Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion

options
Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion written Apr 23, 2022 23:18:21 GMT
aliasChandy
16written posts
chandrewearned bits
offlinecurrently
chandrew
New Member
chandrew Avatar
hullo
Hullo all

So after starting my rewatch of Bleach in anticipation of its return in October and basically falling (back) in love with the setting, I was surprised to see that there's a real lack of options for it for RP, even when a quick search here and on other forums/Discord servers shows there's at least some recent interest.

I've since dug out my old Bleach-related notes and ideas, contacted old RP buddies, and set to work on making a site. I know I can't please everyone but I do want to take into account some of the expectations and criteria others may have. I expect to do a lot of public spitballing and brainstorming so this place probably isn't going to function the same way as most interest checks. Instead, I'll be treating this thread as an extension of my drawing board and will be completely open to discussion. Even if you have no interest in this fandom, feel free to stick around and watch an aspiring site owner talk to himself (and hopefully others) and navigate some common problems! And for those interested in this project, please chime in with your suggestions, opinions, past experiences on comparable sites (running or playing), etc. While I certainly have a vision for what this site might be, I'd love to involve potential players in the development process so that it doesn't become tunnel vision.

Now, for the interesting stuff! At this early stage, nothing is set in stone but I've been making good progress with the basics like history/lore, the overall setup of the site (skins, layout, etc), and, more generally, the concept of the site as a whole. For a first (+ very long and rambly) post, here are some of the things I've been considering:

Style/Tone
I'll be honest... this is a pretty vague and intangible thing but I think most fans of Bleach will know what I'm trying to replicate here. I'm not sure how a site would encourage this in its tone and "culture" but stylishness and sophistication have always been a hallmark of the series. Sure, it's still a shonen involving fighting, power-ups, and evil spirits but it would be remiss to simply go for an edgy or overly grim direction. Is it mature optimism? A sophisticated cool factor that isn't just bigger lasers? Or is it intrinsically tied to Tite Kubo's artstyle and character design? Either way, I think it goes beyond just having an aesthetic site skin and well-dressed FCs.

Factions
Faction-based conflict practically writes itself in the Bleach universe. The contrast between the different races/factions is incredibly distinct while still leaving plenty of room for personal/character-specific conflict to emerge. Besides fighting, there might be politicking both within and between factions (temporary alliances, etc) with each member group vying to influence the outcome of site-wide events/plots. Problems I anticipate mainly involve mechanical and population balance and one faction being significantly more coordinated and/or high-impact than the others. On the other hand, I also anticipate a lot of people wanting to write as other factions specifically because of this lack of structure/organisation both ICly and OOCly so maybe it won't be that bad. Another potentially huge problem is toxicity but I'll touch on that in the Conflict-Heavy section since it's probably more relevant there. As an aside, a closed testing/beta period would probably only involve ONE faction (Shinigami/Gotei) to pressure test progression, mechanics, the site in general, etc.

Plot-Driven VS Player-Driven Plots and Events
I think there's a way to meaningfully implement both. Large scale/site-wide plots can work as a great backdrop and catalyst for growth. Even for those who have yet to reach the heights of influence, these site plots can function as a great way for people to feel less in their own bubble and more connected to a world and world state that they can affect. Naturally, players will also have their own personal plots for more focused character development which will be more organic and more specific to a character's themes. There are definitely times when only another player can satisfy an antagonistic role but I think there's something to be said about NPC villains as a source of site-wide fun.

Conflict
From past experience, some of my own favourite writing/RP moments have come from narrative conflict and situations where my characters are having their ideals challenged. This thread was a super interesting read in which a lot of people far more eloquent than I am articulated some common sentiments regarding conflict in collaborative writing/RP. Some recurring ideas and concerns from that thread that I share are navigating RPers who can't accept the idea of losing, toxicity, people losing perspective and confusing IC and OOC disagreements/negativity, negative encounters being harder to maintain, and so on. With that said, even with this immense minefield of potential problems, I still think collaborative conflict needs to be a central theme of the site and as a springboard for character growth.

As with most problems, more open communication (especially with communicating narrative goals) seems to be a good antidote for unwanted OOC conflict, even if it means a slight hit to the improvisational quality of RP. There's a way to balance this and, in the hands of a mature userbase, allow for compelling storytelling and character development. My current ideas include greater expectations placed on character creation e.g. clearer goals/ideals/flaws and how they might need to be challenged/addressed over a character's journey. However, this might come with the risk of more staff responsibility and an unwanted paternal atmosphere when it comes to policing character concepts. Luckily, I think Bleach provides a good framework already in terms of conflict fodder even at the stage of character creation that I'll discuss another time.

Combat and Mechanics
This is a tricky area. The ideal would be just enough to facilitate fair combat and give substance to flashy moments without being excessively crunchy and susceptible to players gaming the system. I understand that this is incredibly difficult to balance and I see the benefits of scrapping mechanics altogether in favour of something more freeform. The absolute worst scenario would be a toxic cesspool of one-upmanship and since this is still forum roleplay, any combat shouldn't be at the expense of collaborative writing. Mechanics would probably need to be very light and serve more as guidelines since anything too far on the side of simulation means more crunch BUT too loose then everything is left too open to interpretation and, in turn, disagreement.

In terms of flavour, I think stats and skills would add a lot to character expression and progression (discussed in next section) and as an aid to storytelling. But is that just adding another layer to this already scary and unwieldy onion? Fine-tuning the balance and interactions between stats, skills, and mechanics is really the business of game design. I'm a (second-rate) writer so for the sake of my own sanity and the workload of any potential moderators onboard, minimising the need for staff interference and mediation would be great. Mechanics as a whole probably needs the most consideration and workshopping so I welcome all input on this topic!

Progression
Besides being a good incentive to promote longevity and appealing to the brain's love of seeing numbers go up, a defined system of progression is a good way to illustrate growth. This would ideally be a resource earned from the recognition of character milestones and overcoming obstacles rather than a conversion from word count. This could then be spent on improving stats and skills (with the highest tiers of mastery requiring a request, for example). This fits nicely into the wider shonen concept of starting off weak and unskilled before finding your own niche and becoming a force to be reckoned with -- perfect for Bleach. On the other hand, I'd go so far as to say a well thought out progression system could completely replace hard numbers like stats and skills but as with the previous section on mechanics, this is another crucial part of the site that deserves comparatively much more thought.

And that's "all" from me for now! I will continue to post ideas and concerns throughout development but as I've mentioned before, I welcome any and all discussion, suggestions, and advice. Thanks in advance and looking forward to hearing from the wider community. 
last edit on Apr 23, 2022 23:21:24 GMT by chandrew
options
Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion written Apr 24, 2022 1:41:19 GMT
the eldritch truth
pronounsHe/Him
1,102written posts
Phantasmearned bits
offlinecurrently
Phantasm
Part of the Furniture
Phantasm Avatar
Style/Tone
mm baroque

Factions
Agree: I think factions should be kept to a bare minimum. Don't let the playerbase get split up too much. Say no to someone making their oc Sfjnasdn or a Bount. Keep it low - Shini, Arrancar, Quincy. Hybrids can be sub-groups. Races not tied directly into the main events of the story (Fullbringers, etc.) are rather pointless. Even if someone might want to write one, if you've got a clique of 5 people fucking off in some corner of the site doing irrelevant stuff, that's not good.

Plot-Driven VS Player-Driven Plots and Events
Not much to say here atm other than that I think there should be some focus placed on getting people into the story. Many varied events or hooks or other ways to allow people to get invested without needing to make a bunch of 1v1 threads. Though I think this is more a discussion for all sites in general.

Conflict
People might get pissed by what I say here, but I've always thought that staff are well within their right to deny characters or ideas. I think, like you said, a clear 'mission statement' helps. I sure as hell can't cook a souffle - there'll be people out there who can't write seriously or in the vein as what you're looking for. If the goal of the site is a series of well-told stories and character relationships, the person looking to rp a soul reaper who likes to pretend they're a puppy 24/7 might not be the best fit. No amount of 'maybe you should try changing x' will make that into a good situation. Not saying you should be turning away everyone at the gate, but having a clear definition of what you want and communicating that to app staff is important. There should be a base level or seriousness and skill.

Combat and Mechanics
I agree here, plus I'd continue to say that minimizing staff work would be a godsend. The more time staff can spend actually writing, the healthier the site. Member threads, aside from completion/grading/wtvr, should be entirely in the members hands. While I prefer long apps, there is something to be said for small/no apps in that regard too. 

Progression
Personally, I think WC is often boogeyman'd. It shouldn't be the primary focus, of course, but in my eyes it isn't a problem per se. It'd be too complicated probably to do something like a diminishing returns system, and there is some serious hate out there for minimum word counts. No one wants to slog through 1000s of words a post, but how often is 100-200 really enough to fully progress the plot? All that said, I just don't think milestone-only would appeal to a wide audience. Progress in that regard is subjective - some people don't want to follow a character 'arc' and to them progressing is just making and building upon relationships with other characters. If there isn't any forward momentum for their own character, it might not satisfy a milestone reward. tldr; milestone only is tenuous imo

I agree otherwise, some kind of loose system that works for varied abilities and concepts but still allows 'ranking' of characters is important. Whether that is light stats or a specific rank like 1-b or something idk. Tying it to IC rank would be a mistake imo like saying "they're a captain so they must be strong." Of the sites I've seen, in and out of fandom, BG has the system I find the best. Perhaps something even looser could be good too though. 
last edit on Apr 24, 2022 1:42:12 GMT by Phantasm
options
Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion written Apr 24, 2022 16:06:37 GMT
the waking storm
aliasLuxu, Galeforce, TenebraeQueene
pronounsShe/They
358written posts
tenebraeearned bits
offlinecurrently
tenebrae
Senior Member
tenebrae Avatar
i bit the tongue behind my teeth (it was never good enough for me)
Ohai. I see Bleach RP I come running! Anyways; here are my thoughts!

Setting: Bleach's style to me encompasses the early to mid 2000's. From it's style, it's setting, and it's feel. It's like the epitome of an urban supernatural fantasy. Cool clothes, cool characters, and cool abilities. I feel it wouldn't fit anywhere but in a modern setting.

Factions: Stringent factions never made sense to me on past Bleach roleplays. Mainly because Aizen, besides him being the villain. Had Shinigami and Arrancar working together. So I like the idea that races can work together or even maybe in some way loosely "get along" in some instances. Hyper focused groups tend to be annoying simply because I see it causing cliques in and out of character.

Plot Driven Vs Player Driven: Nothing to add here, I agree with you completely.

Conflict: Also agreed!

Combat & Mechanics: Hard stats have scared me off as I got older. Not only am I not roleplaying to do math. I also find it horribly restricting. On the flipside, complete freeform let's creativity but can also be abused. So I agree with mostly freeform but some light mechanics for guidelines.

Progression: I absolutely LOVE feeling like my character is getting stronger! Progression makes my goody good chemicals in my brain go 'brrrrrrr'. It also can be tied to characters own development as a help or even some sort of hindrance. I also agree that if a progression system is good enough, it can replace the hard stat stuff. Which I personally would prefer.


last edit on Apr 24, 2022 16:08:50 GMT by tenebrae
options
Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion written Apr 24, 2022 21:10:15 GMT
aliasChandy
16written posts
chandrewearned bits
offlinecurrently
chandrew
New Member
chandrew Avatar
hullo
Wow, firstly thanks for all the much-appreciated input so far! It looks like we're all mostly on the same page (which is reassuring -- I was never sure if I was just being too picky about a Bleach RP) but you've both also identified some details that I either took for granted, didn't know how to articulate, or just plain hadn't really thought about... which is exactly what I was wanting to achieve with this thread. 

As far as Style/Setting goes, Baroque is one part of it, I think? There's also (often contradictory) elements of gothic (in the literary sense), wabi-sabi, eclectic, punk, minimalism, brutalist, pop art, some Buddhist/Shinto art influences, Kamakura sculpture, etc. Like , I think it's as much a "feel" as it is something visual although the latter is probably the most convenient thing to actually try and influence. I know a cool skin isn't going to save a shitty site or even encourage a particular style of storytelling but conveying the design language of Bleach both visually and narratively is (surprisingly) important to me. That means no instances of cheap fluorescent colour or metallic gradient borders. It's the least I can do.

I forgot to mention that I'm also very against Factions/Races that aren't relevant to the central conflicts of the site, OC or otherwise, especially if it'd mean an unnecessarily fragmented playerbase like says. No moon people or busted science experiments or anything that serves just to stroke someone's ego and desire to be THE ultimate uniquely beautiful test tube snowflake. That also rules out pure Hollow as a meaningful race since they're too one-dimensional and probably function best as NPC mobs. As a whole, I agree with the sentiment that something very pared down will work best. Vaizards, if present at all, should be a privilege awarded through very significant character development. I also agree with Galeforce on factions not being too strictly enforced. There's definitely room for cooperation and depending on the situation, it may actually make sense for 2/3 factions to occasionally team up and prevent the remaining faction from advancing their goals unimpeded. Even on an individual level, there shouldn't be anything stopping the different races working together on a case by case basis.

Anyway, this might also be the right time for me to share some of my notes on the individual races' specific conflicts/issues/central problems. These thoughts will probably end up in some sort of racial/faction guide (after some serious trimming and condensing) and ties into some of my concerns about character creation and writing characters specifically for compelling conflict. There is a huge amount of brainstorming here so I've spoilered them for convenience -- read them at your own risk and only if you happen to be interested in my process!


  • Shinigami

SPOILER: Click to show
My initial thoughts on this is that being a Shinigami isn't an inherent obligation. Sure, the process itself of maintaining the balance of souls is imperative to keeping reality stable but on an individual basis, becoming a Shinigami is actually quite a deliberate choice; it's the willing adoption of a pretty gnarly responsibility so reasons for doing so should be well-developed and thought-out. This translates to what I think is the key underlying concern for a Shinigami: their relationship with duty. What I'm not saying is that all Shinigami should be dutiful and responsible -- just that aspects of their character should be considered in relation to this idea of duty.

Any personality trait or overall character concept can be assessed in this way. It doesn't need to be shoehorning or tropey either, although more skillful writers will achieve this with more subtlety. It just involves making consistent logical connections and framing a character's traits in a way that's mindful of duty as an ever-present backdrop. It's realising your character operates within a context of duty because being a Shinigami is literally a job. It doesn't matter if their characteristics are at odds or complementary to this sense of duty, as long as there is interplay that you can identify and expand on. There's also nothing wrong with insincerity or dishonesty here, as long as the feigned or complete lack of this sense of or relationship with duty is a conscious decision; a deliberate deficiency doesn't mean undeveloped or unconsidered but it's probably still worth framing in terms of a character having a disingenuous sense of their duty as a Shinigami.

I think this is much more important to establish than, say, a question like "why did your character become a Shinigami?" or even to entertain personal morality. Sure, it's nice to have the usual suspects like "desire to protect", "repent and atone for past sins", "overcome sense of weakness", etc but even these tropey motivations can be massively improved when evaluated in terms of duty. Your self-righteous, zealous, fanatical, holier-than-thou character now has an internal logic that ties their history, personality traits, and potential conflicts together in a neat bow: yes, she became a Shinigami in the first place because she was once impoverished and downtrodden but now her identity has been elevated by the inherent prestige of becoming a caretaker of the balance of souls - she just needs to keep doing a stellar job and be a stickler for the rules because if her duties aren't being taken seriously, what does she really have? On the other hand, a comparably impoverished Rukongai resident might have signed up just for the three square meals a day. Maybe he begrudgingly does his job and is lazy and cowardly but sticks around because he can't bear the thought of being a wandering vagrant again. His relationship with duty will be just to do the bare minimum and his convictions don't really align that much with the Gotei.

In both cases, once a relationship with duty has been established, meaningful and compelling conflict becomes easy. Intrapersonal conflict? Your colleagues don't agree with how you're doing your job or how you treat them. Interpersonal conflict? Duty might compel a Shinigami to be more or less sympathetic towards Quincy and either mercilessly hunt them down or let them go without any qualms or even cooperate with them. Internal conflict? You have doubts about whether you're really doing the right thing and other issues about self-belief which all lead perfectly into the whole Zanpakutou dynamic. This underlying relationship with duty doesn't even need to be problematic or in some way extraordinary. On the other hand, regular personality flaws can often be uninspired so I think this standard immediately forces your Shinigami to at least have the potential for developing through the aforementioned conflicts. Otherwise, any flaws are included just to satisfy an application process in balancing out whatever glowing positives a character already has. That's boring.

I don't think this is a big ask. If a prospective player can't even do the bare minimum of relating their Shinigami character concept to duty, then like Phantasm said: maybe they're just not a good fit. But, when it is present, I'l also have confidence in the player rounding off the remaining facets of a character because the core is already there. An additional point is I would honestly prefer a player to have a character concept that's a bit unsubtle and on-the-nose than completely vacuous, jumbled and unfocused. It can start as simple as the self-sufficient loner eventually realising he can do his job better with the power of friendship and teamwork, or a flake who grows and learns to be more independent so as to not over-rely on his comrades. Besides, maturity, subtlety and depth will come with IC interactions and through ideals being tested; I definitely don't believe in characters being finished products immediately after the creation stage or else we wouldn't need to RP in the first place.



  • Quincy

SPOILER: Click to show
In my eyes, being a Quincy also isn't really a deep and inherent obligation but it's not really a job either: it operates more as a way of life. Considering this, a Quincy's identity and character concept benefit greatly from the idea of pride; we hear it in passing as the "Pride of the Quincy" but I think there's something to this conceptually beyond being just a motto.

Their downtrodden history (and I do think maintaining this history of culling and extermination is important even in AU) contributes to a very unique sense of identity. It would be insensitive of me to compare a fictional group of superpowered humans with actual persecuted peoples throughout history but the stereotype is a compelling one. Picture a once mighty but now fragmented community and an immediately obvious impression you probably get is usually one of resilience that's framed in relation to a collective pride. But, on a deeper level, this also interacts with feelings of defiance, shame, a desire for vengeance or at least vindication, yearning for what was lost, and even a longing for a sense of community. In the context of Bleach, this is what makes the Quincy such a great faction: they have every reason to think that they're the good guys. In the canon, they were ordered not to exercise their way of life or else the balance of souls would be threatened. But, if we look at this ultimatum through the perspective of a Quincy, this could be just as easily seen as an affront on their identity -- and it's not like Shinigami are unfailingly around to protect them either.

However, living the Quincy lifestyle is still a conscious choice that reflects an individual's relationship with their Quincy identity and pride. The more well-adjusted ones might want to perpetuate their lifestyle and regather themselves for the sake of safety or even recover some semblance of dignity and pride. A more toxic reflection of this pride might be in the form of compensatory egotism and megalomania, self-righteousness, or a superiority complex. This latter kind might similarly band together for the strength in numbers in order to enact punitive justice on their past aggressors, developing a mindset not dissimilar to nationalism for the Quincy race. Some might not even feel strongly about being a Quincy at all and that can be framed as an individual's indifference to their racial pride. A Quincy is still a human after all and hunting monsters doesn't pay the bills but maybe there's a journey to be had for the reluctant Quincy reconnecting with his heritage. On this point of humanity, there is also an interplay between the ordinary and the supernatural. One person might fear it or resent it but another might love the thrill and commit totally to the Quincy lifestyle as an esape from everyday life. These are just a few personality quirks that benefit from a clear understanding of a character's pride and identity as a Quincy. What does it offer to them? Why would they reject or latch onto this aspect of their identity?

Whatever the lens, pride and identity can be expressed in a lot of ways for a Quincy. There's even a tradition vs modernity or "worshipping the ashes" vs "keeping the fire going" argument here. A Quincy's personal convictions might also be at odds with the will of the community. Much like a Shinigami's duty, I think this idea of a Quincy's pride forms a solid core for any Quincy character concept and paves the way for some compelling narrative conflict, whether that's intra-, inter-, or inner conflict and struggle.



  • Arrancar

SPOILER: Click to show
Some of this might be a bit headcanon-y but bear with me. For me, Arrancar represent an additional layer or extrapolation of the base Hollow survival of the fittest mindset. Regular Hollow consume simply to survive on a primal level whereas Arrancar seem to have evolved beyond this. They still want to grow stronger perpetually since might is right and only the strong survive but this has come with a more developed fear of the alternative: death and what it means. Fans of Bleach will know that I'm talking about an Arrancar's Aspect of Death which was never really formally developed in canon but I've always found it very interesting.

A wild animal doesn't rationally fear non-existence besides an instinctive will to avoid dying and that's more or less what I perceive regular Hollow to experience, even if they demonstrate much more intelligence and seem capable of cravenness, pettiness and fear. For an Arrancar, death has been given meaning and depending on the individual, it might be complementary or in opposition to his overall worldview.

In the absence of the Hogyoku, the site will probably be limited to "naturally-occuring" Arrancar i.e. a Hollow tearing off its mask. If the initial formation of a Hollow's mask represents a kind of regression or denial of awareness in favour of sating base instincts, then I've always viewed the removal of the mask as a form of twisted re-enlightenment or re-engagement with the very human fear of death. It's a transformative process that forces an Arrancar to give meaning to what losing the game of survival ultimately means for them personally. Powerlessness? Inadequacy? Emptiness? Relief? Whatever it is, it should be as central to an Arrancar as a Shinigami's relationship with duty or a Quincy's relationship with pride and identity.


I guess I'm glad that there's a general interest for fewer hard Mechanics (stats, etc) even when combat is part of the equation. The way I'd put it is I want mechanics to aid and support storytelling, not act as an inconvenience.

As for Progression, you both bring up interesting points. I do agree with Phantasm on milestone-only being a pain since constructing an argument for why a character deserves something every time you want achievements or developments to be acknowledged and rewarded just isn't fun -- we're RP'ing after all, not repeatedly defending a thesis. Going for a middle ground might be a cop-out answer on my part but "average" expectations on word count would probably be fine. Depending on a site's culture, relying on solely word count for progression/development might not be realistic anyway but I guess that's where some usage of milestone exp can come in handy to make up the larger chunks in progression. Speaking of BG, I agree that the way they balanced progression was perfectly fine and I wouldn't mind something along those lines. As the saying goes, imitation is the highest form of flattery and while I definitely don't want to rely on copying them, I also recognise that I don't need to reinvent the wheel and implement novel progression mechanics simply for the sake of being different. If there's a clear trajectory for a newcomer to become stronger, then that's a job well done.



If it wasn't already obvious, my priorities for now are definitely Combat and Mechanics and Progression. I find the lore and miscellaneous writing pretty easy so it's honestly "just" the game-y part of the equation that I'm scratching my head about. In the meantime, if anyone else has more concrete examples of light combat mechanics working well even in conjunction with stuff like skills then please let me know! I will also be doing more research into potential systems and will share any interesting findings. As before, any other input is appreciated: suggestions, concerns, observations, anything.

For anyone new to the party, do excuse my giant and verbose posts so far. I guess my elevator pitch at present is "Bleach AU forum RP that's stylish, mature, pared down, light on mechanics with lore-friendly progression, encourages collaborative narrative conflict, features inter- and intra-faction/race interactions, isn't a pp measuring contest, is a healthy balance of both plot-driven and character-driven developments, and isn't cringe".

Cheers!





last edit on Apr 24, 2022 21:12:18 GMT by chandrew
options
Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion written May 5, 2022 20:41:28 GMT
aliasChandy
16written posts
chandrewearned bits
offlinecurrently
chandrew
New Member
chandrew Avatar
hullo
Thank you so much for this, @cyypher  and for taking the time to share your work. This is incredibly valuable information and has already given me a ton of ideas re: the pace and overall feel of combat! I think you've crafted something that works well as a simulation for pretty granular combat, especially in a Naruto setting or even a wider shonen context. I love it! But it's also probably far more complex than is needed for the project I have in mind (especially your mechanics on deception and fatigue). As a side note, your system reminded me of how well-suited Naruto is for crunchy RP since a lot of the in-world mechanics and systems can be gamified very easily (which also makes me jealous since Bleach tends to be more vague and inconsistent haha).

For now, my criteria for the system I'm developing are:
  • Very light
  • DEFINITELY diceless - I don't think factors of probability and randomness need to be considered at all
  • Stats, if present, need to be the roundest numbers possible that aren't a pain to deal with. Also, the fewer stat variables in the first place the better
  • Skills are super important for flavour and give different races distinct options for progression and specialisation. Techniques are just expressions of skill
  • Wound/injury tiers or some other kind of damage approximation to avoid strict tracking of HP and damage formulae
  • Clearly defined limit on actions per round/turn/post/etc
  • Needs to actually suit the medium of Bleach and the wider Shonen/action format and meet typical expectations a prospective player might have regarding combat
  • Combat itself should need zero input from staff i.e. no GM-ing, refereeing, etc.
  • Most importantly: should aid/serve/support storytelling, not act as an inconvenience


Making Choices
SPOILER: Click to show
Rather than think about how mechanics and stats/skills work in isolation as my first port of call, I figured it'd make more sense to work backwards from the perspective of an end user interacting with the system and what some of my expectations might be. At the most basic level, I think it's helpful to have very pared down and clear options in combat. I've identified 3:
  • Offensive Actions
  • Defensive/Evasive (Mitigating?) Actions ("Response")
  • Bonus Actions (I'll talk about this more in the Flow of Combat section)

I agree that blocking and evading should be mechanically distinct and I also intend to keep these separate; I'm only grouping them together here as Mitigating Actions for convenience. With these options in mind, combat just becomes an interaction between actions and responses, with an Outcome/Resolution as a result of the interactions.

Without the clear elemental/affinity relationships as seen in Naruto, deciding the outcome becomes a pretty simple case of comparing the relevant offensive and responding/mitigating stats and skills. In the context of Bleach, this might mean dodging a sword strike or dissipating an incoming spell with the swing of a weapon. This is also where things get interesting, however: a defensive stat makes no sense in the context of actively defending because a character is going to be relying on their favoured skills and stats in a proactive and interactive manner. I.e. Person A's offensive stat and combat-relevant skill against Person B's offensive stat and combat-relevant skill; defensive prowess simply exists as an aspect of whatever combat skill (weapon proficiency, whatever race-specific spellcraft, etc) a character is using.

For dodging, this might be where the Mobility skill (Shunpo, Hirenkyaku, and Sonido for Shinigami, Quincy, and Arrancar respectively) comes into play but also begs the question of why someone would want to invest in speed and these mobility skills in the first place if mechanically responding with an attack of your own to mitigate an opponent's offensive action is equally valid? I think there should be clear situational drawbacks and advantages to blocking and evading. Additionally, as much as I like the spectacle of interruptions in your system, I'm also wary of all the additional mechanics needed to make it balanced and less susceptible to metagaming. If numbers beget more numbers, I'm happy to strip away some systems in favour of a simpler whole.

Anyway, with these ideas in mind, stats feel more like modifiers to skills operating as actions which is more or less how I'm imagining the context in which calculations will need to work.


Calculations
SPOILER: Click to show
As I've stressed before, I desperately want to avoid too many numbers and mechanics. The checks required for every interaction's resolution should be as pain-free as possible. That also means reducing the number of calculations in the first place which makes me think costs and stamina/exhaustion are less important in the context of Bleach. While Naruto has the Chakra system which works perfectly as a finite resource governing all sorts of actions in-universe, Bleach doesn't really benefit from something like this. People do get tired but it's rarely to the extent that they become limited in the number of things they can do in combat. If anything, it's usually gnarly injuries that act as the primary limiting factor and I think this works better for my system. I do like your fatigue and pace mechanics as a solution to tedious skill spam but it introduces some staff input that I also want to avoid entirely.

Anyhow, a basic iteration of a check might be:
  • A's Skill+Stat VS B's Skill+Stat = Resolution informing/affirming RP
(I'll discuss a more contextual version of this in the Flow of Combat section)

The Skill+Stat checks are pretty simple. Bigger numbers or higher tiers (or whatever other metric I eventually use) mean greater advantage, with certain ranges equating to differing levels of dominance. These ranges/bands then inform the injury sustained, if at all, without relying on damage formulae and HP. E.g. if Person A is a Dominant attacker, then Person B receives an injury corresponding to that dominance. If Person A were merely an Advantaged attacker, then a lesser injury would be sustained. I have ideas about how a Resilience or Constitution stat might work in relation to mitigating injuries (maybe only applicable in a separate damage/wound check) but I'm still thinking about it and whether or not it introduces an unnecessary calculation to the mix. I will also discuss these numbers/tiers/names in greater detail in future posts. For now, I think this is a decent framework that avoids too many abstract numbers and provides a consistent guideline for outcomes. The end result needs to be easily interpreted when acknowledging potential injuries, degree of dominance and "success", etc.

As a note to myself, in cases where the checks repeatedly yield equivalent results, I should be wary of combat taking forever and think of measures to avoid stalemates. Could evenly-matched fights turn into a tedious simulation for two individuals accumulating what is essentially chip damage over the course of several pages of responses?

As another note to myself, I definitely want to avoid the possibility of forcing certain checks between combatants. I do anticipate players min-maxing to some extent so techniques that can force a stat/skill check that someone hasn't invested in just wouldn't be fair, nor does it really fit the setting. On the other hand, I think there can be something really fun about skills being more effective against certain checks and reducing the mitigating effect of a response. One-dimensional displays of power and brute force might be mitigated to a lesser extent by a block but can be dodged. Likewise, a tricky technique that trades sheer force for rapidity might be better off defended against rather than attempting to dodge (and risk getting your foot singed or whatever). I think an Arrancar's Cero and Bala can demonstrate this quite well:
  • Cero reduces mitigation of blocks but not dodges; attempting to defend a Cero might mean dropping a tier (or probably something less detrimental) in the relevant checks and translate to a greater potential for injury.
  • Bala reduces mitigation of dodges but not blocks; attempting to dodge a Bala might mean dropping a tier (or probably something less detrimental) in the relevant checks and translate to a greater potential for injury.

In both of these cases, players aren't being forced outright to perform a certain check. Rather, they are aware that their favoured or habitual response may or may not be the optimal response to a situation OR it places a cost to performing said favoured response. This seems to correlate to behaviours in-universe too: characters seem to recognise when an attack is worth defending against or if it's better to just get out of the way. If damage is unavoidable either way then that's where there can be a clear logical choice being made rather than just mindless spamming of certain skills. If this mechanic of shifting outcomes by tiers proves too potent, then it should be adjusted accordingly or limited to higher tiers of Mastery.

Ultimately, skills can only ever be an interaction with existing mechanics. If checks and wounds form the backbone of this system, then skills should meaningfully affect and interact with these mechanics through modifying the default calculations, etc.


The Flow of Combat
SPOILER: Click to show
Without stamina and exhaustion mechanics, I guess I need to be mindful of action economy and anticipating how much back-and-forth actually transpires before a conclusion to combat is reached. As mentioned in earlier sections, stalemates also need to be considered since no one wants combat to unnecessarily drag on.

To begin with, I think 2 Actions per post works out fine. More than that then that's just way too much stuff happening at once. On the other hand, 1 Action per post seems far too granular and just makes combat a very slow grind of rock-paper-scissors. To illustrate:

  1. Person A uses Offensive Action (1) (Perhaps the person initiating combat is limited to one Action for the sake of balance)
  2. Person B uses Mitigating Action (1), describes the outcome (injury, etc), then presents an Offensive Action of their own (2)
  3. Person A uses Mitigating Action (1), describes the outcome (injury, etc,) then presents an Offensive Action of their own (2)

Anything more might be too much, anything less might be too slow. In the example above, I think there's just enough room to allow the calculation to inform roleplay and affect how a response can be written and justified. Here, calculations and checks would be occurring "between the lines" where the onus is on the responding party to consider the mechanical outcome and reflect it in writing.

As for Bonus Actions, I haven't quite figured out where they fit but I do think there's a place for them, especially with power-ups. Would a Bankai-equivalent power activation take up a full Action while a Shikai-equivalent equate to a Bonus Action? This definitely needs more thought.




I think my next post will discuss some of my more specific ideas on stats and skills in more detail - especially the stuff about interacting with existing mechanics. Needless to say, there are still many details that need ironing out but I think I'm making good progress with the overall framework for my system. As always, this is very much a brainstorming and spitballing process so I appreciate any input!
last edit on May 5, 2022 21:03:18 GMT by chandrew
options
Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion written May 7, 2022 20:23:43 GMT
aliasChandy
16written posts
chandrewearned bits
offlinecurrently
chandrew
New Member
chandrew Avatar
hullo
Wow okay, your post is a pretty serious deep dive into a more esoteric and philosophical side of forum RP. You bring up intriguing points and I hope I made it sufficiently clear that my observations on your approach aren't intended to be critical but merely comparative as I work towards developing my own system. If you don't mind, I would also like to keep things on topic and frame this discussion with the development of my site in mind while still addressing some of your points.

The degree of mechanical "intervention" is definitely something difficult to balance in the context of forum roleplay and collaborative writing (and I do think these are distinct things that happen to overlap in practice). Have you considered a more freeform experience with a heavier focus on the collaborative writing side of things, and maybe even moving away from settings where regulated combat interactions might be desirable or necessary? Many of your concerns seem to revolve around systems (in a general sense -- not necessarily referring to hard stats/mechanics) ultimately acting as a restricting or infringing force that can be at odds with your particular vision for storytelling. If narrative craft is your primary concern then I think you're right: there's little reason for Systems to exist because internal logic can be affirmed through communicating with like-minded writing partners who share similar expectations. Even systems intended to safeguard freeform collaborative writing aren't going to work as well as simple communication.

Sure, the same amount of communication should still be observed in sites that benefit from systems for combat -I'm not advocating for some kind of non-consensual PVP crunchfest- but the potential for different interpretations becomes much greater. I think combat inevitably gamifies a roleplay forum even when it manages to avoid unhealthy competition and one-upmanship. Gamification isn't necessarily a good or bad thing but it does mean there is now an inherent incentive to interpreting rules or, in their absence, your idea of "internal logic" and context in a manner that favours one's own characters and allies. This might be an honest mistake or it might be wilful misinterpretation and rule-bending. Regardless, it's difficult enough to maintain genuine neutrality in any collaborative writing context, let alone one in which combat is being simulated.

Anyhow, I'm very grateful for your input because through reading your thoughts and in articulating my own, I think I've now got a clearer picture of this project. I knew very early on that I wanted to avoid a completely freeform experience even though I value a sense of storytelling that isn't stifled by too many systems. I also feel strongly about the Bleach setting thriving in a roleplay context where combat (and conflict in general) is a part of the equation. Going for a middle ground might be a cop-out answer but I do think there's a way to implement engaging systems-based combat without numerical costs, distance/range-tracking, resource management and other minutiae completely tanking any sense of collaborative writing and storytelling. I don't think these two things need to be in opposition to each other.

For me, the activity I'm actually sitting down to engage in is still roleplay and collaborative writing is simply the medium rather than the activity itself. This combination results in a unique feeling of being both a (role)player in a "game" and as (co-)author of a story that isn't felt in more direct roleplay like D&D or purer forms of collaborative writing without the roleplay aspect. I guess my inclusion of combat shifts the vision for my project closer to that of a game, which in turn benefits from guidelines that offer substance and seek to define reasonable parameters for roleplay. Given this, it's probably better to reframe my system as serving and supporting roleplay, rather than interacting with storytelling.

Stats
SPOILER: Click to show
With systems serving roleplay as my new MO, I think it's helpful to discuss some benefits of having stats in relation to what they can do for improving the roleplaying experience.
  • It's a quantitative reflection of progression that works alongside skills in a complementary way
  • Actively distributing an earned resource creates a clear sense of choice and personalisation for a character
  • A range of stats rather than a single modifier (tied to progression/rank, etc) provides more scope for customisation, expression, and distinction between character archetypes and can mechanically support IC reasons to be more invested in one area of progression and development over another

I think it's very rewarding to have the option to build brutes, glass cannons, and everything in between and this process suits the genre well. It does mean more potential for min-maxing but maybe that's better than characters being innately good at too many things simply because of a singular modifier.

As for more specific considerations:
  • "Strength" - reflects physical capabilities and would be used to determine the potency of melee attacks
  • "Spirit" - used for "casting"-related skills i.e. Cero, Kido, Quincy spells, etc. I think a Quincy whose spirit weapon is ranged would use this as their primary stat too, regardless of it being a gun or a bow. A Zanpakuto that manipulates Reiryoku for various means might use this too.
  • "Speed" - I was originally in two minds about this. On the one hand, I thought a stat for innate speediness could be scrapped if there's already a universal "Mobility" skill across races. On the other, I do think that while skills should have a greater effect on any potential calculations, a specific stat does offer additional nuance. I also don't think this should dictate how fast someone's attacks are i.e. how unavoidable their attacks are.
  • "Resilience/Constitution" - defence might be the more classic and game-y expression of this idea but it could also be misinterpreted as someone's active defensive capabilities i.e. defendING rather than innate defences. I think Resilience better reflects the sense of resistance to damage I'm trying to convey here but I'm still unsure about how damage checks might work.

In my previous posts, I talk about how stats themselves can function as a numerical modifier to skills and I think this can work if it's something as simple as a Strength of 50 meaning +50.


Skills
SPOILER: Click to show
I've had some more time to think about an idea briefly explored in my previous post about certain skills having an advantage against certain checks. I think this should be pretty easy to implement without complicating or even altering the system at all and the more I brainstorm, the more this seems like a lot of fun. This also ties into the concept of mechanics serving roleplay; I would hate for skills to just be a mindless clash of big numbers with no real distinction for the players. These skills operate on the 2-action system I've discussed in an earlier post. A super pared-down explanation of this idea would be some skills making blocks less effective as a response, and some skills making dodges less effective as a response. Some might just be neutral. I am playing with the idea of calling this "Mitigation" and should be a mechanic most prevalent in Racial Skills. I don't think this should involve stat checks i.e. being stronger/weaker against either Strength or Spirit.

Universal Skills
Combat Proficiency
Limitations: None; can be used twice per post
Description: Governs use of Zanpakuto, Spirit Weapons, hand-to-hand combat, etc.
Notes: As tempting as it is to split weapon proficiency and hand-to-hand combat, I'm not sure the added flavour justifies the distinction UNLESS I can think of a logical benefit or drawback to using one over another. The RP implication is just that your character attacks with whatever skillset they're most comfortable with. Is it a problem if players default to writing their characters as being equally masterful in both?
This skill is used both proactively and reactively, i.e. blocking would use this too rather than any specific defensive skill

Mobility
Limitations: ? ?
Description: Represents high-speed movement used for dodging and covering distance. Shunpo, Hirenkyaku, and Sonido for Shinigami, Quincy, and Arrancar respectively
Notes: Considering Combat Proficiency's role in blocking, what limitations should dodging/blocking have to avoid one making the other completely redundant? As mentioned in an earlier post, why would someone invest in Speed and Mobility if Combat Proficiency can be used universally for both attacking and defending? Why not invest solely in Strength or Spirit to maximise the utility of Combat Proficiency? Having some skills specifically (i.e. mechanically) more difficult/less rewarding to block is one incentive but I don't think it's enough. I will give this more thought and would appreciate any input. I think I also want to avoid these two skills operating on different scales and thresholds (i.e. easier for dodging to completely avoid damage) for simplicity's sake. 


In theory, all combat can be resolved with the above two skills; if you're not proactively attacking, you are reacting. Within reacting, there's defending and evading. It may be that skills have different utility when used proactively and reactively but I haven't thought too much about this yet.
  • Person A makes an offensive Action (1) | Strength + Combat Proficiency (as before, person initiating has 1 Action)
  • Person B responds by dodging (1) then makes an offensive Action (2) | Speed + Mobility, Spirit + Combat Proficiency
  • Person A responds by blocking (1) then makes an offensive Action (2) | Strength + Combat Prof, Strength + Combat Prof
  • Person B responds by blocking (1) then makes an offensive Action (2) | Spirit + Combat Prof, Spirit + Combat Prof

If the stat+skill total of an offensive action exceeds the stat+skill total of a response, an injury is received. The greater the difference, the greater the potential injury (prior to damage calculation, if it exists as a system at all). Here, the base universal skills don't interact with altering the base calculations beyond providing stat+skill totals. 

Shinigami | Racial Skills
SPOILER: Click to show

Hadō | Way of Destruction
Limitations: Once per post prior to Mastery?
Description: Offensive magic
Notes: I think this can be functionally similar to Cero whereby blocking is rendered less effective but can be dodged without additional detriment*. Without this distinction, this would function identically to Combat Proficiency and I don't think that's ideal. This would scale with the Spirit stat and probably need limitations/drawbacks. *Could it in fact be easier to dodge?

Bakudō | Way of Binding
Limitations: Once per post prior to Mastery?
Description: Defensive and binding spells
Notes: An unfortunate complication is that Bakudō comprises both binding and defensive spells. Outside of personal/signature powers, it also appears Shinigami are the only ones with access to some kind of native "stun" or "immobilising" mechanic. This could definitely be abused or just plain broken if not clearly defined. How should binding work mechanically and how does it interact with dodging and blocking? Should there be specific bonuses when used as a response? The mental image of a character with Mastery in this skill using different spells to respond to attacks and provide attacks of their own is super cool.
Proactive = Binding | maybe using a binding spell interacts with dodging/mobility and therefore "force" a certain response on the next turn? This needs a lot of work but I have a few ideas
Reactive = Blocking | maybe blocking with Bakudō can't be reduced in effectiveness by block-targeting skills like Cero, Hadō, etc? Maybe tie this to skill rank (only Mitigated by skills of equivalent rank)?

Kaidō | Way of Restoration
Limitations: Once per post prior to Mastery?
Description: Healing and restorative magic
Notes: I think I need a more well thought out wound system before further brainstorming on this can actually make sense. For a few early concerns: how would this mess up action economy i.e. would someone want to "waste" one of their actions to heal? Would an opponent's next post need to be limited to one action again akin to the start of combat? If group combat is a thing, this also seems like the only native skill outside of personal powers that can heal others.


Quincy | Racial Skills
SPOILER: Click to show

Blut Arterie
Limitations: ?
Description: Boosts offensive capability
Notes: Would this be a passive skill or Bonus Action? When in use, could it make any attack with a spirit weapon reduce ("Mitigate") the effectiveness of an opposing block? Could it directly modify the universal Combat Proficiency skill? I personally don't think this should confer stat bonuses.

Blut Vene
Limitations: ?
Description: Boosts defensive capability and durability
Notes: Would this be a passive skill or Bonus Action? How would it affect damage calculation? I don't think this should affect blocking, unless maybe a player had earned a Mastery in it (and even then, I'm way of this seeing use as an active skill for blocking etc). To echo the in-universe limitations, maybe the two types of Blut can't be used in the same post. Like Blut Arterie, I don't think this should confer stat bonuses either.

Kirchenlied/Gintō
Limitations: Some kind of set-up being required? 
Description: Quincy spellcraft
Notes: When used offensively, I think this could be functionally the same as Hadō and Cero i.e. being difficult to block but can be neutrally dodged. From a lore perspective, Quincy spellcraft seems to require more setup, moreso than its cousins. Can this be reflected somehow? Unfortunately (from a balancing perspective), Quincy spells also seem to encompass offensive, defensive, and binding/sealing capabilities and I don't know exactly how to convey this without making this a skill that can do everything. I could just make this a casting skill that can be used both proactively and reactively and go from there.

Ransōtengai
Limitations: ?
Description: Allows a Quincy to continue fighting even after grievous wounds have been sustained
Notes: Only self-targeting and temporarily ignores wounds without healing them. Could be useful in a stalemate situation but what might the consequences be of abusing the body like this? I'll be able to workshop this better when I have a better idea of wounds and damage checks.


Arrancar | Racial Skills
SPOILER: Click to show

Cero
Limitations: Once per post? Can't be used in consecutive posts?
Description: A blast of concentrated spiritual energy
Notes: As referenced before, maybe this can be difficult to defend but can be dodged without detriment (or perhaps even easier to dodge?) Other limitations might include being unusable in consecutive posts. 

Bala
Limitations: Maybe this doesn't need the once per post limitation?
Description: A Cero that sacrifices power for speed
Notes: As discussed before, maybe this Mitigates effectiveness of dodge but doesn't affect blocking actions (or maybe could be easier to block)

Hierro
Limitations: ?
Description: A skill that boosts durability
Notes: Much like Blut Vene and as such, the same concerns apply. I do think this functions better as a purely passive skill at damage calculation but I can see circumstances where this might be cool as an active skill. Maybe only at Master? 

Regeneration
Limitations: I think these need to be very well-developed to avoid Arrancar being unbeatable.
Description: Heals wounds
Notes: I think this works well as a passive skill that maybe heals a rank or two of accumulated injuries over a number of posts. Can it be sped-up if used as an Active skill? Maybe limit this to Master.



For my next update/topic of discussion, I'll be working on revisions and standardising terms (especially for concepts like proactive/reactive, dodging and blocking, mitigation, etc). For now, I think I'm happy with the basic feel of these races and their specific skills. Shinigami seem to be generalists, Quincies present quite a resourceful skillset, whereas Arrancar have an oppressive and relentless playstyle. I may have a crack at exploring how personal/signature powers work but I think I want to prioritise stats and skills for now; once these can be more formalised, I can see how powers interact with them.
last edit on May 7, 2022 20:27:02 GMT by chandrew
options
Bleach AU RP - Brainstorming & Discussion written May 12, 2022 18:27:33 GMT
aliasChandy
16written posts
chandrewearned bits
offlinecurrently
chandrew
New Member
chandrew Avatar
hullo
Hey hey, back to share some more notes and thoughts on Skills.

For reference, I don't think Bleach really benefits from overly specific individual techniques (unlike, say, Naruto and Jutsu) besides their use as flavour. As such, "Skills" in this instance refers to families of expertise which in turn give mechanical context to a character's Actions in combat. If someone wants to give their favourite sword stroke or evasive footwork a name, sure -- I would even actively encourage it. I think this area benefits from being more freeform but to avoid custom flavour spiralling out of control, these individual techniques can just be expressions/applications of existing Skills.

As established in the previous post, a player generally has two Actions per combat, with exceptions for those initiating combat limited to one, and certain Skills functioning as Bonus Actions in select circumstances. For the most part, Actions are either:
  • Proactive - used to initiate an interaction or change in state. Not necessarily offensive in nature which is why defining this Action as an "attack" may not always be helpful
  • Reactive - used as a response to incoming attacks and comprises both blocking and evading

Not all Skills can be used both Proactively or Reactively and some Passive Skills may even be neither. In other cases, Skills might gain additional functionality upon Mastery, such as an Arrancar learning to use the ordinarily Passive Skill of Regeneration as a proactive Action to speed up the healing process or a Shinigami learning to employ Hadō/destructive spells more precisely or rapidly to defend incoming attacks as a response rather than solely as a proactive skill.

Mitigation of Response
SPOILER: Click to show
My starting point here was honestly just a combat system that could consistently produce binary outcomes: success/failure, advantage/disadvantage, hit/miss, or whatever. However, if combat can be resolved simply with increasingly large numbers pitted against each other, not only is this not very interesting but there's no reason for investing in a bunch of skills when a player could just invest solely in one and use it for everything. There would be no reason for separate skills to exist at all.

Then I thought about rock-paper-scissors: maybe some skills could yield a clear advantage over another. This wasn't great either since Bleach can't reliably or meaningfully use element/affinity relationships and devising comparable links between the in-universe skills felt arbitrary, not to mention impractical; a game of RPS with 10+ variables and interplay between each equates to an astounding number of specific relationships. RPS is also immediate whereas (written) combat is sequential, meaning a responding player could potentially have all the answers to an incoming attack and make for unbalanced combat.

Thinking more about this idea of interaction, I had a light-bulb moment: the system only needs to offer interactivity... in the interactive phase of combat. More specifically, this just means the moment where an incoming attack is either being blocked or evaded: any relationships only need to exist in relation to these responses rather than existing between specific skills.

Mechanically, all this means is some skills reduce the effectiveness of a block, and some reduce the effectiveness of a dodge. I am calling this interaction Mitigation (of Response) and is the system for how Skills will work and interact in practice. Thematically, this can be explained as some responses simply being less suited for certain incoming attacks. From a previous post:
This seems to correlate to behaviours in-universe too: characters seem to recognise when an attack is worth defending against or if it's better to just get out of the way.
If a technique is particularly oppressive and destructive, evading it rather than meeting force with force might be a good idea. On the flipside, techniques which favour speed or trickery (i.e. goading an evasive response) may be better defended against by steadfastly blocking. There may be cases where either response will yield an injury and it will be up to a player to weigh their options to minimise injury.

I think this is simple to engage with as an end user, and still offers nuance and variety to the immediate context of combat and in longer term progression by encouraging investment in a range of Skills. It also helps manage an earlier concern I had about fights between equivalent characters always turning into stalemates. Mitigation of Response effectively provides the potential for a gentle nudge in any given interaction without completely unbalancing a still mostly equivalent exchange. 

More generally, I think the system provides limits without being too stifling. Additionally, there may even be ways to make skills less susceptible to Mitigation through Mastery against opposing Skills of inferior or even equivalent rank (again, providing incentives to progression). Players can still exercise autonomy and still have the freedom to express how things affect their own characters. If anything, the onus is squarely on the responding party to reflect an outcome in writing, whether that's acknowledging the degree of damage or affirming a complete evasion. Nothing is being done to a character against a player's wishes.

Thinking of the system this way, outcomes also work quite well as emergent writing prompts. If the system has determined that an attack will produce minor injuries, a player can express this accordingly. As injuries become more severe, players can make a spectacle of it: spitting out teeth, coughing blood, nursing a dislocated shoulder or singed hand, etc. I personally think this offers something to the roleplay and the added nuance of Mitigation of Response pushing checks in the favour of different interactions means even more substance and detail can be written in. Attempting to block a blow that Mitigates blocks? Maybe you can write your character getting thrown backwards by the force through a nearby building. Attempting to evade an attack that Mitigates dodges? Maybe you can consider getting caught off-guard and sustaining a context-appropriate injury like being struck in the side when trying to escape the deceptive blow. This is Bleach, after all.


Skills (Revised) (but still work-in-progress)
SPOILER: Click to show
SkillAction Type(s)StatDescription
Combat/Martial ProficiencyProactive/ReactiveStrength/Spirit>Provides no Mitigation (but maybe this can be earned at (Grand)mastery?)
<Blocks with this skill cannot be Mitigated upon (Grand)mastery?
MobilityReactiveSpeed<Evasion cannot be Mitigated upon (Grand)mastery?
Hadō
Proactive/Reactive [M]Spirit>Mitigates Block
<Maybe Mastery means this can be used reactively?
Bakudō
Proactive/ReactiveSpirit>How can this interact with Evasion? Usable twice per post upon Mastery?
<Can only be Mitigated by superior skills?
Kaidō
Proactive->Lowers current Wound level 
Blut Arterie
Bonus ActionStrength/Spirit+Modifies next attack with Combat Proficiency to Mitigate Block? Too OP?
Blut Vene
Bonus ActionResilience?+Lowers incoming/received Wound level?
Kirchenlied/Gintō
Proactive/ReactiveSpirit>Mitigates Block?
<?
Ransōtengai
Proactive->Temporarily ignore Fatal (i.e. fight-ending) wounds for x posts/rounds? 
Cero
ProactiveSpirit>Mitigates Block
Bala
Proactive/Reactive [M]Spirit>Mitigates Evasion
<?
Hierro
PassiveResilience?~Lowers incoming/received Wound level?
Regeneration
Passive/Proactive [M]-~Lowers Wound level by x every y posts?
>Upon Mastery, can lower current Wound level when used as an Action?



I feel like numbers work best when introduced to balance out certain factors in an existing system so my next steps will probably relate to comparison tiers/thresholds and the numbers and ranges involved in determining these outcomes. For skills specifically, I need to work some more on implementing limitations such as potential rulings against consecutive use but also avoiding overly specific cool-down periods. Other options for limitation might involve skills that Mitigate blocks being easier to evade and vice-versa. Not sure about this one but once the numbers get implemented, I think I'll have an easier time balancing (and finalising) the individual Skills.

My current concerns mostly revolve around whether or not this system is already too restricting. When I put myself in the shoes of a potential player, I don't feel too limited by things like some Skills having specific use-cases (not being able to use Hado reactively etc until Mastery or whatever) but am I just giving my own creation some extra leeway? I'm trying to be neutral and also cognizant of player/writer experience but I also know I can't please everyone. I personally don't feel this is a complicated system but I'm the one who made it.

Anyhow, thanks as always to those who check out these posts and I welcome any and all input. I am also considering making a Discord at some point to make short-form discussion and chats easier.

last edit on May 12, 2022 18:30:33 GMT by chandrew