Heroica: Glory Amongst The Stars RPG - Game Development

[Waterbrick Down]

4 hours ago, Goliath said:

I think that is a fantastic list to start with!  I would just add Robot, or call it by some other fancy synonym, to that list for those who want to be completely mechanical. 

That's what the android is for.

1 hour ago, samurai-turtle said:

I was thinking of adding - 

Kappa - (or Tortle if you want a D&D flavor) for tortoises and turtles, plus their is TMNT mini figures and now the Super Mario line. 

Tengu - I am not sure if this will be to close to Ornithun. But I figured since the Chima Ravens exists they look pretty close to other depictions other tangu. And I did find two examples of what I thought they will look like. 

Tabaxi - (again more D&D influence) your basic cat person, since again Chima has "Cats" we should have it available to use. 

Canine - since their is "cats" we better have Dogs. Again if their is Wolves and werewolves for mini figures, I think eventually "regular" dogs & coyotes or any other similar animal could become a mini figure. 

Those are the ones I can think of for now. But if their is a mini figure of it, we should consider a possible creature that going to be need made. I was also thinking if it exists in D&D or even in Starfinder we should have a version in this game. Someone might have a desire to play that creature. 

 

I was just showing I got some items available. But consider the recent issues Brickshelf have had, using it as a hosting spot might not be the best idea, besides I don't think you could even set up a new account. For a standard on pictures a 100×100 pixels square with a solid color background should be easy enough to do, we don't want to make it to complicated. 

I am still not sure about "battle maps" or "establishing shots" what standard should be used for that stuff. Was there any standards before? 

Sure, turtle folk could either be incorporated into Reptins or their own thing. Tengu might be a bit to close to Ornithun, but perhaps a winged variety may make them more distinct. Feline and Canine races would also fit in the right context. As far as races are concerned, the idea would be to utilize a mechanical system where in each of the main races have predetermined features and then have additional ones be added and approved as balanced as time goes on, similar to classes.

Regarding location shots, I wouldn't say there was anything standard before, but it probably wouldn't hurt. I.e. a stock photo of a swamp, or a village, or an ocean temple. Essentially, it's building a library of locations that can easily be included. During the latter half of Heroica 1.0 we almost had enough pictures from previous quests of Eubric Freeport that one could almost run an entire quest without having to take any new photos.

[samurai-turtle]

1 hour ago, Waterbrick Down said:

Sure, turtle folk could either be incorporated into Reptins or their own thing. Tengu might be a bit to close to Ornithun, but perhaps a winged variety may make them more distinct. Feline and Canine races would also fit in the right context. As far as races are concerned, the idea would be to utilize a mechanical system where in each of the main races have predetermined features and then have additional ones be added and approved as balanced as time goes on, similar to classes.

Regarding location shots, I wouldn't say there was anything standard before, but it probably wouldn't hurt. I.e. a stock photo of a swamp, or a village, or an ocean temple. Essentially, it's building a library of locations that can easily be included. During the latter half of Heroica 1.0 we almost had enough pictures from previous quests of Eubric Freeport that one could almost run an entire quest without having to take any new photos.

I thinking the only one (or thing) not brought up yet is Bugs / Insects I am sure that is going to pop up at some point. The problem is I am drawing a blank on any examples but I know their is mini figures of "bugs" from Galaxy Squad (and probably from other space themes). As for Tengu I found these two examples and their is a built in Technic vibe to them  already. 

  

This guy might be a good example for a Canine, but a sub race Vulpine (a fox). Not sure if anyone ever heard of Humblewood it is a D&D setting with animals as playable characters, probably similar to the Chima line. 

 

 

For "location shots" was their some size limit to pictures for the forum like 600×800 pixels? I guess that would be acceptable. 

[Waterbrick Down]

8 hours ago, samurai-turtle said:

I thinking the only one (or thing) not brought up yet is Bugs / Insects I am sure that is going to pop up at some point. The problem is I am drawing a blank on any examples but I know their is mini figures of "bugs" from Galaxy Squad (and probably from other space themes). As for Tengu I found these two examples and their is a built in Technic vibe to them  already.   

This guy might be a good example for a Canine, but a sub race Vulpine (a fox). Not sure if anyone ever heard of Humblewood it is a D&D setting with animals as playable characters, probably similar to the Chima line. 

For "location shots" was their some size limit to pictures for the forum like 600×800 pixels? I guess that would be acceptable. 

Insect races could certainly be added as well. On to Tengu, yep I'm familiar with them, my preference would be to use them as a jumping off point though instead of simply copy pasting them in as is, essentially giving them their own Heroica flavor.

I am familiar with Humblewood and again, just because something does exist in Lego, doesn't mean we necessarily need it in Heroica right from the beginning. It may make more sense simply to create a star system/planet where most of the animal like races come from, instead of creating species for each one. Similar to Hengeyokai in D&D, all the same race, just variations.

Rule of thumb is 600x800 is really the largest size that should be posted. If we use something like a Flickr pool, that would allow for any size to be posted and then shrank to the appropriate dimensions.

[Yzalirk]

10 hours ago, Waterbrick Down said:

That's what the android is for.

Ah, okay!  I was thinking Bladerunner when I saw Androids. Anyways, that works out just fine I think.  For roleplaying purposes there can be older Androids, those that look more machine than man, and newer Androids, those that look more man than machine.

8 hours ago, samurai-turtle said:

I thinking the only one (or thing) not brought up yet is Bugs / Insects I am sure that is going to pop up at some point. The problem is I am drawing a blank on any examples but I know their is mini figures of "bugs" from Galaxy Squad (and probably from other space themes). As for Tengu I found these two examples and their is a built in Technic vibe to them  already. 

2 minutes ago, Waterbrick Down said:

Insect races could certainly be added as well. On to Tengu, yep I'm familiar with them, my preference would be to use them as a jumping off point though instead of simply copy pasting them in as is, essentially giving them their own Heroica flavor.

I am familiar with Humblewood and again, just because something does exist in Lego, doesn't mean we necessarily need it in Heroica right from the beginning. It may make more sense simply to create a star system/planet where most of the animal like races come from, instead of creating species for each one. Similar to Hengeyokai in D&D, all the same race, just variations.

Rule of thumb is 600x800 is really the largest size that should be posted. If we use something like a Flickr pool, that would allow for any size to be posted and then shrank to the appropriate dimensions.

Just to piggyback off the idea of an insect races, they can be categorized into a single dominant species called Insectids or something like some of the other races.  The few other pieces that come to mind for insect-based characters are the the Star Wars Geonosian pieces and the Toy Story Mantis head.

[Waterbrick Down]

6 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Ah, okay!  I was thinking Bladerunner when I saw Androids. Anyways, that works out just fine I think.  For roleplaying purposes there can be older Androids, those that look more machine than man, and newer Androids, those that look more man than machine.

Just to piggyback off the idea of an insect races, they can be categorized into a single dominant species called Insectids or something like some of the other races.  The few other pieces that come to mind for insect-based characters are the the Star Wars Geonosian pieces and the Toy Story Mantis head.

Yep and then there's the fly figure from the collectible minifigure series and the spider tribe from Chima. Your point about androids is valid, depending on the model they may look different, but again the aim is a mix between fantasy (Heroica Automatons) and Sci-fi (Full synthetic beings that can't be distinguished from other races).

[Duvors]

@Goliath @samurai-turtle @Waterbrick Down

If I may interject here, most of what you're describing here seems less like individual species and more like Clades, Families, or even Orders. That is, groups of interrelated species rather than individual ones. So far the only things you've described with distinct enough characteristics to be considered species are the classic fantasy races, Androids, Star-Born, Golems, Zorcon, Cricet, and Quo'ri. Everything else seems to be a catch-all term for multiple species. While this may allow for players to use more designs I feel that this leads to those groups being rather indistinct. I'd suggest rather that Reptin, Ornithun, Ursin, Cephalon, and Icthyan be given more distinct morphologies (and more inventive names). If a player wants to create a new species in the same Order, Family or Clade then just let them and help them equalize it with the others. The ability for players to come up with new races on the spot and then play as them did a lot to enrich the original game.
Also, I'm not really sold on the idea that Cyborgs should be a race. That seems to me more like something people of other species do to themselves.

Moving on, I've made a few changes to my rules writeup.

On 9/19/2020 at 8:44 PM, Lord Duvors said:

Character Points (10 Points)

-You may not have over 10 in any Proficiency, or 20 in any Attribute (bonuses from Strength are still added to Vitality up to 30)

This is just me fixing a mistake I made. Previously I was still calculating the additional vitality from strength as if the attribute total was still 10 (as in an earlier version) after I'd doubled it.

 

On 9/20/2020 at 12:06 AM, Lord Duvors said:

Weapons
There are three damage types for weapons: Kinetic, Energy, and Elemental. Each weapon also has a corresponding range: Melee, Short Range, Long Range, or Artillery. Attacking outside a weapon's range incurs a -1 Weapon Proficiency die penalty for every additional square. All weapon qualities (except standard) have a minimum Attribute score needed for wielding (Kinetic =Strength, Energy =Skill, Elemental =Smarts) and add a number of guaranteed successes to Weapon Checks according to the list below:

This is just WDB's suggested change to how ranges work, which replaces the skill bonuses enemies got. Since the rules were the same for every range I decided just to lay it out here.

[Waterbrick Down]

1 hour ago, Lord Duvors said:

@Goliath @samurai-turtle @Waterbrick Down

If I may interject here, most of what you're describing here seems less like individual species and more like Clades, Families, or even Orders. That is, groups of interrelated species rather than individual ones. So far the only things you've described with distinct enough characteristics to be considered species are the classic fantasy races, Androids, Star-Born, Golems, Zorcon, Cricet, and Quo'ri. Everything else seems to be a catch-all term for multiple species. While this may allow for players to use more designs I feel that this leads to those groups being rather indistinct. I'd suggest rather that Reptin, Ornithun, Ursin, Cephalon, and Icthyan be given more distinct morphologies (and more inventive names). If a player wants to create a new species in the same Order, Family or Clade then just let them and help them equalize it with the others. The ability for players to come up with new races on the spot and then play as them did a lot to enrich the original game.
Also, I'm not really sold on the idea that Cyborgs should be a race. That seems to me more like something people of other species do to themselves.

Point taken on cyborgs. On the animal races I agree which is why I mentioned earlier. 

5 hours ago, Waterbrick Down said:

It may make more sense simply to create a star system/planet where most of the animal like races come from, instead of creating species for each one. Similar to Hengeyokai in D&D, all the same race, just variations.

Moving on though, it's maybe more important when creating alien species to remember that they aren't simply animal-folk as those are simply humanized earth creatures. The idea would be to use the pieces Lego created for animal-folk to represent an alien species that simply shares some resemblance to those terrestrial creatures. It's not that Ornithun are simply bird-people, but that they are a species that come from a planet without birds and have their own culture/characterization. An Ornithun on earth would look at a bird and not think it's related, but that it's an entirely different creature. The alternative is to simply create a planet/galaxy where animal-folk are the race and everything is a variation.

[Duvors]

3 minutes ago, Waterbrick Down said:

Point taken on cyborgs. On the animal races I agree which is why I mentioned earlier. 

Moving on though, it's maybe more important when creating alien species to remember that they aren't simply animal-folk as those are simply humanized earth creatures. The idea would be to use the pieces Lego created for animal-folk to represent an alien species that simply shares some resemblance to those terrestrial creatures. It's not that Ornithun are simply bird-people, but that they are a species that come from a planet without birds and have their own culture/characterization. An Ornithun on earth would look at a bird and not think it's related, but that it's an entirely different creature. The alternative is to simply create a planet/galaxy where animal-folk are the race and everything is a variation.

I understand. Honestly the issue I see is not the presence of animal-like species, but rather the lack of distinction some of then seem to possess. And in that vein I feel that lumping all the animalistic species into a single group is less a solution to the problem and more a case of having the same problem in different clothes. To be honest if I were to lump them all into one category then I'd make them the product of druidic science (magical life sciences). But I'd prefer distinct species. for instance:

Krassar: (Chima Crocodiles/CMF Lizard Suit) A semiaquatic species known for exceptional night vision.
Szromkit: (4-LOM/CMF Fly) A winged scavenger species of unknown origin.
Hyboran: (Chima Bears) An immensely strong species that can endure extreme cold.
Culori: An amorphous cephalopod species renowned for occult mastery
Hir-Connii: (Atlantis Sharks) A predatory aquatic species that requires rebreathers to survive out of the water.
Ornithun: Flightless avians known for their speed.

These are all very basic but you get the idea. I'd also like to see more aliens that have no particular resemblance to any recognizable animals. Lego provides several heads like that and it'd be a shame not to use them.

Also, here's a species I thought up while writing that I didn't think should be mechanically separate because they already fit into an existing one.

Oruk: (Ninjago skull molds) A species that was once notable for having exaggerated facial structures, the Oruk as a species are currently extinct. This is not the last of them however, as many still roam the stars as undead. Their descendants, the Orcs, still revere them as ancestral guardians and heroes. The skull of an Oruk is the device on the famous 'Red Banner' and Oruk are often leaders of orc clans.

[Yzalirk]

@Lord Duvors @Waterbrick Down

I am all for making every species / race distinctly unique, I think that is great!  Though I am terrible at naming things so I can't necessarily help with that too much. If each race ends up having a special racial bonus or something how will this apply to each of them?  Unless we just have a list of said bonuses and let players choose what they want?

[Kintobor]

Just now, Goliath said:

Unless we just have a list of said bonuses and let players choose what they want?

I feel like this is best one to choose from. It allows for characters to still fall into classic tropes for certain ancestries (elves, dwarves, halflings, etc) while allowing players to come in with their own unique characters and cultures.

[Duvors]

@Goliath @Kintobor

I personally was thinking along the lines of having a single trait for each species and then having a free-floating second trait that people could choose. That would allow us to have traits that are inherently tied to biology (such as having four arms) while still having room to customize.

Edited September 24, 2020 by Lord Duvors

[Yzalirk]

2 hours ago, Kintobor said:

I feel like this is best one to choose from. It allows for characters to still fall into classic tropes for certain ancestries (elves, dwarves, halflings, etc) while allowing players to come in with their own unique characters and cultures.

2 hours ago, Lord Duvors said:

@Goliath @Kintobor

I personally was thinking along the lines of having a single trait for each species and then having a free-floating second trait that people could choose. That would allow us to have traits that are inherently tied to biology (such as having four arms) while still having room to customize.

I like it!  I think having a default bonus and one special bonus would be a good idea - a Racial trait and Character trait.

For example: Someone chooses to play a Reptile-based race.  The Racial trait could be Cold Blooded (grants some bonus to stealth).  Then the player can choose another trait that is not specific to one trait, like say Regenerative (+1 health every other turn or something).  I just thought of the example on the spot but hopefully you guys understand what I am trying to say.

[samurai-turtle]

Well I started to to think maybe it needs to be more general; like Mammal - Human - Light Brown or Droid - Android - Battle Droid {might as use something familiar}. And then I ended up watching Guardians of the Galaxy on TV for the first time since I seen in the movie theater. And it got me thinking what about plant(s) types like Groot, I figured someone might want to play "him". And then how does living things get classified in the scientific community, usually with multiple categories, so it started with plants and animals (I am just going to leave out single cell organisms). So I guess it would start something like this...

Plants - (just a note I am no expert here) 

Grass, Trees, Ferns, fungus, mold, moss, lichen 

Animals - 

Fish, Reptile, Amphibians, Birds, Bugs, Mammals, Dinosaurs (???) 

Minerals - (I can only think of two {maybe three here})

Golems, Droids, Cyborgs (???) 

Energy - (I wondering if this should combine with something else) 

Ghosts, Celestials, Elementals 

I do think Cyborgs should be a sub creature thing for my example above: Mammal - Elf - Cyborg. 

But now I am starting to wonder what do I know, if I use an earlier example Kappa would probably go like this: Reptile - Kappa - Razorback. 

[Waterbrick Down]

5 hours ago, Lord Duvors said:

I understand. Honestly the issue I see is not the presence of animal-like species, but rather the lack of distinction some of then seem to possess. And in that vein I feel that lumping all the animalistic species into a single group is less a solution to the problem and more a case of having the same problem in different clothes. To be honest if I were to lump them all into one category then I'd make them the product of druidic science (magical life sciences). But I'd prefer distinct species. for instance:

Krassar: (Chima Crocodiles/CMF Lizard Suit) A semiaquatic species known for exceptional night vision.
Szromkit: (4-LOM/CMF Fly) A winged scavenger species of unknown origin.
Hyboran: (Chima Bears) An immensely strong species that can endure extreme cold.
Culori: An amorphous cephalopod species renowned for occult mastery
Hir-Connii: (Atlantis Sharks) A predatory aquatic species that requires rebreathers to survive out of the water.
Ornithun: Flightless avians known for their speed.

These are all very basic but you get the idea. I'd also like to see more aliens that have no particular resemblance to any recognizable animals. Lego provides several heads like that and it'd be a shame not to use them.

Also, here's a species I thought up while writing that I didn't think should be mechanically separate because they already fit into an existing one.

Oruk: (Ninjago skull molds) A species that was once notable for having exaggerated facial structures, the Oruk as a species are currently extinct. This is not the last of them however, as many still roam the stars as undead. Their descendants, the Orcs, still revere them as ancestral guardians and heroes. The skull of an Oruk is the device on the famous 'Red Banner' and Oruk are often leaders of orc clans.

1 hour ago, Goliath said:

I like it!  I think having a default bonus and one special bonus would be a good idea - a Racial trait and Character trait.

For example: Someone chooses to play a Reptile-based race.  The Racial trait could be Cold Blooded (grants some bonus to stealth).  Then the player can choose another trait that is not specific to one trait, like say Regenerative (+1 health every other turn or something).  I just thought of the example on the spot but hopefully you guys understand what I am trying to say.

1 hour ago, samurai-turtle said:

Well I started to to think maybe it needs to be more general; like Mammal - Human - Light Brown or Droid - Android - Battle Droid {might as use something familiar}. And then I ended up watching Guardians of the Galaxy on TV for the first time since I seen in the movie theater. And it got me thinking what about plant(s) types like Groot, I figured someone might want to play "him". And then how does living things get classified in the scientific community, usually with multiple categories, so it started with plants and animals (I am just going to leave out single cell organisms). So I guess it would start something like this...

Plants - (just a note I am no expert here) 

Grass, Trees, Ferns, fungus, mold, moss, lichen 

Animals - 

Fish, Reptile, Amphibians, Birds, Bugs, Mammals, Dinosaurs (???) 

Minerals - (I can only think of two {maybe three here})

Golems, Droids, Cyborgs (???) 

Energy - (I wondering if this should combine with something else) 

Ghosts, Celestials, Elementals 

I do think Cyborgs should be a sub creature thing for my example above: Mammal - Elf - Cyborg. 

But now I am starting to wonder what do I know, if I use an earlier example Kappa would probably go like this: Reptile - Kappa - Razorback. 

So at one point I looked at putting together a racial point buy system here, but in retrospect it's really hard to balance all of the features. Currently I've been messing with a simple proficiency/trait system. So:

Dwarf
Proficiencies: Start with Engineering or Insight at level 1
Hardy: Start with +2 Vitality

Elf
Proficiencies: Start with Acrobatics or Culture at level 1
Logical: Immune to Enamored Status Effect

Human
Proficiency: Start with any non-weapon or non-magic skill at level 1
Adaptive: Swap one skill proficiency level with another at the beginning of a quest

Orc
Proficiencies: Start with Athletics or Intimidation at level 1
Persistent: 1st time downed in a battle, reduced instead to 1 Vitality

People can then customize their particular Dwarf/Elf/Human/Orc further through the normal point buy system

On to actual race development, I think as long as each one has a unique history/flavor to it, then it doesn't matter too much whether we keep things in big categories (animal/plant/mineral) or very specific (one singular fox-resembling race). People can then propose a new race at anytime with corresponding modifiers and it gets included into a registry topic once reviewed and becomes part of the canon. It's like Heroica 1.0 just with an extra step if you want it to have racial benefits.

[Yzalirk]

8 hours ago, Waterbrick Down said:

So at one point I looked at putting together a racial point buy system here, but in retrospect it's really hard to balance all of the features. Currently I've been messing with a simple proficiency/trait system. So:

 

Dwarf
Proficiencies: Start with Engineering or Insight at level 1
Hardy: Start with +2 Vitality

Elf
Proficiencies: Start with Acrobatics or Culture at level 1
Logical: Immune to Enamored Status Effect

Human
Proficiency: Start with any non-weapon or non-magic skill at level 1
Adaptive: Swap one skill proficiency level with another at the beginning of a quest

Orc
Proficiencies: Start with Athletics or Intimidation at level 1
Persistent: 1st time downed in a battle, reduced instead to 1 Vitality

People can then customize their particular Dwarf/Elf/Human/Orc further through the normal point buy system

On to actual race development, I think as long as each one has a unique history/flavor to it, then it doesn't matter too much whether we keep things in big categories (animal/plant/mineral) or very specific (one singular fox-resembling race). People can then propose a new race at anytime with corresponding modifiers and it gets included into a registry topic once reviewed and becomes part of the canon. It's like Heroica 1.0 just with an extra step if you want it to have racial benefits.

I think the system should shy away from having default Proficiency bonuses so players don't feel too bogged down to when it comes to creating their characters.  An alternative that I think could work could be similar to Rimworld where a character can have a passion or burning passion for some type of Proficiency of their choosing.  I do not know how I would balance it but it would allow players to get a boost at the start.  Maybe your Proficiency you have a burning passion for will start at 3 and another Proficiency you have just a passion for starts at 2?  Or they could vary in "price" when you want to upgrade them in the future?

Apart from that I think each race having a specific trait by default is a good idea.  We would just need to think of one for each race that would fit them best but not be too crazy.

[Waterbrick Down]

45 minutes ago, Goliath said:

I think the system should shy away from having default Proficiency bonuses so players don't feel too bogged down to when it comes to creating their characters.  An alternative that I think could work could be similar to Rimworld where a character can have a passion or burning passion for some type of Proficiency of their choosing.  I do not know how I would balance it but it would allow players to get a boost at the start.  Maybe your Proficiency you have a burning passion for will start at 3 and another Proficiency you have just a passion for starts at 2?  Or they could vary in "price" when you want to upgrade them in the future?

That's the point of the rest of character creation though, you get 3 more proficiencies of your choice and additionally get to increase any of those with the creation points. By giving racial proficiencies it gives a general connecting picture of the culture. It's not to say that every dwarf is an expert at Engineering, it's simply that Engineering is part of the Dwarven culture and this plays out with nearly every dwarf having some experience with it. In a way it's codifying other aspects of biology. Most Elves are more lithe than most Dwarves, ergo mechanically most Elves will be able to pass an Acrobatics skill check more easily than most Dwarves.

[Yzalirk]

1 hour ago, Waterbrick Down said:

That's the point of the rest of character creation though, you get 3 more proficiencies of your choice and additionally get to increase any of those with the creation points. By giving racial proficiencies it gives a general connecting picture of the culture. It's not to say that every dwarf is an expert at Engineering, it's simply that Engineering is part of the Dwarven culture and this plays out with nearly every dwarf having some experience with it. In a way it's codifying other aspects of biology. Most Elves are more lithe than most Dwarves, ergo mechanically most Elves will be able to pass an Acrobatics skill check more easily than most Dwarves.

Ah, okay, I think I see what you're saying now.  So basically what proficiencies are associated with which race, like Engineering and Insight for Dwarves for example, you choose one of the two for for free and can choose any other three you want?  Or do you get both for free on top of three of your choosing?

Also, a bit off topic, but whenever I press "enter" once it bascially creates a gap so I cannot make a compact list or anything.  Anyone know how I can fix that?

[Waterbrick Down]

7 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Ah, okay, I think I see what you're saying now.  So basically what proficiencies are associated with which race, like Engineering and Insight for Dwarves for example, you choose one of the two for for free and can choose any other three you want?  Or do you get both for free on top of three of your choosing?

Also, a bit off topic, but whenever I press "enter" once it bascially creates a gap so I cannot make a compact list or anything.  Anyone know how I can fix that?

Hold shift and then hit enter.

Correct, your race grants you one of two proficiencies for free. Then per normal character creation rules you get 3 more of your choice for free and then can spend your 10 Creation Points to increase those proficiencies' levels or buy even more proficiencies (provided your Smarts attribute is high enough).

So Igaz would have had the normal: Athletics 1, Intimidation 1, Melee Weapons 2, Short Range Weapons 1, and then another proficiency from the Undead racial options. Probably Intimidation or Survival.

[Duvors]

2 hours ago, Goliath said:

Apart from that I think each race having a specific trait by default is a good idea.  We would just need to think of one for each race that would fit them best but not be too crazy.

I was thinking that Species traits didn't have to be unique, It was just a way to give each species a feature that they'd logically have due to biology.

@Waterbrick Down While I don't mind species-based proficiencies that much I feel that tying them to culture is problematic simply because not all members of a species will come from the same culture. There's also the fact that I'm not fond of 'logical' or 'adaptive' as racial traits. Those seem more like generic traits then something naturally following from species biology. As an alternative I'd give Elves Perceptive (grants +1 to Insight and Perception) to represent them having keener senses, and humans would have Endurant (May run long distances without tiring) because that represents something distinct about real humans in regards to the rest of the natural world.

[Waterbrick Down]

51 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

I was thinking that Species traits didn't have to be unique, It was just a way to give each species a feature that they'd logically have due to biology.

@Waterbrick Down While I don't mind species-based proficiencies that much I feel that tying them to culture is problematic simply because not all members of a species will come from the same culture. There's also the fact that I'm not fond of 'logical' or 'adaptive' as racial traits. Those seem more like generic traits then something naturally following from species biology. As an alternative I'd give Elves Perceptive (grants +1 to Insight and Perception) to represent them having keener senses, and humans would have Endurant (May run long distances without tiring) because that represents something distinct about real humans in regards to the rest of the natural world.

@Lord DuvorsHence why it's "most". So it comes down to how much a cohesive canon is desired in the world building and how much of it should be mechanically codified. By having cultural proficiencies associated with race, you then ensure all members of a race share some common history outside of simple biology. If you want to make a Dwarf character, it won't be unique from all other Dwarf characters, it'll exist in the framework of the world and the space in which Dwarves occupy. You can make things open ended, but you then run the risk of a non-cohesive world, where every Dwarf character comes from a different culture and you then don't have consistency. We implicitly agree on some aspects of the world (i.e. space travel is possible, lasers exist, there are still fantastical elements) it's simply a question of whether races fall into that same category as something we want agreement on and to what extent. It's a spectrum ranging on one side where every Elf is mechanically unique, has their own set of Proficiencies, Attributes, Class, and even Appearance and on the other where every Elf is proficient in the same 4 proficiencies, have the exact same Smarts/Vitality/Strength/Skill scores, must play the Ranger class, and must be pale, tall, long blond hair, gaunt, and have pointy ears.

On the biology note, since we're world building, everything can be related to biology if we want it. Perhaps elves in this setting do not produce dopamine or oxytocin and thus are biologically more immune to being enamored than other races. Humans have genetically modified themselves to the point where they can access the learning centers of their brain and easily pick up new skills or languages similar to a very young child, but at the expense of easily forgetting earlier memories.

[Duvors]

7 minutes ago, Waterbrick Down said:

@Lord DuvorsHence why it's "most". So it comes down to how much a cohesive canon is desired in the world building and how much of it should be mechanically codified. By having cultural proficiencies associated with race, you then ensure all members of a race share some common history outside of simple biology. If you want to make a Dwarf character, it won't be unique from all other Dwarf characters, it'll exist in the framework of the world and the space in which Dwarves occupy. You can make things open ended, but you then run the risk of a non-cohesive world, where every Dwarf character comes from a different culture and you then don't have consistency. We implicitly agree on some aspects of the world (i.e. space travel is possible, lasers exist, there are still fantastical elements) it's simply a question of whether races fall into that same category as something we want agreement on and to what extent. It's a spectrum ranging on one side where every Elf is mechanically unique, has their own set of Proficiencies, Attributes, Class, and even Appearance and on the other where every Elf is proficient in the same 4 proficiencies, have the exact same Smarts/Vitality/Strength/Skill scores, must play the Ranger class, and must be pale, tall, long blond hair, gaunt, and have pointy ears.

I understand that, I was just pointing out that it's a bit finicky.

 

8 minutes ago, Waterbrick Down said:

On the biology note, since we're world building, everything can be related to biology if we want it. Perhaps elves in this setting do not produce dopamine or oxytocin and thus are biologically more immune to being enamored than other races. Humans have genetically modified themselves to the point where they can access the learning centers of their brain and easily pick up new skills or languages similar to a very young child, but at the expense of easily forgetting earlier memories.

Weirdly enough, this make me like those traits even less.

[Waterbrick Down]

17 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

I understand that, I was just pointing out that it's a bit finicky.

I guess look at it this way. What things do we want consistent regarding alien species, right now my proposal looks like this:
Appearance: Yes, with some variations on color/fur/feathers/scalses/exo-skeleton
Class: No
Attributes: No
Cultural/Biological/Individual Proficiencies: Yes 1 out of 4
Cultural/Biological Traits: Yes

24 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

Weirdly enough, this make me like those traits even less.

 I'm not necessarily saying that those have to be the case, just that biology can be used to justify anything we want it to in a fictional setting, just like your assertion that Elves are naturally keener senses.  The important thing is coming to a consensus on the mechanically influencing things.
 

[Duvors]

1 minute ago, Waterbrick Down said:

I guess look at it this way. What things do we want consistent regarding alien species, right now my proposal looks like this:
Appearance: Yes, with some variations on color/fur/feathers/scalses/exo-skeleton
Class: No
Attributes: No
Cultural/Biological/Individual Proficiencies: Yes 1 out of 4
Cultural/Biological Traits: Yes

To be honest I think this looks very good.

2 minutes ago, Waterbrick Down said:

 I'm not necessarily saying that those have to be the case, just that biology can be used to justify anything we want it to in a fictional setting, just like your assertion that Elves are naturally keener senses.  The important thing is coming to a consensus on the mechanically influencing things.

I know. It's just that I don't really like those justifications very much. I recognize that 'logical' is supposed to be a reference to Vulcans, but with the Vulcans the commitment to logic was always more of a cultural thing as I understood it. Logic is something they actively elevate over emotion because Vulcan emotions are very intense and they blame this intensity for thousands of years of conflict. My assertion that elves have keener senses comes largely from Tolkien ('What do your elf eyes see?') and I admit that it's not necessary to base our assumptions for this world on his work. I suggested Endurant as an alternate trait for humans because humans are often pegged as the generic species and I'd rather make them more distinctive.

Talking about assumptions though, I have several ideas for a sort of initial lore segment for whatever we call the library. Something to set basic assumptions and give players something to build off. If it's allright I'd like to lay it out here.

[Waterbrick Down]

17 minutes ago, Lord Duvors said:

To be honest I think this looks very good.

I know. It's just that I don't really like those justifications very much. I recognize that 'logical' is supposed to be a reference to Vulcans, but with the Vulcans the commitment to logic was always more of a cultural thing as I understood it. Logic is something they actively elevate over emotion because Vulcan emotions are very intense and they blame this intensity for thousands of years of conflict. My assertion that elves have keener senses comes largely from Tolkien ('What do your elf eyes see?') and I admit that it's not necessary to base our assumptions for this world on his work. I suggested Endurant as an alternate trait for humans because humans are often pegged as the generic species and I'd rather make them more distinctive.

Talking about assumptions though, I have several ideas for a sort of initial lore segment for whatever we call the library. Something to set basic assumptions and give players something to build off. If it's allright I'd like to lay it out here.

Yeah I really have no background with Star Trek aside from surface level pop-culture, so my Elves were more based on D&D immunity to charm than Vulcans. Feel free to post here, though as things refine I'm thinking of creating Google docs for Rules, Races, Classes, Planets so people can edit/comment without bloating EB.

[Yzalirk]

@Waterbrick Down @Lord Duvors

The more I think about it I think each race should just have their own unique trait based on biology, not proficiencies.  I think all proficiencies should be up to the player and how they want to play that character.  So if you want to be a Dwarf who is great at Arcana and knows nothing about Engineering or Insight, you can do just that!  Like I suggested before with being passionate about something and having a burning passion for something else, some way to indicate you excel at certain thing maybe .  I think your starting proficiencies should reflect your character and personality rather than because you chose to play so and so.  I think it will define your character a bit more and make them more unique.  Maybe I am just overthinking it too much? 

Here's an example:

??? Cycles old, Android
Vitality: 5/5
Strength: 1
Skill: 2
Smarts: 2
Spirits: 1
Proficiencies: Acrobatics 2, Athletics 3, Perception 1, Short Range Weapons 1

I just threw this example together pretty quickly so don't pay too much attention to how the points are distributed.  Anyways, the colors indicate that this Android excels at Acrobatics and Athletics.  Acrobatics being highlighted with orange indicates they are good at that.  Athletics being highlighted with red indicates that they are great at that.  Maybe when you perform a skill check with whichever proficiencies your character is passionate about they have a better chance of being more successful at it?