Recent Forum Posts
From categories:
page »
SalemsSalems 09 Nov 2017 20:37
in discussion General / Per page discussions » Unlockable Equipment

Character: Tennyson Ludvigsen
Item: Language Lessons: German
Reason: Tennyson wants to try to expand his linguistic repertoire to include the languages of more local counties, because Danish isn't helping him much on missions.

Just don the mask of whoever you wish to be, The rest follows.

by SalemsSalems, 09 Nov 2017 20:37

Alright, this is my attempt to make a final revision of the system, taking into account the feedback I've gotten.

First, the penalties, instead of being permanent, will heal over a three month period. This cannot be bolstered by XP, both so new pcs are not left crippled and so old pcs don't have a large advantage

Secondly, the player will have a choice between losing three points in one attribute or skill, or losing a point of the relevant health. The same need for GM approval of the impact applies.

These should allow players to still be impacted while avoiding this effectively becoming a way to force characters into a meat grinder. As a note, the same stipulations on 4 health requiring retirement apply, meaning a PC cannot reach more than 3 times in a year and only pick health debuffs.

I honestly do agree that there should be some things classified as instant death, obviously if your PC suffers a severe enough injury, it's lights out. Not just on "Damger runs" but all runs. It's far more realistic to insta-die from things such as spinal injuries and uh- other stuffs. Sorry but if you ram into a building in a car head on, you should kick the bucket for several reasons then and there. Although, there would need to be concrete guides on what does and doesn't constitute that plain old one and done death.

Just don the mask of whoever you wish to be, The rest follows.

Possible alternative could be that falling to this level the first time would cause a permanent 1 drop in Phealth/Mhealth along with the loss of a stat and attribute point. With the second being force retirement or death.

This would display the lasting effects of the severe damage (maybe a physical detriment is added at GM discretion like a limp or constant pain base on the injury?) and increase the risk of runs while not having the promise of retirement if you get a streak of bad luck. It still poses that risk but also would be merciful enough that they might be willing to participate in runs to gain the XP to purchase back their lost Phealth points and what not. If they are continually reckless than their chances drop from three to two and if they waste those then their character is gone.

I think that this is a good idea and second what Spooks above me said. Your other idea is also good, but I can see the downside to it as well.

Another small idea is that this could result in Danger Runs, runs where there are certain things that could just plain kill you… and that's that. That said, it could also create a divide between those confident enough to take the chance that their characters can die, likely for a higher reward, and those who just got into runs.

I don't know. I ramble sometimes and will likely look back at this and say "what the fuck was I thinking" shortly before cringing.

Assuming it would account for the player losing more health between paying and starting the process, I can see this working well. In a case like I just detailed, the options of having to restart or pay more come to mind, each with their own benefits. Restarting provides an incentive in regards to time, while paying provides an incentive in regards to XP use.

On the whole, this a solid idea.

On the subject of this:

These stat penalties should be repairable, but through installments of expensive XP buys judged by GM's with the severity of the injury.

Essentially, it'd be like languages. An XP amount would be paid when it's able to be afforded, with the idea that the time is spent doing physical therapy, undergoing surgical procedures to fix physical penalties, or spending time with an on-site thaumaturgist or therapist to repair mental penalties.

It would most likely be more expensive than Language installments, of course, but it would keep death as a risk while also making injuries both a repairable(And I mean realistically repairable, not magic-poofy-there's-your-leg-back repairable) penalty, and a chance for character building.

Just one little Spooky Bee

Another feature of the system would potentially be retirement at 4 Phealth or Mhealth, however I'm less sure on this component. It ensures people cannot be reckless and only have three chances, but it also is functionally just character death with a happier ending.

Hey, Origins.
This is DSJ.

Recently I've been working on, with feedback and ideas from other staff, on a revised death system that should result in a more risky game without outright character loss being the result.

It would work as follows;

At reaching 0 Phealth, a character will permanently lose one point of Phealth, and an attribute point, which will lower said attribute's point cap to 5. The attribute lost will be chosen by the player, but require GM approval as to ensure it bears relevance to the injury sustained.

At reaching 0 Mhealth, a character will permanently lose one point of Mhealth, and a skill point, which will lower said skill's point cap to 5. The skill lost will be chosen by the player, but require GM approval as to ensure that it bears relevance to the injury sustained.

I would like to see your thoughts and suggestions on this idea.

XP Update!
DreamwalkerFaeDreamwalkerFae 15 Oct 2017 03:08
in discussion General / Announcements » XP Update!

To help streamline everything, the GM Team has spent the past few months reworking the XP reward system, and the results of that rework are now located in convenient chart form at the bottom of the Game Mechanics page. As before, you'll still need a GM to check off on XP awards after a run.

XP Update! by DreamwalkerFaeDreamwalkerFae, 15 Oct 2017 03:08

As another and slightly lowier GM, please post stuff here. It lets all of us see it and allows us to respond to it. Feel free to bring it up in OOC as well, if you want to discuss it.

hi im nemi gm emeritus and channel admin

I just wanted to throw in my two cents here in a place where there's hard copy stuff down and visible: Feedback is, as with any community, incredibly important to its overall health. Kindly leave any thoughts here, players and GMs, so we all can see and stay on the same page. Thanks!

Hi there! Today during a discussion in OOC, it came to my attention that a lot of changes have been brought over the past several months without any input from the community. The original rule change that sparked this was the change for 4 hours in run-time only giving 2XP(which is the bare minimum), which is not worth the risk a medium run these days gives out. The creation of this post was also suggested by Roget after a lengthy discussion with other Origins members with him observing at the time.

So the following post will be discussing a few issues in regards to this! I've set up an IRC channel, #Honeycomb, as well to help with this. There will be no opping or half-opping, the point of the channel is for everybody to work on equal grounds in this channel.

Okay, so really, the issue is here is that the GMs(I really don't wanna get on your case but this has been going on for a long time and it's starting to tick off more people than just me at this point) don't consult the playerbase they're running the game for, when the time comes to make changes.

A good example is the Site move from Site-19 to Site-77. It was over a year ago, but the point stands that nobody in the community was asked if they wanted to- We were told about it, and just expected to go along with it. It pissed a lot of players off, easily over half the base, and drove some really good players off, because it was a one-sided decision with no player-input. Yeah, it was a while ago and we're over it by now, but the point stands that these kinds of things are happening in a secluded channel, with the players having now knowledge or input of the rules that are being put against them.

Which is another issue. Some of these rules have absolutely no benefit to the community, and really only seem to be here for the GM's benefits(And even then, not really.) The XP change wasn't, as it was said in chat, there for a long time. I looked back over XP logs, and that's not true, as well as three other guest-GM's pointing out that that wasn't a thing that happened in a separate channel. Retirement is another nonsense rule: It makes absolutely no sense both mechanically, and in-universe. I'm sure everyone's tired of people bitching about retirement, but that'll actually stop when it's really fixed, and there's an easy way to do that, but that can be discussed in #Honeycomb.

So at the moment, the three big concerns on my own end are; The amount of XP given per run, keeping changes to the core game transparent between players and GMs, how character retirement can be fixed, and character-deaths and how it should/can be approached.

Transparency between players and their GMs is important when it comes to changes in rules. Springing things on us is a quick way to get a lot of people upset, and cause interest in the game to falter. It's logical to keep plot and disciplinary stuff secret in staff chats, but for rule announcements and changes like the XP scenario, the community should be kept up to date. I think these are all reasonably fair things to be able to discuss as peers.

If anybody else has concerns they'd like to bring up, it'd be appreciated if they were put here in detail! I'd like to keep the main discussions to the channel, and use this thread as a kind of summary on what issues are being queued for discussion.

Just one little Spooky Bee

"…If I have to, I guess I'll answer some questions."

Just don the mask of whoever you wish to be, The rest follows.

This is my first real "occupation" in a while, many of my years have been spent drifting.

~🏵~Flower Power~🏵~

Would you say the foundation provides better job conditions than your previous occupation?

We change a lot over time, but there's always a little of our old selves in us. Never forget your old self, they're one of the most important parts of you.

So… questions anybody?

We change a lot over time, but there's always a little of our old selves in us. Never forget your old self, they're one of the most important parts of you.

Which people would you trust the most in the foundation?

We change a lot over time, but there's always a little of our old selves in us. Never forget your old self, they're one of the most important parts of you.

P-please do not.

Make Leon Uncomfortable by TeslaTornadoTeslaTornado, 07 Sep 2017 19:42
(account deleted) 06 Sep 2017 08:32
in discussion General / Per page discussions » Kyou Rina

I envisioned her backstory as such:

She's the daughter of a wealthy Chinese business man and is with him on a trip to Australia when the Imperial Japanese attack. Her father is killed, her mother also dies during the invasion of China (unbeknownst to her) and she is left with a small group of people that evaded capture by moving into the unbridled wilderness of Australia. They use their stealth to pick at the Imperials. Some of them go against Kyou because she looks Asian, despite the Japanese and Chinese not having the greatest of relationships, but others defend her. She prefers to use melee weapons to avoid attention, but others use firearms. Sadly, those with firearms are eventually found out by the Imperials and killed over time. Eventually, Kyou is the only one left and she almost gives up. The Allied forces succeeded in pushing back the Imperials soon after and she returns to society, to an extent. Her skills made her an asset to multiple groups, if she would work for them. Somehow Foundation gets her to join them first…or second….or third…I don't have anything beyond the end of Imperial control of Australia to be honest.

I hereby give this character over to Avocadonut, if she so chooses to use it. Anyone else is out of luck

by (account deleted), 06 Sep 2017 08:32
page »
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License