Griflock

[M. Burrell]

Imizaru, I've been watching this thread with interest and I really like some of the ideas that are cropping up both for the setting and system.

Two games that might be a positive influence are Paranoia and In a Wicked Age. The former talks a great deal about how to play mad, omnipotent supercomputers, and how players might avoid, influence or otherwise cajole such an entity. The latter may give you some insight into mission generation and conflicts-of-intent.

My only comment is that you might find it easier to loose the party mechanic. This isn't a dungeon crawl, it's a scenario filled with characters possessing different desires and memories - such relics of gaming should, perhaps, come under review.

It could be more entertaining for each player-character to be plucked from his cell/eternal slumber by Griflock, informed of their mission and 'beamed' to that location (or near abouts). Griflock's sanity, it seems, waivers and so all the players could be given a single mission wherein they must join up and achieve that goal, contrary objectives that inspire alliances both shaky and firm, or out-and-out conflicting objectives for PvP fun.

Recurring fellow 'Heroes' also sent on mission could act as advisors, saviours or foils - depending on the mission at hand. A further dynamic is that PCs who were bitter enemies in the previous mission may now be forced into uneasy partnership to achieve their goal and not get 'punished' by the machine.

My apologies, my post's been a stream of consciousness but I hope it offers some food for thought.

[Imizaru]

Here are the Memory Archetypes with some description. Each time a memory is gained, players roll to see what archetype it comes from. There is quite a bit of overlap among them, but I think each one has its own distinctive flavor. I want to keep the number small, because these are just shells for players to fill out. Please tell what you think of these, if they are too redundant, or if there are any others you can suggest.

Warrior - possesses great skill and valor on the battlefield; conquers nations and defends kingdoms from attack; these are generals and duelists

Revolutionary - overturns the old ways, challenges the status quo, takes on impossible odds and creates strength through uniting masses

Healer - strives to end suffering and disease, brings health and harmony to the individual and the community

Preserver - defends and maintains the old order, protects against distortion and misinterpretation and corruption

Outlaw - works outside of established structures; brings hope to the downtrodden; champions the common people in ways that others cannot

Builder - creates new forms, structures and communities, nurtures them to maturity, generates resources for others to use

Explorer - treks into the unknown, discovers new vistas, lives on own terms; survives, adventures, wanders, and guides

Prodigy - possesses exceptional skills that are an example to others of what can be done, of what limits are real or only imaginary

Visionary - sees the true nature of things and leads through that vision; creates movements, inspires religions

Connector - brings together people and ideas into powerful combinations; bridges the gaps between nations and races

Teacher - instructs and guides, initiates others into the ways of knowledge and power; helps others to find their potentials and pushes them to excell

Idealist - observes and criticizes the shortcomings of society; strives to lead others to live up to their own ideals

That's 12, and quite enough, I think, but there could be fewer if people think some of them could be collapsed together. I might be missing some really good ones outright, so I'd like to know what you think.


M. Burrell - Thank you for your thoughts. I will consider the games you mention. I have IAWA, but have yet to play it; I will reread the mission building sections again and look for inspiration. Paranoia is an interesting idea - I hadn't thought of that at all. I will seee if I can find it somewhere.

As to your comment on parties, individual tables may choose to cooperate in parties or not as they wish. I think players should work together to flesh out the world and the missions into creations that everyone can enjoy, but their PCs are not required to work together and may in fact battle each other outright, based on their emergent personalities.

[Imizaru]

Some material on Passions, Aversions and Drives.

Passions are things that are attractive to the PC, interesting, or important. They are intended to help set definitions to the PC, showing their personality, habits, mannerisms and appearance. (PC appearance changes as memories change or develop; PCs without memories look like bio-mechanical dolls or androids - see the work of Tsutomu Nihei - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsutomu_Nihei - unfortunately I can't find any good pictures even after image searching. Read his manga Blame! and you'll see what I mean) Passions include art of all kinds, aesthietics, sensory input, certain places or personalities, behaviors, colors, ideas, philosophies, patterns, etc. As long as they have relevance to the content of the memory, pretty much anything is ok by me.

Aversions are things the PC holds in contempt, fear or disgust. They imply a restriction on PC action, things the PC will not do, and as the memory gets stronger, things the PC will not permit others to do. These include things like Apathy, Cruelty, Waste, Weakness, Heresy, Injustice, Arrognace, Hypocrisy, Lies, Greed, Compromise, Inflexibility, Tyranny, Laxity, Rudeness, Suffering in others, Ignorance. The potential list is very long. For these to have meaning, they have to have a context. Players must consider their PC Aversions as they develop the memories, because they reflect the culture the hero comes from.

Drives are things the PC must do because of their strong belief. They have a code of honor, a creed, principles that define who they are. The verbs I used in describing the Archetypes above are a beginning. These are closely bound to Aversions, but they are required action or response for the PC, and as the memory gets stronger, they will encourage others to follow their examples.

Example: Fragment: Warrior archetype, with a passion for steeds (horses, elephants, dragons, slugs, et al), Aversions to Waste and Cowardice, and a Drive to thwart betrayal; Inegrated memory reveals that the PC was a great hunter in a tribe of nomadic horsemen, able to run with horses by merging with them or transforming into a centaur. The tribe relied on a herd of horses that was under threat from fast predators that lurked in the grass and the entire hunting team was required to coordinate to bring one of them down - cowardice in one could bring the death of many. Resources were finite on the steppe, and so every scrap of material was necessary to survive. The PC mistrusted times of bounty, because the tribe would forget how bad the harsh times could be, thus the PC abhors waste or inefficiency. The PC was related to the tribe"s leader, but there was a split in the tribe and a growing threat of sedition, which could threaten everyone's survival.
At the Embodied memory level, this memory would be fleshed out, narrated and played out to even greater detail and the exact kinds of betrayal, waste and cowardice would be developed.

Further memories, even of a different archetype could be from this same hero, or they could be from an entirely different one (which could be very confusing to roleplay, or a lot of fun).

Reactions? Thoughts? Missing pieces?

[Imizaru]

I feel stuck. I may not actually be, but it feels like there are a number of issues that are tied together, at least in the way I'm thinking about things. So here goes in explaining things.

The issues are mechanical, conflict resolution, but involve pacing and the way abilities work. The thing is that I want things to be as elegant as possible. I really love DRYH, for example, and the way the dice work in that game. I want something that approaches that level of sleekness.

PCs have stats. For now they are Body, Mind, Heart, Spirit. Each stat has a pool of dice, adjusted by current memory archetypes. A memory comes with Passions, Aversions and a Drive and each of these have dice. Passion dice are perhaps like DitV's relationship dice. They may be tapped when relevant to an action. Aversion dice may only be tapped when responding to conditions involving the Aversion, and Drive dice may only be tapped for actions directly related to pursuing a Drive mission. The memory grants an additional pool of dice for abilities. As the memory grows from fragment to integrated to embodied, the number and size of these ability dice also grow.

Action events scale, based on the importance of the event. The player can state a preference and the GM (if there is one) can adjust, a la Trollbabe. Simple events require only a show of dice. For example, Alabaster wants to enter a cave seal by a large boulder. The rock is gigantic and the GM says it needs 3 Body. Alabaster's player takes three dice from the Body pool and puts them forward: Alabaster moves the boulder. No need to roll, only to ritualistically show that he has the resources to complete the action. 2nd and 3rd tier events are less clear. I imagine them being somewhat like DitV's bidding system, where contested actions are met with dice from appropriate ability pools, put up die for die, but I'm confused on how to handle escalation. I have a sense of how I want the scenes to play out, but I'm not sure of the ways to get that.

Let's say Alabaster is sent to kill the king. He has no particular problem with that, but there are bodyguards in the way. None of them alone can even register against him, so the GM counts them in squads. One squad has a Body pool of 2d4; there are 3 squads. Alabaster has 5d8 Body and assorted abilities he can call on. One squad attacks, so he must meet them with enough dice to match their highest possible score, in this case 1d8. If he bests their roll, Alabaster's player can say how he repels their attack. If he loses, he can escalate, but he loses the escalation dice from his pools until he can recharge later. They can escalate if they have additional resources.. Because they are the elite king's guards, they have the ability, Concerted Attack/Defense. If they attack in concert, he must put forth 3d8 to meet their combined total.

Alabaster is met by the king's young daughter. She stands in his path and commands him, "Begone!" She has no Body stat to speak of, but her Spirit is very high, 2d12. Alabaster does not have enough Spirit to meet her total, and so he must withdraw and find another way to get to the king.

These NPCs initiated the events so they set the terms of the conflict. If Alabaster initiated, he could set the conflict values. Basically, the PCs will win if they have the dice to cover escalations, but it will drain their pools. They have unlimited access to Machine Dice from the Griflock, but these have some limitations, for example, the Griflock cannot interact with Heart - it is oblivious to emotion. For the sake of conflicts, it has an infinite pool. Also Machine Dice have a separate cost in Dissonance.

This is all fine as far as it goes, but it feels awfully incomplete to me. I am trying to understand the ability systems and how Will Points will fit in.

Any ideas will be met with gratitude.

[MacLeod]

I know this is a bit old but... to help you better, I'd need a more in-depth look at what mechanics you have in mind already. From what I read, it sounds like a solid foundation at least.

[Simon C]

These "memory archetypes" you're talking about seem like character classes.  I'm not sure what they add to the game.

[MacLeod]

Memories are a core aspect of the game. The game mechanics are designed to get you involved in the Memories beyond writing them. I don't think they actually resemble classes though, at least not the traditional D&D style.

At least that is what I gather from the previous posts.

[Luke]

Is your game about moving boulders and beating up mooks?

One of the reasons Don't Rest Your Head's die mechanic is so compelling and sleek is because it ONLY addresses the premise. It doesn't do anything else. It's about staying awake and going crazy. Every application is focused into that context.

If you want to be as sleek as Don't Rest Your Head or as deep as Dogs in the Vineyard, then you need to turn around and put forth a strong premise and focus your mechanics on it.

"Kinda runnin' around doin' stuff at different times and places" isn't a strong premise.

If the game is about remembering past lives and using them to fuel current deeds, why aren't the mechanics focused on that? Why are memories masked by four really bland stats? If you're stealing from Dogs, look at the game holistically and understand what you're taking and why it works in Dogs (and not in your game).

[Imizaru]

Thank you very much for the comments.

Is your game about moving boulders and beating up mooks?

One of the things I realized almost immediately after my last post is that, no, that's not what the game is about, and that it is meaningless to include mechanics for such things. One of the problems I have been dealing with since I first thought about designing games is that I have a tendency to stay within patterns established by my first RPG, AD&D. Other people's comments about things resembling character classes and party systems likely reflect this as well. I am aware of this, but I often feel at a loss as to how to get at other ways of doing things. That's what I mean when I say I want the mechanics to be elegant like DRYH, etc. So, it's something that I'm working on.

Does anyone have any thoughts on breaking away from old thought habits in the design process?

If the game is about remembering past lives and using them to fuel current deeds, why aren't the mechanics focused on that?

Thank you for summarizing the game concept so succinctly. That's pretty close to it. I've been trying to do that for quite some time. Focusing the mechanics is what I'm trying to do. I know that what I wrote before was not working, thus my silence while I try to work it out.

What I have now is still very rough, but I will put it here anyway.

PCs have memory that come with a tree of abilities, with three tiers. The player maps these out when the PC acquires the memory. They exist as fragments, integrates, or embodied memories (EM). In play, the PC will attempt to complete missions. This involves conflicts or challenges (there's no distinction at this time). The player or the the can call for a conflict, set goals and stakes, and initiate action. The PC will invoke the memories that they have that they wish to use as resources, the player saying how they will use it and why it is important/relevant. The player will roll a die, and the result will say how successfully the PC can invoke that memory, at which tier they can access their abilities, and what sorts of restrictions, requirements they will have. This will generate a die pool that the player can spend on different actions within the conflict. If they roll well, they channel the memory and they can get a larger pool than usual (more dice) or a deeper pool (larger die size). Fragment pools dry up as they are used. Integrated pools replenish once or twice after they are fully drained, and embodied pools are worn down through failure, but can otherwise be refilled through moments of reflection. PCs can invoke several fragments at the same time, and perhaps two integrated, but only one embodied memory. PCs can drop out of Fragments at will, and can drop Integrates at the cost of 1 will point. They can drop EMs for 2 WPs. However, if the PC gets a channel roll for an EM, the PCs can no longer drop it normally. That becomes their identity, for good or bad. They lose access to other memories and abilities. There should be chances to escape, but they are rare or difficult. It may become necessary to sacrifice the memory to the Griflock in order to escape from it.

Since PCs cannot really be hurt or killed in a normal sense, failure in conflicts wears down dice pools and checks off items on a damage track. Memories can get rewritten or burned out. New memories can begin to emerge. Memories can conflict or contradict each other. A PC can get lost in a memory and have to find their way out again. Memories can be hijacked by the Griflock or certain other powerful NPCs. Still working on it.

Another possibility would be to invoke memories at the start of a mission, not the start of a conflict. This is good because I have been thinking about handling missions, Drive missions at any rate, as single extended conflicts. By completing Dive missions, PCs can develop their memories, and players can add abilities, or expand/deepen the resource pool. Because Drive missions are personal to each PC, born out of their memories, missions should be as much about their memory as about the current action. I am still thinking about what that means.

Why are memories masked by four really bland stats?

I conceived of the stats that way to try and keep things simple, to provide genres of actions. Because I want the PCs to be very powerful and varied in what they can do and the kinds of color that players can add, I thought it best to keep things general. I was having trouble with that. The idea was that you could have an ability e.g. Engineering, which could be expressed through body, as in building physical objects and structures; through mind, as a way of structuring concepts, building arguments; through heart, as in giving support to another; or through spirit, which frankly I didn't really understand, but it sounded like a good idea at the time - I've already taken that one out. So having a high body stat would encourage players to use their PCs abilities in a certain way. If that sounds bland, well, it is generic. I could call them "The Stat of Meatiness" or some such. Meatiness. Kinda cool. Perhaps you meant something else.

A more highly structured system might be better though. I'll think about it.

I have more things but they are not ready for articulation yet. I hope this is clear, and better than before. It seems better to me. What other opinions are out there?

[Simon C]

What;s so powerful about Dogs (or one of the many things) is that the traits that you bid evoke the history and issues of your character.  You're not just rolling "Gunfighting", you're rolling "I never saw a man I couldn't shoot" or "My daddy taught me to shoot" or "I hate guns".

Here's a way forward with your game: Keep your stats.  They're fine, and what you call them is pretty irrelevant.  Instead of "memory archetypes", just have the players write down what their character remembers.  Like "I remember fighting in a war" or "I remember beating a man to death" or "I remember holding my wife in my arms".  Assign those traits dice, and let them roll them in conflicts, where they're relevant.  Let them risk those things.  I think that's an elegant way of tying memories to character effectiveness in a simple and evocative way.  Maybe your character wants to forget some things, but will fight to the death to retain others.  It also lets you add to the story of your character as you add new traits.

[Luke]

Much better, Im!

I wasn't say that stats are bad, btw. I was saying that you should make your stats descriptive of your game.

Also, I'd definitely make players pick memories for a mission. Recalling/changing in the middle of the mission should be a problem -- should be a resource or a test.

Good luck!
-L