Incarnaverse™ CL 12-2022

This material is not meant for Players or GMs; This is part of design, development and testing and is intended for that audience to assist in creating and assessing Incarna materials.

Incarna This is an iVerse Change Log; a summary of issues raised and/or dealt with through official game designer meetings and efforts.

NPC, places, geo features, etc. Neither of which have much in the way of standards either. After resolving any vanity project level design work, i’d like to focus on world and adventure materials to make having contributing authors jobs easier.

Settled Issues:
PUBLISHED: i20/iCore tabbed content template AND Feature template (for game designers only)
The hierarchy for organizing places and geological features.
‘Ready for use’ status indicators on templates
“basin” scale renamed “Reservoir” scale
Anima Energy “well” features (mana, etc.) renamed to “Reservoir” (get Well and Pool)
skill standard range – document (i20 goes 1-5, icore 1 to +x)

There was a lot on discussion on % success, difficulty, scales and CP values in an attempt to unify iCore and i20 as much as possible. Ex: The PB bonus in i20 – is this enough to make up for the lack of scale? Are we going to have a full skill scale for i20? Does it have a limit? Like are all skills capped for i20 as +5? Plus you get the PB bonus. So… Lore: Occult at 5th level costs 1+2+3+4+5 = 12 CP and +2 for PB = +7 = 35%… a easy/simple is 75% to start, so you have a 110% chance to know a simple DC 5 info / 85% chance to know average info

Knowledge Reference Forms moved to minor/major/significant

Should there be a skill tree? = NO!!!

COST: is anything besides flat and minor (basically one time and a normal scale) justified? YES; assign values to full scale

“Rules of Experience” moved from a required aspect of spending CP, to a experience limiter feature that grants 1 Essence at Character Inception.

Here is how the following features/concepts have been unified: cultural experience, upbringing, cloistered/occult apprentice/mentalist tutelage/ trait: https://incarna.net/feature/experience/

Change in Perspective

moving the “rules of experience” to a Feature called “Experience Limiter”? It would be worth 1 CP gained at Character Inception and is essentially a story based GM assigned trait. So the default is characters have no limits, or its a feature on a character sheet that they need to consult when improving their character. – https://incarna.net/feature/experience/exp/limited/

Arabus Grenier > The only concern i would see with this is it coming across as an over legislation of mechanics.

Kelly > well, it already exists as REQUIRED part of mechanics, this makes it optional and you get a gain from it. I kind of want that to be the point of all the story based features/traits… the base mechanics dont apply a lot of limits, but you get rewarded for playing “our way”… does it make more sense presented that way. I think i will drop that on the “Incarna Approach” page if we go this way.

Kelly > plus its a matter of perspective. If the baseline is the incentivized value, and the calculations we use are based on that, then starting with less will penalize you behind the scenes. Presentation just caters to the positive.

ADDED: Milieu Experiences = 2 per std character max (baseline)

Essence

Starting Essence for i20 now Sanity + PB + Order of being (5 typical) = 18 roughly

Expertises?

So many trait! How to best organize. Hierarchy, not flat. > already started this! Should it all be “traits” or are some just a form of “Expertise” or “mastery”? Call it specialization!

Adv/Disadv

Disadvantage is not the same as Measure of Quality. Both of them alter both the chance of success and the quality of result (for i20). They do NOT have the exact same impact in terms of their specific outcome alteration, but it is similar. The real question is when do we use one over the other. It seems like Disadvantage is THE big thing for DnD – especially OneDnD. We have this, RS, and CS/Attack adj to contend with.

https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2014/07/12/dnd-5e-advantage-disadvantage-probability/, https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/2sq49q/table_of_probabilities_for_advantage_and/, http://rolesrules.blogspot.com/2012/05/d-next-disadvantage.html

– One interesting take away is that rolling with advantage up front (rolling 2 dice on your first check) actually does have a very slight advantage over rolling each individually) – its small, but there (thats what she said!)

How doe we handle penalties? I think adopting the CS/Attack adjustment of a maximum of any one thing granting a + or – 1/2/4 is good. But then, how do we denote a “really special” outcome? We use Result Shifts. Is this essentially better than the CS/Attack 4 maximum?

DC 10 = 55% base chance
DC 10 w/Disadvantage = 30%
DC 10 w/-1 RS (essentially adds 5 to DC) = roughly 30% (negligible diff)
This is essentially a Measure of Quality -1 – on the d20 scale (not for iCore)
DC 13 = 40% base chance
DC 13 w/Disadvantage = 16%
DC 13 w/-1 RS (essentially adds 5 to DC) = roughly 15% (negligible diff)
DC 7 = 70% base chance
DC 7 w/Disadvantage = 49%
DC 7 w/-1 RS (essentially adds 5 to DC) = roughly 45% (almost a full +1 diff)

Is a +4 CS/Attack (Measure of Success) as good as a +1 MQ and the same a Disadvantage/Advantage? No – almost, but no. So Measure of Quality is the equivalent of a shift in 5 on the DC, which is NEARLY the same as Disadvantage.

Issue: Use Advantage universally or Measure of Quality for super impactful situations?

QUESTION 1: MQ -1 (or -2, -3, etc.) or Disadvantage? And should “Disadvantage” then also be a re-roll in iCore?

QUESTION 2: Or, maybe we should just equate Disadvantage to -1 Measure of Quality and shoehorn 5e into Incarna? What are worst outcomes of this?

the old iCore “Character Frameworks” are now moving to the unified “Experience” approach. Archetypes should also get moved to experiences

PLEASE ADD A FEEDBACK FORM TO WEBSITE