This is a pretty standard thinking trap.
It comes from people who are building a game by modifing anothor game.
Don't say "how do I fix attributes?" Say "what mechanics do what I want?"
Don't say "how do I fix attributes?" Say "what mechanics do what I want?"But if you are building a game, and you ask one question, then set it aside, then ask another, and wind up with the same answer, does it make it wrong?
Action, adventure, horror (esp. personal horror). The transformation of men into monsters, physically, who work to retain their humanity mentally, and dealing with those who've lost that fight. Magic is the power and lure of the system, magic changes you, esp. during times of crisis. But magic itself isn't evil, it's just a natural system, with consequences.
Hamfisting the definition. On my phone.
How does your game go about doing that?Well, in several different ways. One is the Deviation system, where you can get small physical and metaphysical mutations which build over time, in response to use or overuse of magic. (This includes 'panic button' mechanics, where the player, in a tough situation, when their character is not likely to survive, can draw in more power than they would normally be able to, but take on deviations as a form of backlash.) These deviations have a mix of positive and negative effects, with positive favoring the front half of a given deviation progression, and negative favoring the back half, with the difficulty that once you start down a path, your character is going to keep progressing down it whether you as the player want them to or not.
What is the horror mechanic? Why am I the player scared?Instilling fear is a very tough concept to mechanically write. Hopefully the challenge inherent in managing the character has a part of this, but a good portion also relies on a good storyteller-as-GM to set up the situation, drawing out the character's details and history to involve them in the overall scenario, using their flaws against them. I know you don't favor it, but this is one of those concepts I can appreciate from the nWoD, the idea that not only are there bigger and badder things out there than you, but that you might become one of those things without even realizing it.
how is your action/sdventure carried out?It is a modern setting, but my principle focus is on combat scenarios and mechanical systems, since I come from a wargame background. The secondary intent is to have mundane and social situations to interweave the combats, including some underworld politics and mystery situations, but I'm mainly setting up a framework there, to allow individual games to expand on them if they find that aspect more interesting within their games. Maybe future supplements, but I'm not intentionally leaving a gap to be filled later.
What does it do different from DnD?Well, a number of things, but I can say that all day and it doesn't mean anything to you. One of my main concepts is breaking down spellcasting to be just as numbers-interplay-based as weapons and attacks. For the most part, I don't have cast-and-done spells, I have spell components which are crafted together to create a 'spell'. I also don't differentiate between casters and non-casters intentionally. Mundane characters are certainly possible, and may even be more viable than mixing fighters and wizards in D&D, or jedi and non-jedi in SW-d20, but the majority of the material is geared towards everyone having some kind of magic, even if it takes different forms.
most important: what about the mechanics would make me choose this game over other aa games?Honestly? Not sure, in a purely mechanical sense, since I can't determine what others will like or dislike ahead of time, only react to what preferences they show once they've shown them. All I can really do from the outset is make a game I think I would enjoy playing, and hope enough people play like me to also find it enjoyable. Part of that, for my case, is the setting, and how well it's integrated into the mechanics. This started as houserules on top of the nWoD mortals rules, and then as an overlay for d20 modern, then back to the nWoD. Neither really worked, since I was fighting too much the existing problems and systems which clashed with what I wanted out of the game I wanted to play.
Modifying one thing to create another isn't any less valid than trying to build something from scratch. That's a mistake I see a LOT of young, trying-to-define-themselves artists make, they think that just because you used a pre-existing reference or concept, or borrowed a technique, or a particular detail concept, that it makes the resulting work any less worthy. We all build what we know from what we've seen before, it's just a matter of how finely we break down the elements before we re-assemble them.The game can be valid.
In your example, Gamma World has a purpose, to be an adventure game. The context is a post-apocalyptic mutant world, but just because the game it was modded off of was a fantasy adventure game, doesn't mean it's any less successful at its purpose than someone trying to make another post-apocalyptic adventure game. Nobody said it was trying to be a survival game, or a horror game. Some might try to play it off as that, but that's them.Gamma world *was* supposed to be post apocalyptic. And it was never popular or successful.
If a design, or a concept, WORKS for its purpose, then taking that concept and adding new material, or modifying it to fit a new context, doesn't make it work for that purpose less than something someone else constructed entirely from scratch, trying to work in a void. Nine times out of ten (in my experience), it actually works better than that scratch-built concept, because it's still had the end-goal of purpose in sight while it's been rebuilt.I am hard put to think of many "good" games that are derivative.
So, the third question, of Jared Sorensons set of questions to ask about RPG's, is "how does your game go about rewarding that". But, your second questions answer needs some feedback, in a new thread.I would be very appreciative of feedback on my concepts. I'm trying to finish the base, version alpha of my system, but it's a ways away from being done, and I feel like anyone looking at the incomplete document would be missing the total picture.
Getting back to attributes:(cut, no argument to make here)
Gamma world *was* supposed to be post apocalyptic. And it was never popular or successful.Popularity is a separate issue, but you're missing my point. I'm asserting that 'post-apocalyptic' is an adventure game in a post-apoc setting. It never stopped being an adventure game, when it was modified from a fantasy setting. That's what I mean by successful, success at achieving its genre and concept, not market success.
I am hard put to think of many "good" games that are derivative.I'm not saying that derived games are automatically good, and obviously I can't match your experiences. I'm just trying to point out a flaw in your methodology. Derived concepts in any medium are not automatically worse than purely original ones. Your experiences may state otherwise, but I'm making this statement not limited purely by the context of games, I'm saying that as a professional creator under any context or medium.
Spirit of the century, Dungeon world, (I have not played thou art but a warrior) that's a pretty extensive list.