MechWarrior: Destiny

[Dahmin_Toran]

If anyone working on Destiny is looking at anything I say in this thread, please keep on the path and keep things as vague as possible. It's refreshing to see a lack of detail for the sake of smooth gameplay.

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. Keep it up CGL.

[Daryk]

To give an example, a Locust pilot can say "I use my 'Mech's Lightning Fast Tag to stay just outside the Archer's range"; if his Piloting roll succeeds, he does it. Simple. that's what the Cue System is for. One doesn't need explicit ranges if one is thinking cinematically, just the right descriptions.

By the way, the rule you're looking for to stay just out of range is covered on page 33, under the heading "Moving the Story Forward". Those two paragraphs give you the freedom to say "I'll keep just out of range", and the GM the freedom to determine the consequences.

That invites a different answer every single time this very common situation comes up.  And again, dooms every 'mech without a Long range weapon facing a faster (or even just as fast) opponent with one.  That way lies madness... madness, I say!

[The_Livewire]

Can you point me to where this is RAW?  I'm trying to get a handle on the rules myself, but the way I read the Plot Points and spending Edge sections leads me to believe you can't just burn a Plot Point to skip a test.  I'll admit to not having finished my read through yet, though, and maybe I haven't seen this specific rule.

Page 33
"In gameplay, Plot Points may be used in many ways. They are
used to interrupt or alter another player’s Narration—a method of
adding a twist to the game. They can also be used to change player
turn order, alter a die roll, or gain back a point of Physical or Fatigue
damage. The ways players utilize Plot Points are only limited by how
creative they want to be."

Emphasis mine.  SO if (to use the OP's example) a room full of gas was intended to be bypassed by Reflex + Athletics (as a GM I'd say Reflex or Strength, one relying on being nimble to get around anything in the room, Strength to represent "Moving quickly, while holding my breath) and a player burns a plot point to 'produce a gas mask they forgot they were carrying' great!  He's used a plot point he might have used to augment his die roll, or heal the damage from the gas, etc etc.

In my example the GM spends a plot point for a plot twist (the battlemech's computer is encrypted)  It seems fair then to allow the player to use a plot point to find the password written down.

Also, remember, when a player uses a plot point, the GM gains one.  So in both examples, the player is not just 'cancelling out' a twist or obstacle, he's also refreshing the GM's resources to shake things up, and depleting his own.

[Maelwys]

Does anyone else think that Body would be better than Strength for the stat? Body seems like a better catchall for what the attribute does than just Strength?

[Daryk]

Yes, and I also thought it was odd WIL wasn't folded into INT...

[NeonKnight]

I'd rather Intelligence not be rolled into Will, otherwise you have dumb as a stump characters who have will to resist, or Incrdibly Intelligent people who can resist anything.

Intelligence and Will separate allows for Sherlock Holmes and his Heroin Addiction.

[Daryk]

Addiction is a negative trait, not a stat.  As it is, WIL only supports two skills (which can be argued to be INT skills anyway) and the Fatigue monitor.  Since they did away with BOD, it symmetry would suggest doing away with one of the mental stats too.

[Dexion]

Looking over equipment,  I found a few more things that need Clarification. 

Gyrojet  weapons are not listed as Ballistic. Not sure if this is intended  (making Gyrojet weapons effective against all armors) or an oversight. 

Under Flechette weapons, a single * was used for the effect of both Needlers and shotguns.  It would be much better to use ** for shotguns to avoid confusion. 

Grenades don't list a damage type, instead being broken up by High Explosive and Anti-Personal  (which, given the abstract nature of the system is meaningless besides the difference in damage).  It would be much better to list High Explosive  (B) and Incendiary  (E) types, perhaps giving the HE version the higher damage value to compensate for the more common Ballistic armor.

The Revolver should probably be adjusted to 5 damage, or rated OK at Near range.  Right now it's out classed by basically everything except the Holdout pistol,  making it kinda pointless.   

[Lyran Wolf]

Two more items to report on the form.

The Elemental armor has a ER Small Laser instead of a small laser.  I suspect it is because there is no Clan small laser on the 3050 weapon list.  It might have been able to slide but it means the that the elemental does more damage with the laser than it should.

On the 3050 clan weapon chart the Small Pulse laser lists 1 heat instead of 2.  Again probably would slide until you start calculating heat for weapon groups.  For the Savage Wolf A I stated up it means the difference between one or two heat tokens.

[Mendou]

That invites a different answer every single time this very common situation comes up.  And again, dooms every 'mech without a Long range weapon facing a faster (or even just as fast) opponent with one.  That way lies madness... madness, I say!

A different answer every single time exactly what a narrative system looks for. And how do your concerns about the faster 'Mech with a longer-range weapon differ from the concerns you'd have in TW or AS in the same situation?

If this be madness, yet there is method to it ^_-

[Nips]

Page 33
"In gameplay, Plot Points may be used in many ways. They are
used to interrupt or alter another player’s Narration—a method of
adding a twist to the game. They can also be used to change player
turn order, alter a die roll, or gain back a point of Physical or Fatigue
damage. The ways players utilize Plot Points are only limited by how
creative they want to be."

I had seen that bit of wording, but it seemed strange to me that the most obvious use of a Plot Point (from my perspective as a Player) isn't just given in the list of examples.  I'll grant you that it's not a silver bullet, since it gives the GM another chit of narrative ammo to use.  That said if I'm a player I'm certainly going to save those Plot Points to totally obviate a difficult Test at every opportunity.

It also didn't seem self evident to me because three pages later EDGE gets described, and it exactly and only is able to affect the dice roll of Tests.  I thought it would be strange to have two different metacurrencies able to affect potential Tests, with Plot Points totally obviating a test where EDGE can only alter the math a bit.  I can square this in my head, given that EDGE isn't replenishable in-game and has a weaker mechanical benefit while also not giving the GM narrative ammo, but it still felt strange.

This whole section on Plot Points feels a little squishy and undercooked to me.  I'd be happy to hear reasons why I'm wrong, though.

In other related tangentially-related weirdness: Under EDGE on Pg. 36 it says "Once you've spent them all, you'll have to wait until the beginning of the next gaming session for your Edge to refresh to its full amount."  So, I could play with a group that gets through one Mission in a game session, or a different group that plays all day through multiple Missions, and in either case I get one set of Edge points to play with.  What sense does that make?  This looks like the only place in the rules where the time metric "gaming session" gates anything mechanically, and that doesn't seem right.

[Ursus Maior]

Does anyone else think that Body would be better than Strength for the stat? Body seems like a better catchall for what the attribute does than just Strength?

Yes, stumbled across it right away.

[Daryk]

A different answer every single time exactly what a narrative system looks for. And how do your concerns about the faster 'Mech with a longer-range weapon differ from the concerns you'd have in TW or AS in the same situation?

If this be madness, yet there is method to it ^_-

And that's why narrative systems (as defined here) aren't for me.  Blame my Physics degree.

My concerns in TW (I don't play AS) are mitigated somewhat by terrain, the Extreme Range rules, and my ability to actually move out of range.  As written in Destiny, you CANNOT escape without "withdrawing" (ceding the battle entirely).  And again, there ARE rules for moving out of Medium Range without "withdrawing".  The lack of symmetry here is what's throwing me.

[victor_shaw]

And that's why narrative systems (as defined here) aren't for me.  Blame my Physics degree.

My concerns in TW (I don't play AS) are mitigated somewhat by terrain, the Extreme Range rules, and my ability to actually move out of range.  As written in Destiny, you CANNOT escape without "withdrawing" (ceding the battle entirely).  And again, there ARE rules for moving out of Medium Range without "withdrawing".  The lack of symmetry here is what's throwing me.

Not that I want to help this train wreck of a game, but the easy answer is just add a new range band "out of range".
It's not hard it make sense to the narrative and allows for tactical movement outside weapons range without leaving the engagement.

[victor_shaw]

The Elemental armor has a ER Small Laser instead of a small laser.  I suspect it is because there is no Clan small laser on the 3050 weapon list.  It might have been able to slide but it means the that the elemental does more damage with the laser than it should.

Yes the Elemental should have a Small Laser instead of a ER Small Laser, but this in an easy fix as the Clan Small Laser is statistically identical to the Innersphere one so just use the Innersphere stats.

[Mendou]

And that's why narrative systems (as defined here) aren't for me.  Blame my Physics degree.

My concerns in TW (I don't play AS) are mitigated somewhat by terrain, the Extreme Range rules, and my ability to actually move out of range.  As written in Destiny, you CANNOT escape without "withdrawing" (ceding the battle entirely).  And again, there ARE rules for moving out of Medium Range without "withdrawing".  The lack of symmetry here is what's throwing me.

Ah. My undergraduate degree is in English, but came from an engineering-focused university where most of my friends were engineers/CompSci.

It's still possible to use terrain and such narratively; there just aren't defined rules for it.

[Asgo]

A different answer every single time exactly what a narrative system looks for. And how do your concerns about the faster 'Mech with a longer-range weapon differ from the concerns you'd have in TW or AS in the same situation?

If this be madness, yet there is method to it ^_-

well, if consistency isn't necessarily something you strive for, then it makes the whole thing notably easier. ;)
Rule ambiguities becomes features and actually help players drive the narration to ever new creative ends. :)

[ActionButler]

Just FYI, if anyone is looking for the thread about using Destiny rules in combination with Alpha Strike, that thread was moved to Fan Rules:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=67009.0

Not sure why it didn't trigger a redirect thread.

[victor_shaw]

Just FYI, if anyone is looking for the thread about using Destiny rules in combination with Alpha Strike, that thread was moved to Fan Rules:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=67009.0

Not sure why it didn't trigger a redirect thread.

Well I'm not sure is would technical be fans rule as no actual rules were being discussed.
It was more questioning if CGL should make optional rules for it, and was just talk about if it would be a good idea.
So not sure if that would be general or fan rule.

[Dahmin_Toran]

Just FYI, if anyone is looking for the thread about using Destiny rules in combination with Alpha Strike, that thread was moved to Fan Rules:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=67009.0

Not sure why it didn't trigger a redirect thread.

That would be so easy to do. Use CBT/AS maps, ranges, damage, movement...use Destiny task/skill resolution for Piloting, Gunnery, Communications or Computers (for Electronic Warfare stuff). It seems that you could also incorporate combined arms (vehicle/aerospace).

[Moonsword]

+++MOD NOTICE+++

Folks, we already moved a thread to Fan Rules.  Posting a notice the thread was moved was not an invitation to begin posting about it in here, nor to start discussing new combinations of the rules.  You're derailing the thread.  Take the discussion where it belongs.  Attempts to start a debate on the topic of exactly what is an official rule will, again, be derailing the thread.  This directive is not up for debate in here.

I'd also like to point out that we have a rule against being excessively toxic or otherwise threadcrapping.  Violators will have warnings issued.  Just because you don't think MechWarrior: Destiny is for you is not a reason to repeatedly spew your dislike all over the place where others might be enjoying it.  (If you're having to question whether I'm talking to you, that's a sign you need to consider what you're posting.)

[Mendou]

I had seen that bit of wording, but it seemed strange to me that the most obvious use of a Plot Point (from my perspective as a Player) isn't just given in the list of examples.  I'll grant you that it's not a silver bullet, since it gives the GM another chit of narrative ammo to use.  That said if I'm a player I'm certainly going to save those Plot Points to totally obviate a difficult Test at every opportunity.

It also didn't seem self evident to me because three pages later EDGE gets described, and it exactly and only is able to affect the dice roll of Tests.  I thought it would be strange to have two different metacurrencies able to affect potential Tests, with Plot Points totally obviating a test where EDGE can only alter the math a bit.  I can square this in my head, given that EDGE isn't replenishable in-game and has a weaker mechanical benefit while also not giving the GM narrative ammo, but it still felt strange.

This whole section on Plot Points feels a little squishy and undercooked to me.  I'd be happy to hear reasons why I'm wrong, though.

In other related tangentially-related weirdness: Under EDGE on Pg. 36 it says "Once you've spent them all, you'll have to wait until the beginning of the next gaming session for your Edge to refresh to its full amount."  So, I could play with a group that gets through one Mission in a game session, or a different group that plays all day through multiple Missions, and in either case I get one set of Edge points to play with.  What sense does that make?  This looks like the only place in the rules where the time metric "gaming session" gates anything mechanically, and that doesn't seem right.

Plot Points affect the narrative, altering the course of events in the story arc. EDG, being an import from earlier versions of MW/BT RPGs, alters dice rolls directly in much the same way it did since it was introduced (I'm not familiar with MW 1/2, so I can't say if it was there, but definitely from MW3 on it's worked this way). Plot Points cannot change die rolls, and EDG cannot change the course of events directly.

[dsteelegm]

I had a very successful first game of Mechwarrior: Destiny.

I run a regular D&D game at a youth shelter in my city. We're between campaigns right now so have been trying one-shots of other systems. I was planning on running ATOW, but the beta rules for MW:D came out just in time, and since it's a low-prep game, I read the rules and got a session ready within a few extra hours on the weekend.

The shared narrative was a huge hit with the shelter youth. One of the things I'm always trying to do with the youth is to create situations where they are empowered to affect their world. In D&D with the traditional delineation between game master as God, physics, and NPCs, and players as just their characters I spend a lot of time working with the backstories and perceived desires of the players to produce content where they feel they have meaningful choices and are part of the world.

The system of Mechwarrior: Destiny did a pile of that work for me, and to a better result than I've had with this group in D&D.

All the players found the pregenerated characters to have ample flavour to hook into. A player I have who always roles up different classes and races, but always ends up creating the same high-status holier-than-thou character, actually departed from their habits and got inside the head of Lovasina.

I ran the "Use the Diversion" briefing with some extra lore about the players being connected to locals on a planet that has changed hands and the new FedSuns duke is bringing in settlers to strip mine, chasing the locals out of the cities. The players are part of the rebellion and need to raid a fort to get a copy of the surrender agreement which they've been told guarantees them rights that are currently being trampled.

They bought in right away. Without having ever played anything "battletech" were able to get the flavour just from the character sheets. They invented a whole new scene right off the hop of going to a strip mine and trying to steal a mining mech to infiltrate the fort in. They failed miserably, but one of the players introduced with a plot point that the MP Officer who was taking them into custody was her Ex and still had feelings for her. Out of the player's imagination was born Captain John Michaels, strictly disciplined security chief, but with such a soft spot for Jaimie that he believed that she was indeed forced into trying to steal a workmech by evil rebels and who's feeling allowed the players the chance they needed to escape the Paddy Wagon Hover Craft and start a firefight in the base courtyard.

With the extra scene, we didn't get to the end of the briefing but finished on a great cliffhanger of another character's girlfriend storming through the fortress gates just as John Michaels orders them opened to let his ex-wife and her two orphan dependents leave to avoid the battle.

The response from the players after the game was adamant that they want another session and they've asked if we can play MW:D instead of D&D for the next big campaign.

I loved it because as a game master I got to welcome player's ideas about the world and I saw the adventure become personal and enticing to the players without having to guess what they wanted from the experience.

I'm a big fan of the system so far.

[SteelRaven]

Haven't had the chance to get a dry run for the system but I do like how it's very narritive driven which is great for playing online via chat as many of my friends now have little time for face to face RP.

[Daryk]

dsteelegm: That's a fantastic result!  Engagement on that level with new players is rare.  Honestly, I couldn't do it.  I played a narrative game last night in lieu of our regular 5e D&D game, and while it was as entertaining as any evening spent with friends, it just wasn't my cup of tea.  Consistency is lost when the players can affect fundamental game mechanics, and consistency is the soul of any game system.  The novelty of Destiny will wear off as surely as it did for Amber and the other "diceless" games years ago.

That said, you've got your hooks into them now, so run with it!  :thumbsup:

[Dahmin_Toran]

dsteelegm: That's a fantastic result!  Engagement on that level with new players is rare.  Honestly, I couldn't do it.  I played a narrative game last night in lieu of our regular 5e D&D game, and while it was as entertaining as any evening spent with friends, it just wasn't my cup of tea.  Consistency is lost when the players can affect fundamental game mechanics, and consistency is the soul of any game system.  The novelty of Destiny will wear off as surely as it did for Amber and the other "diceless" games years ago.

That said, you've got your hooks into them now, so run with it!  :thumbsup:

Although Destiny seems to have a lot of buzz than A Time of War did at the get go, and with the easier buy-in, less GM work, and streamlined rules...it just may have longer legs.

[Daryk]

As long as it doesn't kill AToW, it will be forgiven...

[DarkSpade]

Consistency is lost when the players can affect fundamental game mechanics, and consistency is the soul of any game system. 

You've clearly never played Flux.  ;D

[Daryk]

I've totally played Flux, and it's anything but a game "system".  It's perfectly fine as a game (like Eleusis, back in the day).

[Orin J.]

As long as it doesn't kill AToW, it will be forgiven...

IF AToW's material presentation can't kill AToW i don't think MW:Destiny will.  ;D