[Geomancy] Money and Rewards

[Jasper]

Indie Design is really booming now (which is great to see) so I'll try to keep this question as focused as possible.

I'm pretty well into designing a game about geomancers. Geomancy, if you don't know, includes things like feng-shui (the original Chinese art, not the game) and is more-or-less about manipulating and working with the energies of the living world -- becaue if things like buildings and graves aren't set-up in accordance with good geomancy, bad stuff is sure to hapen. So in this game you play geomancers. Not in China, but somewhere in between medieval Europe and some small Pacific islands -- imagine a centralized government and religion, kinda like the Catholic Church, spread out across some thinly populated island chains and with brown-skinned people.

Basically, think of it as Dogs in the Vineyard but with Catholic geomancers instead of Mormon ginslingers. Rules-wise it borrows a number of things from DitV, but not everything, and needs some new elements of its own -- hence why it's not just a DitV conversion, which I did think about doing. I can talk more generally about rules if anyone wants but right now I'm interested in reward mechanics. They're the last major thing I need to get down in some form before playtesting can begin.

Rewards are all about connecting what the player does with what the chracters do, so I'll outline those. The characters will,

• Arrive in town, sent their by the central Church, or after receiving a summons from the local clergy.
• Discover that a new building/grave/waterwork needs to be built; or that bad things are going on, probably because someone's done something stupid and messed up the earth's forces locally.
• Perform geomantic "rituals" and interview locals to discover the nature of the situaiton more fully, including how various people's interests are in conflict. E.g. I want my brother's new grave to have the best citing possible, so he gets to heaven fast; but if I put it where I want, it'll interfere with two other, older graves, and bring bad luck on my neighbor's crops.
• Make various preparations for settling things down, geomantically, as best they can; by surveying the area, collecting together resources and tools, and developing relationships with the locals, who will help later.
• Make some judgment on who in the town gets priority, and how that'll work. Then perform the geomantic rights to make it happen.
• Often, when things aren't set up right geomantically, sprites, wayward spirits and even demons can invade the village and cause trouble. The PCs (or some of them) double as demon experts. They'll hunt down the monsters, make temporary deals with the big ones to buy time, and then perform rituals to drive them out.
• With some religious authority, mete out judgment if anyone has done something to harm the welfare of the village, like stepping on too many cracks and thereby inviting brownies to live in them (tongue in cheeck there).

So, based on the above, the players have a few main things to be doing.

• Thinking of intersting kinds of preparations for the various big rituals and ceremonies the PCs will have to do. Coming up with good color here helps a lot, since the details of geomantic practices will be left somewhat vague -- it's up to the players to BS some techno-babble terms, do-dads, ceremonies, and so on.
• After figuring out the situation with the townsfolk, decide how to resolve disputes; and mete out some penalties for flagrant idiocy.
• Play the characters as the arrogant but respected outsiders that they are. And make sure that the villagers don't lose respect for the PCs.

I'm now thinking about reward mechanics to encourage those last three items. I don't want "chaacter advancement." Character change would be acceptable but I don't think should figure in too much. Handing out free-narration points, to let players add in beenficial elements, has crossed my mind but doesn't seem to fit. The GM really has control over the town, landscape and NPCs. One possibility is money but I don't exactly know how: I've imagined that local clergy and elites will call the PCs in to work on one of their own buildings, paying them in the process, and the villagers would pay them as well to take care of their more modest concerns--but the PCs are morally obligated to help them just as much. Maybe that tension between morality and money would overpower other elements, but it might also be interesting in itself. What reward could there be for acting morally; for exorcising demons and resolving disputes? Does there need to be a reward? I suppose DitV doesn't have a real reward for passing judgment -- it's just what you do, and the process (conflicts) is what's rewarded.

Any thoughts?

[Kirk Mitchell]

Yeah, Indie Design is really booming here, and so is religion based games too, so it seems (we've got Witch Finder, Dogs, my 1984/Spanish Inquisition game, that Malleaus game in Iron Game Chef...its all cool because they all have new ways of treating it).

If you'll just allow me to start chucking ideas around (I'm not good at structuring critism)...

What I really like about this concept is the more ritualistic way of dealing with things. This should be really focussed on quite heavily. The sense of setting that I get from the game is of a highly ritualistic society, and a very static society. I don't really see the Geomancers moving around like travelling monks or Dogs. Also, another thing that I really think you should do is to have, instead of character development or change, is have the town that the Geomancers construct be the source. Feng-shui is about the flow of energy of the living world through the constructed world, so have the stuff that the Geomancers do and build in the town be the advancement. They are the local builders/spiritual guides and lawmen, all rolled into one, and as the town grows, they get more powerful or whatever you want them to grow towards. So have the people in the control of the GM, but the physical Town and landscape itself in the control of the collective powers of the players.

In my game (the thread is [The Order] Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!), there is no reward for moral behaviour. None at all (actually, this is the main point of discussion). You have to weigh what the players are likely to want to do naturally, and what they are going to need encouragement to do. This is very dependant on the system and setting, as well as the ways that the players like to play. Perhaps with the suggestion I made above, that the players draw their power from what they build, and that they remain static in one town, they are obligated morally to help the people under their protection and living in their town for two reasons: one, the simple moral aspect of it, where the players may feel some sort of real desire to behave in that manner. And two, because if they don't then they won't be taking care of the town, and bad energies and spirits will seep in.

Just some ideas. Keep, toss and mangle at your leisure.

Kirk

[Greg Sewell]

Hi,

Its my first post here at the Forge, even though I've been lurking for a while now.

This game idea sounds really fun!

I was thinking in regards to a reward mechanic that something akin to the idea of Ghost Money could be used. Perhaps the cash rewards the characters receive are used to purchase their way into "Heaven" or some equivalent in the faith.

I definantly like the idea of having moral conflicts be the focus, but the first thing that came to mind was a more mercenary minded individual trying to buy his way out of his own trouble. Thats probably from having watched Constantine recently though *grins*

Well, at any rate I hope these ideas help if even in a round about way, and I'd definantly like to see more about the mechanics of the game as well!

[Jasper]

Thanks for the comments so far.

Kirk, you're mostly right about the nature of the society -- though nothing's set in stone yet -- it is static and ritualistic/superstituous. But I was imagining the PCs moving from town to town. Each village isn't likely to have new buildings going up very often, or even very many new graves or smaller structures. So moving on is a way to discretely package the action, and keep fresh challenges coming at the players. Of course, placing the PCs in a city would allow a larger scope, but I like small villages because it allows the internal conflicts to be showcased very easily, like in Dogs -- if you're in a city, and the whole city is corrupt, sorting out sin or geomantical problems is going to be a big mess.

However, I do like the idea of the PCs building up a larger reputation for themselves. They may very well be assigned to a small locality, moving between villages on a circuit to handle regular issues. So maintaining relationships would still be valuable. And by successfully dealing with problems, the PCs would gain prestige as well, maybe even church promotion. I like that as a way to tie each village together more, but still...is gaining prestige iself enough of a reward, for the players? Mechanically, prestige might make (some) people easier to work with...but since that's sort of the focus of the game, I wouldn't want to trivialize it.


Greg,

Welcome (even though you've been lurking). I don't think "Ghost money" will work because PCs won't actually die in the game...I mean, ghost money wouldn't actually affect the play itself, it would just be an abstract measurement of morality, right? I think I like DitV's approach of not measuring that, but letting it up to the players.

The PCs could probably have some use for money, but they would -- as you suggest -- mainly have to to be about personal relationship, not buying equipment or somesuch. Now that you mention it, we could combine that with Kirk's suggestion of a more stable role for the PCs in their community: money could be primarily used to keep up s certain level of lifestyle, and thereby appearances as well. Without that appearance, the church itself will become unhappy (priests need to represent their church well) and people will start to doubt your effectivenss, making your mission harder.

And that produces a nice conflict for the PCs: in order to be effective, you need money, but charging a lot for your services is uncharitable. How much will you deceive the ignorant peasants in order to keep your reputation?

In general, I'm not sure how much of the PCs' personal lives I want in the game. Dogs, my bible here, does have family members popping up to complicate things, but the Dogs themselvs don't have major goals or projects they commit to, besides fulfilling their duties. I gues one route would be to allow a lot more of a "behind-the-scenes" look at the personal life of the geomancers. So one might have a house somewhere, with some family members, and raising money is essential to keeping them all fed. Maybe, alternately, I could include such background but only as background -- not actually playing any of it out, but as a looming consequence of failure.

Lots of things for me to think about here...but keep any more ideas coming.

[Greg Sewell]

What about taking the small village episodic format and combining it with Kirk's suggestion about the building constructions building up the basis for power?

Rather than say doing alot of building in one town, have the smaller effects such as new graves sites etc., add up cumulativly to your reputation or prestige with the church.

Also I'm curious, how would the 'level of lifestyle' affect the peasants outlook of the PC's? Wouldn't that be more of a difficulty within the church heirarchy? I do like the idea of not maintaining the churches standards and being penalized for it. How about not being able to call upon the resources from the church (or rather having a more difficult time) if your character hasn't been keeping up with the level of lifestyle. I'm thinking along the lines of some geomancy doodads required for x ritual.

Maybe thats just taking away from the PC's abilities though.



It would be interesting if the peasants you're decieving were also your family members. Which is more of a plot idea though, I suppose.

[lumpley]

Hey Jasper. I'm going to say stuff more about rewards in general than about your game, I hope you'll find it helpful.

Dogs' reward rules reward you for getting your character in over her head - for taking the blow in conflict. They reward you mostly by making it even easier to get in over your head in the future.

The Mountain Witch's reward rules reward you for having your character seem trustworthy, whether he is or isn't (and usually he isn't). They reward you by putting you in the position to make real your trustworthiness-or-not.

Primetime Adventures' reward rules reward you for contributing fun cool stuff. They reward you by letting you participate more in conflicts when your character's not involved. (They also reward you by letting your character win more of the time, but that's the less interesting.)

Under the Bed's reward rules reward you for using your character's traits inventively. They reward you by making you more effective both when you pose a conflict and when your character has to deal with one.

So all those games - a few I happen to be familiar with - reward stuff that's really quite immediate. They reward you for what you're doing right now. They also reward you immediately: you can use your fan mail, your fallout traits, your trust, in the very next conflict.

Notice that reward rules are two-pronged: they reward you for something, with something. You want to create a fun little feedback loop.

And here's a third consideration: "the GM is responsible for awarding rewards" is not the funnest or easiest way to do it. The two alternatives you should be looking at are "some particular thing is always rewarded, mechanically" like taking the blow in Dogs or bringing your traits to bear in Under the Bed, and "the group is responsible for awarding rewards," like trust in the Mountain Witch and fan mail in Primetime Adventures.

So for your game: I'd suggest that you sit down and write out an ideal play transcript, like Roy suggests here in the sticky. Go through it and highlight any statement that a) seems extra cool to you, b) seems like it'd be hard for the player to come up with on the fly, or c) seems like something the player wouldn't really prefer to do. See if you can't build your reward rules to fit those.

-Vincent

[Jasper]

Greg, yeah. Cumulative reputation in the church tied to resources could work. (See below.)

Vincent,

That's good advice. Thanks. I had a rough "ideal transcript" in my head, but hadn't thought about it with quite those questions in mind.


Upon reflection then, I want players to...

- Come up with weird and cool geomantic procedures and explanations.

Reward: Make conflicts easier if accompanied by cool descriptions.

Invest a lot of time and energy into the geomantic- and demon-related processes, with lots of preparations.

Reward: Have preparations give significant bonuses to otherwise difficult actions.

- Help the peasants with their minor problems. This includes straightforward help, like investing time to extirpate a demon, but also getting involved with the village issues and settling conflicts, often by making difficult decisions -- and not to weenie out.

Reward: When peasants are helped, the GM raises their relationship score with the PCs. Later, they'll give significant aid to the PCs, maybe in preparations, rituals, or be easier to negotiate with.

- Try hard to be successful regarding the town's major issue (e.g. a new temple being built).

Reward: ? (see below)

Walk a fine line: to occasionally lie and misrepresent things to the peasants and leaders, using the authority of being church-sanctioned geomancers. Maybe to help solve problems, maybe for a "greater good" (like church authority), or maybe just personal benefit.

Reward: Have peasant's aid, and the success of the mission be as much about perception on the locals' part as about actual results. Keeping everyone happy will ensure that the PCs get help when they need it and that their whole visit will be deemed successful.


Regarding the question-mark. A few options:

1. Immediately improve the PCs' relationships with everyone in town, for use in wrapping up any remaining issues.

2. A larger reputation-score that endures between towns and helps them interact with people. Maybe as an expendable resource, or at least usable only a limited number of times in each new village. (People stop being awed after a while, and you can only hold your reputation over their head so much.)

3. Treat overall success in a town as a way to please the church. The consequence is increased tools/resources in later missions and, with enough approval, additional training between missions, for added effectiveness.

4. Success = being paid. Money allow the purchase of tools/resources and/or the PCs to keep up lifestyle levels to impress people and retain their class-based bonuses in social conflict.  Redundant with #3.


#1 seems like a definite. I'm leaning towards also using #3, and #2 for really great victories. Am I missing any other options? Or are there ways of combining some of them?

[Jasper]

Another reason to keep to church happy with you: when you fuck up in some other village, they'll it slide. If you keep fucking up, they'll say, "Looks like you're not cut out for thing. Back to the cloister!" And that'd be the only way for a character to be removed from play.