, with no impact on their capabilities.

There are various fixes to this problem:

1) Use the Vitality/Wounds system from Star Wars. This allows characters to take multiple hits, but also leaves them horribly vulnerable to criticals. Which is, I think, a good thing. That said, the VP/WP system is closed content at the moment, so not available for general use.

2) Use the hit point system from Babylon 5, where characters get 1d6+c hit points at first level, where c is a class-based constant. Each level, they gain 1 to 3 more hit points, again based on class. Constitution increases the chance a wounded character will stabilise; it does not give additional hit points. To be honest, I was sure this would be the route they'd take.

3) Use a save versus damage, coupled with wound levels. This is the system I would use:

Each time a character takes damage, he must roll a Fortitude save (see below for DC). If the character succeeds, he shrugs off the damage without effect.

If the character fails by 1-5 points, he takes a functional wound. Such wounds don't impair the character noticably at the time they are received, but may have greater effects after the combat ends. Functional wounds can also be of an aggravated and non-aggravated form. Basically, they start off non-aggravated, but become aggravated if the character engages in strenuous activity before getting them treated (so, if the character continues fighting, his wounds become aggravated). Functional wounds are things like stab wounds to the chest, torn muscles, and so on. Basically, anything that doesn't immediately take the character out.

If the character fails by 6-10 points, he suffers a non-functional wound. Such wounds take the character out of the fight immediately. Non-functional wounds are therefore quite serious, but they're not necessarily more dangerous than functional wounds - just more instantly debilitating. For instance, a non-functional wound could simply be a blow to the head that renders the character unconscious.

If the character fails by more than 10 points, the character takes a mortal wound. Such a character is immediately removed from the combat, and additionally proceeds to bleed out. Unless such a character stabilises on his own, or received treatment urgently, he will be dead in 10 rounds. (The rules for stabilisation are unchanged.)

The DC of the save versus damage is (15 + damage taken + wound modifiers). Each wound the character has taken (regardless of type) adds 5 to the base DC. So, a character takes 3 points of damage from a dagger, having previously received 2 functional wounds (which were treated), 1 functional wound (which has become aggravated) and a non-functional wound. The DC of the save versus damage is therefore (15+3+5+5+5+5 = 38).

After the combat, it is expected that the character will seek treatment for his wounds. This is also the time when the actual effects of the wounds are determined (useful in a cyberpunk game). At this point, we also reach the end of my thoughts on the matter, so I'll post again when I have more.

"What is Roleplaying"...

I'm currently reading OGL Cybernet, which is essentially d20 cyberpunk. I say essentially because it uses the d20 mechanics, but is published under the OGL rather than d20 license, in order to include character creation rules, and it's in no way related to the Cyberpunk 2020 game - except in that it covers the same genre.

Anyway, the game is moderately interesting, despite a couple of things that are driving me crazy (cyberware and hit points being the main ones, but that's another rant). However, as with so many other role-playing games, it opens with the standard discussion of what exactly roleplaying is.

Now, perhaps I'm being foolish, but I would expect that a game as obscure as this title (and, indeed, every other role-playing game except D&D and maybe Vampire) is only ever going to be sold in speciality game stores, or on places like Amazon where you're only going to find it if you specifically look for it. Either of which means that only gamers are likely to pick it up. And, one would expect, gamers already know what roleplaying is (not to mention that the concept is now generally understood, due to the use of roleplaying in education, staff training, and the like. It's only the concept of a role-playing game that might need explained).

So, frankly, what's the point? Just assume your readers know what the game's about, and use the space for more useful things. Like blank space or something.

Storyteller Advice

While I'm on the topic of wasted space, I'm starting to lean towards the notion that GM advice on constructing stories, campaigns and so forth (rather than specific issues like accurately balancing challenges, varying encounters, and so on) are a waste of space. Such discussions are often aimed at such a level that every good GM already knows everything that's mentioned in them. It's also manifestly obvious that bad GMs don't even read them, or if they do they don't pay any attention, instead being focussed on the 5,000 additional enemy groups you've just introduced, and are now advising they don't use.