Get Into the Machine, Shinji!

Proof of Concept for a Mark of the Odd-based Mecha* game. My design goal for this is to be a game that is rules-light, that is seamless between Pilots and Mecha, but where the mechanics are just different enough to feel like more than just re-flavoring between the scales. It also takes some inspiration from Cypher, and a tiny bit from my "Mechs & Monstrosities" Hack for Tunnels & Trolls.

*Why didn't I call it "Get Into the Mecha, Shinji!"? I dunno, this just sounded better to me...

Ability Scores

Three ability scores, which we're tentatively going to call the standard STR, DEX, and INT, and regular HP. We can call them something else later, but it's roughly these three categories, and they're the same for Pilots as for Mechas.

Special Abilities

Do you want some cyberpunk in your mecha game? Ok, you've got hacking, robotics, AI-assisted mini-missiles for bullets, high-frequency laser swords, etc. Oh is this an Escaflowne-style magitech setting? Ok, you've got magic now too. Whatever you would normally do with Mark of the Odd, you do. They can also just be skills, talents, careers, etc. Let's say you get 3 of them to start.

Mecha

Pilots and Mecha are separate "characters" / character sheets but character creation is mostly the same between the two. Roll HP and the Ability Scores, and multiply by 10. Damage dice? Multiply by 10. If it's just Mecha-to-Mecha, you don't even have to bother, the 10x is mostly just for scaling Pilot x Mecha stuff. Because there's gotta be some maniac taking potshots with a Mecha-Buster sniper rifle out there...

But peeps are littler...

You are correct, hypothetical person, peeps are littler than Mecha. As a peep dodging a Mecha attack; Dex Save, on Success you take 10x fewer points of Damage (the amount from the roll before multiplying). Mecha are big, peeps are little, so they're harder to target, but susceptible to collateral. Probably not going to satisfy everyone but it's modular anyway, if you've got a better idea go for it.

If you're using a system that allows for partial Saves (like MRD...), you could even do something like Full Damage, Damage/10, No Damage. Basically, if a Mecha really wants to fuck up a peep they can do so, but if a peep stays hidden and/or keeps a fair distance, it should be an option to engage, albeit risky.

Mecha Abilities

Mecha Abilities are inventory-based. You can get as crunchy or as loose as you want with it, but tentatively we'll say there is Head, Core, Lower, Upper x2, Special x2. Generally, they aren't going to add strictly quantitative buffs but you can default to that if you want.

Upper: Held weapons, special arms, or shoulder-mounts, probably at least one of the two providing Damage dice (e.g. Beam Sword, Rifle, Claw Hand, Shoulder-Mounted Missile Launcher), but also things like Repair Kit (restore HP), Extra Arm (for holding extra items, not necessarily full articulation/impact), Special Scanner.

Lower: Types of mobility (e.g. Humanoid Legs, Quadrupedal Legs, Treads, Hoverjet).

Head: Types of sensors (e.g. Radar, Sonar, Infrared, Ultraviolet), Head-Mounted Minigun.

Core and Special: Can get a little fancy, like a unique energy source, a "signature move", atypical things like AT Field from Evangelion or Funnels from Gundam.

You can make these Mecha Abilities require Saves, or just work as-is, the same kinds of decisions you would make designing any other MotO items or abilities. Some of these are a little vague or have overlap but that's a feature, not a bug!

Alternatively, I could imagine stripping all of that out entirely, and just giving each Mecha X number of Special Abilities, and not get hung up on inventory slots or any of that, but Mecha are maybe the one genre where I actually kind of prefer that slightly more simulation-y crunch to it (but only just a little bit).

Pilot Abilities

This is the "secret sauce" of this hack; these are Special Abilities that Pilots have that they can only use while piloting a Mecha. Depending on what you're going for, you could have them be specific to a given Pilot / Mecha pairing, or more flexible.

As before, in some cases, these abilities may require Saves, but more often, they should cost Pilot HP or Pilot Ability Points. So for instance, one kind of boring and straightforward ability might be Ace Dodger: Pilot spends 1 Dex for every 10 Damage to dodge an attack. Must be all or none. So if the Pilot has 5 DEX remaining and that they are willing to spend, and their Mecha is about to take 50 or fewer points of Damage (the opponent rolled 5 or lower on a d6 Damage die), they can do so.

Some more interesting examples might be, if the Pilot is a hacker, they might have a Pilot Ability that lets them remote-hack another Mecha at some cost per turn; if they have magic and some spell that might normally affect a peep, you can spend INT to apply it to a Mecha instead.

And let's assume starting with 3 as well (in addition to 3 regular Special Abilities).

My rule of thumb would be, if it seems like something another Pilot could theoretically do, but they don't have the specific Pilot Ability, they can still do it but it might require a Save on top of a cost, or require a greater cost than normal; this isn't about locking Players into specific builds and being a crunchy tactical game. The Pilot Abilities are mainly just there for a point of reference. Or you can be stricter about it if you prefer, you do you.

You can have regular Special Abilities cost Ability Points as well on a case by case basis, but I think this mechanic should mostly only apply to Pilot Abilities, for reasons I explain below.

Analysis

There is arguably still an incongruity here like if you wanted a big fighty-type Pilot in a nimble dodgy Mecha, you're working somewhat against type, but since the effect of Pilot stats towards Mecha is only related to Pilot Abilities, and these Pilot Abilities are generally more so about unique things you can do than quantitative stuff, I think that is more so mitigated than in many other RPGs that try to consolidate Mecha and Pilot Abilities in some way.

It's a similar kind of abstraction as with Cypher System, in that you spend points to use Abilities, and you could even imagine something like Edge and Effort from Cypher being applied here as well which I would likely do if I expanded this proof of concept.

Also, while many people seem to dislike the Pool Point system in Cypher, I think that should be less of an issue here, because again, it allows the Pilots' stats to affect Mecha-level play, without overwhelming it, but it also allows for mixed-scale play. While a Pilot may have taken Ability Score Damage by using their Pilot Abilities, since generally, only Pilot Abilities cost points, they could still exit their Mecha and immediately get into a gunfight or fistfight if they wanted to with minimal impact. Unlike Cypher, it is less so the case that Ability points are also HP. This might be more of an issue with MRD but not to an extent that I'm concerned with, especially since MRD spreading HP across the three Ability scores + Karma already makes characters sturdier than in regular MotO.

If you're concerned about things like Ability Damage penalties, I would be inclined to just say it's threshold-based like you take a -X penalty to Saves if an Ability is below a certain threshold, like say -1/3rd of the total, etc.; that way you can still have Ability Damage penalties, but it doesn't penalize players for using Pilot Abilities quite as severely. I'd be more inclined to just remove Ability Damage penalties altogether or implement it in some other circumstantial way.

So I'm pretty happy with this proof of concept. I'm so focused on MRD that I don't know if I'll have time to develop this further, but also, given that MRD is already basically a MotO hack, I actually think this could be bolted on top of MRD fairly easily, so maybe I can have my cake and eat it too...

Minigame: Tama-Dama Collectible Egg Battle Game!

I have several other posts brewing but I've been fairly busy lately, so I figure now's the time to break the glass on some of my backup posts. This is something I wrote up forever ago.


This is a minigame that exists in my Phantasmos campaign setting, but could be applied to other science fantasy, or even other science fiction or regular fantasy settings, with a bit of tweaking. The game was designed around Numenera / Cypher System and would need to be heavily re-worked for other systems, but I still think it's a cool idea.

I ran it in my old Numenera campaign set in Phantasmos which was forever ago, I can't believe I never posted this on my blog!

It only showed up a few times, mainly giving the players some alternative ways to problem solve (the shopkeep won't sell the mcguffin... unless you can beat him in a tama-dama battle!), and I thought it was fun. You could theoretically build a whole campaign around this!

Rules for Tama-Dama battling

• By default, lvl 3 difficulty
• For every lvl difference between tama-damas changes difficulty by 1
• Element advantage/disadvantage changes difficulty by 1
• Anti-Information>Absolute Solid>Liquid Starfire>Impossible Light>Anti-Information
• Learn more about the Elements of Phantasmos
• Training/specializing in Tama-Dama battling changes difficulty by 1 or 2
• Intelligence/Might/Speed type determines which pool to use for effort

List of Tama-Dama

Cordicoyot: A cyan-furred puppy coyote-like creature with a psilosymbiote infection 

• Element: Anti-information
• Type: Might

Starmander: A translucent yellow, gel-skinned salamander-like creature which breathes liquid starfire

• Element: Liquid starfire
• Type: Speed

Angefel: A pink-skinned, cherubic, semi-humanoid, golemite vulture-like creature

• Element: Absolute solid
• Type: Intelligence

Elephanshine: An impossible-colored baby elephant-like creature which sprays impossible light rainbows from its trunk

• Element: Impossible light
• Type: Intelligence

BB-Beetle: An emerald shelled beetle with pinkish skin, which shoots spitballs of absolute solid

• Element: Absolute solid
• Type: Speed

Phreaky Frelin: A frelin-like phreaker who casts spells of anti-information magic

• Element: Anti-information
• Type: Intelligence

Cosmom: A ball of gelatinous starfire with arms and big, red lips, which smothers its enemies with love… to death

• Element: Liquid starfire
• Type: Might

Impossipanda: A panda-like creature with patches of impossible colored fur, and mesmerizing eyes which produce impossible light. Surprisingly fast for such a fat creature

• Element: Impossible light
• Type: Speed

A sample Tama-Dama Tournament

Players will compete against 4 NPCs or each other in a tournament:

Georgina: A mutant girl with the mouth of a lion. 

• Battles with a lvl 1d2 BB-Beetle.
• A bratty girl who acts mean to cover her insecurities. Underneath her bluster, she's actually timid and caring.
• Will get angry and flustered if she loses the first round.
• Will cry if she loses.
• If you convince her that you respect her, even if she loses, she will cheer up.

Ruk: A middle-aged tartarian with a hunched back. 

• Battles with a lvl 1d2 Phreaky Frelin. 
• Is trained in tama-dama battling.
• Neckbeard.
• Will accuse you of cheating if he loses.

Loys: A mutant boy with spirals in place of eyes. 

• Battles with a lvl 1d2 Cosmom.
• Nice, but very weird.
• Has an overbearing / domineering mom.
• His mom will yell at you if you win the first round.
• She will begin crying and console the (unperturbed) Loys.
• He will ask if he can be your friend, regardless of whether you win or lose.

Vincent: A pale, skinny mutant with greasy grayish-blue hair. He is almost attractive, except for his slightly droopy, beady eyes, and large nose. 

• Battles with a lvl 2 Impossipanda. 
• Is specialized in tama-dama battling.
• Arrogant. Too cool to talk to you. Mildly sociopathic. 
• 1337 h4x0r.
• If Vincent makes it to the final round and loses a single round, his Impossipanda will turn into NaNo, the secret glitch tama-dama. 
• NaNo has type superiority regardless of player's tama-dama type.
• Will be an over-dramatic edge-lord if he loses. 

High Level Games: 5 Tips to Handle Settlement Building in Tabletop RPGs

I finally wrote another article for High Level Games! They're great and I hope people give the article a read. I've been thinking a lot about settlement building, and how to make a campaign out of a single location, something I emphasized heavily in my SHIELDBREAKER campaign and intend to emphasize in my current Aquarian Dawn campaign. As the image suggests, this HLG post was largely inspired by Numenera Destiny (linked in the article itself). Check out the article here!

Tunnels & Trolls: The SoftMax Hack + cheatsheet + general impressions

I've recently started a campaign in my Aquarian Dawn setting using Tunnels & Trolls. I may post a session report (or more likely a partial-module of my GM notes) at some point, but probably not until one or two more game sessions from now.

I'm running the most recent edition of T&T and the translation of the Japanese quickstarter rules, mostly as-is, with a few mechanics streamlined and a few homebrew mechanics. On the whole I'm enjoying the system, and I'll discuss why at the bottom of this post, but I also think there are certain ways in which it feels antiquated or anachronistic. I think it could use some OSR-ifying, and I've got some ideas for a revised version of T&T that I think will make it feel more modern and accessible, and I hope people will be influenced to check T&T out as a result.

This version, the SoftMax Hack (a joke that hopefully a few of you will get), is mostly just a cheatsheet for the rules that won't make a lot of sense unless you're at least a little familiar with the game (which is why I feel comfortable posting it), with a few houserules. I may change this as I go, but after one session of my campaign so far, this is what I'm thinking.

At some point I'll do the true Max Hack, which I imagine as being similar in philosophy to how many OSR systems attempt to streamline old-school D&D.

At the bottom of this cheatsheet + house rules are some of my thoughts on the system. I would be interested to know what other people think if they've played T&T, or if this makes anyone interested in checking it out.


Character Creation 

• HOUSERULE: 3d6 for each stat, roll two extra 3d6 and drop lowest two dice. A 3d6 of all the same value (e.g. 3,3,3) allows you to roll again and take the sum, until not triples. Rearrange stats as desired. 
• HOUSERULE: Start with two talents rather than one 
• HOUSERULE: 250 gold rather than random roll for gold (for simplicity) 
• HOUSERULE: Start with 3 AP 
• HOUSERULE (for Aquarian Dawn): Take an esper power (such as one of my 100 superpowers)

Advancement

• HOUSERULE: Separating XP and AP
• HOUSERULE: Milestone XP Given at end of session (generally ~100) 
• Increasing a stat costs stat * 10 (e.g. increasing a stat from 7 to 8 is 7*10 = 70 XP)
• Once per level you can spend 300 AP to gain a new talent
• HOUSERULE: Learning spells:
• Wizards gain 3 new spells per level of spell level equal to character level or lower. For example, a level 3 wizard can learn three level 3 or level 2 spells 
• They should already know all level 1 spells, but if you introduce new level 1 spells as the campaign progresses, they could learn those as well 
• Rogues gain up to 3 new spells per level, where the sum of the spell levels cannot exceed the character level. For example, a level 4 rogue could take one level 4 spell, one level 3 spell and one level 1 spell, two level 2 spells, one level 2 spell and two level 1 spells, or three level 1 spells
• Wizards and rogues can also buy spells with gold (1000 * spell level gold)
• HOUSERULE: Spending XP to learn spells
• It's surprising to me that the TNT core book only has rules for learning spells by spending gold, but not by spending experience. This could be like the equivalent of doing research to advance their knowledge.
• This would need to be tested, but tentatively I think it makes sense that the XP cost to learn a spell should be spell level * 100, so a level 1 spell costs 100 XP, level 2 spell costs 200 XP, etc.
• In addition to normal spell requirements, it might be fair to put some limit on the highest spell level a rogue can learn independently by spending XP.

Types

• Warrior
• +1d6 dice per level for combat rolls (unarmed or melee weapon) 
• Can double the damage reduction of armor but increase chance of it breaking 
• No magic 
• Rogue 
• Start with one level 1 spell and can learn more spells
• Gain one extra talent at start of game 
• Wizard 
• Start with all first-level spells 
• Spells cost Character Level – Spell Level less WIZ to cast (e.g. for a level 2 wizard casting a level 1 spell, the spell costs 2-1=1 less WIZ) 
• Casting with a focus (staff, wand, amulet, etc.) subtract level from WIZ cost (e.g. a level 2 wizard with a focus spends 2 fewer WIZ to cast a spell) 
• No personal adds for weapons with > 2d6 damage dice 
• HOUSE RULE: Dropping DEX requirement for spellcasting

Equipment 

• HOUSE RULE: No encumbrance, just common sense. If you’re over-loading, there may be a GM intrusion… 
• HOUSE RULE: No STR or DEX requirement for equipment, just common sense. As above, if you're wielding or wearing something a bit too big for you, there may be a GM intrusion...
• HOUSE RULE: Since I’m dropping DEX requirement for spellcasting, instead the DEX reduction on armor counts towards an increased WIZ cost for spellcasting

Combat 

• Weapon dice + weapon adds + personal adds (+1 for each point over 12 for STR, LK, DEX, SPD), take difference between player (or party if doing simultaneous combat) and opposition 
• Spite Damage: Any roll of 6 gives 1 spite damage, guaranteed damage even if you lose the opposed combat dice roll 
• Missile weapons roll DEX SR (generally lvl 2, 4, 6, etc. against a medium sized creature at point-blank, close, medium range. Smaller targets increase by 2, larger decrease by 2). Success means guaranteed damage even if failed opposed combat dice roll. Failure means roll opposed combat dice as normal 
• Armor Durability: If using the warrior ability to increase damage reduction, or as a GM intrusion, roll SR for luck. On failure, the armor can take 1 less hit (one wear point). For each wear point, the SR difficulty increases by 1.

Saving Rolls 

• Roll 2d6 against SR level – stat (e.g. a SR1LK roll would require you to roll 20 – your luck stat) 
• If you have a relevant talent subtract 3 from the difficulty 
• Rolling a 1 and a 2 is a critical failure 
• If you roll two of the same value, roll again and take the sum, repeat until not the same

Adventure Points (HOUSE RULE) 

• Can only have 3 + level total AP at one time 
• Can spend 1 AP to reroll a single die 
• Can spend 1 AP to add +3 to SR or combat roll (prior to rolling dice)
• Can spend 1 AP to add a d6 to a combat roll (prior to rolling dice)
• Can spend AP to do extra-special stuff such as esper powers, cost determined by GM
• Can spend 1 AP to reject a GM intrusion
• AP NOT the same as XP!
• Gain AP for doing cool roleplaying
• Gain AP for accepting a GM or player-suggested intrusion
• Intrusions: Complications to a given scenario

Dice Trade (HOUSE RULE)

• Players can swap dice to an equivalent distribution, reflecting cautiousness vs. risk-taking
• For instance, rather than rolling 2d6 for a saving roll, the player can roll a 1d12
• In this case, there is no doubles-roll-over, but also no critical fail. The range is technically different (2:12 vs. 1:12), but the big difference is that the probability distribution is uniform rather than normal. For a very difficult task where an average 2d6 would likely fail anyway, you may be better off rolling 1d12 than 2d6.
• For combat, you could substitute any number of d6's, such as 1d12 for 2d6, 1d20 for 3d6, etc. Just be mindful of what effects this has on the distribution.
• I may flesh this out more in the future...

Impressions / Mini-Review

I've only played one session of my new campaign with this system so far and there was no combat and only a few saving rolls (basically skill checks), so this is really more my impressions than a thorough review.

Likes:

• Opposed rolls for combat: While this significantly complicates the outcome probabilities, making it less intuitive how encounters will play out, I've always been intrigued by this mechanic. Maybe I'll end up disliking it, but for now it's a like just given that it's something I've wanted to try.


• Simultaneous combat: The core book suggests that by default all players should roll against all opponents simultaneously and everything should be resolved altogether. I don't know if I'd like to do that as the default, but it would make combat faster. More than that, I think it could be a cool tactical option for dealing with larger or more powerful enemies, or swarms of smaller enemies. A monster that would be insurmountable may be defeated if the players work together, or in the reverse, enough small goblins targeting a single player may be a significant threat. The players could all team up to defend against the goblins targeting the one player, but then they can't team up against the big ogre until the goblins are no longer a threat...


• Personal adds: I really like how you receive combat dice modifiers based on a contribution of stats. I think this is a flexible way to allow for different kinds of builds to be combat viable in a way that often feels counter-intuitive or over-complicated in D&D.


• Types: I haven't played long enough to get a sense of balance, but I like how the types (basically classes) work. Warriors get major bonuses to combat but no magic. Wizards have limits on how much combat damage they can do, but with ranged weapons they always have a chance of at least doing some damage. Rogues are inbetweeners. You could GLOG-ify this I'm sure, but as a core game these seem nice.


• Magic: I've never been a fan of Vancian magic. I much prefer a mana-based system. The way that spells can be powered up, and the ways that wizard spell costs decrease as they level, to me seems more flexible, fun, and intuitive than D&D-style magic.


• Saving Rolls: This stat-based skill-check system reminds me of the kinds of rolls I would make players do in Cypher System, which is always a plus. It's a simple number, lvl. 1 difficulty is 20, then +5 for each additional level of difficulty, with modifiers from the relevant stat. For a more OSR-style game, you could keep these to a minimum and not be any worse off for it.


• Monster Levels: I don't talk about it on this cheat sheet, but monsters can be reduced to a single number, which determines HP, number of combat dice, and any adds. Again, the simplicity and flexibility of it reminds me of Cypher, which is always a positive.


• Advancement: I generally prefer incremental advancement to monumental levels, so this point-buy system for increasing stats, learning new talents and spells, etc., with a few larger benefits for level, is a nice balance (once again, similar to Cypher). I also like how the cost for increasing stats increases as the stat gets bigger, so a player that rolls poorly during character creation may be able to "catch up".

Dislikes:

• Too many stats: Many of these stats feel redundant, or at least the book doesn't do a good job of explaining where specific stats would be important. I think this game could be streamlined to maybe 3 or 4 stats and be better off for it. Any stat may be used for an appropriate saving roll, but otherwise SPD isn't really doing anything that can't be covered by DEX besides contributing to adds. Do we really need a LK stat? CON is mostly just HP and WIZ mostly just MP, I'd rather just make those their own thing and not consider them a core stat. CHA could seemingly be taken out entirely, or maybe given some added value by allowing a character to use CHA in place of INT for spell requirements as sort of a "Sorcerer vs. Wizard" distinction. Anyway I think I'm over-sharing my ideas for the full Max Hack...


• Spell names: Many of the spells have long and cutesy names that give the trollworld setting personality, but are kind of cumbersome and annoying to keep track of.


• Stat Requirements: DEX as a prereq for spellcasting seems weird. I get the logic of waving hands around for spellcasting, but it seems like just a way to keep wizards from wearing heavy armor (given that heavy armor imposes DEX reduction). I think my houserule (or some version of it) is better. I also don't like that every weapon has a STR and DEX requirement. For now I've just reduced the requirements a bit with my houserules, but I might get rid of it altogether. Warriors already get bonuses with melee weapons and wizards already get disadvantages with weapons (partially mitigated by the missile rules), so having additional requirements seems unnecessary.


• Some fiddly mechanics: The way that kindreds work (basically races) seems to involve a multiplier of stats, in some cases by numbers like 0.66 or 0.33. It's just kinda messy and I'm ignoring it. Encumbrance sucks too, but I hate encumbrance in any system so that's a personal preference. There are some weird bonus types like specialist and commoner that I don't see the point of. Old-school D&D is full of these kinds of mechanics as well, and I've gotten decent at figuring out quickly which ones are interesting to me and which aren't, and how to get around them.

30 Day Challenge: Day 28 Community Building

I recently started reading Numenera Destiny, and so far I'm impressed. It's probably not surprising that I like the Numenera setting, I've said many times before how much I like Cypher System, and I know MCG has taken a lot of heat (deserved or not) for Invisible Suns, but I think Destiny is one of the most interesting tabletop books I've read in a long time outside of OSR.

The purpose of the book is to add lore, advice, and mechanics for community building. It's one of those ideas that seems so simple and obvious that I was surprised I hadn't seen much like it and that it's not more of a thing in tabletop. I don't have much experience with Dwarf Fortress, but I think something like a cross between Numenera Destiny and Dwarf Fortress would crush it in the OSR scene.

Anyway, I haven't actually played it, but even having just read it, I can tell there are certain mechanics that I'm not 100% on board with- it seems like something that would need some revising down the line, but on the whole it's a decent framework. The main features are that it adds a resource that gets used exclusively for building "magical" structures, adds some mechanics for dealing with communities and community actions, and adds special abilities that relate to the new resource, community mechanics, crafting, etc.

I've already played a fair bit of Numenera, so as intrigued as I am, I probably won't get around to this for some time, but I'm considering adding a stripped-down version of this into my upcoming Aquarian Dawn game (more on that in a separate post soon). So for my five minute challenge today, I'm going to spitball some ideas for community building campaigns.

• A short campaign where the players know they are on the verge of a major invasion. Over the course of some finite amount of time, they must build defenses, organize the community (seven samurai style), and scout the environment. Additionally, they have reason to believe there's a traitor among them...
• The party overthrew an evil lord, but now someone must manage the fiefdom. The lord was cruel and short-sighted, but the land is rich and tactically well-suited. The cruel lord was a cog in a larger, corrupt kingdom, with all the same problems at a larger scale. Under competent leadership, this fiefdom could take control of the whole kingdom...
• An eccentric architect has undecipherable schematics for a new world wonder. The architect has undeniably proven their skills, but this wonder requires certain resources money can't buy. The whole project is a long-shot, but he claims it will change the world. He can't afford to pay, he's fully invested in the wonder, but if he succeeds, those who helped him will go down in history...

High Level Games: 3 Ways to Modify Any Game

Image Source

I'm breaking my "posting only every other week" rule to share that high level games has posted my next article! In the article, I discuss, in very broad strokes, a handful of system-neutral ways to modify games. I think if you're reading this blog there's a good chance you're already familiar with my suggestions, but even so, my discussion of dice probabilities and how modifiers affect different dice or how dice can affect character progression may be interesting if you have not given that much consideration.

You can read the article here!

LotFP: Decyphered (WIP)

This is an attempt to hack the OSR game Lamentations of the Flame Princess to utilize certain core mechanics from the Cypher System. Note that I have no LotFP/OSR experience (although I'm supposed to play my first LotFP game tonight!), but I love the Cypher system, and have been very interested in OSR for a while now and have read many OSR books and blogs and listened/watched many podcasts and actual plays. That being said, this is very much a WIP, given not only my lack of experience, and by extension that this has not been playtested, and also I whipped up this first version rather quickly. That being said, for as rough as it may be, I thought it might be more efficient to just put what I have out there and let people much better and more experienced than me at game design let me know what they think! As for why I'm doing this, I discuss in this post on r/rpgdesign why I love the Cypher System and how I think these mechanics can benefit other systems. Depending on how successful this is, how much effort it takes (pun intended), and how much I can playtest this or others are willing to playtest or contribute to this, I would like to do something similar for other systems such as FATE and some PbtA games. Without further ado:

Character Creation and Progression

Rather than the traditional D&D stats, there is Might, Speed, and Intellect. Roll 2d3 three times and either assign the sum of each paired roll to the three stat pools down the line, or assign by preference (GM discretion). An easy way to roll d3 is to roll a d6, where a 1 or 2 = 1, 3 or 4 = 2, and 5 or 6 = 3. For races/classes with starting HP > 4, assign 1 additional Pool point to either Might or Speed for every 2 starting HP > 4.

At character level 1, start with an Effort Level of 1, and increase Effort Level by 1 at every third level (4, 7, 10, etc.). Possibly cap Effort at character level 10 (max Effort = 4).

At character level 1, start with 1 point of Edge which can be applied to any stat, and add a new Edge point to any stat at every third level (4, 7, 10, etc.). Possibly cap Edge at character level 10 (max Edge across all stats = 4).

Do not roll for HP. Instead, at each level, roll 1d4+2 and add that many points split across the three stat pools in any way. Races/classes with HD > 1d6 receive 1 additional Pool point to either Might or Speed for each unit increase in HD die (e.g. +1 for 1d8, +2 1d10, etc.).


DESIGN NOTES: The choice of 2d3 for stat Pools was meant to provide starting characters with roughly comparable total Pool points to starting LotFP character HP, and roughly comparable variance in starting attributes by way of modifiers after random rolling. This was entirely determined by eyeballing/intuition and not something mathematically derived nor that I'm committed to. The 1d4+2 Pool progression rate was also meant to be comparable to HP progression. The bonus points for characters with higher HD in Might and Strength is meant to serve a similar balance purpose, but I'm definitely worried about balance with this. The rate of progression and proposed caps on Edge and Effort was meant to keep the characters from getting too powerful (and making balancing easier ;) ); this is still meant to be OSR-esque and players shouldn't be able to 100% buy their way to victory.

Combat

Attacking

Melee: Before rolling to hit, spend any number of Might Pool points up to Effort level and add Might Edge, split up any way either to Attack Bonus (AB) or as a modifier to the Damage roll. At GM discretion, certain melee weapons could use Speed Pool and Edge instead of Might, such as a rapier.

Ranged: Before rolling to hit, spend any number of Speed Pool points up to Effort level and add Speed Edge, split up in any way either to Attack Bonus (AB) or as a modifier to the Damage roll. At GM discretion, certain ranged weapons could use Might Pool and Edge instead Speed, such as a Gatling gun.

Defending

Before rolling to defend, spend any number of Speed Pool points up to Effort level and add Speed Edge to AC. On a failed defense, subtract Damage from Might Pool. If Might Pool is depleted, subtract remaining/subsequent Damage to Speed Pool, followed by Intellect Pool.

Initiative

Either roll for players vs. enemies, or for individual character initiative, prior to rolling for initiative, spend any number of Speed Pool points up to Effort level and add Speed Edge to initiative roll.

Spellcasting

For Damage-dealing spells, before rolling Damage, spend any number of Intellect Pool points up to Effort level and add Intellect Edge as a modifier to the Damage roll. Do likewise before rolling for success if the spell has a misfire or negative outcome possibility for a low roll, or before any other spell roll with a graded response (see below for magic saving throws).

Before rolling a saving throw for Magic or Magical Device, spend any number of Intellect Pool points up to Effort level and subtract Intellect Edge to decrease the saving throw.

In addition to prepared spells, spellcasters can cast a number of additional spells per day up to Effort level. The spell costs as many Intellect Pool points as the spell level minus Intellect Edge (minimum 0).

DESIGN NOTES: My understanding is that most spells in LotFP are not damage-dealing, but I wanted to hedge my bets. I wanted to avoid touching saving throws altogether, but it seemed unavoidable here, so then i figured I may as well do the rest of them.

Saving Throws

For Magic and Magical Device, see Spellcasting. For the other saving throws, at GM discretion, spend any number of relevant stat Pool points up to Effort level and subtract relevant stat Edge to decrease the saving throw.

Stat Pool Depletion

If a stat Pool reaches 0, Edge cannot be applied to actions which use that stat. Additionally, natural 20’s do not count as critical successes (although natural 1’s may still count as critical failures), and Pool points for actions using the other stats can only be applied up to half Effort level rounding down. If two stat pools reach 0, in addition to the above, Edge for actions using the remaining stat cannot be used, and Effort level is treated as 0. If all stat Pools reach 0, the character is either rendered unconscious, or dead (GM discretion).

ADDITIONAL DESIGN NOTES

1. Ideally I would like to apply this mechanic to skills as well, but can't think of a straightforward way to do so that doesn't require completely reworking skills. If it could be done in a way that used a relatively straightforward conversion rule, that would be ideal. In any case, especially for the Specialist this seems important to figure out. 
2. I have not considered what to do about retainers yet, but would probably fold charisma-esque stuff into intellect. 
3. I have not considered what to do about encumbrance yet, but would probably fold strength-esque stuff into might. 
4. There are plenty of other more specific rules for LotFP I have not thought about yet. 
5. I know that LotFP differentiates between various kinds of AC, but I don't know if this still makes sense given the level of abstraction of this three-stat system. That being said, I'd like to figure something out.