Honestly I like a lot of it - a few thoughts:
- This was one of the first rpgs I even took on designing, and though I like it, there are definitely some improvements I'd add now. I like to think I've gotten slightly more elegant with my design, and I think some of the things you've added are stellar.
- I in fact in my first back-of-napkin writing of this game thought to use the "mind body soul" framework for attributes. But in full honesty I value the variation of classic dexterity versus strength. i, additionally wanted to leave a "charisma" and "intelligence/wisdom" type skill to provide a variation for numerous magic systems that could be used. all in all, i feel as though I like the attributes I had picked for the meaning behind them, but do like "persona" more than charm.
- tenet is a much better word than core belief. I like that.
- i personally do like the hp system I had put in place as it feels it honors some more old school methods of your attributes influencing your other dependent variables of stats (aka wizards end up being glass cannons, etc.), but can understand the desire to start at a more even playing field!
- healing mechanic is great, i like it - just didn't end up putting it in, but i agree on the method of doing it. might offer 2 hp rather than 1 hp because 1 hp doesn't go very far post a fight.
- i like the max hp idea to 7. over the years of my rpg experience and growth, i've also come to love the "if you bounce back from passing out, you grow stronger and gain hp" method some games use, as I find it encourages risky and fun play and develops a grizzled character. that could potentially be another way to gain hp if you're someone who isn't gonna focus on physical attributes. but also using the 5 xp to gain hp is a good idea too. not as narrative engaging in my mind perhaps, but still great!
all in all, great edits all around. nothing about hacking an rpg is presumptuous, if anything it feels honoring to have you hone it to something even better!
Thanks for the reply and compliments!
ATTRIBUTES. Funny, after seeing “Persona” on the document, I found “Charm” more, uh, “charming”. Not to mention, at five letters, it’s two letters shorter, making it fit better and visually (very closely) align with the four-letter words “Body”, “Mind”, and “Soul”, which matters in a game this compact and succinct where the text doubles as an aesthetic.
GENRE. I was initially viewing Wander as a thoroughly generic system unbeholden to any genre (larglely due to the presence of the skills "Technology" and "Science" which lead me to conclude that the game is for a nonmagical setting) and hence sought to broaden the concepts of each attribute, but based on what you’re saying, it sounds to me like you have traditional fantasy in mind, so that:
Muscle = Fighter
Agility = Rogue
Wits = Wizard
Charm = Cleric
IS THAT CORRECT?
MUSCLE. What do you think about changing “Muscle” to “Strength” in order to match the other immaterial descriptors? Or do you feel like “Muscle” is needed to convey a physical beefiness that translates to HP?
CHARACTER CREATION. My second thought about Wander (the first being “COOL!”) was that the attributes are out of balance due to Muscle and Agility determining HP while Wits and Charm determine nothing. there’s no apparent mechanical incentive to fill Wits or Charm at the time of character creation.
Is it a reasonable assumption that upon meeting Wander, players will plan to import an extraneous magic system that will justify filling Wits and/or Charm at conception? Knowing roleplayers . . . probably . . . but it’s unfair, I think, to foist it on them or even incentivize it by excluding inherent, immediately-tangible benefits to filling Wits or Charm from the start. And not all settings even contain supernatural elements. AND, again, the skills "Technology" and "Science" lead one to conclude that the game is for a nonmagical setting. So the GM/player is incentivized to import a magic system but also led away from a setting with magic by those two skills, catching the GM/player in a thematic contradiction (unless they plan to play Shadowrun.) I hope that all makes sense.
Perhaps the way to balance this out is you get to fill an XP or additional Skill box for each box filled in Wits and Charm. What do you think?
MAGIC. And/or Magic could be a skill somehow linked to Wits and/or Charm (which may open a can of worms), but theoretically, what do you think about magic as a skill?
HEALING. I chose 1 HP because I prefer slow healing. But 2 HP would theoretically yield 1 HP per day on average, so yeah I could see that.
HIT POINTS. I think allowing players to spend XP for HP jives with the narrative of growing stronger through experience, a ubiquitous RPG mechanic. It would all but require an HP cap though.
ELEGANCE. What are the “some improvements” that you’d “add now”?
The mockup of the front is hideous, I know, but I'm a total amateur at these kinds of things.
On a word document, the rules text on the back is all caps, bold "aptos (Body)", 7 font, single spacing. It fits into a 2" wide, 3" tall space. the first word of each break is umber color. Anyways, here's the iteration.
CHARACTER. WRITE A NAME AND MAXIM. FILL 2 STAT BOXES, A SKILL BOX, AND 3 HP BOXES. INTRODUCE AND DESCRIBE YOURSELF.
GAMEPLAY. A GM FACILITATES AN ADVENTURE. IF AN OUTCOME IS UNCERTAIN, THE GM PICKS A STAT. FLIP A COIN, PLUS 1 MORE FOR EACH FILLED BOX OF THAT STAT, PLUS 1 MORE IF SKILLED AT IT. IF YOU WIN A FLIP, YOU SUCCEED UNLESS OPPOSED. IF OPPOSED, WINNER OF THE MOST FLIPS SUCCEEDS.
DAMAGE. MINOR =1; MODERATE =2; MAJOR =3; MORTAL =DEATH. AT 0HP, FLIP A COIN. IF YOU WIN, YOU PASS OUT. IF NOT, YOU DIE.
HEALING. ONCE A DAY, AFTER 6 HOURS OF SLEEP, FLIP A COIN. IF YOU WIN, HEAL 1HP.
EXPERIENCE. FILL AN XP BOX IF YOU FAIL AN ACTION, MAKE A HARD CHOICE BASED ON YOUR MAXIM, OR SURVIVE AN ADVENTURE. YOU CAN SPEND XP: 3 =A FAILED ACTION HAS MIXED RESULTS; 5 =FLIP A COIN; 7 =FILL A BOX.
Quibble. In your original front, there's a heart for hp and a heart for charm, which sends a mixed message at first glance. It's kind of a cognitive misdirection.
