Re: [Living Alchemy] - It's a PDF for your review

[Eric J.]

Um... so there was some kind of problem.  I guess it's an empty thread.  No matter!  I'll post it again!  If there are still problems, I'll contact an admin!

Hello!  It's been 1.5 years in the making.  Living Alchemy is a crunchy system about playing an adventuring scientist driven to accomplish something at any cost.

This is a protoguide.  It is the first draft of the game and probably entails a lot of confusion. It has several in-your-face editing mistakes.  I don't have time to fix it this weekend but I will the next.  If I could have some advice to work with as well, I would be very much gratified.

It's designed to let the players create practically any kind of crazy experiments.  It means that most anything is possible with some practical and interesting limits.  There are a few things I'm concerned about, though.

Is it a too incoherent?  At first glance, it's scope is too great.  Luckily improvement is fairly harmless.

What would be the most difficult part of playing it?  I think that learning how the game works would be somewhat difficult but once you are past that, it should play with little pain.

What about the "going over your limit" mechanic?  The pain/blood mechanic?  These were the hardest parts to create but also potentially the most rewarding in play.  I really want it to encourage doing risky things like mad experiments.  I also really like the reward mechanic.

Here it is for your pleasure.

www.wingsoftime.net/downloads/living_alchemy.zip

May the wind be always at your back,
-Eric

[Seth M. Drebitko]

Is it a too incoherent?  At first glance, it's scope is too great.  Luckily improvement is fairly harmless.

At certain points it is nothing that does not make it unreadable though. I would say it reflects a first draft though, an orderly explosion of an idea.

What would be the most difficult part of playing it?

I am thinking the lack of social traits, just my preference though. In my opinion without them those people who do which to play the more suave characters who are built to talk their way in and out of situations are pointless.

What about the "going over your limit" mechanic?  The pain/blood mechanic?

It looks good to me I liked these mechanics.

I would say other than your direct questions asked when you do a full write up of this game I can totally see having a couple differant genres described with multiple types of "alchemy" in each genre. Any further supplement books could simply and very easily more in depth explore a setting or genre.

regards, Seth

[xenopulse]

Hi Eric,

I read through the basic resolution mechanic on my way home, and I already have a few comments and questions, so let's focus on that part exclusively for now.

1. You mention the GM rather late.  I think a basic description of the distribution of authority early in the game will help it a lot.  This might also clear up a LOT of confusion I now have about who set up challenges for whom and on what basis the target numbers are chosen.

2. You don't explain that a player can only combine the same numbers. It's obvious from the examples, but needs to be made clear. Also obvious from the examples but not clear enough is that the result of combining is one higher than the number the dice have in common, not their sum.

3. Example with Bob and fire and smoke. First, who decides the values? They seem to be environmental, so I figure it's the GM, but it doesn't say. Then apparently the player decides which ability to use. Is that always the player's call?

4. Example with Bob and poison. Why does the player need to split up dice beforehand? Wouldn't it be neater to just roll the dice and see which one is more important to the player by how the player splits up the results?  In other words, what do the differently colored dice and the beforehand-splitting up accomplish in your design that wouldn't be there if you just handled it like any other multi-value conflict?

5. The whole paragraph about the sheet of ice went over my head. I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

6. Like Seth, I wouldn't mind social rolls, but I'm sure you have a reason for keeping those to GM fiat.

7. "Usually the factor represents the amount of time that it takes to perform the action." Huh?  I thought different values were for different tasks at the same time?

8. There are no guidelines about what value to choose for environmental targets, so I'm not sure it would be "pretty effortless"   But more importantly, in that same paragraph (page numbers would be good for reference) under "some more on target numbers," you say that it would be much more interesting to do two tasks at once. While that may be true, it's also much HARDER to succeed at two tasks at once rather than just one. So why would I ever want to do that?

9. I still haven't grasped the concept, at this point, of choosing my own target values. How and why?

That's it for now.  I'll move on to character creation once we've got these figured out.

[David C]

Interesting. Isn't it kind of neat to see your work moving towards "completed" (if that ever really happens? lol)
Having come a long ways in my system myself, I wish I had done what I'm recommending to you. "Find a piggyback system"  Find a game that is almost what you want - GURPs might be a match for you. Don't let this constrain you, just so you can say "It's like GURPs, but this, this and this are different." This will let you focus on developing the world, skills, "gifts", races/regions, classes, "spells", without worrying about mechanics too much. Also, it is much easier to convince play testers to try things out.  After that is squared away, change your mechanics.

My story is that I've spent 300ish hours working on my mechanics and world at the same time. About 100 of those hours was "revision" because this mechanic or that mechanic changed, so I had to change every single skill, gift, etc that relied off that mechanic.

[Eric J.]

Thank you guys very much for the replys!

Since midterms are over, I guess I can move forwards with another revision this weekend.

As for the questions, I'll act like they're in two groups.

First: Social Skills-

I set up social skills as they are pretty deliberatly.  In most RPGs, they're kind of a substitute for talking and negociation which is kind of what interaction is for.  So often, someone will give a very very convincing (or terrible) argument or speech and the resolution system (oblivious to this argument) will return an arbitrary result.

The idea behind a resolution system is that it resolves things in an interesting way depending on what the circumstances are.  But how do social skills make things more interesting if they can be resolved through conversation which is automatically interesting?

That's why I strove for "kind of" resolution social skills.  When you use one, it will tell the player something new or deny them that privilage.  I'd really love to expand upon this.  With two pushes in that direction, I guess that's something for me to do.


Then we have Xenopulse's very useful questions-

1. You mention the GM rather late.  I think a basic description of the distribution of authority early in the game will help it a lot.  This might also clear up a LOT of confusion I now have about who set up challenges for whom and on what basis the target numbers are chosen.

You're completely right.  I mention everything about how the game works kind of late and incoherently.

2. You don't explain that a player can only combine the same numbers. It's obvious from the examples, but needs to be made clear. Also obvious from the examples but not clear enough is that the result of combining is one higher than the number the dice have in common, not their sum.

That's exactly how they combine.  When they can combine is an important issue.  I should explain that.  Short answer: The player can combine dice as much as she wants.  Targets don't combine.

3. Example with Bob and fire and smoke. First, who decides the values? They seem to be environmental, so I figure it's the GM, but it doesn't say. Then apparently the player decides which ability to use. Is that always the player's call?

Regarding who decides the target numbers: Big overlook here.  You are right in your guesses (they should have to be guesses).

Usually the GM decides the target numbers for the environment.  Each number represents a different problem.  This means that any one roll can have multiple outcomes and sometimes the player chooses what to succeed at and what to fail at.

The Player always get to choose which ability to use but the GM doesn't let them use some abilities because sometimes it's inappropriate.  You can't sneak if you're in plain sight for instance.  What's interesting is that you can use abilities creatively, especially alchemy.  If someone threw a small bomb at you, you could use a ping-pong gift to knock it back.  And since you can use basically any gift at any time, it should allow for some creativity.  That's the idea anyway.

Alright.  Target numbers are a little tricky.  That's why I had so many sections on them.  I'll practice explaining them here.

either
1. you roll against the environment (GM sets the target numbers with some input)
or
2. you roll against yourself using an ability (you set the target numbers to do something special)
or
3. you roll against the target numbers from another character (the other character sets the target numbers)

In the first case, the GM creates targets depending on challenges in the environment.  This could be important people watching, an ice sheet across the ground, or that you're bleeding.

If you're just trying to do one thing like in any other RPG, you just roll against one target number.  Say you want to kick a door down, then you might have a target number of 6 (set by the GM) and then the player rolls stamina.

The POINT of having multiple target numbers (and of different values) is that the player gets to choose what to succeed at and what to fail at which makes the game more interesting.  If you're trying to sneak past a patrol on ice, you have to roll against (6, 3).  If you get a 3, but not a 6, the patrol spots you.  If you get a 6, and a 3, you're past them no problem.  If you get neither, then you fall on your ass with the patrol people after you.  This diversity also encourages people to take calculated risks (especially in alchemy).

Characters also have abilities which let them roll against target numbers.  To turn lead into gold, the player uses an ability:
The target numbers are as follows: 6 (lead), 7 (Nuclear transmutation), 6 (gold).  They now roll against those numbers to accomplish that task.  What might get tricky in the explanation (but not the game) is that players can have an affect on environmental target numbers.  The GM says "A rock falls from a height of 3 stories.  If you get hit, it deals a damage of 7."  The player says, "Okay, the next time we're 3 stories above, we'll start dropping rocks on other people and each rock will deal a damage of 7."  The GM would kind of have an obligation to let them do that.

4. Example with Bob and poison. Why does the player need to split up dice beforehand? Wouldn't it be neater to just roll the dice and see which one is more important to the player by how the player splits up the results?  In other words, what do the differently colored dice and the beforehand-splitting up accomplish in your design that wouldn't be there if you just handled it like any other multi-value conflict?

4. Splitting up dice:  The only time you split up dice is if you're using two different abilities to accomplish different tasks.  This is really just for balance's sake and if it's too complicated, I'll just get rid of it.

If the character has 6D stamina and 3D agility, why do they get to use the three best stamina dice to run?  Splitting it up avoids some confusion.  What if there are two tasks (a minor one that uses a big gift) and a smaller one (that uses a much weaker gift).  Say 8D and 3D.  Then if you roll them as just one pool or split them up after the fact, you're letting the player use the big pool for resolving something that you shouldn't be very good at.

5. The whole paragraph about the sheet of ice went over my head. I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

I was just trying to explain the purpose for having target sets, how you can use them to make conflicts more interesting.  Since tasks have a definite number associated with them, you can use these targets more rigerously.  It should lead to new ideas too.  Does one of the villains use some chlorine gas on you?  Use it right back at him.

6. Like Seth, I wouldn't mind social rolls, but I'm sure you have a reason for keeping those to GM fiat.

I explained my stance on social skills above.

7. "Usually the factor represents the amount of time that it takes to perform the action." Huh?  I thought different values were for different tasks at the same time?

That's some pretty crappy wording on my part.  I'll explain the third resolution type.  Characters can set targets for other characters.  They roll the dice for an appropriate gift or attribute and use 1-3 of these numbers and use them for targets (after combining as much as they want).  How many targets they get to set depends on the amount of time the character has available to her.  I shouldn't say this because it's confusing.  I think you had it right before you read this.  Each target represents a task (as always).  They can't set more than three tasks at once.

8. There are no guidelines about what value to choose for environmental targets, so I'm not sure it would be "pretty effortless"   But more importantly, in that same paragraph (page numbers would be good for reference) under "some more on target numbers," you say that it would be much more interesting to do two tasks at once. While that may be true, it's also much HARDER to succeed at two tasks at once rather than just one. So why would I ever want to do that?

The setting for environmental challenges is supposed to be driven by interest and coherence.  If you're trying to do the same thing as before, the target is the same.  All characters have to roll against the same targets for the same tasks.  The idea is supposed to be that it's fun to do multiple things at once.  That's how conflicts should be framed.  Jumping accross a ledge isn't interesting but jumping accross a ledge while running from a hoarde of cannibals is awesome.

You are right, though.  There is no reason to roll against two targets if you can do them one at a time.  But if you have the freedom to roll against them one at a time, you probably shouldn't be rolling for them anyway.  Most of the time, when crafting, performing alchemy, in combat, when performing crazy stunts, in complicated scenes, you'll be rolling against multiple targets.

9. I still haven't grasped the concept, at this point, of choosing my own target values. How and why?

You get to choose your own targets when performing abilities.  Say you want your character to be able to identify members from the green dragon syndicate.  Your character examines some green dragon syndicate people and notices that each of them has a green dragon tattoo on their forearms.  Now, the player talks with the GM and they decide that any time they make a perception check against someone, there also exists a target of 5 for (see the green dragon tatoo).  If they hit that number they'll know whether the person is part of a syndicate or not.

It is also one of the most important parts of the system, alchemy.  You set your own target numbers to create special kinds of thing happen.  Do you want to shape a copper rod into a heart?  4 (copper), 5 (shape).  If you can hit those numbers, it happens.

I hope that this has answered more questions than it's proposed. .

David,

I've looked at GURPS, and a pretty wide variety of systems in general.  Darkshire has a pretty big collection of RPGs on there.  The descriptions are short but I've also looked at many of the free ones.  Very few of them have mechanics that resolve simply.  I'm not trying to create the crunch.  I'm trying to create tools for creating the crunch.

I think that there are a lot of great systems out there.  I designed this one because I've been really intruiged by the world of alchemy and human discovery in general.  Science has always been an interesting field with some of the absolute best characters in history, stories full of exploration, defensiveness, and even vengence.  The fantasy "wizard" has absolutly nothing on this.

So I wanted to create a game where you could play someone like Tycho Brahe, a complete asshole who managed to get his own observatory and a small person to help him, Newton who got into fights with Hooke, and was a complete madman who spent his whole life questing after the heavens (his personal search resulted in a huge push in human enlightenment).

I want to give people the tools to do things like that.

Anyway, thank you everyone for all of your suggestions and comments.  I'm going to write a quick-launch version that tells you just enough stuff to start playing in a preset kind of scenario.  I'm thinking about two possible premises:  "You're monster hunters!" and "Someone is taking credit for your machine!  Get the credit back!".

Anything that people can get in before the weekend is through will be included to make it easier for people to understand.

May the wind be always at your back,
-Eric

[LandonSuffered]

Eric -- I read your post a couple days ago, but this is my first chance to reply/comment.

I think your initial concept is both awesome and exciting...I hope you're able to get your game up and running.  While I am not too familiar with FMA, there are plenty of other inspirations I would name for this kind of concept: from Steam Boy down to that Dexter cartoon to M.S.'s Frankenstein.  Alchemy itself is fantastic concept...I'd strongly reccomend reading Coelho's The Alchemist, if you haven't already.

I think there is great dramatic conflict in the ideas of
man versus nature
power versus responsibility
knowledge versus innocence

In occult terms, the alchemist's true search for transforming base metal into gold is an allegory for achieving self-transformation.  This is an underlying theme for many science-themed stories: What is my true nature? What does science reveal in me? (see also the films Dark Man and the Swamp Thing)

I like your base mechanic a lot...I think the combining numbers for achieving target numbers echoes your theme (alchemy) especially well. Certainly it allows the players to "transform" their dice rolls into something they prefer, picking and choosing between possibilities, how they will succeed, etc.

Okay, now for the criticism: I am not a scientist or a student of science...hell I got a B.A., dropped calculus because it was boring, and took "weather systems" as my lab class in college because it didn't require going to an actual lab.  I get completely lost when you start writing about Pure Elements, Source Elements, and Processes...though whether this is due to me being a bone head or lack of clarity in writing (or both) I can't say.  Why is air and wood source elements, while CO2 and Water (in all its forms) are pure elements? Why is carbon "pure," coal "source," and diamond "pure?"  Why is "Combine" different from "Oxidize" and "Heat" different from "Burn?"

I understand your desire to make the system "crunchy;" but is there any way you can make is scaleable to make it more accessible to the non-chemists/physicists?  I have seen some games that start with the abstract ideas and allow one to "scale up" the complexity level based on individual knowledge/comfort level; is this a possibility for your game?  I (and a couple players I know) would love the idea of an RPG that allows us to be mad scientists, cranking out world-shattering inventions and dealing with the repercussions.  However, we'd be hard pressed to use your system...at least without a lot more examples!

Of course, it is your game so you're under no obligation to make it less crunchy or more accessible.

One last note...after watching Steam Boy, I was strongly inspired to try making a Steam-powered Sorcerer version, but the genre just didn't seem...um, scary enough (for lack of a more complimentary term) for the system.  I think your system has a lot more potential for telling these type of stories...that of the "scientist protagonist" (not just "scientist warrior"), Good luck on fleshing it out...I'm looking forward to more!

[Eric J.]

Hey, thanks!  I'll see if I can get a quick-lauch PDF out by Monday.  Sadly, I burned all of Saturday playing Grim Fandengo.

As I said at the end of the document, I really hope that there are people who can recognise those elements, and that my system can take advantage of them. 

I can vouch for the very low clarity of the elements as they're presented.  As said earlier in the document, they're just one kind of alchemy.  It's basically just a bunch of stuff that has to do with the alchemy as seen in the anime Full Metal Alchemist.  Of course, I don't actually explain that.

I think that if I put in a few more examples, it would become much clearer.  Basically, what it does is let you change the elements listed around into stuff.

You could create a character that create un-steel things:

Steel: 6
Separate: 3
Iron: 4
Carbon: 4

If you were able to hit these numbers, you could separate steel into constituent materials.

I apologize for releasing it in such a sorry state, but everything that everyone has said has been very usefull and it'll make the next thing I'm working on much easier to write.

BTW- If you think it's bad now, you should have seen all of the crazy things I had in there before .  It started with abstract concepts like how much energy you were using, complexity of the compounds, and all sorts of wacky stuff.  Then I turned to fulfilled chemistry.  Instead of having things like water and human as elements, you actually had to roll for each nuclear constituent element.  My brother told me, "Eric, people will need a chemistry book to play your game."

"What?  Just because I'm using chemistry books to design the game, doesn't mean it'll be complicated or anything!"

Anyway, I'll tone down the crunch for the next version a little bit.  Right now I'm thinking it'll be a setting where mechanical computers came about a hundred years earlier?  (I haven't read "The Difference Engine" yet.  Maybe that would be a good idea.)  I was really impressed with the Petrana wiki I saw around here with the clockwork automatons and rival guilds.  This one won't be so long.

One thing I'm really interested in is how well my system can support the kinds of themes (be them narrative themes or just setting themes or whatever) that I'm trying to draw from.  In my experience, metagame mechanics can get in the way if they're too blunt.  I thought that making science versatile, powerful and rewarding performing risky experimenting and letting players sacrifice to get out of trouble would be enough.  Only playtesting will tell, though.

May the wind be always at your back,
-The Living Alchemist

[Spooky Fanboy]

Just my $.02

In order to prevent this from becoming just a mad-science based supers game (while recognizing that as a worthy goal in it's own right), I think it would help to have motivational mechanics of a sort. After all, yes they can do cool super-science stuff, but the question is: why? What makes a person risk body and mind to perform these experiments? Why not just go into medicine or engineering, and keep a reasonably-priced health plan?

The Riddle of Steel did a respectable job of using goals and passions to drive the game, making them necessary to move the game forward without making them intrusive. I'd recommend looking at that, especially for a game about mad, beautiful science and the people who live that life.

[Spooky Fanboy]

Sorry!

Also, if you do include mechanics like the ones I described, I would recommend letting them have some impact on the social end of things, for good and ill. Passion and enthusiasm is contagious, but it can also be alienating and scary.

[Spooky Fanboy]

Question: do you plan on having a system, roughly as detailed, that would allow Transmutation of Power (fire, kinesis, lightning, etc.) Mind, and the Spacetime Continuum as you have developed at the rough stages for Matter and Life Science?

I ask because you've obviously detailed the Matter portion of the Alchemy ability. I'm curious if you plan on having Life as detailed, or perhaps you might be considering generalizing in Matter a bit, so as to make Life (and any others you might add) part of an overall template. For myself, I'd prefer the latter; I'm all about pulpy sci-fi, but getting deep into the Science aspect of it might well be daunting for someone not similarly inclined (like, say, me.)

Also, IMO, anyone should be able to whip up just about anything within those 5 categories that would be appropriate for a game of "mad" science. Just a thought.