Episodic

[Tim C Koppang]

And so I humbly submit my own game for your perusal... (not another one you say)

Episodic isn't a setting, but a system really.  Narrativist in nature, it makes use of a karma based resolution mechanic, and has a drama mechanic tagged on.  What I'm really proud of though, is the character creation and advancement rules.  It makes no attempt to encourage narrativist play through character rewards (the game still needs work probably) but it builds a sort of journal as you go.

Regardless, I welcome any comments/suggestions.

http://www.students.uiuc.edu/~koppang/content/episodic.htm

_________________
- Tim C K

[ This Message was edited by: fleetingGlow on 2001-08-29 00:12 ]

[hardcoremoose]

This will probably be short, since I've only read over the rules once, but on the basis of that once over, I found a lot of things to like about Episodic.  Moreso because it reminds me of the kinds of mechanics I've been tinkering with.  I especially like your suggestions about keeping it free-form...leaving aspects of the character undefined, allowing them to develop through play.  This is a very cool - and under-utilized - tool that allows the player to customize his character to the scenario at hand as it unfolds, better illuminating him as a protagonist (sheesh, I've been talking to Paul too much :smile: ).

There are a couple of things I'm not sure about.  I'd have to play it to be sure, but I think I'd get rid of the meta-gamey Drama Points and instead allow for greater Authorial/Directorial power on behalf of the players for particularly high Degrees of Success (sort of like the direction Jared is taking InSpectres).  I might also reduce the cost of buying dice, but couple that with a risk factor (i.e., you wager one or more Traits to buy the dice, and if you still fall short, those Traits are gone...either permanently or temporarily).  Then again, a lot of people are doing the gamble thing since The Pool has leapt onto the scene (I'm actually working on a mechanic that's almost identical to the one I just described), so maybe wagering Traits and gambling on them isn't the most original way to go.

Those are my initial thoughts, and neither are meant to be criticisms, but rather food for thought.  In short, I'd like to see how it plays out...

Take care,
Moose

[FilthySuperman]

Heyo,
      I'm in a bit of a hurry so this will be real quick.

I like entire idea behind character creation. I think it's something that alot of games could learn from. (Also- GMTA, I use traits in my game :smile:  )    I'm not a big fan of the pool of dice system.. but it appears as though it will work out fine. Overall I can't see any mechanics that I don't think will work and I also like the way the GM actually has to do his/her job throughout the game yet there is still a narrative feel to it. I have to agree with Moose though, I don't care much for the Drama mechanic. Don't get me wrong, I've only just read over the rules and certainly haven't playtested it. Perhaps in playtesting it's worked out better than it looks? At any rate.. I love the system. I'd like to see it put to a setting, since I'm lazy. :razz:

Good work!


T.

[Tim C Koppang]

Thanks to the both of you for your responses.

As far as buying dice goes, I was also unsure about the high cost.  This is the primary reason I made dice explode.  Still, in play it works out that players would usually accept their failure than gamble a higher degree of loss.  In a way I like this.  It keeps the karma mechanic in the foreground, but still leaves room for luck.  Alternatively, I've played the game with more than just d4s.  For instance, I allowed a player to purchase a d6 for four points or even a d10 for six points.  The costs represent a 50-50 chance of improving your standing.  However with the exploding dice, the outcomes tend to be a bit better.

I'm not sure how to address the issue of drama points.  I suppose I'm not sure what it is you don't like about them.  I intended them to balance the power a GM receives in a karma-based system.  With so much dependent on GM whim, I thought the players would appreciate a bit of control.  I have to admit, the players I play-tested with aren't big on using meta-game mechanics so my viewpoint may be skewed.  I'd thought of changing drama points to a more objective form of control, where the points altered rolls or some other established mechanic, but I'm still toying with that idea.

Thank again.

[hardcoremoose]

Hey Tim,

Regarding Drama Points...

I love having some degree of control over the game.  In fact, it's almost a requirement in any game I'm going to play (here I'm using the term "play" differently than "GM"; I'll GM any game, but to play a game I need to be trusted to contribute ideas to the story).  So yeah, I love the fact that Episodic wants to put some of the narrative power into the players hands.  

But the Drama Points don't seem quite right.  I'd tie the players' narrative ability into the task resolution system somehow - the better their Degree of Success, the more narrative power they have.  

Maybe this seems odd to you.  For example, how much narrative power can a player exercise while picking a lock successfully?  You either pick it or you don't, right?  The trick is in remembering that the player isn't interested in picking the lock for the lock's sake; what they are really trying to do is gain entrance to a room to see what's behind the door.  If the player is really successful, let them determine what's behind the door.  If they fail miserably, maybe it turns out that lock was trapped, or maybe they alerted the guards that were standing on the other side of the door.  You could do all of this with Drama Points, but the system you've designed is very capable of handling it all on its own - let it do the work.

Of course, this is not a new idea.  The Pool uses the Monologue of Victory to accomplish the same thing.  Jared runs InSpectres like this.  Almost all of the games I run these days incorporate this level of player empowerment.  I just happen to be biased towards a system that is more event oriented than task oriented.

Please, ignore me if I'm getting longwinded.

Take care,
Moose        

[Uncle Dark]

Tim,

I just finished reading Episodic, and I have to agree with the priase so far.  The character generation system is great,.

I have my questions about buying dice, too, but you and Moose have convered that ground.

Now, about the damage system-- I assume that crossed-off traits are returned to play when the associated wounds are healed?  The text as is could be read this way, or it could also be read as saying that those traits are lost permanently.

And a design philosophy question: why a karma-based system?  I (being a long-time Amber player) can see how a karma system can encourage creative/descriptive play, but most of the people I play with are heavily into fortune mechanics.  What do you think of using dice, on a one d(whatever) per point basis?

Maybe in your next edition, you'll want to include some non-combat examples of how equipment and such provide traits.  I'd also recomend borrowing a bit from Hero Wars and having NPCs add traits to the active PC (i.e. the character's bodyguards are a trait s/he can use in combat (an * trait?)).

Also, would you think it useful to include some differentaiton in skill level?  Maybe allow exceptional traits to count double?

Just thinking out loud (sort of :smile:).

Lon

[Tim C Koppang]

Now, about the damage system-- I assume that crossed-off traits are returned to play when the associated wounds are healed? The text as is could be read this way, or it could also be read as saying that those traits are lost permanently.

Yes, the traits come back.  I looked over my text, and have already uploaded a new version.  Thanks for the pointer.

And a design philosophy question: why a karma-based system? I (being a long-time Amber player) can see how a karma system can encourage creative/descriptive play, but most of the people I play with are heavily into fortune mechanics. What do you think of using dice, on a one d(whatever) per point basis?

Basically because I wanted to design a karma based system.  For me, the "buying dice" option was enough luck.  It's a matter of personal taste.  Not everyone I know likes diceless play; likewise I don't expect the role-playing community to rally behind "Episodic."  But on the other hand, play is fast and concise.  It emphasizes creative play – so that you are forced to play to a character's strengths.  Basically you are asking me to defend the whole of karma based resolution, which I can't do, but I do appreciate the chance to contemplate the issue.

Maybe in your next edition, you'll want to include some non-combat examples of how equipment and such provide traits.

That's some food for thought... I'd like to add a bunch of examples actually, but having specific input helps me to prioritize.

I'd also recomend borrowing a bit from Hero Wars and having NPCs add traits to the active PC (i.e. the character's bodyguards are a trait s/he can use in combat (an * trait?)).

This is an interesting idea.  I haven't played Hero Wars, but the idea sparks something in my imagination.  I thought about putting more of a concentration on situational modifiers, but the NPC factor never occurred to me.

Also, would you think it useful to include some differentaiton in skill level? Maybe allow exceptional traits to count double?

This idea did occur to me.  I originally had three different levels of skill available for each trait, but with the free-form nature of traits and quirks I threw out the rule.  How can you compare a personality idiosyncrasy with a feature of strength on the same scale?  So you say have a different scale for each trait, with generic levels – but I say just let the player pay for a new trait.  The cost will work out the same, it will give you a more personalized character (which is the point of traits in the first place), and it will actually work out better for the player.  Instead of one trait at a high level that only applied in certain situations, he can now have a related trait that allows him to cover more ground overall.  In other words the character is more diversified in his skills.  If a player really wants one particular trait at a higher level, he can take a new trait with a similar name that represents more advanced techniques.

Does that all make sense?  I'm not sure.  To simplify:  I want diverse characters with very specific lists of advantages and disadvantages.  I want the player to choose what those qualities are, what they're called, and what situations they are applicable to.

Just thinking out loud (sort of :smile:).

And I appreciate your input.
_________________
- Tim C K

[ This Message was edited by: fleetingGlow on 2001-08-31 18:03 ]

[Jeffrey Straszheim]

My comments,

I think the character creation and advancement rules are great.
I mean really great.  Possibly the best I'e seen.  I can't help
but contrast them to systems such as Hero Wars and The Pool,
where you write a paragraph then dredge from it your traits.
The problem is that folks seem to find such a system almost too
freeform.  In creating a Hero Wars character for my wife, she
just didn't know how or where to start.

Anyhow, Eposodic's systems will (perhaps) provide just enough
structure to get folks like her started, but still be very free. Also,
it builds a backstory in a natural way, but again with an easy to
grasp structure. Hopefully we can try it out this weekend.

The resolution mechanic, on the other hand, excites me only
marginally.  Perhaps it's just that I hate D4's :smile:

I'm quite tempted to try out a combination of Episodic (for character
creation) with The Pool (for its fortune mechanic and wagering).
I think the two will fit together perfectly.

I know this makes me an infidel :smile:

[Uncle Dark]

Tim,

I think I was unclear.  I wasn't asking for a defense, I was curious as to what it was about karma systems which caught your attention and inspired you to write a game based on them.  The comment about my players was  color, not critique.  Sorry for the confusion.

I'm quite tempted to try out a combination of Episodic (for character
creation) with The Pool (for its fortune mechanic and wagering).
I think the two will fit together perfectly.

I was thinking much the same thing, actually.  Let me know how it goes if you ever do it.

Lon

[James V. West]

Infidel defilers! You shall all drown in lakes of...oops. Waitaminute.

Just skimmed over Episodic. It looks cool! I'll have to give it a more in-depth reading before I can make any serious comments.

However, just wanted to pipe in about a couple of things.

Someone mentioned using traits like bodyguards or other aspects that are not an integral part of the pc. I haven't played Hero Wars, but I do treat traits this way in The Pool. I wanted a system that allowed for any kind of trait whatsoever to be able to influence the game. Snoring, a rabbit's foot, the habit of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, knowing a rock star...anything. I love that stuff in games.

Also, the idea of leaving a character open-ended is one I'm drawn to. That's why I made char gen in The Pool so loose. I wanted to promote a style of play that supports "emergent" development of characters. I think Episodic could do a nice job of this.

Good stuff.

James V. West
http://www.geocities.com/randomordercreations/index.html

[Tim C Koppang]

Hopefully we can try it out this weekend.

Just wondering if you, or anyone else tried out the system yet.  Someone had mentioned combing it with The Pool, which also sounded intriguing.

Anyway, just curious to what sort of opinions/problems others had.

Thanks...