[Poll] Which system do you want?

[Destination]

First off, the system currently floating around. Mine is in place currently, Bunting Martel has been working on his, and Saber in her free time compressed my system.

• Tusjecht's, the current one.
  
• Bunting Martel's, a tabletop edition that relies on luck and comparison, focusing on combat situations
  
• Saber's, a simplification of the current system, not including damage and KG gain system.

Take your time to read through all three and the explanations put forward before making your choice. Make an informed decision, and vote for the system which you think is the simplest, most straightforward, yet easy to understand and grasp.

The poll is a Global Announcement for 72 hours from the time of this post. Afterwards, I will look at the results and work on the stat system that you have chosen.

I'm sorry for making this such a messy issue, but as Saber has said, if it's too complicated and turns off people from joining, then I will change it to something simpler.

As one of the parties involved here, I will abstain from the vote entirely. I can't tell if Bunting and Saber are voting, nor can I prevent you from voting, so be gracious and abstain from voting your own system as well.

EDIT: Final votes:

-Tusjecht: 8 votes
-Saber: 1 vote
-Bunting Martel: 5 votes

Clearly cut. Thank you for your feedback.

[Belzera]

I can understand what you are saying Saber however the admin team here view your altered profile sheet as a simplified version of their system (You have removed a couple of stats on the basis that you find them to be redundant) which would amount to a new version of the old system and they have taken that on as a system suggestion (which is right because any alteration to a system changes it, whether it is removing redundancy or not).

As for the thread that contains Buntings system, its a suggestion thread, it should really contain everything about that system in one place, if it got implemented yes the thread would be best off broken into multiple threads for separate sections for ease reading.

As for his system being tabletop, I'm assuming you mean a pen and paper RPG rather than something like Warhammer because it certainly ain't a Warhammer level complexity. I'm also guessing as to the issue with the concept of it being tabletop;

If the issue is that the battles can just be broken down into basic math, yeah I get that, it can remove an element of roleplaying from it as all you have to do is build something that is overpowered and go from there designing a monster, however this is an issue easily solved by making the system allow for bonuses for good or descriptive roleplaying sort of like you could easily just go "Silver Crow throws a punch towards his foe aiming for the face" or you could go "Silver Crow facing down his opponent curls back his fist and clenches his fingers tightly into a ball, pouring his frustration into his ball of a fist, staring angrily into the face of his foe before he lets out a load scream and throws forward his punch aiming with all of his might to smash the smug Avatar in the face for his actions" One option is a better roleplaying description in my mind and if you allow for quality as well as description to affect stats you get something less mechanical.

If the issue lies in stuff like the mechanics section, well that is them trying to give some system sense to the settings reliance upon the logic of the real world as in Accel World the Accelerated world uses logic quite heavily and in order to try and give some form of that in a battle they've listed and created a list of modifiers. Its just something that is done to try and mimic the feeling of the original setting.

As for the comment on doing a site restart with a system change.... That isn't a bad idea especially if something like Buntings system is chosen as it sets everyone on an equal level and allows newer people to get involved in the early stages of the story.

Anyway long rant/comment over.

[Katie]

I think I'll pour in my own two cents here. If the main irk is that the introduction of Bunting's system kills roleplaying, how is that so? Tabletop games are the forefathers of roleplaying for a reason. The idea of a system is to lend mechanical consistency and certainty behind a player's actions so disputes arise less. Otherwise, it becomes the standard "no I'm right and you're wrong" kind of thing people do in elementary school.

I do think that Belzera is right about the math not nearly being that complex; I've seen worse and more rigid in RPs before. I think Bunting's system offers the combination of flexibility and mechanical backing so some judgements can become much more easier than others. While it doesn't necessarily eliminate the idea of referee intervention, it can certainly make these kinds of things much easier on the GM.

In addition, as AW is such a combat oriented setting, I feel a rigid system is better. Something that can easily handle bouts of combat without getting too clunky and number crunchy, which I think Bunting's system provides. It's very FATE influenced, and FATE is the kind of system that naturally rewards narrative success. I'm fairly certain intelligent moves will be more rewarded than non-intelligent ones via modifiers or even just the creative use of your own skill set.

Not only that, it feels like combat will be streamlined, a godsend if I have ever seen one. I've been in RPs where absolutely everything stalls due to a fight that takes forever to resolve. In interperative, this problem is only more exacerbated, especially with players harassing their GM all the time, something I have been on both sides of. I like a sense of certainty in my fights, rather than wondering how my opponent will downplay the "damage" they just took.

Last but not least, a more solid system does not prevent you from role playing? Ever hear about that DND campaign where an orc suplex a dragon in the air by pinning its wings? Ever hear about how a necromancer spread his arts across the land so humanity could prosper with free labor? Or how a rogue pretended to be a paladin and successfully defended his area with an absurd amount of traps? The numbers aren't limiting these people from pushing their limits to uncover new horizons. They take the solid framework they have and play with it; when constrained, the imagination can do amazing things.

tl;dr Bunting's system is sturdy and flexible enough for fights and I doubt it kills roleplaying by being tabletop-like, since those are practically the origin of RPing as we know it today.

[Guest]

Hmm... I think this is actually a very hard decision. These two systems (Bunting's and Tusjecht's) both have good qualities and bad qualities

Tusjecht's system has a simplistic point and ranking and grid system that makes damage easy to figure out and doesn't require any real calculations to be used. The problem with this system however is that various builds have more power to them then others and with a little time and study these builds can be easily created. I have also noted what I call a major flaw in the formulas because I don't like having two types of offense stats with two types of defense stats and then just adding them together to get an overall stat which is used in the formula. What's the point of having two stats if you're just going to fuse them at the end of the calculation. It just makes having two stats pointless in the first place but that's just my preferences of keeping two types of attacks with two types of defense and neither stat affecting the other.


Bunting Martel's Stat system on the other hand is a lot more complicated. It fixes Tusjecht's major flaw by separating the different types of attacks and keeping them separated only matching them to one type of overall defense. However the different modifiers add things depending on situations force players to calculate what they do and may even require a GM to do the calculation for them because it's not so straight forward and that makes RPing a chore for both the player and the GM and I've been getting a dislike towards GMs recently, most likely due to a personality clash.

So now I'm caught between two paths and I know that once I go down one path. I won't be able to go back. I've been able to play in one system and seen that it has a major flaw that I think needs changing but unable to play in the other to test that one out. So I am unsure and can not make a decision at this time.

I'll leave it up to you guys and if anyone cares I actually have a system of my own developed for the most part.

[Destination]

I can't really speak for Bunting here, but I'd like everyone to keep in mind an important point, that is when I said I would work on the stat system chosen, it also means I would simplify it and make it easy to be understood. I know full well it's quite redundant to do that after people vote, but with the great differences between mine and Bunting's, I believe people should still be choosing whichever system seems to have better flow.

A point to note Gadget, is that even if Bunting's calculations seems complex, it is always possible to have players include an OOC section showing their workings; I have done so for Turquoise Protector's stats, I intend to do the same for Cul Howitzer.

[Eminence Puppeteer]

Both systems have potential but both have flaws and complexities. Do we really have to pick one? Could we not take the good bits from both and smush them together? If one system does something well and the other does the other thing well then- theres your system.

Anyway on to my main point~

 The problem with these systems and all of the previous systems is they are (or have been) first iterations of that system on this forum.

When a game is being made the basic mechanics will be in some playable state within the first 20% of the development cycle, meaning the the remaining 80% of the time devs will be TESTING, REVIEWING and IMPROVING the mechanics.

Nothing is ever good on the first try. That is how design works.

So what I'm saying is when we pick a new system, whichever it my be, when a problem occurs (which it will) it gets fixed and improved rather then throwing out the whole thing and starting again. This means that the person who created the system will have to listen to criticism and weigh it objectively. It sucks when someone says your thing is bad, but if they say it is and give a good reason then it needs consideration.

Hopefully after all that we will have a decent system, that works in the AW setting on a forum. It may take some time and patience but this is how its done (usually, because design is subjective and their is no 'right' way to do it, just this way seems to work best).

 Also as far as 'attracting new members' is concerned, I feel the layout of the forum could be improved.

-Firstly a specific place for ALL of the system's guides and rules.

- A 'Getting started' sort of place. This will contain what the site is about/ what is happening on the site, site rules, 'introduce yourself', a clear character creation and a clear fighting tutorial and RP rules/ etiquette/ whatever.

Think thats me done for now. /flops

[Destination]

All points Emi raised noted.

For my own reference, just to save the time rereading:

• Nothing is ever good on the first try.
  
• This means that the person who created the system will have to listen to criticism and weigh it objectively.
  
• layout of the forum could be improved.
  
  
  • specific place for ALL of the system's guides and rules.
    
  • A 'Getting started' sort of place. This will contain what the site is about/ what is happening on the site
  
  
• They take the solid framework they have and play with it; when constrained, the imagination can do amazing things.

[Sado Ikaru]

I'd vote for Tusjecht's on the condition that ATK and DEF get separated and all weapons affect SKL, rather than DIR. My reasons are thus:

1. I don't completely understand Martel's system, and Tusjecht's is simple and straightforward.
   
2. ATK and DEF aren't really necessary imo. If someone w/ 0SDF and 100AMR can tank a SKL attack and someone w/ 100SDF and 0AMR can tank a DIR attack, what's the point in combining the defenses in the first place?
   
3. Let's take my «Chrome Wakizashi» into consideration. It boosts DIR by +30, bringing my DIR up to 80. That means my punches and kicks are now B+-Rank (rather than B-Rank) simply by having the weapon in one hand. And since my SKL is only 30, my ATK is boosted from B+-Rank to A-Rank. This also means that my STR (which was originally 80) is now 110 (w/o my armor EA). That means that I can pull/lift more weight, all from just a 2-foot sword. If it were place in SKL instead, only my ATK would change, which is what swords are supposed to do in the first place. The only thing about having weapons affect SKL is that weapon users of any kind will need more SKL to do damage. Personally, I'm fine with this change. SKL is «Skill» and should reflect as such.

[Nakara]

Completely agree on point 3, have to agree on 2 as well though I would say combined AMR and SDF into DEF and drop those rather than dropping DEF(and just give metals multipliers for defense or a fixed bonus for each attack type as seen in bunting's system) and then drop ATK in favor of using SKL or DIR depending on the attack type. But then weapons have to either use SKL or boost DIR voiding point 3 >.<

[Kerubin]

True on your part Naka, but also remember, some EA's can have a DIR and SKL Ability at the same time, but your DA would more than likely use their Specialty almost 85% of the time.

Other then that, I do agree with Xaq's points, but in my opinion, I'm comfortable with ANY System, cause I can adapt fairly easily, and I haven't finished the Entire History with my Chaos Reaper DA and Character, sooooo......if Bunting's System get's picked then you know......add in some Scythe Usage and Specialty to my Rpc xD and I get my Attack Bonus  (jk jk lmao)

But in all honesty, I'd rather just pick Tus' System OR Saber's (even if she never meant it to be a new Stat System), because I'm accustomed to it xD

[Destination]

I take it that all of the above posters have voted, since the votes haven't changed after about Katie's post...

[Guest]

I have decided on Tusjecht's system and agree with what Charles is saying.

[Platinum Blader]

I also vote for Tus and agree to what Charles and Emminence said. We do need to do some changes of the layout of the forum. Hell, even I am getting lost at times when i'm searching for the systems, which ain't normal for an admin >>. But yeah, this ain't where we speak of this.

So, when does the poll close?

[Destination]

I can deal with the forum arrangement afterwards, but..

Man, are you all sure you want something like mine, created with zero prior RP experience? I would personally favour Bunting's, because it looks like something tried and tested.

Not to mention, I'm likely going to revamp and combine some stats and adjust the numbers and things. I will most likely end up borrowing lessons from Bunting's system...

[Platinum Blader]

Saber, no need to bring a point you already brought. Also, like I said, this ain't the place to speak of this. So let all the other posts be relating to the poll and the stat systems.

[Destination]

I wil be taking care of the forum arrangement this afternoon. I've been slapping sections on as well, so part of the responsibility lies with me.

Hold on to your hats guys.

[Destination]

Poll is now closed. The final vote is Tusjecht's System.

Christmas talk aside () I'll get to work then. I'll revamp and make changes to the stats, their definitions, and names.

[Sponsored content]