TMW:COTEC - Sample Of Play - Pt1 (Long)

[RobMuadib]

Hi all

As my posts thus far seem to have garnered little comment on the game, I thought I would post a sample of play, or rather a vision of it as I
currently concieve of it, to give people a basis from which to
contribute comments and feedback.

I know it is detailed/realistic sim-focused design-based play, but there
are going to be lots of narrativists structures available. I mean, Story
Guide is one of the guide roles that players can take to facillitate
play for the other players. Then there is case of Meta-Narrative, where
you have more than the standard character-focused narrative. Thus you
can create long term "histories" along the lines of Ars Magica's
Covenants, plus things like Aria's perpetual genealogies, and
Interactive Histories, basically all kinds of neat large scale narrative
ideas, you can even do Eternal Champion style Aspected Myth, or
whatever, I mean it's crazy go nuts.

So, without further ado, a sample of play

Sample of Play
--------------------------------------------------------

Rob, Bob, Ralph, Mike and Ed get together to play some TMW. They are
sitting in the order listed. After everyone settles in with the
necessary rulebooks at hand, some pencil and paper, some poker chips,
some dice, and the requisite snacks, Rob gets things started.

"Ok, lets create a new Sphere for this game. How about we Roll
to see who gets first creation. Highest roll gets it. Everyone starts
with 100 points of Nomenar for creation." , Rob says.

[100 points is a fudged number for this sample]

Everyone agrees and rolls a d6. Ralph gets the highest roll, and thus
gets gets first turn in this Genesis Session. Meanwhile, Rob passess out
a 100 points worth of chips to everyone.

After everyone has their chips, Ralph says, "Lets do something with
Mecha, I could go for some big robot action. But nothing to outrageous,
say only Battlesuits are agile, everything else is a lumbering tank."

Ralph throws two one point chips into the Pot, one for the Mecha
Setting Tenet. Any such Mecha will need to be designed by
the Vehicle Design Framework. The second  one is for the agility
Limitation for larger mecha..

"Who's gonna be Chronicler for this anyway?", Ralph Asks

"I will," says Ed.

"Cool." says Ralph.

Ralph tosses Ed a 1 point chip, as does everyone else at the table.

Ed grabs a notebook and starts taking notes on the Genesis Session. He
writes down under Setting Tenets, Has Mecha, Battlesuits only are Agile,
Larger mech are limited to tank maneuverability.

Ed adds, that the Spheres' Tech Aspect is going to have to be
pretty high. Rob grabs the Rulebook, and looks in the appendices for the
Tech Aspect Scores.

"Needs to be at least a Score of 15 for the Tech Aspect to have Mecha
running around.", Rob says.

"Cool, thanks" says Ed, throwing Rob a 1 point chip.

"Your turn Mike.", Ralph says.

"'Kay." says Mike. "Well, if we are going for cool stuff, how about
having powerful Psyker dudes running around too. They can have lots of
powerful PK type abilities so they can fight against Battlesuits and
Mechs." Mike throws 2 1 point chips into the Pot. These Psyker
Abilities will have to be designed using the Metability Framework

Ed writes down this under Setting Tenets, Has Psionics, High Power
PK anti-mech fighting abilities. Rob, ahead of Ed, tells Ed that means a Metability:Psi Aspect of 17.

"Your turn Ed.", says Mike.

Ed smiles and says, "Umm, how about some over-the-top anime hyper-
powered Magic, so the magic dudes can wail on Mechs and stuff too." Ed
throws 2 more chips into the pot. Then rights down another Setting Tenet- Has Magic, High power level with anti-mech fighting ability.
He writes down a Metability:Magic Aspect of 17 as well. This
means the Magic Abilities will have to be designed using the
Metability Framework as well.

"Your Turn Rob.", says Ed

Rob fingers a few chips, thinking, then says, "I know, lets set this on
some kind of post-apocalyptic Earth. Something occured that brought all
this stuff into conflict at the same time. I know, lets say it's Earth
after some kind of cataclysm that opened a Dimensional Nexus,
bringing all kinds of strange tech, and magic, and Psykers into the
world, Oh, and lets have wierd extra-dimensional creatures too, you
know monsters and mutants and tentacled horrors and all."

Rob then places three 1 point chips into the pot, one for making the
Setting a "Post-Apocalyptic Earth", one for having the apocalpyse being
some kind cataclysm involving a Dimensional Nexus. And two for adding
extra-dimensional creatures to the setting, since this is a 2nd
Tenet unrelated to his first proposed Tenet. This provides two
History Facts for the world. The Extra Dimensional Creatures will have
to be designed by using the Creatures Design Framework, while the
Mutants and other humanoid types can be designed using the Persona
Design Framework.

Ed writes down more Setting Tenets, Post-Apocalyptic Earth,
Dimensional Nexus caused by Cataclysm, and Setting Tenet -
Extra Dimensional Creatures.

"Your turn Bob.", Rob says.

"I know, lets say that several warlike nations have arisen among the
ruins of the old earth. These nations are formed from all
kinds of different power groups, based on their control of
technology, or magic, or psionics, or tentacled war beasts, as the case
may be. Further, these nations are periodically attacked by maruading
bands from the wastelands."

"Wait," says Mike, interrupting Bob by slapping down a chip. Ed calls
on Bob to recap his proposals, and pay for each one.

"Ok, there was the rise of the warlike nations among the ruins, as
a Setting Tenet." Bob says putting a chip into the pot. "Second, each
of these nations are formed from power groups in control of tech,
or magic, or psionics, or tentacled war beasts and other wierd biogenetic/
mutant/alien things. So thats another one.", he says, putting another
chip in the pot. "Then I thought these nations could be subject to
regular attacks from marauding bands from the wastelands."

Mike pushs his chip into the pot, interrupting Bob to say. "How about we
say that they are regularly attacked by various creatures and things
that come through the dimensional nexuses instead."

"Sounds cool." Says Bob. Mike then puts another chip into the pot,
paying for his proposal. Ed then writes this Narrative Tenant down as well.
"Hey, speaking of wastelands, lets say that the wilderness areas between
each nation state are chock full of all kinds of super-dangerous
beasties, monsters and creatures." Bob puts two coins in the pot, to pay
for this second proposed Setting Tenet. Ed writes this down as well.

"Your go Mike.", Bob says.

Mike thinks a moment, then says, "Hmm, how about we set the worlds
Reality Rating at an "Action" rating. Still enough for a bit of
fighting, while still having huge body-counts once the bullets and
energy beams start flying. You know, kind of hyper-violent like an
Anime, but still have some outrageous stunts and action going on."  Mike
looks around the table then tosses in a 1 point chip. Ed then records
this as a Rules Tenet - "Action" Reality Rules are used.

------------------------------------------------------------

I will cut this first sample of play here, to keep things manageable.
I will continue this in a second Sample of Play, showing more of
my ideas about the game in another thread as well.


Rob

(I edited the terminology a bit, to reflect my current system, as you will see below)

[Shreyas Sampat]

Rob,

Could you explain (in whatever level of detail you wish) the significance of chips?  There seems to be a lot of chip-trading goig on, and yet by the chip costs, 100 chips is a very generous-looking quantity to be handing out at world-design, unless there is something else going on of which I'm unaware.

[RobMuadib]

Shreyas

Hey, thanks for your interest. As to what the Points/chips are for, I have written up a rough description the Rewards system which I will include below. The 100 number was just a fudge I came up with while I was writing the sample.

However, I was considering using a Triangular progression for the proposal of Tenets within a single turn. So the first Tenet you propose costs 1, the second 2, the third 3, the 4th four, the 5th five, so it will really cost you if you try to "Hog" the genesis session. Thus, if you wanted to propose 5 unrelated Tenets in one turn, it would cost you 15 points, for instance. This is just a thought at this point, consider the numbers subject to change.

Anyway, I have included a rough outline of my "Nomenar" Rewards/point system below. This is obviously influenced by Ralph's and Mikes' work with Universalis, some of Fang's ideas with Scattershot (Spontaneous Rewards/Proprietorship), as well as numerous other games I own, plus possibly a few original ideas in there by yours truly.

Design Notes - The Nomenar System
============================================
Ok, the central meta-mechanic of The Million Worlds:Chronicles
Of The Eternal Cycle is the point based rewards system. The
rewards are referred to as Nomenar, a reference to the Ubiqnomen
of the Omyrii from the game universes' Mythos.

What do these currency buy you?
------------------------------------
Put simply, Nomenar are the means to sharing in the play of the game. It
is through spending and earning of Nomenar that you engineer and define the nature of the game setting and world, by defining Tenets. It is through Nomenar that you introduce Entities into the game world. By investing Nomenar in a entity, you can exercise authorial control over that entity within the game world. Finally, Nomenar allow you to Script events, situations, and even outcomes within the game.



Tenets -

   Tenets represent the basic building blocks of the game,
   they define the outline and foundation upon which all
   play occurs. They represent the guiding principles,
   expectations, and limits within which the game is to be
   conducted. All players have equal opportunity to define
   the Tenets of the game. This is usually done during a
   "Genesis Session"

   Setting Tenets -
   These tenets define the nature of the setting and
   what exists within it such as it's geography, races,
   cultures, nations, and it's technologies and metabilities.
               Note, the Setting Tenets automatically include the Omyrii
   Tenets as described in the Game Universe chapter. These
               describe the nature of The Million Worlds Universe.
       
   Narrative Tenets -
   These tenets define relationships, conflicts,
   and situations involving a world's Setting tenets.
   These also include considerations of Genre, Theme,
   and other storytelling constructs.
   
   Game Tenets - These tenets define the
   procedures and mechanics used to conduct the
   Game. These Game tenets include the various
   Guide roles that players can take. These
   roles are not usually bought, except in the
   case of a challenge between players.
             
   Player tenets -
   These tenets define agreements between the
   players about what kind of social contract they
   want the game to operate under. This includes
   "Table Rules" regarding the conduct of play,
   as well as expectations of play among the players.
   
   Rules tenets - These tenets define the rules that will be
   used while conducting the game. Specifically they are used to
   set any variables within the game mechanics, such as  
               switches, and dials altering how things work. As well default
               power levels and point totals for designing game entities.

   

Entities

   Entities are the actual entities within the game world as
   defined by the game mechanics, or systems/effects that
               apply  to entities within the game world. These Entities include
   Personae (Characters), Metabilities, Metabilities Systems,
   Vehicles, Weapons, Equipment, Cultures, Nations, Religions,
   Organizations, Locations, misc Props & FX. etc. Pretty much
   anything that will interact with a Personae within the game
   reality.
   
   A large part of play is involved in players designing Entities
   via the Design Architecture for use in the gameworld. You
   gain Nomenar for Entities designed by you being used in
   the game. Nomenar earned this way are referred to as
                Royalties.
   
   Players also pay Nomenar to introduce entities into a  
               Narrative.  When points are payed this way, they become the  
               Proprietor of the entity, such as a Persona. Players that are
               the Proprietor  of a entity can also Invest Nomenar in that
               entity, allowing  them to spend Hero Points for that entity to
               alter how the game mechanics effect it. They can even spend
               points to alter/improve the entities Traits.
   
   Nomenar can also be spent to rent or buy Entities from other
   players in order to invest in them or exercise authorial control
   over them.
   
   
   
Scripts
   
   Scripts are a device used to exert Narrative control, exercised
   by a player, over the action of the game.  Scripts include
   various narrative devices such as framing scenes, instigating
   events, introducing characters, as well as conflicts, and
   relationships between characters. They can also
   be used to script outcomes and introduce complications.
   
   In general it costs more for players to Script Entitites
   of which they are not the Proprietor, and costs more to
   script implausible outcomes for actions by Entities.
   

   
How Do You Earn Nomenar?
---------------------------------------------------------

Nomenar are earned by 4 chief means, designing Entites that are used in
the game, Taking on various Guide or support roles to facilitate play
for the other players, through transactions between players during play
of the game, and by Spontaneous/Play Rewards as awarded by vote of the players.

[Voidwalker]

Hrm... yet it doesn't tell us much about the total mechanic, friend... perhaps a link to a full explanation might be in order, if we're to understand your post fully?

[Valamir]

Rob's shared with me some thoughts that he has for the game and I must say they sound very impressive.  I shared with him a VERY early draft of Universalis from back when it was far more traditional and sim than it became in the final version.

From what I've seen he wants to take some pretty heavy metagame components and build them into a very traditional simulationist RPG.  Something I've always said should be completely possible, so I look forward to seeing where he takes this.

[RobMuadib]

Hrm... yet it doesn't tell us much about the total mechanic, friend... perhaps a link to a full explanation might be in order, if we're to understand your post fully?

Voidwalker

Well, at this point the reward system mechanic is still under development, existing primarily as ideas and the sum of the document I posted in response to Shreyas' post.

However, I did discuss more of the overall thrust and concept of the system, which might give you a better foundation in which to consider the system thus far.

You can find this system concept post under TMW:COTEC - "...Aware Of Yourself As a Gamemaster."

The reward system will in essence be the primary driver and facilitator of the thrust of play, Collaborative Role Playing with an emphasis on detailed world creation.

I will be expanding the Earning system when I next post, most likely adding it to this thread. If this information isn't helping you, perhaps you could ask some more specific questions such that I can better gauge how to explain the system and concepts to you.

Thanks for your interest and attention.

Rob Muadib

[RobMuadib]

Voidwalker

Hey, I managed to finish writing up the majority of the Rewards System document, and have posted it in a new thread titled TMW:COTEC - Why You SHOULD Care (Long) . It should help you understand the driving mechanic
behind the game, and maybe put the sample of play in perspective.

Rob

[Christoffer Lernö]

I'm a little confused here Rob.

The chips paid and distributed at creation, are they same as the Nomenar in the other thread? Doesn't they get "used up" during play and creation in that case? Could you state more clearly the "cashflow" in the game. You write:

Nomenar are earned by 4 chief means, designing Entites that are used in the game, Taking on various Guide or support roles to facilitate play for the other players, through transactions between players during play of the game, and by Spontaneous/Play Rewards as awarded by vote of the players.

Which of these numenar gains are trading between players and which ones are taking from the heap of unused chips?

Secondly, is it possible to entirely cancel a Tenet someone has suggested? Say Mike really doesn't want Mechas, is there a possibility to pay for a veto? Maybe it's somewhere there in the rules?

Your example lists an example where one person pays a chip to alter a tenet just paid for, but it seems like the other person has to agree with that change? What happens otherwise? A bidding war? What if a third person doesn't want neither the first or the second?

[RobMuadib]

I'm a little confused here Rob.

Which of these numenar gains are trading between players and which ones are taking from the heap of unused chips?

Pale

Hey, good questions, a lot of assumptions developed themselves as I
writing the document. Players recieve a "grant" of Nomenar during
the Genesis Session, to get things rolling. The working capital as it were.

Design Rewards, Player Rewards, and Character Expectation Rewards
come from the "bank". While Guide Rewards, Design Royalties, Narrative
Expectation Rewards, Narrative Role Awards, and Challenge Bids and
payments are payed by the players. At least that is the assumptions
I had developed while writing it up.:)

Secondly, is it possible to entirely cancel a Tenet someone has suggested? Say Mike really doesn't want Mechas, is there a possibility to pay for a veto? Maybe it's somewhere there in the rules?

Your example lists an example where one person pays a chip to alter a tenet just paid for, but it seems like the other person has to agree with that change? What happens otherwise? A bidding war? What if a third person doesn't want neither the first or the second?

I had assumed a General Challenge Mechanic to exist (oh, amusing point I wrote the sample of play before I wrote up the reward system, so some of the stuff there has changed significantly, of course.)

Basically, there would be two types, similar to what I wrote in the rewards document. There was the negotiated Challenge, which I will probably change to Conditional Challenge, and the Unconditional Challenge.

Conditional Challenges
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Conditional Challenge, the Challenging player would bid some number of Nomenar and his proposed changes/conditions to the challenged player. The Challenged player can then accept that change/conditions, or counter-negotiate, bidding some nomenar less than the amount bid by the Challenger back to the challenging player along with his counter proposal, or Veto it.

If his Proposal is Vetoed, the challenging player can accept the Veto, with the Challenged player paying him a number of Nomenar equal to the amount the Challenging player originally bid. Optionally, the Challenging player can Call for a Vote (or just Call), in this case, a Vote is made. If the Challenging player wins the Vote, then each Player Voting in his favor
must pay an amount equal the amount bid by the Challenging Player, to the Challenged Player, and to each person who Voted in his favor.

If the challenged player wins the vote, then he, and each person who voted with him, must pay the Challenging player, and each person who voted for him an amount equal to that bid by the challenging player.  Players can choose to abstain from such votes, thereby avoiding having to pay any Nomenar, but also can't gain any Nomenar, and are still bound by the results of the Challenge.

Unconditional Challenge
---------------------------------------------
The Unconditional Challenge works similar to this, except that the Challenger is Vetoing the players proposal altogether. When making an Unconditional Challenge, the Challenging player Bids some number of Nomenar, and indicates his Veto of the players proposal.

The Challenged player can then accept that Veto, getting the number of Nomenar bid by the Challenging player. Alternately, the Challenged Player can Call for a Vote. The Vote procedure works like that described for Conditional Challenges above. In general Challenges are limited to a
cycle of One Challenge/One Bid/One Vote on any particular subject, to
keep the meta-system from dominating the game.

In order to discourage frivoulous Unconditional Challenges, say someone making unconditional challenegs for 1 point to extort Nomenar from a player, or just be disruptive. Players can set an Ante for making Unconditional Challenges, of say 1 Nomenar. This can be established as a Play Tenet as well.

That should give you a better idea of what I was thinking. What do you think of this set-up, does it seem workable, also I noticed some poker terminology seeping, must be because poker chips would be the most convenient way to track nomenar between the players.

TFYI

Rob

[Christoffer Lernö]

Sounds to me that the meta mechanic is should be working. Have you played it any yet?

The whole gain and trade actually reminds me of Monopoly and similar games with a bank handing out and receiving money.
There is no risk that all players would run out of Numenar? In Monopoly and such there is a steady (external) currency input to buffer variations in the amount of currency leaving the game. What are you thoughts on this? Maybe it's not a problem in actual play? However if the players agree on Numenar to start with, then I guess there's a minimum for a working game.

Hehe, I just envisioned a version where there was a constant number of chips in the game with the bank being like a jackpot you could win from ;)

As for the chips. I had this vision of people sitting around a table using GO black and white beads for chips, that would be pretty classy. But maybe not so practical if everyone gets a heap of 100.

[RobMuadib]

Pale

Hey, nope I haven't as yet play-tested the system yet. It is like super brand new, the document I posted was the first draft of the system.

Yeah, it is kind of like monopoly that way, but what makes it interesting or unique, is that this Money represent authority and power over the game.

As for running out of Nomenar, I am still developing the system and establishing costs. Once I get everything in place I will be able to analyze the numbers and see how my little economy works.

As for what I have established so far, It seems a fair amount of the chips will stay in circulation between players, due to the use of Challenges, the Narrative Guide passing out Narrative Rewards to the players, and Design Royalties. The major outlays will be Investments into Entities to use as Hero Points, or to improve a character. The use of Scripts by the Narrative Guide to introduce Events and Persona into the Game, assign Narrative Roles, and create Narrative Expectations will be the single largest outlay among players.

I will be working this info out next.

Yeah, since it occured to me that fairly large values will likely be used, probably more like around 50 for each player, poker chips would be more practical, not to mention cheaper and more widely available.:)

Rob