Polaris: Fate and Choice

[Ben Lehman]

Hi Everyone--

So my RPG, http://www.balefulengine.net/tsuu/rpg/polaris/polaris.html">Polaris is in final devolopment, before playtesting ensues.  Since the last thread on it rocked so much (thanks to everyone who responded!  Sorry I didn't get back to you on that last post, Emily.  Mike, I await your comments), I thought I would take the chance to ask a few more questions about this iteration of the game.  

Note to people who read the last thread -- the posted text of the RPG has undergone no revisions since you last read it.  It has been revised on my hard drive, but I've had no good uploading opportunities.  *sigh*

This thread is about Traits, so you'll want to read the example trait list, the character creation section, and the experience mechanic.  Traits are the real meat and drink of the Polaris game, I think -- they define active schticks of the character.  But, it is important to note, they are not measures of character effectiveness -- by and large, every character in Polaris is equally effective at all times.  So more traits isn't a measure of ability -- it's just more "handles" for conflict.

So I have two questions.

1)  I have shamelessly ripped off Riddle of Steel for a lot of the trait classifications, particularly the Passions (Glacier traits.)  Howevever, I would like to rip them off even more.  Particularly, I would like a set of traits that defines a Fate for the character -- it could be a good or bad thing, but it is just something that Will Come to Pass.  In fact, the characters could have the default Fate: Betray the People, which would be cool.  But they also get their own Fates, like "Destined to Die for Love" or "Fated to Learn the Lost Lore of the Pleiades."

But my problem is: Where is Fate?  It's like the red-headed step-child of the trait system.  It used to be a Passion, but that made no sense.  I thought about moving it to Abilities, but that category is crowded enough as it is.  It could be considered an Office -- but Office is a strange category and I'm really worried about shifting focus off of the social offices like "High Librarian" and "Third Conductor of the Lowermost Orchestra (Horns Section)," which I think give the game a lot of Versailles / Victorian England color.

One thing that I had thought of would be to make Fate a special attribute linked directly to Zeal/Weariness -- which means it is good for the Knight at the beginning and end of your arc (the most dramatically tense times) and good for the Mistaken in the center of the arc, which I think is cool from a story perspective.  That said, it would favor the demons considerably, to the point where I'm very skeptical about using it at all.  I thought about giving it a flat +1 or +2, but that is very out of keeping with the rest of the design.  In general, such a decision is out of keeping with the rest of the design, because it would be the only way in which character effectiveness would significantly shift over time.

I'm almost thinking that it could be some thing totally unrelated to the Traits -- a sort of Character Arc goal of sorts that the Heart or the Solaris Knight (or both) could use to guide the narration, but I'm not sure how much I want in the way of non-mechanical structure.  There is already a lot.

Does anyone have any thoughts about what to do with Fate?

2)  How do new traits happen?  This is a tricky one.  I'm thinking of three possibilities:

a) As a novice, you can have up to 8 extra traits (past the automatic ones), limited to two in each category.  You can save as many as your Zeal as Unassigned traits, and just assign them during play.

As a Veteran, you get an extra trait with each advance, which they must assign.

Pros: Keeps differentiation between Novices and Veterans.

Cons: However, as Veterans are forced to assign, it makes getting traits in game harder, and has the potential to be somewhat obnoxious (I found this cool sword, but it doesn't exist yet...)  Novices' advances are not as meaningful.

b) As a novice, you can have up to 8 extra traits, and save a number equal to your Zeal (as above.)  In addition, you may change a trait to another trait of the same type with each advance.

As a vet, you get an extra trait with each advance, which you can hold for later.

Pros: The ability to change traits is cool.  Also keeps vets from boredom, and allows some "discovery of character" for those who start with Novices.

Cons: The possbility of changing traits could pull the rug out from under plotting, and raises the possibility of changing fixed traits, which I don't like.

c) Assign traits whenever appropriate in-game.

Pros: Less hassle.  Allows more free expression.

Cons: Advances less meaningful.  Less Novice/Veteran distinction.  Possibility of mile-long trait lists disconcerting.

Are there any thoughts about how to handle this?  Keep in mind that more traits does not equal more effectiveness, but it does, generally, equal longer refresh cycles (so a slow-down in the Weariness spiral) and/or larger scale fallout from challenges.

Thanks everyone for your help!

yrs--
--Ben

[Eero Tuovinen]

So my RPG, http://www.balefulengine.net/tsuu/rpg/polaris/polaris.html">Polaris is in final devolopment, before playtesting ensues.

Looking really good! If I succeed in clearing time come fall, I'll definitely try to gather some people to try this. Hopefully others will agree to make the people insects...

I'll throw out some ideas, but the system is sufficiently complex that most likely you have to evaluate any changes needed yourself. Fiddling with traits will have all kinds of repercussions in the conflict resolution, and you might have to remove some steps if you include Fate.

1)  I have shamelessly ripped off Riddle of Steel for a lot of the trait classifications, particularly the Passions (Glacier traits.)  Howevever, I would like to rip them off even more.  Particularly, I would like a set of traits that defines a Fate for the character -- it could be a good or bad thing, but it is just something that Will Come to Pass.  In fact, the characters could have the default Fate: Betray the People, which would be cool.  But they also get their own Fates, like "Destined to Die for Love" or "Fated to Learn the Lost Lore of the Pleiades."

First, divide Fate in two, the Fate and Karma attributes. The first are unchangeable and inmovable, the knights fight them in vain. The latter are fluid and vague, changing constantly depending on the actions of the character. One is "destiny", another is "luck". All knights start with fate "Doomed to fall" and Karma "Has chosen sacrifice". First is self-explanatory, even the rules agree, while the latter comes to pass because the fates smile on those who sacrifice for others (the whole general karmic shebang).

Then, associate Fate with Freeze/Fade and Karma with Flicker/Thaw. Fiddle with the ability definitions and conflict resolution. Ponder on Fate and Karma until they start to make sense as story elements, and write plenty of hints so others can make sense of it as well.

One thing that I had thought of would be to make Fate a special attribute linked directly to Zeal/Weariness -- which means it is good for the Knight at the beginning and end of your arc (the most dramatically tense times) and good for the Mistaken in the center of the arc, which I think is cool from a story perspective.  That said, it would favor the demons considerably, to the point where I'm very skeptical about using it at all.  I thought about giving it a flat +1 or +2, but that is very out of keeping with the rest of the design.  In general, such a decision is out of keeping with the rest of the design, because it would be the only way in which character effectiveness would significantly shift over time.

One thing that I had thought of would be to make Fate a special attribute linked directly to Zeal/Weariness -- which means it is good for the Knight at the beginning and end of your arc (the most dramatically tense times) and good for the Mistaken in the center of the arc, which I think is cool from a story perspective. That said, it would favor the demons considerably, to the point where I'm very skeptical about using it at all.

How come? Is it because Zeal and Weariness are lower than other values? That's easy to fix by associating with the secondary values.

2)  How do new traits happen?  This is a tricky one.  I'm thinking of three possibilities:

Your line of thought here seems a little dull, for it's just a matter of putting in an arbitrary number and calculating. Wouldn't it be much better to device something light that derives traits from in-game material? After all, everything else in the game is controlled by relatively merciless mathemathics, so the trait application could be a kind of an escape valve: it wouldn't break the progression, but it sure would make it much more uncertain how characters develop. They could have different trait makeups as far as attributes go, and different numbers of traits as well. One veteran could fall with only ten traits, while another could have three dozen.

Note that I'm not suggesting your option c, freeform. That would be too much interpretation, and would reduce player focus from more important things. What I'd like to see would be something systematic, drawing decisions from in-game, but not connected to attributes in any way. The only connection I'd like to see would be that novices and veterans generate and lose traits in different ways.

I wouldn't think it at all impossible to have a little differing rules for different traits. It'd be much more elegant than "8 traits, at most this many in one attribute". A central mechanic that's triggered by different conditions for different trait types would be best.

I'd also like to see provision for losing traits. This'd probably be a grave matter, and the choice within trait type (and possibly between types) would fall on the Heart player. Maybe, whatever you'd use as a trigger here, the Snow Maiden would choose the type of trait lost, while the Heart would choose the exact trait?

Actually, in the above vein, you could have different types of trait gain and loss depending on whether the change happens because the character wants it or not. So a character could lose traits by a Sacrifice (embedded in the conflict mechanic), in which case the Heart chooses the type and Ice Maiden chooses the exact trait lost, or by a Loss, in which case Snow Maiden chooses type and Heart chooses the trait. Something similar could be possible for trait gain, as well.

So, to recap, I'd like a trait manipulation subsystem that differentiates between
- novice and veteran
- trait types
- gaining and losing traits
- type of gain or loss:
    - Sacrifice
    - Loss
    - Ambition
    - Benefice
and would not be tied into the ability mechanics at all, but instead would step in a roughly same direction and progress about as fast. So the veterans would still generally have more traits, but there'd be more differentiation and untold possibilities.

A random suggestion towards the above goals: The moons could control when and how the character gains or loses traits: The new moon would decide on Loss and Benefice type trait changes, and full moon Sacrifice and Ambition, as an example. The decision could be tied to conflict resolution, and could be an option if the moons deny support to both sides. When triggered in this way the die would be rolled against the prime attribute the trait falls under, with success denoting gain (Ambition/Benefice) and failure loss (Loss/Sacrifice).

Alternatively changes could be triggered by stakes in conflict (Loss/Benevolence) and Heart's Bargain (Sacrifice/Ambition).

The above suggestions include plenty of contradictions. Modify to taste.

[MarktheAnimator]

I've dealt with Fate in a new way in my game, Fantasy Imperium.

I have a separate Fate stat (1d6).  
Every game year, there is a chance of one of these fates occuring.  
I have made a Fate Table with all kinds of fateful events.  
Two thirds of the Fates are bad, while the rest are good.  

Fateful events include such things as "Find the love of your life" to "Lose your legs in an accident."

The final Fate Point is the character's death.  

There are spells in my game, such as Evil Eye that will drain a victims fate points, and if they run out, they will die.

Mages sometimes collect extra Fate as they cast spells.  

Anyway, thats how I dealt with Fate.  Hope that gives you a few ideas.

[Ben Lehman]

I've dealt with Fate in a new way in my game, Fantasy Imperium.

I have a separate Fate stat (1d6).  
Every game year, there is a chance of one of these fates occuring.  
I have made a Fate Table with all kinds of fateful events.  
Two thirds of the Fates are bad, while the rest are good.  

Fateful events include such things as "Find the love of your life" to "Lose your legs in an accident."

The final Fate Point is the character's death.

The thing is that Polaris is a very streamlined game, and I'm really loathe to introduce new subsystems.  Plus, in Polaris, death is the good ending.

yrs--
--Ben

[Ben Lehman]

Eero--

 Thanks a ton.  That's a huge amount of stuff to chew on.  Expect a lot of it to enter the text.  Especially tying Fates to the subattributes.

The thing about the cold mathematics of traits that I like are twofold:

1) It makes the Advances more meaningul.  Advances are supposed to be a big deal and, without the addition of a new trait, they are mostly just "shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic," numerically speaking.

2) It makes it so that every starting character is identical to a character who could be generated through play.  This isn't key, but its a bit of the system that I liked you can start as a weariness 6 veteran and it is the same as if you played him from a zeal 6 novice.

yrs--
--Ben

[Eero Tuovinen]

1) It makes the Advances more meaningul.  Advances are supposed to be a big deal and, without the addition of a new trait, they are mostly just "shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic," numerically speaking.

I'll take your word on it. The system is something to digest fully, and to tell the truth I'm not on the top of my form this month, what with breaking into rpg publishing and all. Simply no time and energy for real indepth analysis. So you definitely have to listen to your own notions rather than me.

That said, my first impression was that the Advances would in any case be a big deal by the virtue of being the clock of character doom. Compared to your common indefinitely running fantasy game the arc of the Polaris character is limited, and when the clock ticks it is by no means only shuffling.

However, that was just a first impression. If you seek to give added weight to Advances, I suggest just chewing on my notions about dynamic trait control and hooking them into the Advances. For example let the moons control whether traits are gained or lost, and use the suggested method in choosing the trait. I feel that it's important to have variable, changing amounts of traits, and a possibility for sacrificing them for advantage. The whole shebang I wrote before, actually. Don't disregard it lightly, I feel that those factors should play a role.

By the by, I agree with you wholeheartedly about traits being a central feature of the game. Just beautiful, the way you've managed to give the traditional character control all the while divorcing it completely from character efficiency.

2) It makes it so that every starting character is identical to a character who could be generated through play.  This isn't key, but its a bit of the system that I liked you can start as a weariness 6 veteran and it is the same as if you played him from a zeal 6 novice.

I appreciate the aesthetic here, and agree that it should be preserved. However, you have no freedom at all in character development apart from choosing which traits to take. The traits are like molded for the sole purpose of differentiating between characters - while all characters have to have all types of traits, characters can be differentiated beautifully by the amount of different types, all the while preserving the arc of character development.

How about, to preserve the idea here, if you'd just design first the ideal system of trait advancement, and applied it to the character creation. If the system would produce in average ten traits for a four-point veteran, say, then just roll d8+6 for traits when creating that kind of character. Then the created character would still be roughly equivalent to one that's played there. You could even give the traits as constants in the character creation as long as the advancement system averaged the same numbers.

Riffing from the above, it should be noted that if you go with a dynamic, free trait allocation, the allocation should really be divided along the lines I lineated earlier. If the Heart has the sole power of choosing traits you have to either put in unbending and clumsy limitations (like "at least two traits of each type") or let the Heart just specialize in one trait (unthinkable). Letting Ice Maiden choose the type and Heart the particular trait (or vice versa depending on the situation) is extremely in the spirit of the game.

Don't get offended by my gushing, as I tend to get a little bossy when I care about these things. Just do your best; I'll never forgive you if you botch this design ;) I'll come back with some thoughts about differentiation between novices and veterans trait-vice when I get the time.