Morituti Characters: a good idea?

[Blessdevil]

Hello, my name IRL is Michele Gelli.

I started working on a game inspired by an old and obscure Marvel comic called "Strike Force Morituri". It was a really unusual comic (expecially for the '70 Marvel) and featured really strong themes.

The comic premise goes more or less this way:

- an alien race (the Horde) conquered the Earth.
- the Horde wiped humanity out of the sky, destroyed every ABC weapon and are keeping the planet under siege from orbit
- the Horde have no interest in ruling the world. They basically want a place to raid for fun and profit.
- the last hope of humanity is the "Morituri Process". People who undergoes the process will die within a year (the first one dies in a couple of days without even touching a Horde warrior) and will be granted a completely random super power (one got the power to make the flowers bloom).

The key of a game inspired by such a premise would be "you WILL die and you will die SOON: what are your priorities on such a tight schedule?". Nobody must feel safe. The Morituri Process could ask his price anytime.

This constant state of uncertainty gave a distinct atmosphere to the comic and I'd like to reproduce that kind of atmosphere in my game but am not sure which is the best way. My first thougt would be to insert some rule to have PC die randomly but it would be very upsetting for a player to have his character die before being able to develop it.

So what I'd like to ask here is an opinion: Do you think it would be a good idea to live to chance the death of a PC to eighten the tension of the situation or is this a recipe for disaster?

I thank in advance anybody who'll give me his opinion.

--
Michele

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Michele, and welcome to the Forge!

I think you might find my review of Godlike interesting, because I found that the best way to enjoy that game, for our group, was to bring an extremely Morituri approach to it.

I also think that opinion-polling may not be the best way to help you in this thread. I suggest instead that we proceed from the assumption that this is a good, strong concept to work with, and not run 'round in circles about why it might or might not be, or might or might not be on Tuesday, or might or might not be when the dog howls at the moon. Internet conversations tend in that direction unless we all accept something as a given.

So - the working assumption is, characters are (a) doing something very dangerous that could kill them, and (b) may spontaneously die due to some intrinsic factor of their existence. Which is, as I'm sure you know, only a basic description of normal human existence anyway, which is why I think we can proceed with this assumption without hesitation.

As far as offbeat-role-playing is concerned, that's pretty offbeat. To get the most out of it, here are a couple of ideas to bat around for yourself, and when you answer them, they'll give the rest of us a better idea of what you're after.

1. Should abilities or powers be randomized and potentially ineffective, as in the comic? Note: this adds another angle of offbeat-ness, and may not work as well in role-playing as in a comic, in which the more effective characters can be given more screen time.

2. What external threat is occurring? This is huge - the whole point of Strikeforce Morituri which I think you're after is that the risk of intrinsic death is worth it - because the external threat is so heinous. I'm also getting the (positive) idea that you're not aiming so much as to emulate the comic specifically, as to find the emotional or dramatic "node" that gave it that edge you described, and which I remember as well.

Best, Ron

[Tony Irwin]

Hi Michele,

I loved that comic and Im interested to see how your game develops.

This constant state of uncertainty gave a distinct atmosphere to the comic and I'd like to reproduce that kind of atmosphere in my game but am not sure which is the best way. My first thougt would be to insert some rule to have PC die randomly but it would be very upsetting for a player to have his character die before being able to develop it.

Have you considered making a division between what the PC knows and what the player knows? If the players know when (or perhaps which session) their character will definately die then it gives them a chance to bring in some really horrifying dramatic irony. Making your character fall in love with an NPC will seem all the more poignant when you know they'll never have time to continue their relationship. Starting a novel or series of reports becomes more poignant when you know your character won't live long enough to even half finish it. (Did the main character write a book about his experiences, or was he a journalist doing reports, i can't remember). To have your character risk their life to escape out the training base and take on some aliens will seem all the more dangerous and terrifying when the whole group is aware that the character has loads of time left and risks losing it all by dying early.

When I played Legend of the Five Rings we loved playing around world changing metaplot events. Knowing what is coming next, when our characters don't know, made everything our characters do seem much more significant/abhorrent/heart breaking/heroic or whatever. That level of player knowledge didn't ruin anything, it amplified everything that happened in play.

Here's the thing though - I guess this won't mirror our experience of reading the comics where we really didn't know what was coming next. Its an option though.

Tony

[Arturo G.]

Hi, Michele!

An interesting point of the Morituri process you describe is that the characters have chosen the high risk to try to get an advantage to face the terrible danger that threats them.

If all the players start with a character who has already made the choice, getting a sudden death could be an annoying thing. A different concept could be to begin with characters who have not yet made such a choice. Then the player may decide when the danger is too much and when to make the choice, knowing that the consequences implie a sudden death in a near future associate to a given probability. This choice is then a strategic one, dangerous, difficult, with terrible consequences, but it is still governed by the player.

Probably you were thinking in a different kind of tension, but perhaps it is something to think about.

Arturo

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

This is a neat idea, Michele.

I think that you'll find that there are a couple of satisfying ways to deal with the power effect you describe. One is that the powers are not the source of the player's effectiveness; that their pre-power life is deeply affective to them, and that their power of being able to smell colors adds complexity to their lives, but not necessarily power. They go off to fight aliens using their relationships to their families, other recruits, political ideologies, what-have-you. Powers all give you the same increased effectiveness, whatever their absurdity.

Another way to do it is to say, "Lots of people have stupid powers. You don't. Make your hero who can control the flow of information or alter emotions in others, and a couple of recruits who can speak to fish or have skin like velcro as your supporting cast." That supporting cast should overlap; the guy who sweats honey and is your son-in-law once had a fling with the PC played by the person to your right.

Both of these directions (and I'm sure there are others that are at least as good) allow for kooky powers and still empower the protagonists to do stuff.

Now, how about cranking up the heat a little? Every time you do something, you draw from a pool of dice. When you're out of dice, you die. You only ever need to roll one die — only the highest one (or two, or whatever) are used to win a conflict. So I can take a huge risk and roll fewer dice against you than you're rolling against me, but when you roll lots of dice, you're more likely to succeed. I think it's probably best if you roll, make some decisions, then roll more dice if you want to.

Ron's of course right: the motivations for this happening are important. I bet people will be more willing to push their characters closer and closer to death if they really care, as players, what the threat is.

[Mark Woodhouse]

I've kicked around a concept like this a few times, and two things I put into it were:

Structured Kicker: You're going to die. What one thing do you most want to do before you die? That's a pretty good place to jump into creating situation.

Escalation: The more you use your powers, the closer you get to death, but the more effective they get.

Not sure it's relevant, but my idea was heavily influenced by Ray Winninger's Underground rpg.

[Blessdevil]

Thanks a lot to everyone for the feedback.

Also please excuse me in advance for my poor English (not my native language) and forgive me if I'm not very familiar with the "Forge jargon". Please bear with me.

You are right Ron. I'm not looking to emulate specifically the comic, but wish only to find the emotional or dramatic "node". I think I will also not give alien full description, but only relevant traits, more or less like Baker made for the "Faith" in DitV. It will be up to the party and the Game master to decide wether the aliens will be Hulk-like brutes or repelling insects-like things with mental powers.

Here below are my first thoughts about this game. 

CHARACTER CREATION

1 - Player split "N" points between tree or four characteristic.
2 – Game Master and /or other players interviews the character in the making, simulating the screening process of the organization selecting the people to submit to the Morituri process.
3 – Player chooses his "super power", and chose for it a power level from 1 to "M". He also chooses a scar, a quirk or a fear left from the traumatic power-activation process. 
4 – Game Master and /or other players update character psychological profile.
5 – Each player must come with his own deck of cards. He will draw the first 25 – M cards, that will represent character's lifespan. The end of the player's cards will mean the death of the character.
6 -  the player using the higher number of card per game session will have to take at least one step in the creation on his next character within the same session.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

1 – Game master choose difficulty of the conflict
2 – the players compares difficulty with the appropriate character's characteristic, adding – if applicable – skills & quirks. The higher number wins.
3 – player can choose to use add the value of one or more card from his deck, if he really wants to win the conflict. If player is not winning after drawing the first card, he will be forced to draw AT LEAST another one. The player can chose to draw other cards, if he wishes.
4 – if the player draws an ace, he will add a card to his character's deck.
5 – if the highest card played is red, the player will tell what happened. If the highest card played is black, the Game Master will tell what happened.
6 – for every card played (except the first) the Game Master will be allowed to add one unpleasant attachment to the action's results
7 – the last card of the deck of each player always means a success when played

So playing cards will probably turn the action into a success, but will make character's life shorter (and player will not be able to tell exactly how much). Every time the player will have to use a card he will be forced to answer the question "does this really matter to you?". I think this will be a good thing.

Now I think I will need some kind of "mission template", that could give players (and characters) a common goal and a clear "to do" list, like the "Uphold the King of Life's Law in this troublesome branch" in DitV.

I think I will also need some way to insert a way for the character to deal with unresolved (and URGENT, since they are going to die really soon) personal issues, but I'm not sure how... If the Morituri are a government-controlled operation (and that's really reasonable), they will have a really short time to deal with personal problem. If I give them lot's of time for personal problems, the whole background will lose credibility.

I will have to think more about this.

[Kirk Mitchell]

Hey Michele!

The instant I read your initial post, I was hooked. The mechanics sound great, too. Everything clicks nicely into place. A couple of suggestions:

At the beginning of the game, how about some "Problem Creation" system, where you create a whole series of personal issues for the character that they have to resolve. Really pressing stuff, like "My younger brother has just disappeared, leaving a note saying that he is going to kill himself". Include a checklist of stuff that has to be specified to make a good Problem, like:

A Problem must specify a specific person close to the Moritui character
A Problem must have an immediate time limit
A Problem must have permanent, irreversable consequences if left to run its course

And include mechanics to reinforce consequences for the Moritui character if they don't persue these Problems. So, you've got a whole bunch of Problems, some of them conflicting, with each of your characters madly persuing them and in the background you have the threat of immenent death constantly overshadowing every decision that they make. Which brings me to my second suggestion.

I have to strongly advocate random death. I don't know about you, but when I imagine playing this game, I see frantic life-or-death struggles at an intensely personal level. They say "the candle that burns brightest burns the most swiftly", and this game to me is about people who burn like the sun. So thematically, having your character die at a completely random point perhaps without achieving all of their goals, would be quite powerful. Having the characters quick and easy to make would be good, if you went this way.

My suggestions may not suit your vision of your game, and that's cool, so feel free to take or leave as you see fit! I am very interested to see what comes out of this one.

Cheers!
- Kirk