I feel like this would be partially based on the type of scene or even the environment of the game. I think social based stuff is a lot easier to do async where as action based items feel like they need to be sync’d just to keep moving.

I also like the separation of sync / distracted / async. I really don’t have the life space to do sync’d anymore, almost always I’m distracted or async, but the problem for me like so many other mentioned is getting the motivation blues when it comes to async taking too long.

In the past while running it I have told the table that cyphers which are carried over from one session to the next cost xp. So one cypher carry over free. Two costs 1. 3 cost 3 4 cost 5 and so on

Like a lot of modern games cyphers are part of the game currency for story telling and get hoarded. The best approach IMO is they don’t carry over and need to be used in the sessions they’re earned.

I have dm’d numenera a dozen times for different groups at cons and in the group of friends. I have never once gotten bad feedback on the setting. Because it alllll works. It lets you be free. Awesome setting and execution for what it is trying to do.

@mietze

This is exactly my dream as well. A table top with extended downtime activities and stuff for players to sink their teeth into around the main campaign.

I think there’s Role Play which takes place a lot by players, but there’s also the Game element which is the more system in place element.

The beauty of his hobby is that a lot of times both exist together. Players role play through a lot of the game, but then there’s the events or actions that trigger game events. Those of us that are looking at the code barrier to entry are talking about the fact that we want the game element to be as functional for the players (and ourselves) to help with that part of things.

Otherwise, why not just set up a big google doc?

@L-B-Heuschkel

I think that’s always been my ‘hiccup’ as it were in regards to the FS3 automation vs. anything else.

If you want to keep the tasty combat in, you are really handcuffed in what you can do. Otherwise, it’s far less restrictive.

Take for example even the simplicity of adding a ‘bonus’ to your actions based on a BG skill in FS3 automated combat.

@L-B-Heuschkel

I’m curious if this is with the intent to be used with the automated combat systems? Since otherwise wouldn’t everything be just on the narrative side?

@Tat

I have considered putting in the legit work to develop a Powered by the Apocolypse plug-in for ARES. Flexibility built into it serves as a narrative-based ‘system’ and there are a lot of materials out there for a wide swath of genres.

I’d have to second what a lot of people above had said. Barriers to Entry.

If you think about the thread talking about ‘how long should a game run for’ and tie it into this. Consider: 6 months to develop a game that runs for 6 months is a pretty high entry cost.

ARES has certainly helped with this, assuming you are content to do the out-of-box packaging. If you want to make things a bit more customized, now you’re talking about at least one code base to learn if not two. That’s increasing your entry cost even higher.

Or you go with classical Penn/Rhost/MUX, which has those coding barriers plus less modern features. Anyway, it just becomes a thing. And yes, there’s always the 'Just learn to code it’s not that tough. For some people sure, for others, it is a challenge.

Summary: Barriers to Entry are too high to create a game that very well may die off in less time it took to make it.

@bear_necessities

That’s what I’m saying, too many passions. They’re all exciting to contemplate which is why nothing gets done.

I’ve batted around for almost a year a few ideas to develop on an ARES platform (since that time investment is lower than a lot of other platforms which relates to the ‘how long should a game run’ conversation) and always end up bouncing between the ideas so much nothing gets done.

How does one decide what to actually develop?