A product fantasy-One Consumer's POV

[komradebob]

What if you never set out intending to make a core system?

I've seen a couple of companies make stripped down versions of their games for demos. WW's stripped down Vampire the Masquerade was available on their website. IMO, it is actually better and more playable than their full rules. However, their attached scenarios sucks moonrocks.
Why? Because the scenario was never their emphasis, the ruleset was.

Along with being a rpger, I'm also a miniatures junkie. While searching for piratable/inspirational ideas for a WW1 minis system, I came across this site http://www.juniorgeneral.org/index.html. I'll use this as an illustration of my point.

On this guys site, there are rules for playing the Battle of Verdun. The rules are short, utilise miniatures and are very playable. For Verdun. They do not include everything necessary for every battle of ww1 in every theatre, nor even other trenchfighting. They also don't include things commonly found in more generalized ww1 minis rules, such as troop quality, force organization, morale, ammo, and aircover. The rules only cover what is fundamentally necessary to play the German assault on the French positions at Verdun.

Further down on the same site, the author has rules for a minis bash re-creation of Little Big Horn. The rules for that battle, while also short, are radically different from the Verdun rules. Players take the role of various Indian warbands attempting to outdo one another while massacring the Seventh Cavalry.

My point is this: Both of these rulesets exist because the author was scenario oriented. he doesn't attempt to recreate overarching rules that cover every battle with minis. Nor does he attempt to have a core system that is modified for both battles. Instead, he concentrates on the aspects of each scenario that are important to playing just that scenario.

Now, in a roleplaying application, one might tie together multiple scenarios through setting, rather than rules. That was primarily what I was thinking of when I started this thread. The scenarios may or may not be related to one another by similar rules, or chronology.

Here is a hypothetical product:
Title:Far Marches: Life and Death at the reaches of Human Space
Style: General SciFi (space opera?)

Scenario One: War Council
Frexam colonists have been pushed off their worlds by the advance of the vicious Xenobug Swarms. Their refugees are swarming into the Outer March worlds, threatening trade and overwhelming local officials with their demands for space on populated worlds to settle.
Players take the parts of various OuterMarch Nobles and Merchants appealing their cases to the Emperor to convince him to take action to stop the Frexam. In the mean time, each of the involved parties is attempting to promote their own individual agenda and gfoals at the expense of the other participants.
Style: Think Model UN game.

Scenario Two: Raiders! Five O'clock!
Outer March colonists take matters into their own hands, using their militia ships to attack and turn back a small caravan of Frexam Refugees and their armed escort. The refugees have to survive long enough to make their hyperspace calculations. Neither side can afford serious casualties, though the Outer March militia/stellar lynchmob has murder on their mind!
Style: Straight outerspace wargame with some rping color thrown in.

Scenario Three: Lost souls.
The characters are survivors of a raid like that described above. Their ship is falling apart. Life support is failing. Perhaps a single lifeboat is available!
Style: Character interaction, R-Maps and related moral quandries. Perhaps some puzzles to represent attempts to fix onboard systems. How about a time limit IRL, to add pressure?

Scenario Four: First Contact
Caravan survivors crash on a local world, and encounter strange aliens. Perhaps the aliens can help them, if they can only figure out the strange alien culture. And what might the aliens have for motivations?
Style: I'd base this on an excersise from my anthro 101 course. The players are split into two teams. The aliens have some sort of apparently non-sensical language and activity they are engaging in. The human players have to figure out the simple language structure, and the rules of the activity to succeed in this scenario, within a time limit. Throw in some xenophobia and other strange attitudes and watch the fun.

Okay. None of these scenarios require the same overarching rules. They probably wouldn't even benefit from them if you tried. They are all tied together with setting, and in some sense chronology. Each could be played seperately, using simple rules. Each could be completed in relatively quick order, and with minimal setup reading. This hypothetical product could verywell represent a tie in to a more complete scifi game system and setting.

[Paul Czege]

Bob,

Example: I'm building a roaring '20s scenario. One of the characters only has a pistol. I give the character a car that says: .45 Pistol one use only: When you reveal the pistol, announce in a loud voice that you have it. silently count to three. If no other player has interfered, you may fire the pistool in a burst of savage violence. Pick another character as a target. Play rock/paper/scissors. If you win you may choose to kill or wound that character. On a tie you may wound them. If you lose, you've missed. This card is removed from the game once fired.

The Sandman: Map of Halaal RPG worked almost exactly like this.

Paul

[Walt Freitag]

I'm struck by how much Bob's examples resemble the LARP mechanics and scenarios I've worked with. The text from the pistol could have been taken verbatim from an item card in an SIL-style LARP. In one LARP, Spaceport Adeline, where I was trying to minimize both printed rules and GM refereeing as much as possible, individual weapons got even simpler. There was one blaster that could only be used to escape from being arrested, another that could only be used to rob items from another player-character, and so forth. (One use only, automatic success, in each case.)

I notice that Bob's four SF scenarios all, in different ways, minimize the creative responsibilities of the GM (some appear to require no dedicated GM at all). Which points out one of the key issues for accessible scenarios: whether or not the quality of play will depend on GM skill. I suspect most one-pamphlet rule systems will make the task of playing a player-character simple by making the GM tasks (whether actually performed by a GM or distributed among the players) more important. Overall, this won't necessarily give you the accessibility sought for. Somewhat more hefty content, but designed to be used in a controlled step by step way (as opposed to the traditional "learn all this, then run the scenario with all of it in mind" approach), would appear to be required. The design problems and applicable techniques appear to overlap those of solo RPGs.

- Walt

[komradebob]

Wow, Paul, I haven't heard a reference to that game in ages. Did anyone ever win the prize? I remember that was a big advertising point for it. Do you know what the deal on the Sandman's identiy was?

 Actually, Sandman: Map of Halaal might be an argument against scenario oriented design. Does anyone know how the product sold over the years?

One of the things I've noticed about tabletop rpg design is well, that the use of a table is implied. I mean an actual table, the wooden or metal kind that you might set at to eat meals. I know that may seem obvious, but it does effect design to some extent. If you have a table, or something substituting as one ( the floor, a coffe table) you have a surface to spread out game artifacts on, roll dice on, stack a pile of books on, etc.  I've noticed a general tendency for tabletop rpgs to be system/setting oriented, with adventures/scenarios oftenan afterthought for their designers.

LARP rules seem to be more scenario oriented. Minds Eye Theatre WoD rules and Cthulhu Live seem to be exceptions to this, but then both are translations of tabletop games. I was rereading the old posts about an Arabian Nights LARP last night, and was struck by just how scenario oriented their rules were. To paraphrase (since I can't seem to find the thread right now), the players were given cards that showed their special abilities, items, etc, and the rules for them were written on the card itself. There were not really any overarching rules/system tto learn at the character level.

Ironically, Walt was responding to this thread at the same time I was, and brought up some good points.

Should a stand alone scenario indicate in a blurb whether a GM in a traditional sense is necessary? It would certainly change the dynamic, compared to a shared GM duties approach.

I don't know a lot/anything about SIL style LARPing. What does SIL stand for, and do you have any links to read up on the subject?

Earlier in this thread, someone mentioned that they wouldn't mind skipping the "what is roleplaying" essay that seems required in tabletop rules sets, especially since it takes up page count and adds to both printing and shipping cost, presumably. Actually, I'm perverse enough that I actually enjoy reading those essays, along with designer notes and essays on play style and so on, as applied to a particular game setting. As a thought however, consider where and how you are promoting your product. If primarily you are using a website, these are prime candidates for freedownload status. After all, you may well be dealing with a potential audience already familiar with gaming in some form. Even setting itself might be a freebie, not to mention rules, if scenario oriented design iis your goal.

I guess it comes down to this: Is your interest in having players play using your system, or is it to have them play in the game universe you've created?

[Paul Czege]

Hey Bob,

The second box in the series was announced, but as far as I know never appeared. And I can't imagine anyone solving the mystery and getting the prize from just the first game.

I will say that the Casablanca sequence in that game remains one of my most enjoyable player experiences from the 80s. The post-apocalyptic parking garage sequence, however, seemed pretty weak. But I'd buy a similarly designed card-based game in a heartbeat, particularly if it ditched the amnesia/self-discovery component and offered enough cards and guidance to a prospective GM in creating scenarios that it wasn't just a play-once product. (And the various blaster cards that Walt describes are fascinating to consider in the context of such a product.)

Paul

[Jack Spencer Jr]

Wow, Paul, I haven't heard a reference to that game in ages. Did anyone ever win the prize? I remember that was a big advertising point for it. Do you know what the deal on the Sandman's identiy was?

 Actually, Sandman: Map of Halaal might be an argument against scenario oriented design. Does anyone know how the product sold over the years??

IIUC the publisher, Pacesetter, went out of business shortly after releasing the original boxed set. I have been told the second boxed set, Key to the Inland Sea did get a very limited release, but I have never physically seen a copy. SO it's not an arguement against such a product. They were just on their way out the door anyway.

[Walt Freitag]

I don't know a lot/anything about SIL style LARPing. What does SIL stand for, and do you have any links to read up on the subject?

The most compehensive thead on LARP, with a lot of discussion of different styles, is here. SIL-style refers to a LARP using most or all of the following techniques:

- Pre-written character backgrounds ("character sheets") created by the game authors.
- Characters have a wide variety of individual goals, linked in a relationship web designed to bring individuals and factions into cooperation and opposition with one another.
- No scenario continuity or character continuity from game to game. (They're one-shots.)
- Played primarily indoors.
- Abstract combat systems (as opposed to physical combat simulation e.g. boffer weapons).
- Multi-day games, 36-48 hours in duration.
- Custom rules for each event, containing only mechanics needed for that game's setting and scenario.
- Emphasis on politics, economics, diplomacy, espionage interactions that don't need to be simulated .
- Wide range of settings and genres, wider even than most tabletop (e.g. Shakespeare, Gilbert and Sullivan, Watergate, Titanic).

"SIL" stands for "Society for Interactive Literature" which was an organization started in 1983 to produce and run, and later promote, such games. (Another organization called the ILF, for Interactive Literature Foundation, split off in an acrimonious schizm in the late 80s and I believe still exists.) The SIL name came from a campus tabletop role playing club that I'd started a few years earlier, many members of which came along with me into LARPing. Why the role playing game club had such a pretentious name in the first place also has a story behind it. Essentially, the pretentious name was required to get the university to sanction the club ("Fantasy Gaming Club" was rejected).

The Arabian Nights game is, I believe, the best of all the SIL-style LARP designs I worked on. It's described here.

A different style of LARPing (NERO, one of the boffer weapon systems), is discussed in this thread: Live Action Role Play.

And a brief discussion of yet another style in: Mass Acres LARP

[komradebob]

I just checked out the SIL West site and read up on the subject a little. It sounds like these folks are pretty much dead on to what I was thinking when I started this thread. The only difference seems to be an issue of scale. The SIL West site talked about events with like 70+ people, and custom built for the scenario rules. I was thinking something a bit more modest, maybe 3-5 players, perhaps 8-9 for an in-one's-apartment type event.

I must admit that the SIL people really seem to have the style going. I may even take a shot at attending one of these events, since the impression I have from reading their site seems to suggest a better organized event than the WoD LARPs I'd tried out before and stopped bothering to attend from sheer boredom and lack of character hook. (That last bit is strictly my personal opinion. I know dozens znd dozens of folks who think the MET WoD weekly sessions are the best thing since sliced bread or dark beer...).

Ironically, a question of how much I'd pay came up earlier. The SIL West Events seem to run @$75 entry fee plus whatever associated expenses you incur for a 2 1/2 day event. Given the apparent quality, I'd actually consider that a very good buy for my gaming buck...