Skip to main content

On Sale: GamesAssetsToolsTabletopComics
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines

Is my game, Into the Woods..., the kind of thing you are looking for? All the things you encounter are basically fixed stat blocks that you need to roll against. It has two systems in play:

  1. Target Number - Where you just need to beat the target number with a D6 roll + modifier
  2. Opposed Roll - Where you need the higher overall number on a D6 roll + modifier

Rewards are given out depending on what phase of the game you are in, and are listed on the creature's stat blocks. So to me, that sounds close to what you are looking for at least. The game has been performing very well from what I can tell (compared to other TRPG's and such), so the system seems to have some decent appeal. My game was just a jam project, so it could certainly do with further polish, but it should serve as a solid base. I have an expansion for the game that fixes some things in the base game while expanding some of the content (at a small cost, base game is 100% free). Let me know if you want to look at that, we can probably work something out.

Anyway, I hope this was helpful. If this wasn't the kind of thing you were looking for, then sorry for the unnecessary reply. I'm interested in learning more about what you are making. Being totally honest, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "gamebook-oriented rule system", but it sounds cool nonetheless. Happy gaming, and in this case, creating! :)

(+1)

I'll have to give it a read, at 58 pages Into the Woods isn't exactly tiny. Sounds about right though, from your description. Meanwhile, to answer your question, I mean a system that doesn't require decisions to be taken for enemies during combat, removing the need for either a game master or AI. Fewer dice rolls are a bonus, though that's much less important when a computer does all the math for you. So I came up with this concept where enemies have an overall combat score (it's not like you should be able to see their exact stats anyway). You roll the dice; if you beat their combat score, you deal damage. If you fall short, you take damage instead. Variety would come from which of your stats you roll against and various (dis)advantages providing trade-offs.

Of course, as always the devil is in the details, hence why I started this conversation. Thanks for the help!

Haha, well very true! My game is not exactly small. Still, I'm happy to hear you are giving it a look, and I'll be extra happy if it proves useful to you in any way at all. Of course, I'd love to hear if you enjoy the game (if you do give it a shot and not just read through it). As to your explanation, yes, that was much more clear! Thank you for that. Sounds like I did get the general idea then. Sounds like a cool game though, so I look forward to how this all turns out in the end.

(+1)

Oh, 58 pages is small enough, just not possible to figure out at a glance. I left you a comment (and a rating). Other considerations aside, I notice your game does rely on opposed checks after all. And it turns out my rules had a fatal flaw as described earlier. Going to pivot again and try for a rock-paper-scissors system pitting each of the three attributes against a certain other. That should make combat interesting enough: what to do when your favored stat is well-matched by the opponent's?

(+1)

I hear ya. I appreciate the comment and rating, even if the game wasn't to your taste. I'll be responding to your comment there as well (for the benefit of future folks). Anyway, I was perhaps unclear last night, but yes, my game does rely on opposed checks, but only some of the time. Either way, it sounds like you still got something out of reading so I suppose that's good enough lol. Wishing you the best with your own game of course :)