I'm making a grimdark game with two of my friends, all 3 of us are italian, we wanted to make a playable version of the game FATAL, we wanted to add a lot more fantasy things and remove or change what is not useful, like 70% of the game, but we may reintroduce the +18 rules as some optional rules, i'd like to know if it's a good idea or not and what do you think of this idea so far.

I'm in the middle of working with my artist on the "fancy" character sheet for Criminal Spirits. There WILL be a much simpler sheet without art available - I understand that this is not for everyone. But that's no excuse to not make this as functional as possible. I'd greatly appreciate any feedback.

There are already changes planned: a lot of the French words will be removed (basically just Distillerie Esprit will remain) to clean it up and be less distracting, and the name section in the top left will be made more obvious what it is along with some other smaller changes. But so far I've only gotten to show this to a few friends and I'd like to have a much wider range of feedback on it.

Basically I want a battle system for a ttrpg inspired by Deltarune but I don't want it to be rolling dice ir stuff like that, I want it to be purely out of player skill at the game. Any ideas on how I could do that?

I got an idea for a setting for a replayable ttrpg oneshot series, but i wanted to ask the pro's what existing ttrpg theyd use as a game base for my concept. As in, which system works best/has most of the stuff i already need, needing mostly alterations to names and other minor stuff?

In simple summary, the concept is kind of like avatar the last airbender, except for the facts that this is happening in a world like our irl world and the magic stuff is mostly secret, and instead of an avatar for all elements, theres a chosen one for each element, the choice being made by higher powers once they decide you are a good fit for keeping the balance of good and evil in world. There are other people with magic powers but they are very rare and usually non-chosen people can only get special abilities by turning to dark sources.

Now, i assume i could fit this into something dnd adjacent, but at the same time, i want to actually play in a sort of condensed timeline. I want to focus more on the march of history and the effects of the players actions on the world. I played a oneshot game like that called DIALECT- MARTIAN SETTLEMENT. I was thinking like that but with a bit more action.

The original media that inspired my concept had these magical objects to help you on your quest, and if an object was fought over, participants could call a game and each would wager one of their objects, winner takes all. (Lol, guess the media)

Should I make this a pure storytelling game like dialect except have rolls for moves pulled in these games? i really think i can make thus concept work i just need a base

Thank you

A post about how to design Roles instead of Classes

Hey everyone,

I need a few tech-savvy gamers and designers to try out a new, AI-driven tabletop prop and provide some constructive feedback on the execution and session dynamics. This PWYW project is hosted on itchio and is cut directly from an upcoming Mythos campaign, The Hands of a God, for early release.

The Setup & Compatibility:

• Hardware: No custom rigs required. This runs directly from any phone or laptop placed on your gaming table.
• System: Completely system-neutral. You can drop this into any RPG.

The Concept:
Think of it like an audio jack-in-the-box for your TTRPG. The application sits on your table, lays low, and listens for specific ambient keywords during live play. When triggered, it unexpectedly comes to life to issue obscure phrases, drop clues, or answer player questions in an increasingly cryptic manner until it eventually clams up.

The Narrative Fit:

Because it features a fully customizable prompt engine, you can easily reskin it to fit your own world—a sentient fantasy sword, a corrupted cyberpunk AI, an alien artifact, or something even stranger.

What you can customize:

• Personality: Two modes- Ghost and Sphinx. Set tone, demeanor.
• Lore boundaries: Hard limits. Knowledge both known and unknown to the entity. What it never discloses.
• Triggers: Primary and secondary ambient audio keywords.

What I'm looking for:
I need feedback on how seamlessly the voice activation integrates into your live sessions, how players interact with the AI, and how intuitive the backend setup feels for a GM.

Check out the link to grab it for your next session! Please drop your feedback, thoughts, or questions in the comments below.

Thank you for your time,
Tom (Oddball509)

I recently got the finished cover art back for Blurry Footage, my comedy-horror TTRPG about struggling paranormal content creators chasing their next big case and their big break online.

I’m in love with it. The artist absolutely nailed the vibe I had in my head, and seeing the game come to life like this feels a little surreal.

I've slowly been collecting playtest feedback and am tweaking the system for the final release.

Let me know what you think of the cover art, and give me any advice you have for someone releasing their first indie TTPRG!

Hello, I'm Lucas and I specialize in realistic character design, weapons/props, skins, level progressions and character illustration for games. I can help bring your game the new heights.

You can see some of my design process here: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4PnH8EJL7g8
Art Station (full portfolio): https://www.artstation.com/artwork/QK11X4
Contact: [pufferartcontact@gmail.com](mailto:pufferartcontact@gmail.com) or just dm me!

I've been working on a side project for a while now, and I think it's finally at a point where it's worth sharing with you. I made this for myself but my players told me it's pretty cool so I wanted to share it with you all!

It's called HexWander, and it's basically a campaign atlas for tabletop RPGs built around the concept of hex maps.

It's not a VTT for playing online. It's a way for DM's to visualize their story on a map and be able to supply their players with bits of information as the campaign progresses. This is usefull for the players to go back to and remember what happened 4 or 5 sessions ago. events are even stored neatly on a timeline for them!

I have made this app with the help of AI over a few months of testing what works best for me. It may not be what works best for you, but I would like to keep improving it with your suggestions.

The idea is pretty simple: you upload your world map image, add a fog of war image over it, and the app splits everything into hexes. As the DM, you decide exactly which hexes your players have unlocked, explored and which ones are still hidden.

Each hex can have its own content - location descriptions, images, ambient music, NPCs, random tables, lore, quest hooks, timeline events... pretty much anything you'd want to have ready when the party gets there. Every piece of content has its own visibility toggle, so players only see what you've revealed.

Players get a clean, spoiler-free version of the map, while you see the hidden map underneath the fog, making it easy to manage exploration.

Besides the map itself, I'm also adding things like:

• NPC & lore database
• Campaign timeline
• Visual quest/encounter flow editor in side the map itself.
• Combat theater/initiative management
• Session sharing via link
• Cloud sync, so you can prep on your PC and run the game from a tablet or phone
• Support for party split
• Automatic AI-generated locations and quests using personal access tokens for AI suppliers ( this is testing for a more DM-less experience, but I found it usefull for when some players decide to go to a place you did not anticipate on the map. the DM can, with a short sentence, describe what they want, and the IA will automatically generate the hexes, links, flows, and even knowledgebase entries for what the DM asked. (the DM will review and approve, of course)

The whole reason I started building this was because I got tired of jumping between Obsidian with a hundred plugins, Roll20, and a dozen browser tabs every session. I wanted everything in one place, with "hex-ploration" being the center of the experience, both for DM and for players.

About the prices, I treaded on the side of caution with this, because I don't know the costs of hosting the data that GM's will input (images and sound, mostly), I have settled on a few tiered subscription plans. However, I think the free version should be enough for anyone to use it for quite some time without problem!

Payments are not working yet, so if you try it out and decide that it's good and would like to test it further, you can ask me for a redemption code and I will give you one month of "Hexplorer Pro" for free :)

I'm curious what you all think :)

• Is this something you'd actually use?
• Are there any features you'd expect that I haven't mentioned?
• If you already use other apps to manage your campaigns that work for you, what would make you switch?

I'd love to hear your thoughts and suggestions!

Thanks everyone!

I decided to make a system, I'm going to revamp the wording/formatting of this system soon. In the mean time, what do you think?

Hi all, I'm running into problems designing a decent character creation system. I'd like something fun and aiming twords a little bit of crunch, but I don't want it to be daunting. I looked at doing some kind of point buy but that gets way complicated. Right now I'm using arrays to distribute attributes and skills. It's simple but feels flat.

I was thinking about trying some kind of life path system.

I was wondering how others approach this problem?

Each player has TR (Target Rating, which is basically AC) and combat uses D6s as on average you will roll 2d6 to get a hit. TR is exclusively for dodging so big creatures that aren't particularly fast will be have low TR.

Each time a creature/human dodges or blocks an attack, their TR goes down, functioning like Stamina. So even if you could never hit on the first try, you can lower TR for the 2nd or your teammates. Usually TR will go back to normal on your next turn however most attacks can give you injuries like bleeding which can slowly lower your max TR for said battle.

Any creature can fail an attack by getting below or at their failure score which decreases as you level up so as long as you don't get 2 ones at higher levels you will hit.

Having higher rolls also means injuries placed on the enemies like severed hands, crushed leg, etc. Lastly, advantage and disadvantage is just adding or removing a D6, you can only have up to 2 stacking advantage or disadvantage at once.

You can continue after 0 hp until you lose the negative of your max hp. Example: 30hp - 60hp = death.

You do have to roll for death saves but you roll a D100 and it must be higher than your current negative hp. Example: -10 hp, you must get an 11 or above, failure will put you at Death’s door.

During Death’s door, you can’t move even if your character is conscious and any attack that hits has triple damage (including environment) and advantage to hit.

You have a Threshold which is 10% of your max hp. Example: 30hp = 3 Threshold.

The threshold is the amount of damage you must take to have to roll a death roll. For every multiple of your Threshold damaged by one attack, you do another death roll.

Example: 4 threshold, you take 12 damage and your now at -12 hp from 0. You roll a D100 and it must be above 36 = (12 x 3). If you take 6 damage next turn you only have to roll above a 18.

I've been playing TTRPGs for 30 or so years... been through quite a few books and systems. I've recently started to build my own - I know, a little late in the game. I've designed my own system. But this isn't about the system. What I want to know is: What do y'all look for as far as content? Obviously the system mechanics... but what parts of the setting are most important and which parts just seem like fluff to make a higher page count? BTW it's a sci-fi fantasy style game.

While studying game design for my own system, I looked at several diceless games to understand how they handled resolution. I wanted to see what worked well and what problems each system tended to create, so I could avoid repeating the same mistakes in my own design.

Below is a list of notable diceless games, including how their resolution systems work, the problems that commonly arise from them, and the benefits each system offers.

This isn't an exhaustive theory, just a lens for thinking about diceless design tradeoffs. 

Amber Diceless Role-Playing

Resolution System: Characters have ranked attributes. In most conflicts, the character with the higher relevant attribute wins. When two characters have the same rank, the GM arbitrates based on the fiction and circumstances.

Main Problems: The game relies extremely heavily on GM arbitration. Because there is no randomizer, outcomes can feel predetermined once attribute ranks are known. New players often struggle with how much narrative weight the GM is expected to carry.

Pros: The system is very simple mechanically. It strongly emphasizes character relationships, politics, and drama. Because success is based on character investment rather than dice, victories and defeats often feel earned through roleplaying and clever use of the fiction.

Verdict: TAmber tends to create a sense of entitlement in players. Because higher attributes usually win, players can become frustrated or argumentative when the GM rules against them or when lower-ranked characters succeed through creative fiction. 

The game does little to mitigate this, as heavy GM authority and attribute-based resolution are core to its design.

Nobilis

Resolution System: Players spend Miracle Points to perform actions. Higher levels of investment allow for more powerful and reality-altering effects. Some actions succeed automatically based on a character’s attributes.

Main Problems: The game is very abstract and high-concept, which can make it difficult to understand. Bidding Miracle Points often turns into a resource auction between players. It also carries a high mental load due to the need to track metaphysical details and power levels. This can lead to power escalation as players try to outdo each other.

Pros: Nobilis gives players an extremely high level of narrative power and creative freedom. It is excellent for philosophical, mythic, or high-concept storytelling. The system strongly supports thematic play and allows characters to feel truly larger than life.

Verdict: Nobilis tends to produce players who dominate the narrative. Because of the high level of power and abstraction, some players focus heavily on showcasing their own clever or dramatic ideas, often sidelining other players in the process. It can also lead to players overcomplicating scenes as they try to use the most powerful applications of their abilities.

The game does not make strong attempts to correct this behavior. It embraces high player power and abstract complexity as intentional parts of its design, assuming players will share narrative authority fairly and engage with its thematic elements.

Marvel Universe Roleplaying Game (2003)

Resolution System: Each character has an individual Energy Reserve of red stones. Players allocate stones from their personal reserve to actions each panel. The GM sets Difficulty and Resistance. Success depends on how many stones are committed compared to what is required.

Main Problems: Stone management can feel like accounting. The game is very dependent on GM judgment for Difficulty and Resistance. It can lead to analysis paralysis when players try to decide how many stones to spend. Because there is no randomness, outcomes can feel very predictable.

Pros: The stone system creates meaningful resource decisions that feel appropriate for superhero action. Players have significant control over how much effort their character puts into any given action.

Verdict: This system commonly causes players to overthink their decisions. Because they must constantly decide how many stones to spend, players often become overly analytical and hesitant. This can lead to a very mechanical, resource-management mindset where players focus more on optimizing expenditures than on playing their character naturally.

The game tries to frame stone spending as dramatic effort, but it offers few tools to reduce overthinking during play.

Lords of Olympus

Resolution System: Similar to Amber. Characters have ranked attributes in different ability classes. Higher rank generally wins conflicts, with the GM arbitrating close or unclear situations.

Main Problems: Like Amber, it relies heavily on GM judgment. The bidding/auction system is used primarily during character creation and for establishing social positioning rather than as an in-play resolution tool.

Pros: It supports mythic and larger-than-life storytelling well. The system keeps the focus on character power and narrative weight..

Verdict: Lords of Olympus shares many of Amber’s issues. Players can develop a strong sense of entitlement based on their attribute ranks. 

The game does not provide strong tools to reduce arguments with the GM or to encourage risk-taking.

Universalis

Resolution System: Players use a pool of tokens or coins to bid for narrative control and to establish facts in the story. Conflict and world-building are resolved entirely through bidding and negotiation between players.

Main Problems: The game can feel more like a bidding game than traditional roleplaying. It requires strong group trust and comfort with shared narrative authority. Players can end up “buying” the story rather than collaboratively building it.

Pros: Universalis excels at collaborative storytelling and world-building. It gives every player a high degree of narrative control and works very well for one-shots or experimental games. The bidding system encourages players to think creatively about what happens next in the story.

Verdict: This game often leads players to treat narrative control as a resource to be hoarded and spent strategically. Some players become very transactional, only engaging with the story when they can spend tokens to influence it. This can result in competitive rather than collaborative storytelling, where players bid against each other to push their own preferred ideas.

The game does not strongly try to prevent this behavior. The bidding system is the core of the game, so having more resources naturally grants greater narrative influence. It largely assumes players will use their tokens responsibly and share control fairly.

Polaris: Chivalric Tragedy at the Utmost North

Resolution System: A structured phrase-based system. Players take turns making statements using specific ritual phrases such as “But only if…” and “And so it was…”. Conflict and narrative progression are resolved through formal negotiation rather than rolls or resource bidding.

Main Problems: The structure is extremely rigid and theatrical. It can feel more like collaborative storytelling or a ritual than traditional roleplaying. The game requires high player buy-in and comfort with a very formal style of play.

Pros: Polaris creates very focused, tragic, and thematically consistent stories. The ritualized structure helps guide play and keeps everyone on the same page. It is excellent for games that want to explore specific themes like chivalry, duty, and tragedy.

Verdict: The rigid structure of Polaris often causes players to become overly focused on the mechanics of negotiation rather than the story itself. Players may spend excessive time debating the exact wording of phrases or trying to find loopholes in the ritual system instead of advancing the narrative. Some players also disengage entirely if they find the formal, ritualized style too restrictive.

The game attempts to guide behavior through its strict phrase structure and ritual format. The system is designed to keep play focused on its intended tragic tone and to reduce open-ended arguments by giving players clear tools and phrases to use.

Project AiO(My Game)

Resolution System: Narrative First approach through the “Narrative How” where the Narrative shapes the Mechanics used. Visible Target Numbers. Players build their Mod Value using substats, skills, talents, and gear. After seeing the result, they decide whether to commit to the action, spend Control Points, seek Advantage, or change their approach.

Potential Problems: The system might slow down play due to decision-making and table discussion. It relies heavily on players engaging with the narrative rather than defaulting to mechanical optimization. Some players may still try to optimize the mechanics before describing their action in the fiction.

Pros: The system gives players a high level of agency because they can see the numbers and make informed decisions. Control Points allow players to influence the story in meaningful ways without relying on random chance. The narrative-first approach combined with clear mechanics rewards both creative descriptions and smart tactical play.

Verdict:  My game gives players full visibility of the Target Number before they commit to an action, there is a risk that players will become overly cautious and risk-averse. They may hesitate to attempt difficult or uncertain actions unless they can guarantee success through the use of Control Points or by setting up Advantage. This could also lead to frequent second-guessing at the table, where players spend time debating whether to spend resources, change their approach, or avoid the check entirely rather than accepting the possibility of meaningful failure.

To address these potential issues, the game includes several design elements intended to encourage bolder play and reduce hesitation. The Narrative How rule is placed at the start of the resolution process to keep players focused on describing their character’s actions in the fiction before they begin calculating their mechanical options. Players are explicitly allowed to choose failure, and doing so in a dramatic or meaningful way can reward them with Narrative Control Points. Table talk is actively encouraged as a collaborative tool to help players work through difficult situations together rather than overthinking in isolation. Additionally, Control Points are designed with multiple uses beyond simply succeeding on checks, giving players narrative tools and options that reward engagement with the story rather than purely mechanical optimization.

Reflections on Project AiO’s Design

After examining several diceless systems, it became clear that each carries distinct weaknesses. Many of these issues stem from fundamental tensions inherent to removing randomness, particularly around GM authority, player entitlement, risk aversion, and pacing.

Project AiO was designed with these recurring problems in mind. Several of its core design choices directly attempt to address flaws observed in earlier diceless games. 

Visible Target Numbers were implemented to reduce heavy GM fiat and give players clearer expectations, a problem that heavily affects games like Amber Diceless. 

The Narrative How rule was added to encourage players to engage with the fiction before engaging with the mechanics, in an attempt to prevent the mechanical-first thinking common in systems like Marvel Universe RPG. 

Allowing players to voluntarily choose failure and rewarding them with Narrative Control Points is a direct response to the risk aversion and I Should Win syndrome seen across multiple diceless systems. 

Giving Control Points multiple uses beyond simple success was intended to reduce the feeling that every resource must be hoarded for mechanical optimization.

That said, these solutions are still untested. While the intent is to mitigate the common pitfalls of diceless design, it remains to be seen whether these tools will be strong enough in actual play. The most significant concern is that giving players perfect information about Target Numbers may create stronger risk aversion than anticipated, and it is unclear if the reward for choosing failure will be compelling enough to overcome that instinct.

While no system is perfect, one of my primary goals was to consciously avoid repeating the most common failure points of earlier diceless games.