You've piqued my interest. Downloading, I'll post when I've looked at this.

>>12802301
Awesome.

For anyone who missed the last thread, the setting is nebulously defined, but right now the default is an island prison with minimal automatons as staff that's more or less run by various gangs in a pretty grimderp near future. Everything else is in the pdf.

Wait, important question: what should the timeline for this be like? Part of me want to set it far enough into the future that it isn't completely stupid, but part of me wants to keep to the retro theme and have the entire US government collapse and be replaced by megacorps in 1995.

Safety bump. Here's an infographic that I plan to include with no explanation, and change as little as possible. I'm a little bit unhappy with the ratio of bullshit events to relevant events, but overall this is fine and about the level of stupid that I want.

Thread night survival bump. Going to be in and out for a few minutes, so hit me with questions within about ten minutes from now or wait until morning.

Morning bump. Chances are that very little will get done today, but I'll be around enough to take notes and answer questions and stuff.

>>12804799
seems like an acceptable infographic. Full of things, some of them seemingly pointless, all in a line.

I figure you might as well go with the early-collapse, keep the retro robocop/oh god everything in the world is collapsing feel. Except keep japan out of it. Lets avoid the concept of japan taking over the world, so No Katanas.

if it was set into the future too much it would become somehow more implausible (unless everyone is in a VR prison, which is why everything is focused on fighting, which hurts, instead of killing, which can't happen. hmm..)

>>12808097
>some of them seemingly pointless
A lot of them are actually legitimately pointless. Well, the Venus Neon one and the AI project one, anyway, the others at least sort of contain relevant content.

>I figure you might as well go with the early-collapse
I realized after posting that I should probably shift the years back about a decade.

Bump because I happen to be around. I've finalized my decision to move the timeline back a decade, putting the start of the game at 1996. Streets of Rage 3 came out in 1994, and since the setting is sort of from the point of view of 1988 I feel I'm on solid ground giving everyone tall hair and torn off sleeves.

Ok, I'm trying to figure out a sort of post-fight sequence. I stumbled onto the idea of hideout construction, which took me in a bunch of different directions at once, all of which I really liked.

So, immediately after a fight, both gangs would note which characters were on the winning and losing teams, which characters were still standing at the end of the fight, and which characters ran away.

Next, each player decides what each character will do during the non-combat phase. Options would include looting, training, and working on the hideout. This is where the characters' end of fight statuses become important - worse statuses mean fewer options available. Losers who ended the fight out cold would probably have to spend their entire non-combat phase dragging themselves back to the hideout. I'm not sure of how to make this work so that losing is a punishment, but not a campaign ender, so I'm being intentionally vague.

Anyway, hideouts. A hideout would start as a featureless map. Characters can work on the hideout by constructing terrain or placing loot to construct useful facilities. There need to be training facilities, weight rooms, and things of that nature that allow characters to spend XP on their stats in their off time. My other ideas for base upgrades are beds (allow a gang's roster to increase in size), boxes (allow storage of weapons/equipment), a party room (gives some kind of morale boost) and possibly some kind of defensive feature.

Having hideouts work like this gives the option to have high risk/high reward base attack scenarios that let the attacker break upgrades (or take them apart and steal them), but give the defender a home-court advantage.

I'm also thinking of doing an achievement system for XP awards once I figure out how to best implement that sort of thing.

>>12811054
hmm.
i can see how this would work in a vid'ya game, base building and so forth.

dunno exactly how it would work, but sounds interesting. a configurable terrain piece that is also the source of certain mechanical effects for the team. earns upgrades but also acts as a vulnerability.

hmm.

wrapping my brain around where to upshift or downshift complexity. a multi-character/player group p&p game Or a player/simplified-character top down tactics game like warhammer.

i dig the thinking and the lack of it being in boxes.

>wrapping my brain around where to upshift or downshift complexity.
Yeah, this is kind of my big concern. If it gets bloated, it won't be any fun.

Some non-combat phase specifics:
Phase 1: Mark down won/lost and standing/out for each character.
Phase 2: Each player declares actions for each character. Characters on losing teams who ended the fight Out get no action. Action list:
-Loot (SKI or INT)
-Build (INT or PHY)
-Train (none, probably)
Phase 3: Players roll stat-7+2d6 (minimum 1) for each character's action, then total up their team's total build and loot points.
Phase 4: Players spend their loot and build points on upgrades. I have no idea what the various looted items should cost, but 1 build point per raised level, 2 points for a hindering or climbable* sounds good for terrain.

Upgrades are going to have to come at the same time as XP to make any sense, which is going to be complicated.

*a ladder, basically, it was suggested but I forgot to put it in last update.

Ok, facility upgrades.

Weight Room (2x2 hexes, 15 loot points)
Allows 4 characters to spend 2 XP each per non-combat phase to train PHY.

Training Ring (2x2 hexes, 15 loot points)
Allows 4 characters to spend 2 XP each per non-combat phase to train ATK, or to spend 1-3 XP to learn a new move.

Track (1x4 hexes, 15 loot points)
Allows 4 characters to spend 2 XP each per non-combat phase to train SPD.

War Room (2x2 hexes, 15 loot points)
Allows 4 characters to spend 2 XP each per non-combat phase to train INT.

Bed (1 hex, 5 loot points)
To recruit new characters, a player must have as many beds as the new total number of characters. Players can heal one character to full HP per non-combat phase per bed in the hideout. (I'm not really sure about this and will probably redo it a bunch of times.)

Equipment Rack (1 hex, 5 loot points)
All weapons must be stored in equipment racks. Any weapons that are not stored in equipment racks are lost permanently. Each rack can store 3 weapons.

Weapon (0 hexes, 10 loot points)
To be statted later.

Doing this is making me realize that I should change "points" to XP in the character creation process.

For a facility to be useable, it must be possible to travel from the edge of the map to it and back without requiring any rolls to avoid fall damage. All facilities count as empty terrain during combat.

>>12813678
Tentative rules, but I think that a system like this is going to work. Anyone who loses but still manages to keep a few characters standing is going to end up behind on XP but still able to loot and build between fights. Losses won't really be game ending setbacks until a team piles up two bad ones.

Since we've got base attacks in the game, it seems like campaigns should go until all but one gang has their base sacked by enemies. The problem there is that players can be eliminated and left with nothing to do. I'm trying to decide between a different victory condition and giving eliminated players strong NPC gangs that aren't allowed to sack bases.

>>12813696
>>12813678

so large-area miniatures game on a hex. different terrain options, 'home base' options all existing.

in my brain this plays out something like team fortress 2 (which i have seen once, so forgive glaring mistakes) only each player is controlling an entire team rather then each player controlling a single unit.

interesting.

so overall 'flow' og gameplay sounds like..

1. Challenge
_lay out combat area OR lay out 'base area'
_place fighters

2.combat combat combat
_win/loss conditions met (forfeit, no more fighters on the field/base/no more fighters active)

3.receive XP, resolve post-battle
_'scavenge' loot points from environment according to stat
_steal/salvage weapons from KO fighters according to stat
_steal/salvage weapons/loot points from facility if applicable

4. resting/resetting.
_return fighters to facility
_note state changes(these two burning their EXP on training, +1PHY)
_hideout changes


something like that. the bookkeeping is sounding like murder. computer could handle it, but its currently looking like shuffling through several character sheets all the time.

working on grokking

>>12814090
Pretty much. I don't think it's too math heavy in comparison to Necromunda or Mordheim as far as I can tell, but I'm always looking for ways to slim it down. Let me know if you find any redundant stuff or anything that could stand to be taken out.

Oh, and I'll be around for a few hours, so I'll host a gametable game if you or anyone is interested.

Oh, one thing to be clear, though I haven't even made tentative rules around it yet: my intention is for most fights to take place on maps that aren't anyone's base.

Couple of thoughts. There should probably be either a random scenario picker that has a small chance to spit out a base defense match, or a territory mechanic. But a territory mechanic sounds hard, so I'm leaning towards random scenarios. Maybe random should be the default, but characters can spend loot points (as scouting) to buy scenarios.

Also, gangs should be able to retreat voluntarily. They can't explicitly do that now.

Might as well do tentative XP awards too.
Winning - 1XP
Win by voluntary retreat - 1XP
Win with no characters Out or off the board - 1XP
All enemies Out - 1XP
Win in 4 rounds or under - 1XP

Each XP earned must be assigned to a character immediately. Characters who have more unspent XP than any of their teammates cannot be assigned more XP.

I thought about awarding 1XP to each character for each achievement, but I thought it might be an unfair buff to unreasonably large swarms of terrible characters. This might be an unreasonable buff to 1 girl gangs. We'll see, I guess.

Weapons next, which is going to be a mess. I think I might need categories other than tiers if I want weapon specific moves. I'm not sure if I want weapon specific moves. I might make a separate category for double techs anyway, there's only one right now and it's horribly phrased.

Any obvious flaws?

This is basically what someone else wrote in the other thread, but with slightly more specifics.

Weapon types:

Attached
Includes: Steel toed boots, brass knuckles, short length of chain wrapped around fist, boxing gloves wrapped with barbed wire
Damage: +2 to all ATK vs DEF attacks that deal damage and do not require a grapple as a prerequisite
Extra: Remains equipped, regardless of character's status effects. Can only be picked up off of a character who is Down or Out. Cannot be thrown.

One-Handed
Includes: stick, bottle, medium length of chain, sock full of quarters, nunchucks
Damage: +3 to all ATK vs DEF attacks that deal damage and do not require a grapple as a prerequisite
Extra: No penalty for throwing.

Reach
Includes: hockey stick, baseball bat, broom handle, pipe
Damage: +3 to all ATK vs DEF attacks that deal damage and do not require a grapple as a prerequisite
Extra: Attacks that deal extra damage can be done against characters 1 hex further than usual, provided they are not separated by terrain that would block forced movement.

Grappling
Includes: long length of chain, whip, rope flail
Damage: +2 to all attacks that deal damage
Extra: Targets hit with attacks from a grappling weapon become grappled by the attacker.

Characters drop their weapons in their current hex upon becoming Prone, Down, or Out unless otherwise specified. Characters equipped with weapons outside of the Attached category may throw them. Make a strike attack (at -4 unless otherwise noted) against a character within line of sight, regardless of range or whether the character has that move purchased. Hit or miss, the weapon lands in the hex of the target.

Any character in or adjacent to a hex containing a weapon can pick it up at a cost of 5AP. If the weapon is in hindering terrain, the character must first roll INT+2d6 and score 11 or higher.

Characters can attack adjacent characters who are within 1 z-level, or 2 z-levels if armed with a reach weapon.

To determine line of sight for throwing or reach weapons, attempt to draw a line between the two character's hexes. If it can be done without having to travel up more than one z level per hex from lower character to higher character, the characters have line of sight to each other.

There, I think that covers everything boring. Now to paste it all together and check for fuck ups.

Late night bump so I don't lose the thread.

Is there any mechanics in the game to allow for claiming one of the losing team's members? Either to recruit a beaten but impressive girl or drag off a KO'd one for either ransoming or recruitment?

Might be a good tactical choice for a team to target a strong opponent and then drag her off while she is out cold...

>>12817872
Not right now, but I thought about it. I decided against having every team member who was Out and left behind by the losers get captured, even though it made sense, because it would be too huge of a setback. Any ideas on how to implement it other than that?

>>12818894
More on this idea. I was thinking of allowing a team to carry away injured members for the purpose of changing them from Out to voluntarily ran away. That might lower the chances of a capture.

Actually, another idea: make holding captives require a base upgrade. A 1 hex, 20 loot point chain-and-heavy-thing upgrade would work. Without it, no capturing Out characters on the losing team.

That also allows a rescue scenario without actually adding more rules, which I like. There also needs to be an option for ransoming (I guess a trade of loot points and equipment would work) and recruiting, but recruiting a captured character should be really hard.

Ok, base attack scenario rules.

The defending player places characters first, anywhere on the map, then the attacker places characters on one edge (I guess this means there needs to be a rule against building on edges). Combat works normally.

Base upgrades such as beds, equipment racks, and training rings have DEF and RES stats of 0, HP equal to their loot point cost, and cannot be grappled or moved. If reduced to 0HP, characters may pick up one hex of the upgrade for 5AP, where it essentially becomes a weapon that gives no effects (dropped on down, out, or prone). If an attacking team brings all hexes of an upgrade to the edge of the map and runs, either voluntarily or due to Demoralization, that team may install the upgrade in their own base. Upgrades that are stolen partially are simply destroyed and may not be used by anyone.

Prisoners captured in cells (probably need a better name for this upgrade) behave normally, but cannot move or be moved while their cell is intact.

This kind of raises a question about deciding on what scenario to play. I'll say that players bid on scenarios using their loot points, which only get spent if someone wins, with a d6 roll (1: Base attack, player 1 on defense, 2-5: Neutral map, 6: Base attack, player 2 on defense) deciding ties for now.

Are there any obvious scenarios that need to go in? Might bump up to 2d6 as the random generator if there are a lot. I can't think of any, though.

So I guess my to do list is "paste this shit together and be on the lookout for places to make cuts." I'm probably being a little bit picky. The ruleset is unlikely to break the 20 page mark, which is pretty short in comparison to most things.

Has anyone who has read the current combat rules got any idea of how bloated or not-bloated they are? I feel like they're pretty usable, but my opinion is probably invalid.

I'm trying to decide if I need equipment other than weapons. Other than roller skates (SPD boost, vulnerability to trips/forced movement) and some kind of armor or shield, I can't really think of any, but the idea is kind of fun. The character sheet would have to get bigger to accommodate this, though, and I think it's already too big. Actually, there's no spot for equipment on it right now. Note to self.

Actually, I remember playing with scenario ideas originally back in the old days of the game. If I need results for 2-5... let's see.
2: Capture the flag. The flag can be picked up and dropped (voluntarily or involuntarily) as if it were a weapon. It is worth 2 XP to the winner of the fight (if it is still present on the board) or to whichever character brings it to their starting edge and leaves the map.
3: No special rules.
4: Capture the flag. The flag is a character with 1 in all main stats. She is captured upon a character who is grappling her voluntarily exiting the map. The character joins the capturing team, provided it has sufficient beds (she can be stored in a cell, but not fielded from it).
5: Capture the trophy. The trophy is a 1 hex 20 loot point upgrade that adds 1 to every character's max morale, installed as if it were a base upgrade in the center of the map. Trophies do not stack.

Obvious flaws or missing ideas?

Low content bump, since I'm curious. Is there any type of website that's easy to use and provides a maptool/gametabley type of map that can be saved and edited by multiple people? It doesn't have to be very good, I just think that google wave sucks and trying to schedule people for gametable games sucks too. Easier is better.

Winner is scribblemaps.com until further notice. It's basically the battlemat application for google wave, without google wave accounts or any accounts for that matter. Shit just got a ton easier - no more fucking around with ports and IPs and invites and slow ass scripts and other such nonsense. Is there an equivalent thing for dice? I guess there's /tg/'s dicebot. I wonder if anyone has actually used it for a game before.

Anyone interested in a 150 point game using the ruleset in the OP? The thread has seen a few updates, but they're too disorganized (and poorly written) to really count, and I'm mainly worried about the basic combat right now anyway.

Just realized that I don't have any rules for jumping down off of a ledge and attacking. This is a problem.

Things are getting complicated enough that I'm probably going to need a section for a whole game sequence summary, with references to more detailed descriptions.

I'm still around, but if anyone wants to wait much longer before starting a game it's probably getting abandoned and finished later.

Anticipation of a morning where this thread still exists bump. My contact info is in the e-mail field, in case something absolutely vital beyond all belief happens at 4 in the morning and you have to let me know right away.

Morning bump. Probably going to compile the rules I sketched out in the thread today.

>>12809583
My next character.

>>12830594
The picture, or a generic tall haired chick with torn off sleeves? This is important.

Low content page 14 bump because I'm about to toss out a new rules update and don't want the thread to die, but have nothing to add right this second because the update isn't done.

http://www.zshare.net/download/8282135014f8e768/

Version 4. It adds a ton of features (mostly stuff I posted, but I changed a few things) and makes a few edits. I expect a shitload of arguing over whether it is infinitely worse or better than the previous one.

Also, whoever downloaded the old one because of my last bump: what the fuck, you knew damn well I was minutes from uploading a new one, why did you bother

I'd like to buff the war room a bit without making it ridiculous. What's a good upgrade that's useful but not game ruiningly so? I want to encourage people to have their smartest character in the war room yelling at people every non-combat phase.

Back. Any opinions on the latest version? I'm here for a bit, so I'm up for discussions on readability, shit that can be taken out or shortened, shit that needs to go in (shouldn't be anything big left here, really), or a guinea pig game to see what's broken.

I'll actually contribute after reading the latest versions.

For now, I bump.

>>12837911
Awesome, that saves the thread from page 16. Keep in mind that the latest version is almost entirely additions and fixes of objective mistakes, so there isn't much of a point to reading both.

O.K., actual helpful things:

1). Have the character sheet take up the entirety of one page, because then people can print it off without wasting ink on how players create characters using point buy and how to calculate defence.

2). If you need more space on the character sheet, shrink down the Combo box rather than removing the arithmetic showing you how to derive stats. Because I like the arithmetic showing you how to derive stats.

3). Change the rules for voluntarily moving to a hex 2+ levels lower so that jumping on enemies hurts them, because its something crazies like to do.
Something like replacing "A character doing this rolls . . ." with "Characters in that hex roll . . .".

4). If you're adding climbable terrain, maybe add Additional Floors as something to spend build and loot points on? Because having scrap tower bases sounds cool.
Also, work out the level difference betweens floors of a building.

N). It's kinda funny how knee pads don't add their damage to Knee Strike.
___

I can't think of anything else.

I really want to condense the "Target must be grappled by the attacker" and ". . . do not require a grapple as a prerequisite" bits down, though.

>>12834006

Have the War Room give virtual loot points towards choosing the scenario?

>>12838796
All good points. I guess character sheet size is something that can go either way. I wanted to make them easy to manage, but I guess making them easy to understand might outrank that.

>4). If you're adding climbable terrain, maybe add Additional Floors as something to spend build and loot points on? Because having scrap tower bases sounds cool.
You can walk on raised terrain, but having multiple height levels per hex could get confusing. You're reminding me that I forgot climbable terrain rules though, so thanks for that.

>>12839076
Fuck, that's perfect.

>>12839533

You've got a point about the multiple height levels, especially if you build a war room on top of a training ring on top of a weight room.
___

I came up with a perfect idea - cool.

Shame I don't have any others right now.

>>12840037
Not a problem, I think it's just a question of refining at this point. Last bump to keep the thread alive until morning.

Morning safety bump featuring a repost of the latest version, which is different from the version in the OP, so you do not download the version in the OP.

http://www.zshare.net/download/8282135014f8e768/

Current priorities are... basically just fixing broken shit. The only areas that might need additions are hideout upgrades, and possibly a full section of tag team moves.

How about replacing "Prerequisite: Tier 2/3. Target must be grappled by the attacker/Attacker must be grappled by target." with "Prerequisites: Tier 2/3, grappling target/grappled by target."?

Also, replacing "Target must be prone" with "prone target".

Also also, replace Backhand's extra text with "Use this move against one extra target."
___

Just to save a bit of space, really.

>>12846063
Done and done and done.

Also, I'm changing my priority to figuring out an end to a campaign that doesn't involve eliminating players. I'm thinking of some sort of reputation system where each team is either trying to be first to hit a number, or a "highest score after x fights" system. Knocking over someone else's hideout would be a way to gain reputation, but there should be some other ways too. Maybe loot points could be exchanged for reputation at an extremely poor rate to represent tagging and stuff.

>>12846151

I think a high reputation is a good way to end a campaign - I mean, no-one messes with the Pussy Posse, because those are some vicious bitches.
I like the idea of a post-combat action that increases your reputation - patrolling your territory, etc. (SPD check vs. your reputation, maybe?)

Also, maybe the first fight of a campaign is carving out some turf of your own to set up a base? Not sure what benefit that would have besides a story one.

>I think a high reputation is a good way to end a campaign
Ok, then going with this until someone comes up with something better.

>I like the idea of a post-combat action that increases your reputation
My plan was to just have it under the broad category of looting, since it's pretty abstract already. In this case, your looters would just be going around yelling at people and spray painting the gang's name on things, rather than picking up valuables. Patrols are kind of the same thing - the looters don't actually loot, they scout out enemy hideouts and make sure that nobody is planning to ambush them - that's why you can bid on scenarios with loot points.

I'm really open to specific ideas for reputation mechanics though, since I'd like there to be a little bit more going on there. Ideas tied to or independent from existing mechanics are both fine.

>Also, maybe the first fight of a campaign is carving out some turf of your own to set up a base

Forgot to respond to this one. I like it but I have no idea what it would do either. Not letting the loser set up a base would be such a ridiculous setback. It would lead to that situation you get in monopoly where everyone knows the winner, but the game is only a tenth of the way done.

Maybe reputation has an effect on your WP?
Something like adding 0.5(your character/gang's reputation - enemy gang's reputation) WP to each gang member.
Then any gang member who ends up with 0 WP says "I ain't going up against those bitches!" and won't participate.

Maybe WP can only be reduced to 1 this way?
___

It might be more bookkeeping, but maybe each gang member has their own reputation score?

Reputation = XP earned? Then add in some more sources of XP for doing fearsome things, like landing on people without taking damage, knocking someone Out with one attack, etc.
___

I've just realised this is player vs. player.
That kinda changes things.

>Maybe reputation has an effect on your WP?
This isn't bad, but I'd have to think about how to implement it. It's the kind of thing that could end up either worthless or game breakingly central pretty easily.

>It might be more bookkeeping, but maybe each gang member has their own reputation score?
Actually that's pretty interesting.

>Reputation = XP earned? Then add in some more sources of XP for doing fearsome things, like landing on people without taking damage, knocking someone Out with one attack, etc.
I do actually like the idea of characters getting their own XP using the same system, and combining it with reputation might be easy. It's the kind of thing that leads to balance issues though - I don't want to give XP for every one hit KO if it means making zerg tactics a useless XP farm, for example.

>I've just realised this is player vs. player.
The closest thing I can compare it to is Mordheim or Necromunda, if you're familiar with either of those.

I'm really liking per-character reputation, actually, as long as it contributes to the gang's reputation pool. I'm going to have to think about how to put that in without it being annoying to keep track of.

Gang reputation as the sum of its member's reputations? Maybe it could be part of a "gang sheet", along with details of your base, etc.

If you make a gang sheet, make a gang sheet.
Also, what happens when people are killed?
___

Possible Individual Reputation/XP Rewards:

Standing at end of fight - 1XP
Suffered no damage - 1XP
All enemies Out - 1XP per enemy, distributed evenly amongst gang.
Win in 4 rounds or under - 1XP per round under 5.
Death-defying move - 1 XP
___

I really like the idea of a lone badass beating the shit out of whole gangs. Might stop me from coming up with cool zerg swarmy stuff.

Also, maybe replace XP with Rep?

>"gang sheet"
Yeah, I think I'm going to have to do this. If it only gets changed immediately after fights, it won't get that complicated.

>Also, what happens when people are killed?
It's streets of rage, so people only get beat up. They regenerate 1HP if they end a fight Out, or all of them if they rest in a bed in the hideout.

>Possible Individual Reputation/XP Rewards:
These follow the existing ones as a model pretty well. I was thinking of having characters earn reputation with stuff like never been KOed, never ran away, etc. That would be a lot of bookkeeping to do for 1 character, so I might set them up as pre-declared goals on the gang sheet.


>I really like the idea of a lone badass beating the shit out of whole gangs. Might stop me from coming up with cool zerg swarmy stuff.
This needs to be possible. I think the most expensive character you can make costs 107 points, so it would probably end up being more like Double Dragon, with two really good characters vs a bunch of crappy ones.

>>12848838

You could possibly have a choice of different gangs, who earn Reputation in different ways. Sort of a "choose X of these" deal.
Putting all those different ways on a gang sheet could be tough, though.
___

Just noticed HP isn't listed as a derived stat. It's underneath something listed as derived stats, but it's not as clear as I think it should be.

Also, can't see anything about stat maximums.

>You could possibly have a choice of different gangs, who earn Reputation in different ways. Sort of a "choose X of these" deal.
Putting all those different ways on a gang sheet could be tough, though.
Yeah. More likely than not I'll throw together a workable version and then add to it.

>t's underneath something listed as derived stats,
I was worried about this. They're both supposed to be derived from PHY but you're right. I'll see if I can make it clearer.

>Also, can't see anything about stat maximums.
Supposed to be 1 to 12. Could have sworn I put it in, but I checked and I didn't. Throw it on the pile, I guess.

>>12850686

There goes my plan for Bitch of the North Star~

Including the suggested armour/shield (modified attached weapon, reduces damage taken, possibly decreases DEF), I think there may be enough changes to warrant a rules5.pdf now.
___

Crazy mental image: Tag Team off a cliff.

>>12851128
>rules5.pdf
I'll start compiling one in the morning.

>Tag Team off a cliff.
This is... really to be encouraged. My guess is that it's super hard to set up (even just pulling off a slam in the old version was hard as hell) and if anyone does it, they deserve the ridiculous amount of overkill damage it does.

Final bump of the night for thread survival, despite the thread being archived now so I don't lose suggestions again.