Voting is open for the next 6 hours, 23 minutes
Could we just steal the invention system then? Or am I misunderstanding something fairly fundamental about MM?

It seems to me the largest problems are jutsu/seal development; having a good way to generate that would fix a lot of problems.
I would certainly be down for developing a standardized measure by which techniques and seals are developed, but the invention system in M&M is linked to the power level system.
e:
Yeah, would be (Senses: chakra awareness, radius. Removable.) @ 2PP. Not too bad. Well within even Hazou's spare PP per PL.
Yeah, I still don't really like the idea of Seals and stuff as Devices. I mean, they are by their nature consumable. That screams "invention" to me, and they aren't subject to PP limit anyway, as far as I'm aware.

In addition, part of our previous system was that developing new stuff like that explicitly didn't cost XP to do. It's part of what makes sealmasters so potent as a ninja-archetype.
 
Last edited:
The invention system is basically "build a power using the M&M effects, and then pass a check with a DC determined by how much those effects cost". So unless some other system has as versatile a power-building system, you couldn't really translate it that well.
To bring up GURPS again, again:

Chakra Sensing Seals: Detect (Common, Chakra; Breakable, DR 2 or less, non-repairable, SM -7, -40%; Can Be Stolen, Quick Contest, -30%; Cosmic, No die roll required, +100%; Reliable 2, +10%; Short-Range 1, -10%; Untrainable, -40%; Vague, -50%) [8]. Using your seals, you automatically detect when chakra is used within 7 yards, but you can only determine direction and quantity on a critical success of a plain roll (three 3s on 3d6).

Under this approach, you pay character points for seals, but you can replace them for free during downtime if they're stolen or destroyed.

(Note that Cosmic + Reliable 2 + Untrainable is a pretty weird way to turn "Perception-based roll" into "you always succeed with a rating of 10", so I welcome alternate suggestions to force Detect into an independent static effect instead of a character-stat-based roll.)
 
Last edited:
See, my problem with these things is paying anything other than the points for Sealing as a whole. To have to do so really isn't cool to me.

e: Specifically because learning sealing as a whole is very difficult and a massive investment of its own: For it to be necessary to also invest into every seal you use and for every person who uses said seals to have to do the same...

e2: That said, I am slowly warming up to the idea of GURPS, I just loathe the idea of critfails and critsuccesses as a whole :p
 
Last edited:
See, my problem with these things is paying anything other than the points for Sealing as a whole. To have to do so really isn't cool to me.

e: Specifically because learning sealing as a whole is very difficult and a massive investment of its own: For it to be necessary to also invest into every seal you use and for every person who uses said seals to have to do the same...
Note that if you use the method where you pay for every seal (whether GURPS or M&M or most other point-buy games), you do not pay for separate costs to create them. At most you might separately invest in a skill for sealmaster lore, but the effort to create seals is essentially thematic fluff.

With GURPS there's also an alternate method:

- Stat up each seal using the method from my last post.
- Convert the seal point values into cash costs using the ratio from Signature Gear (1 point = 50% of campaign starting wealth).
- Buy Sealcrafter: Quick Gadgeteer (Accessibility, seals only, -30%; -Chakra, -5%) [33].
- Buy ranks in Thaumatology (possibly renamed to "Sealmastery"), as well as Artist (Calligraphy).
- You can now create seals using the rules for Quick Gadgeteering, requiring skill rolls and time rather than separate points investments. You can also create seals with Quick Gadgeteering using the stats for printed equipment, as long as they would reasonably make sense as seals. However, none have the plot protection that come with buying the powers directly (which guarantees you can always replenish them during downtime even in worst-case scenarios).

e2: That said, I am slowly warming up to the idea of GURPS, I just loathe the idea of critfails and critsuccesses as a whole :p
Well, for GURPS, keep in mind that critical success/failure is more complicated than most game systems:

• A roll of 3 or 4 (about 1.9% of all results) is always a critical success.
• A roll of 5 (about 2.8% of all results) is a critical success if your effective skill is 15+.
• A roll of 6 (about 4.6% of all results) is a critical success if your effective skill is 16+.

• A roll of 18 (about 0.5% of all results) is always a critical failure.
• A roll of 17 (about 1.4% of all results) is always at least a normal failure, and is a critical failure if your effective skill is 15 or less.
• Any roll of 10 greater than your effective skill is a critical failure: 16 on a skill of 6, 15 on a skill of 5, and so on.

The effective rating stuff is important because it interacts with stuff like using Feint or Deceptive Attack, as well as with any general penalties applied to you (environmental effects, etc). For example, if you've got godlike combat skill or you're facing somebody who's a total chump, you can Deceptive Attack for a whole bunch to force an opponent's active defenses into immediate critical failure territory.
 
Last edited:
Note that if you use the method where you pay for every seal (whether GURPS or M&M or most other point-buy games), you do not pay for separate costs to create them. At most you might separately invest in a skill for sealmaster lore, but the effort to create seals is essentially thematic fluff.
This is definitely not appropriate for MfD, though: There's supposed to be a significant amount of risk in the process of creating and learning sealcraft.
With GURPS there's also an alternate method:

- Stat up each seal using the method from my last post.
- Convert the seal point values into cash costs using the ratio from Signature Gear (1 point = 50% of campaign starting wealth).
- Buy Sealcrafter: Quick Gadgeteer (Accessibility, seals only, -30%; -Chakra, -5%) [33].
- Buy ranks in Thaumatology (possibly renamed to "Sealmastery"), as well as Artist (Calligraphy).
- You can now create seals using the rules for Quick Gadgeteering, requiring skill rolls and time rather than separate points investments. You can also create seals with Quick Gadgeteering using the stats for printed equipment, as long as they would reasonably make sense as seals. However, none have the plot protection that come with buying the powers directly (which guarantees you can always replenish them during downtime even in worst-case scenarios).
This looks a little more reasonable. I'm not entirely sure about the whole process of converting to moneys, but... maybe? I dunno, I'm not super familiar with GURPS.
 
This is definitely not appropriate for MfD, though: There's supposed to be a significant amount of risk in the process of creating and learning sealcraft.

This looks a little more reasonable. I'm not entirely sure about the whole process of converting to moneys, but... maybe? I dunno, I'm not super familiar with GURPS.
The point of the money would be to interact with both existing equipment lists (which in GURPS are extremely voluminous - there are entire books worth of stuff), as well as the Invention/Gadgeteering rules, which list a full process for going from money and time in to $X worth of new gear out.

One aspect that would fit sealcrafting complications rather well is that Gadgeteers who make items of a higher TL (Tech Level) run into weird side effects if they screw things up. For example, getting a 3 on 3d6 on the Gadgeteer Bugs table results in "the gadget attracts the unwelcome attention of aliens, time travelers, Men in Black, Things Man Was Not Meant To Know, etc. (GM's choice.)"

(Tech Level is treated as equivalent even if it's achieved in nonstandard ways. A lot of Naruto-from-MfD would probably be TL4 or so off the top of my head, while a bunch of seals would be TL4+5 or higher and so de facto TL9+ for rules interactions, for better-than-modern functionality like storage seals, extremely compact air purifiers, etc.)
 
Last edited:
The point of the money would be to interact with both existing equipment lists (which in GURPS are extremely voluminous - there are entire books worth of stuff), as well as the Invention/Gadgeteering rules, which list a full process for going from money and time in to $X worth of new gear out.

One aspect that would fit sealcrafting complications rather well is that Gadgeteers who make items of a higher TL (Tech Level) run into weird side effects if they screw things up. For example, getting a 3 on 3d6 on the Gadgeteer Bugs table results in "the gadget attracts the unwelcome attention of aliens, time travelers, Men in Black, Things Man Was Not Meant To Know, etc. (GM's choice.)"

(Tech Level is treated as equivalent even if it's achieved in nonstandard ways. A lot of Naruto-from-MfD would probably be TL4 or so off the top of my head, while a bunch of seals would be TL4+5 or higher and so de facto TL9+ for rules interactions, for better-than-modern functionality like storage seals, extremely compact air purifiers, etc.)
I'm fairly certain the QMs can stick to their old sealing failure tables so long as the chance of failure remains same-ish.
e:
Well, for GURPS, keep in mind that critical success/failure is more complicated than most game systems:

• A roll of 3 or 4 (about 1.9% of all results) is always a critical success.
• A roll of 5 (about 2.8% of all results) is a critical success if your effective skill is 15+.
• A roll of 6 (about 4.6% of all results) is a critical success if your effective skill is 16+.

• A roll of 18 (about 0.5% of all results) is always a critical failure.
• A roll of 17 (about 1.4% of all results) is always at least a normal failure, and is a critical failure if your effective skill is 15 or less.
• Any roll of 10 greater than your effective skill is a critical failure: 16 on a skill of 6, 15 on a skill of 5, and so on.

The effective rating stuff is important because it interacts with stuff like using Feint or Deceptive Attack, as well as with any general penalties applied to you (environmental effects, etc). For example, if you've got godlike combat skill or you're facing somebody who's a total chump, you can Deceptive Attack for a whole bunch to force an opponent's active defenses into immediate critical failure territory.

Any % chance of "always fail no matter what" inbuilt to a system is infuriating to me from the perspective of:

PCs will make a great number more rolls than any NPC will.

This means that PCs will make a great deal of errors that simply won't occur with NPCs because that would require every NPC be simulated.

This makes for a less virisimultitudinous world, because, well, everyone I've played with, there's a background assumption of competency amongst NPCs. Mechanics generally don't break a car even once a year, Tony Hawk doesn't break his ankle for every 200 kickflips he does -- that kind of thing, but PCs do.
 
Last edited:
One thing to consider would be divorcing how you handle combat and how you handle social. I know a couple GMs who don't bother with rolling anything for social interactions, leaving that entirely to their narrative interpretation of the characters and their in character motivations. You might still have rolls for things like if a deception is detected or not when two characters have skill levels in that regard that are relatively close, or if there's mitigating circumstances that would make one party think that deception is likely, etc, but handling things like that the way you handle combat doesn't necessarily make sense.


Inb4 we just say "fuck it" and build all the characters using D&D.

Introducing Hazou the artificer, Kei the ranger, Noburi the cleric, and Akane the monk. :rofl:

I think the Humans and Hallways system would make more sense than D&D. The mechanics are more relevant to a ninja world. :p
 
One thing to consider would be divorcing how you handle combat and how you handle social. I know a couple GMs who don't bother with rolling anything for social interactions, leaving that entirely to their narrative interpretation of the characters and their in character motivations. You might still have rolls for things like if a deception is detected or not when two characters have skill levels in that regard that are relatively close, or if there's mitigating circumstances that would make one party think that deception is likely, etc, but handling things like that the way you handle combat doesn't necessarily make sense.

The other side of that issue is that XP (or whatever equivalent we transition to) is meant to represent all the time you spend training your skills, and socials are a thing you have to train intensively to get really good at. In the world of Marked for Death some ninjas spec socials and if you don't have socials cost XP then all the XP they get goes to combat skills and they're still amazing at socials as if all that time they spent training combat stats was also spent training socials.

There's probably still merit in not making socials work like combat, but we will need to quantify how good someone is at socials if only to make sure the time and effort they spent on it is subtracted from the time and effort they invested into setting things on fire.
 
One thing to consider would be divorcing how you handle combat and how you handle social. I know a couple GMs who don't bother with rolling anything for social interactions, leaving that entirely to their narrative interpretation of the characters and their in character motivations. You might still have rolls for things like if a deception is detected or not when two characters have skill levels in that regard that are relatively close, or if there's mitigating circumstances that would make one party think that deception is likely, etc, but handling things like that the way you handle combat doesn't necessarily make sense.
For the most part, this is my strategy.
The other side of that issue is that XP (or whatever equivalent we transition to) is meant to represent all the time you spend training your skills, and socials are a thing you have to train intensively to get really good at. In the world of Marked for Death some ninjas spec socials and if you don't have socials cost XP then all the XP they get goes to combat skills and they're still amazing at socials as if all that time they spent training combat stats was also spent training socials.

There's probably still merit in not making socials work like combat, but we will need to quantify how good someone is at socials if only to make sure the time and effort they spent on it is subtracted from the time and effort they invested into setting things on fire.
...although this is a good point. Overall I use social combat only when I'm not confident of the outcome.
 
There are scenes where Nobby and Keiko managed to resolve a fight diplomatically/through intimidation, respectively. I thought those were parts were really awesome and would like to see stuff like this going forward again which would require doing social rolls, no?
 
@Roadie Since you seem to be an expert on GURPS, if the QMs DID decide to go with it, would you be available for reference? For both us and them :p
 
Brief key to this post:
  • Name of seal
    • A link to each post where one of the above was first mentioned in the story
    • A link to each post where mechanics were mentioned, if they were
    • A link to each post where it was stated that you had finished researching one of the above.
If I've missed anything please let me know and I'll add it.
  • 08/14/17: Created post.
  • 08/17/17: Added shaped charges.
  • 08/18/17: Completed Usamatsu's Glorious Life-Saving Purifiers.
  • 10/07/17: Completed Night-light seal (shudder).
Added night-light seals, and god save us.
 
I think GURPS is a better system; Also 3d6 has less variance than d20s.
Honestly, I'd rather there be a scaling dice pool in accordance with skill than a set dice pool, but very few professional systems do that because of the difficulty in actually counting the dice: either that, or they only consider given numbers to be successes on a per-die basis, which comes with its own issues.

Shadowrun comes closest to my preference for dice mechanics, though it doesn't use numbers additively as I'd prefer; it just uses the success count method I mention above.

That said, there's no real issue I've found with changing d20 to 3d6 in systems overall.
 
@Roadie Since you seem to be an expert on GURPS, if the QMs DID decide to go with it, would you be available for reference? For both us and them :p
Yes, but irregularly.

Better general advice would probably come from the GURPS forums, any, which have had occasional discussions on converting all kinds of things, including things much harder to model than Naruto, like Exalted.

In general, though, most of the stuff beyond the specifics of power representations is self-explanatory once you look through the books. In particular, stats, skills, and techniques make up the vast majority of what would be in use most of the time, plus a smattering of extended rules from different books.

The main extended-rules stuff I'd recommend to look at would be:
- Deceptive Attack (Basic Set: Campaigns p. 359) and Extreme Scores in Regular Contests (Basic Set: Campaigns p. 349), to handle resolving things sanely when opponents have very high skill ratings.
- Flying Combat (Basic Set: Campaigns p. 398), for use with skywalker seals.
- Hit Locations (Basic Set: Campaigns p. 398), for attacking specific parts of the body or striking at weapons or held objects, and commensurate effects.
- Energy Reserves (GURPS Powers, p. 119), if the GMs like the idea of representing chakra stores as a separate mechanical element from normal physical fatigue.
- Abilities Enhancing Skills (GURPS Powers, p. 162), for general guidelines on using special abilities to enhance skill rolls.
- Defending with Powers (GURPS Powers, p. 167) and Resisting with Abilities (GURPS Powers, p. 169), for general guidelines and options on using relevant powers alongside normal defenses (like using movement or transformation powers in place of Dodge/Parry).
- Super-Effort (GURPS Powers, p. 58) and Strength and Super-Strength (GURPS Supers, p. 24), for ways to model dramatic strength that doesn't add to striking damage at the same rate.
- The sections in GURPS Powers and GURPS Supers that add more modifiers to Advantages and Disadvantages, to aid in representing powers.
- Styles (GURPS Martial Arts p. 141), for assorted real-world fighting styles and Skills, Techniques, and Perks that go well with them, as well as rules for recognizing the styles used by others.
- Basically all of GURPS Low-Tech, for assorted equipment and weapon lists.

Honestly, I'd rather there be a scaling dice pool in accordance with skill than a set dice pool, but very few professional systems do that because of the difficulty in actually counting the dice: either that, or they only consider given numbers to be successes on a per-die basis, which comes with its own issues.

Shadowrun comes closest to my preference for dice mechanics, though it doesn't use numbers additively as I'd prefer; it just uses the success count method I mention above.
Just about every tabletop system with a die pool uses success counting. The only real exceptions I can think of are Risus (which caps out at something like 5 dice maximum at a time) and Exalted 3e (which is only kinda-sorta an exception, because it uses success counting but the actual numbers on the dice are also relevant for some effects).
 
Last edited:
Just about every tabletop system with a die pool uses success counting. The only real exceptions I can think of are Risus (which caps out at something like 5 dice maximum at a time) and Exalted 3e (which is only kinda-sorta an exception, because it uses success counting but the actual numbers on the dice are also relevant for some effects).
D20 systems generally do not, as far as I am aware.

e:
In general, though, most of the stuff beyond the specifics of power representations is self-explanatory once you look through the books. In particular, stats,
You seem to have cut off here.
 
Last edited:
Just to get a read on everyone's thoughts so far; this is not intended to be binding at all:

[X] System Poll: Mutants and Masterminds (HERO)
[X] System Poll: GURPS
[] System Poll: Dresden Files
 
I think the problem with going PLU is that it leaves us with no frame of reference for what the numbers mean. With PLs, we can easily just say "PL3-PL7 is genin, PL8-PL10 is chunin, PL11-PL12 is jonin, PL13+ is S-rank" or something.

I guess we could do PLU for important characters, but make all the "generic ninja" templates obey power levels?
 
I think the problem with going PLU is that it leaves us with no frame of reference for what the numbers mean. With PLs, we can easily just say "PL3-PL7 is genin, PL8-PL10 is chunin, PL11-PL12 is jonin, PL13+ is S-rank" or something.

Is... there a reason we can't do that anyway? Actual question, not sarcasm, etc. Probably not using those numbers, but.
 
Voting is open for the next 6 hours, 23 minutes
Back
Top