26 Ways: the Game of Alphabetic Action (looking for feedback

[redivider]

Hi,

I'm posting a 2 page summary of a game I'm working on. The 12 page pdf with all the rules and more examples is available on line at

http://home.earthlink.net/~markvalli

I welcome any and all feedback. Comments on whether any of the minor rules are confusing or look unwieldy would be especially useful.

Thanks

mark

26 Ways: the Game of Alphabetic Action

What is it? 26 Ways is a Role Playing Game with a Word Game nestled near its heart. 26 Ways uses an alphabet-based mechanic. Participants take turns narrating actions or events derived from words starting with a single, randomly-generated letter of the alphabet.

Why is it? I was moving some old board games and came across a 20-sided Scattergories™ dice with letters rather than numbers on its faces. It inspired me to mess around with some concepts for alphabet-based action resolution. I moved from inspiration to a 12 page draft because I liked the idea that constraining the ways that participants describe "what happens next" could inspire some atypical and creative narration.

How does it work? The game's special rules kick in when:
* a character or NPC tries to do something with an uncertain outcome.  
* a player wants to narrate something that happens "outside" of their character's actions, such as describing what another person does, describing what happens to a nearby object;  or dictating a change in the weather.  
* the moderator decides that the rules would make a situation more interesting or dramatic.

In these situations, there is one main rule and nine secondary rules.

Alphabetic Action is the main rule. When each participants says "what happens," they have to narrate an action or event centered on a Word that Starts with a Single Letter of the Alphabet.
* each participants generates a letter. (An appendix gives five methods to pick letters: close your eyes and point at a page of any book or magazine, roll percentile dice and consult a chart, roll scattergories die, pick scrabble tiles, use ouija board).
* going in alphabetical order, each participants picks a single word starting with their letter, then narrates 1-2 sentences revolving around that core word.

Example: A private investigator character is going through the trash and recycling bins outside of an NPC's house one night. A rent-a-cop shows up and shines his flashlight at the character. The player generates a "B."
* Batteries. His flashlight sputters and dies and I escape into the darkness, or
* Bribe. I give the guard $60 and he agrees to forget he ever saw me here, or
* Bum. I'm dressed in old sweatpants and a windbreaker so I should be able to pretend I'm homeless and looking for bottles, or
* Butterfingers. The clumsy guard drops the flashlight, which breaks, plunging the alley into darkness, or
* Any other B word the player can think of that allows them to narrate a desirable outcome.

Minor Rules.

* Think Fast. In game situations where the characters have to react quickly, the moderator should set a time limit (somewhere from 5 to 30 seconds) so the players can't sit there forever to think up the ideal core word.
* Don't Repeat Yourself. A player cannot use the same Core Word twice in one game session.
* Core Curriculum. The Core Word chosen by a participant must provide one of the main themes of the participant's statement. You can't just tack on the Core Word as a meaningless modifier or subsidiary clause.
* Pay Attention. Earlier actions change the situation. So don't speak as if nothing has changed.
* Friendly Amendment. While participants can't pretend an earlier statement didn't happen; they can use their own turn to block or modify the earlier change, as long as another participant has not already acted upon the earlier statement.
* Stay Sane. Players cannot narrate an impossible or wildly improbable action or result. What's impossible/ wildly improbable will vary by the context, the setting/genre; by the joint expectations of the players and moderators; and by the whim of the moderator.
* The Limits of Mind Control. You can't make another person do something that's intentionally self-destructive or against their own interests. Example: it's ok to have someone else accidentally drop a pistol. It's not ok to have them turn the gun around and shoot themselves.
* A , B ... Z. Players can't jump right to the "end" or "solution" of a story without any build up or connections.  
* And One. However long a statement is, the most that can happen is an event, the natural consequences of the event, And One other thing that follows. Example:"Batteries. His flashlight sputters and dies and I escape into the darkness." (Battery dies. Light goes out. Escape in darkness.)

Optional Rules.

* Buy a Vowel. This option gives players a limited pool of resources with which they can adjust the rules to make things easier for themselves. Each player starts the game with a limited number of Buys: say from 5 to 10. They can spend their Buys at any point during the game to: Get More Time, Change Letter, Consult Dictionary, Choose letter, or Demand a Vote (on the legality of their action).
* Nope. Instead of adding more rules, the Nope option replaces all nine of the minor rules. Every player and the moderator get a few vetoes (called "Nopes") and can use them to block any statement after it has been made.
* Alphabet Soup. This option is a blend of the Buy a Vowel and Nope options. Nope rules are in effect (no minor rules apply) and the players and moderator each have a pool of 6-12 special points they can use to: Change Letter, Consult Dictionary, Impose Minor Rule, or Block Action.

[Emily Care]

Hello,

This is a great idea.  I can see game this being a good bridge for players who have not done much narrative sharing--the random letter gives you a spring-board for thinking up what might happen.  

The puny rules are excellent. The analogy of limits on mind control (being that if you take over temporary control of another player's character that you cannot have them act against their best interest) to hypnotism is logical and a clear line to draw.

For Staying Sane (limiting player statements to those plausible within the setting/tone of the game), you might want to put more emphasis on the initial decision made by the group about what kind of "fictional scenario" they are interested in.  And refer to that decision in the Staying Sane bit.  Is it up to the moderator to determine if a statement is "sane"? If so, do they ask the player to modify their statement, negate it, or choose a course of action at their discretion. An alternative way to handle it might be to offer it up for a vote among the other players, with moderator breaking a tie.

Dueling spirits (deciding an interplayer conflict by choosing up letters and doing the ouija board thing) is hysterical.  And using pools of letters to choose among, also rocks.

Regards,
Emily Care

[MachMoth]

I always thought Boggle dice would be cool for something like this...

Uh.. sorry.  Guess I got off track a bit.

[Paul Czege]

There are also http://www.biffleys.com/Dice/thricedice.htm">these 30-sided alphabet dice. Koplow, I believe, sells them individually.

Paul

[redivider]

machmoth

Boggle would be fun. I was looking for a set but my sweep through a few thrift stores a while back didn't net me any. I'll keep my eyes open. Wasn't there also a pop-a-matic version where you rolled a bunch at once by pressing down on a plastic bubble? Vowels would be over represented but I'm sure there's away to adjust.

Paul,

thanks for the lead on the 30 sided alphabet dice. I'm going to get hold of one or a few.

[redivider]

For Staying Sane (limiting player statements to those plausible within the setting/tone of the game), you might want to put more emphasis on the initial decision made by the group about what kind of "fictional scenario" they are interested in.  And refer to that decision in the Staying Sane bit.  Is it up to the moderator to determine if a statement is "sane"? If so, do they ask the player to modify their statement, negate it, or choose a course of action at their discretion. An alternative way to handle it might be to offer it up for a vote among the other players, with moderator breaking a tie.

Thanks for the comments, Emily.

Yeah, I should draw a closer connection between the kind of game the participants want and the way the rules are interpreted. You could apply the minor rules strictly to promote a "gamist" atmosphere; or use them as looser guidelines, like shared assumptions about the kind of narration that will advance the action.

My default 'enforcement' mechanism is that the moderator judges whether statements are permissible. The first time a player violates a rule (including stay sane) they get to try again. After that, the player's improper statements are just negated.

I like the idea of having players vote on whether a statement is allowable. Right now a  player can "demand a recount" under the "buy a vowel" optional rule, but they have to spend a few points to do so.

[Paul Czege]

Hey Mark,

Can players choose a proper noun (e.g. the name of an NPC) as their Core Word?

Paul

[redivider]

Hey Mark,

Can players choose a proper noun (e.g. the name of an NPC) as their Core Word?

Paul

Good question, Paul.

I had been assuming yes.  But names are a potential loophole, aren't they? A player who wants something or needs someone to intervene could turn any letter into a proper name 'courier/savior' without much effort. Ie- character x is standing in front of a locked storefront, trying to figure out how to get inside:

"Adam/Bob/Cecile/Dave/Elise/Frank/ etc etc walks by. He/she is a friend of mine who happens to work at a local locksmiths shop..."

I'll have to think about whether to specifically address this. My inclination was to cut rather than add, but we'll see..

mark