Observation: intent must have resistance or there is no victory

Here’s the current design in one place.

Core Combat Concept

The game centers on sword-duel style combat that could eventually lean toward either an autobattler or a timing game.
(autobattler WITH optional interactions)
--> small windows to chose action (maybe card based)
--> small "quicktime" events (hidden -- like super mario rpg)

Each action takes time and stamina.

Primary combat stats:

Weapon weight interacts with Strength and Speed through a penalty curve. A weapon that is heavy relative to your Strength becomes slower and more tiring to use.

Stamina

Every active action costs stamina.

Standing still costs 0 stamina.

This is important because the best defense may simply be:

Realize the attack was going to miss and do nothing.

High Perception makes this easier to identify.

Running out of current stamina causes the character to faint / lose.

Getting Hit

Hits reduce both:

• Current stamina — immediate shock/exertion

• Maximum stamina — lasting injury during the fight

So there may not need to be a conventional HP system.

Blocking can drain current stamina through impact, while an actual hit additionally damages max stamina.

Defensive Responses

Defense is an energy-efficiency problem.

Rough progression:

1. Do nothing

2. Small dodge

3. Large dodge

4. Deflect

5. Block

6. Defensive action + counterattack

Counters have a very large stamina cost.

The ideal defense is generally:

Use the cheapest response that actually avoids the attack.

DEF vs ATK Focus

Each defensive option can have a defensive and aggressive version.

DEF-focused

• Easier check

• Safer

• Usually preserves more stamina

• No offensive advantage afterward

• May give up positional advantage

ATK-focused

• Harder check

• Greater risk

• Often positions you offensively

• Successful execution grants Advantage on the follow-up attack

Example:

DEF Small Dodge

• Move clearly outside the attack

• Easier Accuracy check

• No follow-up advantage

ATK Small Dodge

• Barely evade while maintaining offensive position

• Harder Accuracy check

• Advantage on next attack

Range

Use discrete range bands, not continuous distances.

Exact bands aren't finalized, but something like:

• Grapple

• Close

• Reach

• Long

• Out

Weapons have different ideal ranges.

Example:

Dagger

• Excellent close

• Poor at reach

• Cannot attack at long range

Sword

• Good close

• Ideal reach

Spear

• Poor close

• Excellent reach/long

This means defense also changes positioning.

A dagger fighter against a spear could:

• dodge backward safely but remain unable to attack

• attempt a harder aggressive dodge inward, enter dagger range, and gain Advantage

So range control becomes part of the duel.

Dice / Skill System

We moved away from conventional d20 + modifier toward a dice-expression skill system.

The important conceptual distinction is:

• Potential = how high you could possibly perform

• Skill / Consolidation = how reliably you can access that potential

• Insight = knowledge about hidden systems/options

• possibly Power = raw die size / magnitude, though terminology isn't finalized

Examples:

1d8

Range:
1–8

Compared with:

2d4

Range:
2–8

Same maximum result, but 2d4 has:

• higher floor

• greater consistency

• less extreme randomness

So:

d8 → 2d4

represents consolidating knowledge, not necessarily increasing potential.

Similarly:

d12 → 2d6 → 3d4

All retain a maximum of 12 while becoming progressively more reliable.

Potential growth instead looks like:

d4 → d6 → d8 → d10 → d12

Possibly with d12 representing the normal ceiling.

Breakthroughs

A rare advancement could allow:

d12 → d20

This represents extraordinary potential.

A d20 character could achieve things a 3d4 master literally cannot, but is much less reliable.

Eventually:

d20 → 2d10

would represent someone with both exceptional potential and increasingly consolidated skill.

Advancement

Each completed mission gives one advancement attempt.

The player chooses what dice expression they want to target.

Advancement DC

Current idea:

DC = average result of the target dice expression, rounded up.

Examples:

You roll your current skill expression against that DC.

That creates a natural progression constraint.

For example:

d4 → d8

requires DC 5, but a d4 can only roll 4.

So it is impossible.

But:

d12 → d20

requires DC 11.

A d12 can roll 11–12, so the breakthrough is possible but rare.

Failed Advancement

Current direction:

• advancement attempt is consumed

• no stat gain

• normally no skill regression

So taking a large jump is meaningful risk.

Discovered Expressions

You can only target dice expressions your character has discovered.

So even if your current dice could mathematically reach 2d6, you cannot attempt it until you've learned that training path.

Expressions could be discovered through:

• mentors

• quests

• observing exceptional fighters

• experimentation

• books/manuals

• Insight

• rare events

Mentors could reveal unusual expressions such as:

d8 → 2d6

instead of ordinary:

d8 → 2d4

Mission Results Affect Advancement

How a mission goes can modify that night's advancement attempt.

Examples:

• excellent execution → advancement bonus

• relevant experience → bonus to a specific skill

• injury → penalty

• mentor encountered → unlock new expression

• unusual discovery → special advancement opportunity

This affects how much advancement risk the player wants to take.

Example:

Normally you might safely attempt:

d8 → 2d4

But after an exceptional mission grants +2, you may gamble on:

d8 → 2d6

So mission success isn't just XP—it changes the risk/reward landscape of advancement.

Run / Objective Structure

The game is loosely inspired by Slay the Spire, but instead of rooms leading to a boss, each run revolves around a large objective.

Example:

The castle will be assaulted in 10 days.

Each day:

Choose one mission/preparation action.

Each night:

Receive one advancement opportunity based partly on how that day's mission went.

After the countdown:

The assault happens under the conditions created by all of your previous choices.

Day / Night Loop

Day

• choose mission

• make strategic/tactical decisions

• resolve consequences

Night

• advancement attempt

• possibly recover/resources/etc.

Repeat until the objective resolves.

Preparation Matters

Mission choices modify the final objective.

For a castle assault, preparation might affect:

• enemy numbers

• reinforcements

• morale

• supplies

• fortifications

• secret entrances

• allies

• equipment

• enemy leaders

• intelligence

• your own injuries

• starting positioning

So two runs of the same objective can create radically different final encounters.

Other Objective Types

Not every objective has to be a fixed countdown.

Example:

Rumors of a dark power stirring in the North have reached the king. You and a group of soldiers are ordered to discover the truth and report back.

This becomes a push-your-luck expedition.

You might learn enough to return early:

Undead activity confirmed.

Or continue deeper and discover:

Their numbers, leadership, objectives, weaknesses, etc.

Continuing means:

• more advancement opportunities

• better intelligence

• better rewards

• greater chance of injury/death

• dwindling companions/resources

So returning alive with partial information can still be a successful outcome.

Character Rank

The game starts with the player at low rank.

Higher rank doesn't mainly mean stronger enemies.

It means:

More authority, more responsibility, more difficult decisions.

Low Rank

You might simply be told:

You are one of six soldiers sent to investigate bandits.

Most decisions happen during the mission.

Higher Rank

You might receive:

Bandits have been reported east of the keep. Decide how many soldiers to take.

Now resource allocation itself is part of the problem.

Take too few:

Mission becomes dangerously difficult.

Take too many:

The keep becomes under-defended.

And perhaps the entire bandit attack is actually a diversion for a heist.

So higher rank shifts the gameplay from:

What should I do?

toward:

What resources should I commit, what should I leave exposed, and which risks am I willing to accept?

Very high rank may involve deciding:

• which threats are real

• which are distractions

• where soldiers/resources go

• what missions you personally handle

• what gets delegated

• what risk the kingdom accepts elsewhere

Objective Tiers / Difficulty

There can also be different tiers of objectives, loosely analogous to STS Ascension.

But difficulty should mostly change scenario complexity and pressure, not just enemy stats.

Higher-tier objectives might introduce:

• worse starting information

• fewer preparation days

• stronger consequences

• enemies reacting to your plans

• false information

• hidden factions

• resource shortages

• more persistent injuries

• rarer but more valuable advancement possibilities

Your rank determines what types of objectives you're offered.

Higher rank = broader and harder objective pool.

Character Identity / Reputation

A prior character system also fits naturally into this game.

Character creation/history includes:

Motivation

Aspiration

• Who the character wants to become

Fear

• What the character desperately wants to avoid

These act more as role-playing/scenario hooks than simple numerical bonuses.

Reputation

Tracks things the character has done.

Accomplishment

• Positive deed

Failure

• Negative deed

Identity

Tracks what kind of person the character is perceived to be.

Achievement

• Positive trait

Flaw

• Negative trait

Examples:

• Courageous

• Protective

• Decisive

• Reckless

• Overcautious

• Glory-seeking

Traits can potentially emerge from repeated behavior rather than simply being selected initially.

Top 3 System

Accomplishments, Failures, Achievements, and Flaws use a Top 3 concept.

New events can replace older, less significant ones based on:

• impact

• recency

• how widely the story spreads

So the character sheet gradually becomes a procedural biography.

Early:

Killed the Wolf of Greendale

Later:

Held Eastwatch during the siege

The early event may eventually stop defining the character.

Reputation vs Rank

Important distinction:

Rank

What authority have you been granted?

Reputation

What do people think you've done?

Identity

What kind of person do people think you are?

These can diverge.

A highly ranked officer might be respected for winning battles but also widely viewed as reckless.

That reputation can affect:

• NPC reactions

• objective offers

• willingness of soldiers to follow

• assistance

• rumors

• political consequences

• hidden resistance or support

Hidden NPC Reactions

NPCs don't necessarily tell you why they react the way they do.

A merchant might refuse service because of a rumor.

A subordinate might quietly alter your orders because they believe you're reckless.

Repeated interactions, checks, investigation, or even full missions can uncover the reason.

This reinforces the broader design theme:

The player rarely has complete information.

The Emerging Overall Theme

The systems are starting to align around a common idea:

You are constantly making decisions under imperfect information, choosing how much risk you're willing to accept.

That happens at every scale:

Combat

Is that attack actually going to hit? Do I spend stamina defending?

Defense

Do I take the safe dodge or the harder aggressive dodge?

Advancement

Do I take a safe consolidation attempt or gamble the entire advancement on a breakthrough?

Missions

Do I pursue the dangerous option for a better strategic outcome?

Command

How many soldiers can I safely commit?

Objectives

Have I learned enough to return, or do I push deeper?

Reputation

What consequences will this decision have that I don't currently understand?

So the strongest unifying design principle so far is probably:

Information determines which risks you understand; skill determines which risks you can survive; and the player decides which risks are worth taking.