[Echos] A proof of concept

[PhilV]

Greetings all.

This is a proof of concept idea in response to this thread http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=20334.0 by Callan. I didn't want to bog down that thread but the concept intrigued me so I wanted to create a proof of it. If I understand the thrust of the idea, Callan wanted to see if a mechanic could be created to work in a roleplaying game that ran along the same lines as a drinking game: ie the players can only lose or draw even but losing is essentially its own reward and entertaining.

The idea is called Echos. It needs to be played with a group of friends who know each other relatively well. To cut down on rambling I will simply list the order of play.

1. Each player draws a card from a deck. The person with the lowest card is considered to have died on the spot or later on that day. The become an Echo - a ghost bound to the mortal coil.

2. The Echo is dealt 10 cards face down. This is their Ascendance pile. Once they have used up all 10 cards they have Ascended to wherever it is they go in the afterlife and can no longer touch the mortal coil.

3. The Echo must then travel around the mortal coil and put their affairs in order. They may want to tell people they love them, or make sure their will is found, or even track down their killer and bring them to justice. The other players play the people the Echo wants to interact with (which may be themselves).

4. In order to directly affect the mortal coil the Echo must spend card/s from their Ascendance pile. They can choose how many cards they want to spend on an action and then flip those cards face up. The player they are trying to interact with then flips the top card of the normal deck. If the Echo has the highest card their action succeeds as they narrated and the cards they spent are removed from their Ascendance pile. If the Echo has the lowest card, their action failed and they must remove the cards they spent +1.

5. The Echo is trying to get all their affairs in order before they Ascend. They want to Ascend but they want to do it only after they have resolved everything. So by winning an action they are Ascending at the rate they have chosen. By losing they are still ascending by they are doing it at a faster rate and they might not get everything done before they do.

6. The game ends when the Echo Ascends.

Notes: There will probably be a heck of a lot of emotion flying around with this concept but I think it would be an interesting game to play at least once. If it is too close to home, it could perhaps be used in conjunction with another rpg when a character dies. It then gives the players a chance to see the ramifications of that character's death from a slightly different perspective and give the deceased a chance to affect the world after their demise. 10 cards might be too few so the number could be changed to create a longer or shorter game depending on the desires of the players.

Questions:
1. Does this game support/enforce the "drinking game" feeling of play?
2. Could you see your group playing this game or does it cross "that line"?
3. Is the mechanic deep enough or would you prefer that Echo's had different measures of ability such as "Manifesting", "Dreaming", "Telekinesis", "Empathy" etc - and each ability was rated with the maximum number of cards you could play when using it?

Thank you for reading. Comments and criticism are most welcome.

Phil V

[Christoph Boeckle]

Hello!

I didn't read the previous thread, so I don't think I can answer question number one. Still, I find your game interesting so I have a few suggestions to make.

I get the general structure of the game and I like it a lot!
Concerning question 2, I think we could play that game comfortably. The players would only get as far into emotional stuff as they feel like.

I like the structure of the mechanic in a general sense. I certainly wouldn't want any "powers" to be taken into account, I'd rather have the players do what they think is appropriate based upon their liking of ghost stories.

Now, I think you could go a few steps further with the very same card mechanic, so as to make the game easier to play.

For example, how do I know where to start if I'm the Echo? I want to have some clues so as to be able to start immediately.
This is where the cards drawn by the other players could come in handy. Each card could be a certain goal the ghost wants to achieve. Thus you'd generate a relationship web automatically from the start, giving the player a choice where to start too.
The obvious association is that a heart card would be an affective relationship to a character, played by the person who drew the card. You might want to check Clinton R. Nixon's Face of Angels or Matt Snyder's Nine Worlds for ideas of how to use card colour and values as cues for play.

Rule number 4 sounds a bit whiffy to me. The Echo player has no idea how effective he could be in overcoming the challenge, making this more a game of luck than a game where the player can show how much he cares for a given affair. If I come up with something I'll let you know.

Rule number 5 is all good, but I'd like to know how to measure the Echo's success in Ascendance. By the reading of your rules, I could spend all my ten cards on the first affair, succeed (or not) and be considered having ascended at the proper rate.
How about having a fixed number of affairs to deal with (the obvious answer would be one per other player), and dealing out a number of cards proportional to that, so the player can manage his ressources strategically?

I'd also like to know what the other players can do while the Echo player and the current affair player are dealing with their stuff. Do they get to play minor characters? Can they link their affair to the current one? Can they affect the outcome of the current affair in any way? If yes, what are the advantages and the risks the players take?
I think it's important to get the other players involved as well.

[PhilV]

Hi Artanis

Thanks for the reply. Your concerns and questions are all very valid and I will deal with each in turn.

Concerning question 2, I think we could play that game comfortably. The players would only get as far into emotional stuff as they feel like.

For myself, I believe my group would be quite comfortable playing this game too, and I think you are right in saying that the players will only go as deep as they want to. Some players might play the game very close to home, or they might settle on fictional circumstances (such as tracking down their "killer" or inventing false items that they want living people to find). I think either option would be entertaining.

For example, how do I know where to start if I'm the Echo? I want to have some clues so as to be able to start immediately.

I think this game would be rather personal and that each player would know instinctively what is most important to them and what they would like to focus on and accomplish first. For myself, I would want my fiance to know how much I love her and that I want her to be happy and live her life. To this effect, I would be happy spending the majority of my cards to see this happen. I would be surprised to see a player absolutely clueless as to what loose ends they want to tie up before Ascending.

This is where the cards drawn by the other players could come in handy. Each card could be a certain goal the ghost wants to achieve. Thus you'd generate a relationship web automatically from the start, giving the player a choice where to start too.

Excellent idea and I think here is where we could introduce more "game". The number on the card that the other players intially draw could be the number of cards they get to oppose the Echo. These are drawn from the deck once play begins. The Echo gets to draw a number of cards equal to the sum of the other cards drawn by the other players. So if there were four players and the three non-echos drew cards equal to 6, 8 and 10, the Echo would draw 24 cards. They may then "choose" 10 cards from this hand to be their Ascendance pile. This will increase the Echo's chances. During play, a non-Echo chooses a card from their hand to oppose the Echo and the Echo bids cards from their Ascendance pile as per my previous post.

The cards initially drawn by the other players can also be Representative of the issues the Echo must overcome and how difficult they may be to overcome. For example, a 2 of hearts might be a very minor emotional challenge, a 5 of diamonds might be a moderately important piece of information the Echo must convey, a 10 of clubs might be a difficult physical task the Echo must perform, and a king of spades would be an almost impossible secret the Echo must unearth. While I think many players will not need these cues, I can see that they might prove useful in a fictional setting or if the game was played "off the cuff" in a made up setting that had not really been discussed.

I'd also like to know what the other players can do while the Echo player and the current affair player are dealing with their stuff.

Good question, something I hadn't really considered. In a more "traditional" rpg, the other players would patiently wait their turn, but I think in this game, we can involve them a bit more. What if the other players where facets of the Echo's personality that could talk to them during the game. When play begins, each non-Echo decides on a personality facet they want to portray. In some ways, each player could be one of the seven deadly sins or cardinal virtues. During play, the non-Echos whisper words of encouragement or derision to the Echo and the Echo can respond to them, creating a running monologue with their own ego (of course it isn't really a monologue as the other players are responding - but fictionally it would be). When the Echo attempts a task and a facet of their personality wants to oppose it, they may also play a card from their hand in addition to the card played by the player who is opposing the Echo's action as per the standard run of play. Alternatively if a facet wishes to help the Echo, they may play a card from their hand in addition to the one played by the Echo to increase their likelyhood of success.

Once more, thanks for the response, and C&Cs are most welcome.

[matthijs]

I like the concept of trying to get everything in order before you ascend. But playing in such an emotionally charged setting has some challenges - at least, if you're assuming people play themselves.

- What if, for example, I most of all wanted to put things right with my mom, but none of the other players even know her? How could I play out that issue?
- Playing yourself, and having other players portray parts of you, can very easily turn stupid or ugly. It requires a very high level of trust and respect.
- It seems a bit strange to have a more-or-less random strength for issues that the Echo player is probably very aware of. For example, if I know that the major obstacle between me and my mom is my stepdad, while the fact she lives far away doesn't really matter, it won't make sense if I have to overcome a score of, say, 3 for the first obstacle and 10 for the second.

[PhilV]

Hi Matthijs thanks for the reply.

All very valid points, let me respond to each in turn.

What if, for example, I most of all wanted to put things right with my mom, but none of the other players even know her? How could I play out that issue?

This is one of my concerns with the game and I have no real answer for you. It would depend on the group I suppose. Some people may be happy with a facsimile of their mother, or they may like to discuss the scene with the other players before hand so everyone has an idea of what their mother is like and the issue they would like to resolve. I am unsure of a way to facilitate this in a rule set except for providing advice on the two methods above.

Playing yourself, and having other players portray parts of you, can very easily turn stupid or ugly. It requires a very high level of trust and respect.

Completely agree with you on that point. Much of the way this game would play relies very heavily on group trust and the maturity to deal with the issues. I think the non-Echo players need to have some guidelines regarding this part of the game - an actual play breakdown would be helpful in this respect and perhaps some examples of how to portray the different parts. In my mind, the other players should be reactive not proactive. If an Echo decides to do something - another player can agree or disagree with that decision with their reasons why from the point of view of that personality facet.

It seems a bit strange to have a more-or-less random strength for issues that the Echo player is probably very aware of.

I think that when the cards are drawn, the Echo can decide which issue to asign to each card. They may decide to assign their most important issue to the highest card so it is a real challange and the main thrust of the session, or they may assign it to the lowest card so they can be relatively assured of victory. The random nature of the actual card results can be a springboard for story and conflict. An issue that you thought would be really easy suddenly becomes a challenge and the reason for that challenge needs to be explored. For example, I try to tell my fiance that I will always be there for her but I meet a high card that I don't beat. Perhaps she is afraid of ghosts and refuses to acknowledge my advances, or perhaps she is too distraught, or doesn't want to believe I am even dead. I find these unexpected complications one of the interesting parts of this game but YMMV.

Once more, thanks for the reply. I am finding dissecting this idea most interesting.

Phil

[Christoph Boeckle]

Oh, you're supposed to play yourself? I didn't understand that from the start.
This would change my answers completely. Some of my friends wouldn't want to play such a game, especially if as Matthijs mentioned important aspects can get completely mangled.
As I understand it, the Echo's personality is completely defined by the affairs he has to resolve. This depends on how the other players go about with their description of their characters and as such the Echo's character is really a group creation, through play.

The simple way out is to play fictional characters. Players who want to explore what they would do can still do so, by the way.

Concerning the mechanics, I'm not too fond of drawing cards according to the number shown on the "affair card". This determines the importance of a conflict based on purely mechanical constraints, and I prefer going from the fiction to the mechanics, letting the player give it the importance they feel is appropriate, not the other way around. Of course, this is your project, don't worry about my preferences if they don't make sense to you.

How about something along those lines:
1. Each player draws a card. One player becomes the Echo, the others play characters the echo needs to deal with. The kind of relationship is determined by the card color (fr ex: heart - affective, clubs - enmity, diamonds - professional/political, spades - spiritual). The Echo is dealt a certain number of cards which he can see (let's call them the pool).
2. Each Other player defines a "challenge". For example: "ask for forgiveness". These player's goal is to make the challenge difficult (but they need limited ressources to represent that).
3. The Echo player chooses where he starts his journey and describes how the Echo attempts to do what he had in mind.
4. Goals are achieved (or not) in a mechanic similar to black jack, with the exception that the Echo player may use a card from his pool instead of drawing a random card. This allows a player to override the mechanic initially in the favor of the Echo's failure. Each drawing of a card is accompanied by some narration that cannot by itself resolve the challenge, but shows a way of getting there.
5. The Echo goes from character to character. His pool never replenishes.

The idea is that the mechanic resolves the challenge in an open number of "rounds" (contrary to black jack), letting the Echo player go as far as he wants. Since his pool does not refresh, spending it all on one challenge might yield success, but since the other challenges are all negotiated with his character in an unfavorable position to start off with (similar to blackjack), that might be really destructive for the rest of this affairs (actually, the pool could represent how much the Echo can push back the "time-out" before ascending).

I like the idea for the "inactive" players to represent sins. Or any other obstacle that could get in the way of the Echo's success (the mechanics would have to be tuned to take that into account of course).

There should be some kind of reward system for the other players. I don't have a sensible idea yet, but it should push them to play their challenges to the hilt.

Unused pool cards and whatever earnings from the reward system could then be used to narrate all the characters' epilogues, ending the story.

[PhilV]

Hi Christoph

Some great ideas here I would like to discuss.

Oh, you're supposed to play yourself? I didn't understand that from the start.

In all honesty, this depends on the comfort level of the players. I think the Echo needs to be someone the players know - whether a fictional character or themselves is entirely up to them. As this was a mechanical proof of concept, I wasn't too concerned with this and left it rather ambiguous.

In response to your suggestions;

1. While the specifics of the suit meanings are not completely to my taste, I agree with their concept. I am also more inclined to keep the "fixed" pool value (say 10) for the Echo.

2. I like the idea of the other players defining the type of the issue with a fictional character but I think the Echo may need to be the one to do this with a personal character. Of course, the premise of the game could be that the Echo is not resolving what they consider to be issues, but what some "higher power" deems they need to do. Thus some of the game could be set aside for the Echo to determine what it is they need to do to "pass on". As for the limited resources, I am still confident that the issue could be assigned a number of cards equal to the number on the initial card. I will explain why further on.

3. Perfect.

4. I like the idea of this, but let me spin it a bit. The Echo has a pool of 10 cards. They may look at these cards. The players have a pool of cards equal to the number on the card the drew initially. They may not look at these cards. When the Echo confronts an issue, the player controlling that issue flips the top card of their pile and describes the first obstacle to the Echo resolving this issue. The Echo wants to create a total of 21 to resolve this issue. They may ask the player controlling the issue to flip one of their cards, making that player describe another obstacle. The Echo may play a card from their pool and describe a way in which they overcome the obstacle to get at the issue. If they reach 21, they have resolved it. If they bust they may ask the other player to flip another card and try a different approach. If the other player has no more cards, the issue goes unresolved. Neither the Echo's or issue player's pools refresh. The Echo can actually resolve an issue without playing a card from their pool, with the result that they don't actually interact with the subject of their issue, and in fact, that issue existed only in their own mind. For example, the Echo needs to tell their estranged father that they love him and forgive him. The Echo asks the player controlling the issue to flip their card - a 10. They then decide to ask the player to flip another card - an Ace. The result is that the father knew in his heart that the Echo loved him and forgave him. Once the Echo spends all the cards from their pool, they Ascend. If they resolve their issues without spending all their cards, they may Ascend or they may keep interacting with the mortal coil until they spend all their cards. This method of play is drifting from the initial concept but it is proving to be very interesting to me.

5. Agreed.

There should be some kind of reward system for the other players. I don't have a sensible idea yet, but it should push them to play their challenges to the hilt.

Not sure how this would work or if it is required. There is a possibility that the other players playing the Echo's sins don't want them to Ascend and so essentially offer advice such as; "Why don't you appear to your father and tell him you love him" (ask the Echo to play a card from their pool) or "Your father is a bastard and never loved you (asking the issue player to flip a card). This dynamic may help to encourage the other players to play the Echo's sins and provide a small reward system for them if the Echo fails.

Great ideas from everyone so far - although the nature of this discussion has turned more into a discussion of the mechanical details as opposed to the 3 questions I initially proposed - I am certainly enjoying it so feel free to keep going down this path.

Phil

[Christoph Boeckle]

Yes this has strayed quite a bit from you three initial questions, but to be fair, I answered two out of three before rambling about the mechanics.
I think you've got enough stuff to put together for a playtest document, what do you think?

At this stage, I'm not sure I could add anything intelligent to the discussion without testing what you already have. Which I should be able to do.

[PhilV]

Yes this has strayed quite a bit from you three initial questions, but to be fair, I answered two out of three before rambling about the mechanics.

Indeed, my comment was meant as an observation, not a criticism and your insight has been most thought provoking.

I think you've got enough stuff to put together for a playtest document, what do you think?

I started this thread merely as a way to explore an idea promoted by Callan. I am unsure if I really want to take this idea into actual game territory but if there is interest I will surely pursue it. Although if I was to turn this into an actual complete game - I would be more inclined to add this game as the death part of another game. I have been kicking around an idea where the protagonists are Sensitive to the Echos, and each game explores the unresolved issues of an Echo as they try to communicate through the Sensitives. Basically, each player character will have a gift such as clairaudience, clairvoyance, channeling (writing, drawing, or voice), they will be contacted by an Echo and spend the session trying to figure out what the Echo wants and how to get it for them so they can pass on. In the event of a player character's death, then the rules we have been exploring in this thread will come into play - reversing the roles so to speak. This "whole picture" interests me more than the subset - as it explores themes and character choices I am interested in. How far will you go for stranger? How far will you go for someone who is already dead? What if they are a loved one? What if they were a criminal? Would you do it for love, revenge, pity, hope etc? This is more the type of game I would be interested in creating.

[Christoph Boeckle]

I should have put a smiley after my first sentence, I was just being silly, not trying to justify myself. :)

Well Phil, all I can say for the moment is that if you aren't taking this further, someone possibly will. I think you guessed who...
I'm just interested in the quick version of the game, though. Playing with a mere deck of cards and aiming at the 1-2 hours of play range.

If you go the full way, keep us posted!