help on mechanic

[Matt Wilson]

I've been trying to figure out a mechanic that resolves the potential for multiple actions in a given round/scene rather than a more common "roll for every single conflict."

I've run into some obstacles, though, and I'm not sure about how to fix 'em.

The concept is that players can roll a certain amount of dice, each one representing a potential thing that they can do in that "turn." The die can come up as an Action, or as a Setback, or just as a nothing (need better name for that last one).

Actions are what they sound like. You can spend an Action to do something, like charm the bartender, leap behind cover, hack into the network, or wallop a bad guy.

Setbacks are complications to the scene. You don't fail because of them, but the task just got a little harder. Remember the scene in Star Wars where Han and Chewie chase the stormtroopers around the corner, and...

Characters also have Edges, which are descriptors that let players edit the dice after rolling them. That would have been a setback, but I'm an ace pilot, so now it's just a blank.

I'm stuck on two things: one is who acts first. The second is who should narrate setbacks. I think it would be great if the dice rollers get to narrate their setbacks themselves, but that's met with some skepticism about whether the impact of setbacks will be marginalized. Would guidelines be in order? They're pretty subjective, so I don't know if there's an easy way to set a "consequence level."

Anyway, your thoughts are most appreciated. And if you can't come up with anything, I have a backup plan!

-Matt

[clehrich]

The second is who should narrate setbacks. I think it would be great if the dice rollers get to narrate their setbacks themselves, but that's met with some skepticism about whether the impact of setbacks will be marginalized. Would guidelines be in order? They're pretty subjective, so I don't know if there's an easy way to set a "consequence level."

You might take a look at Vincent Baker's Chalk Outlines Waiting to Happen, which you can find by going to the Resource Library, going to kill puppies for satan, and then going to the list of games.  The mechanic there is that players have to narrate and invent their own Concessions.  There's also a thread, which you can find from that site, of Forge people who actually ran a game of this, and you can see what they said about it.

[szilard]

Two questions that might help:

How is the number of dice a person can roll in a round determined?

Does each die correspond to a predetermined action, or is this resolved after the dice are rolled?

Some possibilities in terms of initiative, depending upon the answers to the above, might be to go in order of number of dice rolled, in order of numbers of actions, or allow players to spend actions (rendering them blank, or even to setbacks) to increase their initiative.

As far as narrating setbacks goes, you could always let the player do it, but allow some formal room for the GM to add narration if the player lets himself off easy.

Stuart

[Matt Machell]

Matt,

sounds somewhat similar to the system I used on Covenant, right down to naming traits edges. Take a look, it might give you some ideas.

I'd go with main protagonist goes first (how you decide this will vary). OctaNe has a nice way of doing this, by saying that you only get involved in a scene if you have a relevant style. If you have some kind of currency that you have to spend to go first (plot point, whatever), then it might make deciding easier.

No sure about the setbacks, I'll have a think.

-Matt

[Matt Wilson]

sounds somewhat similar to the system I used on Covenant, right down to naming traits edges. Take a look, it might give you some ideas.

Dang, that is indeed similar. I'll give it a thorough scouring.

How is the number of dice a person can roll in a round determined? Does each die correspond to a predetermined action, or is this resolved after the dice are rolled?

# of dice is equal to Vitality. Your Vitality is 4? Roll 4 dice. You roll first, then apply edges, then decide what you're doing. I'd considered that whoever rolls the most unmodified Actions can do something first, and when that character spends enough Actions that another character has more, that other character can do something.

Or, everyone makes a general declaration, and then you try as close as possible to pull it off based on what you roll, again with whoever has more Actions going first.

I want it to be FitM, though, or at least anti-whiff. I like the idea that everyone rolls, and then uses what's rolled to come up with a cool scene. It has the potential for GM-protagonism that I like in Trollbabe.

[M. J. Young]

Three thoughts that might help.

First, edges shouldn't apply until the character has decided what they are doing. This may be obvious, but the way you phrase it in your second post sounds as if you can apply the edges and then decide what you're doing, but the in the first post it is apparent that edges are rather narrow. That is, the fact that you're an ace pilot gives you an edge in evading the attack, but not in negotiating with the attacker, so you've got to decide that this die applies to that function before you can decide what edges apply.

Second, although I don't see the curve or die type, something that we use for Multiverser GE rolls might be applied here. Scale the dice against a sort of table. That is, have levels of actions and levels of setbacks, so that on a great roll the character has a remarkable action and on a terrible roll he's got a major setback. This sort of descriptive usually gives a kind of self-regulating benchmark. Everyone understands the difference between a major setback and a minor setback (and you could put in disastrous setback if you've got the range).

Third, for who goes first, I would suggest that whichever side has the highest die roll gets that option, using the Risk idea of matching dice until one wins. Ties inevitably go to the side with more dice, because their next die exceeds no roll no matter what it is. Thus:
5-5-4-2 versus 6-3-1 goes to the second side;
6-5-2-1 versus 6-6-1 goes to the second side;
6-6-2-1 versus 6-6-2 goes to the first side.
This means that the side with more dice will go first more often, but that the side with fewer dice will sometimes go first, which can be important. Also, I would alternate moves as evenly as possible, and allow players to use the dice in whatever order they wish. With five dice versus two dice, the two dice side would break up the actions of the five dice side; but either side can opt to put either their actions or their setbacks first.

I hope some of that is helpful.

--M. J. Young

[Matt Wilson]

First, edges shouldn't apply until the character has decided what they are doing. This may be obvious, but the way you phrase it in your second post sounds as if you can apply the edges and then decide what you're doing, but the in the first post it is apparent that edges are rather narrow. That is, the fact that you're an ace pilot gives you an edge in evading the attack, but not in negotiating with the attacker, so you've got to decide that this die applies to that function before you can decide what edges apply.

Yup. I have a test version using Fudge Dice, and Edges let you turn [-] into [ ] or [ ] into [+], with the minus being a Setback and a plus being an Action. You have to say what the Edge is that's letting you change the die and how it applies to the situation.

The scalable idea doesn't work so well with this model, but I think players could, say, spend [+] [+] on something to achieve a greater result.

And I was thinking of using a similar idea to yours for who gets to do something first. It would be whoever had more [+]'s in front of them after rolling.

Thanks for the ideas.