How do we go about Drifting a game? (Split from White Wolf)

[Precious Villain]

Seriously.  When we say that "WOD's incoherence allows players to drift any way they want" how do they do it?  I think that there are different levels of drift.  Rules drift, which is ignoring or patching a published rule of the game, is the most obvious.  But I don't think this happens with a majority of groups.  In fact, I think that unwritten rules get drifted more.

Consider, the GM might want to run a more story based game.  No focus on serious tactical combat.  (I.e. system exploration or step on up).  Most GM's aren't going to re-write the combat chapter of the WoD book.  Instead, they'll recruit and encourage players to build characters who do things different ways.  Non-combat skills and abilities will predominate.  Fights will be few and far between.  In short, I believe a lot of rules drift occurs by a unwritten rules changes.  

Another example.  I'm running a Shadowrun game which is focused on lower powered characters.  I effectively created some house rules limiting the beefiness of starting Shadowrunners.  Now those aren't written down, but everyone agreed to follow them.

I think drift takes place at Social Contract level, in other words, as much as at the System level.  As long as the Social Contract is all right, Drifted play creates no problems.  

There seems to be a sort of "meta rule" that says, roughly (and help me out here): characters will not take actions that violate the CA of this group.  Or is it: no player will use techniques/ephemera that violate the CA?

Help me out here.  Just how do I drift a game, assuming I wish to do so.

[Ben Lehman]

Any game text contains some of:
Color, Mechanics, Setting, Situation and Character

Changing any of these things is Drift.  D&D 3e that isn't in a dungeon is drifted (interestingly, AD&D 2e that isn't in a dungeon is not drifted.)  Vampire without the Camarilla or similar power structures is drifted.  The first of these is a drift of Situation, the second is a drift of Setting.  There are no effects on the mechanics, but they are still Drift.

yrs--
--Ben

[John Kim]

Any game text contains some of:
Color, Mechanics, Setting, Situation and Character

Changing any of these things is Drift.  D&D 3e that isn't in a dungeon is drifted (interestingly, AD&D 2e that isn't in a dungeon is not drifted.)  Vampire without the Camarilla or similar power structures is drifted.  The first of these is a drift of Situation, the second is a drift of Setting.  There are no effects on the mechanics, but they are still Drift.

That's not how I understand it.  Changing these things is only "Drift" in the sense of Ron's Big Model if it changes from one Creative Agenda to another.  i.e. So if I play D&D3 not in a dungeon, but still with the same Creative Agenda (probably GNS Gamist), then it's not Drift.  From Ron's Provisional Glossary:

Drift
Changing from one Creative Agenda to another, or from the lack of shared Creative Agenda to a specific one, during play, typically through changing the System. In observational terms, often marked by openly deciding to ignore or alter the use of a given rule.

[erithromycin]

The two most common forms of drift are adding to the rules and ignoring rules.

A WoD game where players start a couple of generations lower than given in the rulebook and have access to more disciplines has drifted towards different priorities - if not purely Gamist, then focusing on the original "kewl powerz".

House rules are drift in progress - they reflect the priorities of any given game (as a complete entity, including players and local influence) - taken to it's most logical extent, fantasy heartbreakers are what happens when drift takes a game outwith the recognisable confines of its parent.

Where and how this compares with the increasingly common practise of running one game world with another game system I leave to others - the gist is easy enough to pick up.

Drift is a change of priorities, simply, from as written/expected to those that work for a given group. Inconsistency and obfuscation are the parents of Drift because they require interpretation - no two people interpret something the same way unless they discuss it, and that often produces a third viewpoint -

The vagueness effectively allows play priorities to crystallise around particular features - this is the incoherence - as a whole most of White Wolf's games are wrapped in inconsistency "Vampire is a roleplaying game of personal horror; what is the damage rating of a jury-rigged flamethrower?", in that there are lots of rules and notions and ideas that do not add together simply.

By forcing groups to change their focus to produce something that works for them, you have introduced drift. The same is true of a large number of games - some do it by being sparse, some do it by being dense. Remember that WW _explicitly_ encourage rules drift with 'rule 0': the power to ignore or change a rule in your game if you don't like it.

[eyebeams]

Since my preference for drifting games is well known, I'll describe some practices I use:

1) Variable resolution detail: Once you have a core system it is very easy to customize how you want to apply that to a given situation.

For example, I can run a combat in a number of ways using the WoD dice engine. I can make opposed rolls for everybody and apply 1 HL of injury per winning success. I might use the entended roll rules for this, ending when a definite result is reached.

Alternately, I might use the actual combat system. Or, if I want even more, I may aggressively apply situational modifiers and even allow the synergistic use of other traits to provide an equipment-style dice bonus.

Of course, the common hue and cry is that the game doesn't really support it, but "systems are systems"; that is, any game systems that are applied to any given circumstance are a legitimate use of the system.

The truth is that people run lots of games like this all the time. Everybody adapts rules or declines to use certain rules.

What takes a bit more skill is to use multiple types of resolution on the same occassion -- to have one quick roll combat at the same time as a detailed slugfest.

2) Rethinking the concept of the creative agenda: Games are meant to entertain individuals, not collectives, and games ought to be run accordingly.

The virtue of a toolkit design is that it encourages a dialogue about what the game can accomplish for the player. It it's worst form, this is called rules lawyering, but with players who don't suck, it's really rules-generated inspiration. In a group, then, some systems are going to be more attractive than others to different people. The GM makes a note of this and proceeds accordingly. Player A wants a detailed computer hacking system and B doesn't. We give each player what they want according to the principle of variable resolution detail.

[Marco]

Any game text contains some of:
Color, Mechanics, Setting, Situation and Character

Changing any of these things is Drift.  D&D 3e that isn't in a dungeon is drifted (interestingly, AD&D 2e that isn't in a dungeon is not drifted.)  Vampire without the Camarilla or similar power structures is drifted.  The first of these is a drift of Situation, the second is a drift of Setting.  There are no effects on the mechanics, but they are still Drift.

yrs--
--Ben

I strongly disagree with this. The 3rd Ed rules, for example, contain wilderness encounter tables, the ranger class, etc. These are all out-of-dungeon things. Even if there is a piece of flavor text that says "You MUST ALWAYS play in a dungeon" I would consider that an incredibly weak form of "rule" that would be being changed.

Where do you find the Color, Setting, and Character for GURPS or Hero? If I have my Vampire players go down into a tomb does that make it drift because "they're in a dungeon?" What "Situation" is specified in The Riddle of Steel?

I don't buy this.

I think to be meaningful, for a traditional game, the term drift needs to involve a direct change or intentional ignoring of a printed mechanic. If making a character and making an adventure that doesn't line up with some Forge poster (mine included) of what the game ought to be like is considered drift then I think the usefulness of the term is extremely faulty.

-Marco
Note: I would consider playing non-vampires in the original V:tM drift, yes--but playing above-ground 3rd Ed? There's a lot of rules that support that in black and white in the book.

[Ben Lehman]

Any game text contains some of:
Color, Mechanics, Setting, Situation and Character

Changing any of these things is Drift.  D&D 3e that isn't in a dungeon is drifted (interestingly, AD&D 2e that isn't in a dungeon is not drifted.)  Vampire without the Camarilla or similar power structures is drifted.  The first of these is a drift of Situation, the second is a drift of Setting.  There are no effects on the mechanics, but they are still Drift.

yrs--
--Ben

I strongly disagree with this. The 3rd Ed rules, for example, contain wilderness encounter tables, the ranger class, etc. These are all out-of-dungeon things. Even if there is a piece of flavor text that says "You MUST ALWAYS play in a dungeon" I would consider that an incredibly weak form of "rule" that would be being changed.

BL>  Point about overland travel is taken, but consider that, say, the rogue has abilities which specifically apply to a dungeon context.  How does the rogues player feel, in a gamist sense, about a game that doesn't ever go into a dungeon?  How about a D&D game where you do nothing but, say, grow crops?  Technically, it's supported by the system, but there are large mechanic chunks of the game that you are ignoring.  See, the thing is that I run D&D games like this.  I just also acknowledge that it is Drift (and, yes, true Drift, in the definition that John just corrected me on.)

Where do you find the Color, Setting, and Character for GURPS or Hero? If I have my Vampire players go down into a tomb does that make it drift because "they're in a dungeon?" What "Situation" is specified in The Riddle of Steel?

BL>  Hey, check it out.  Right up there there's "some of" in black and white, implying that one or more of the following would be included.  Clearly, the basic GURPs has no setting (although the system implies things about the settings it can have, but that's another thread...)  But that really doesn't change the point, I think, which is that setting or situation or character or color can be just as important as the "black and white rules."

Note: I would consider playing non-vampires in the original V:tM drift, yes--but playing above-ground 3rd Ed? There's a lot of rules that support that in black and white in the book.

BL> Interesting.  I agree.  But the main V:tM has specific rules for playing mortals.  So why is that drift?

yrs--
--Ben

[Matt Wilson]

The virtue of a toolkit design is that it encourages a dialogue about what the game can accomplish for the player. It it's worst form, this is called rules lawyering, but with players who don't suck, it's really rules-generated inspiration. In a group, then, some systems are going to be more attractive than others to different people. The GM makes a note of this and proceeds accordingly. Player A wants a detailed computer hacking system and B doesn't. We give each player what they want according to the principle of variable resolution detail.

I have no argument with this viewpoint, but I think any "toolkit" should provide the players with an understanding of how to reward different kinds of play with that specific game.

Clinton's "The Shadow of Yesterday" is the coolest example of that I've seen. Players choose the "keys" that interest them and are rewarded for factoring those keys into play. For example, if you have something like "the key of glittering gold," you get xp for being greedy. If you have the "key of the mission," you get xp for overcoming obstacles while trying to complete the mission, etc.

What that means in play is that the guy who likes fighting and tactics and the guy who likes hamming it up with his master diplomat both get rewarded. - and all the GM really needs to look at on the players' sheets in order to whip up an excellent adventure are those keys.

[eyebeams]

The virtue of a toolkit design is that it encourages a dialogue about what the game can accomplish for the player. It it's worst form, this is called rules lawyering, but with players who don't suck, it's really rules-generated inspiration. In a group, then, some systems are going to be more attractive than others to different people. The GM makes a note of this and proceeds accordingly. Player A wants a detailed computer hacking system and B doesn't. We give each player what they want according to the principle of variable resolution detail.

I have no argument with this viewpoint, but I think any "toolkit" should provide the players with an understanding of how to reward different kinds of play with that specific game.

Clinton's "The Shadow of Yesterday" is the coolest example of that I've seen. Players choose the "keys" that interest them and are rewarded for factoring those keys into play. For example, if you have something like "the key of glittering gold," you get xp for being greedy. If you have the "key of the mission," you get xp for overcoming obstacles while trying to complete the mission, etc.

What that means in play is that the guy who likes fighting and tactics and the guy who likes hamming it up with his master diplomat both get rewarded. - and all the GM really needs to look at on the players' sheets in order to whip up an excellent adventure are those keys.

I wouldn't know these days, since I don't offer participation awards of any kind any more. I figure everybody's enjoying themselves, so they all get the same number of brownie/XP points and can use them as they wish.

What I would suggest, though, would be cooperative evaluation with each player on how well they felt they got into the game, with a bonus for helping others do the same. Most reward systems are competitive (since they determine who gets the biggest one) or they adjust speed of advancement/change. I don't have any interest in the former outside of gamist play, and I typically follow the players' intentions and err on the side of generosity for the latter. For something like XP, the guy who *doesn;t* want to apply changes quickly can just refuse to spend 'em.

[Callan S.]

Hi Malcolm,

In terms of

I typically follow the players' intentions and err on the side of generosity for the latter.

That'd be quite a rewarding benefit for you, as your in the pivotal position of deciding rewards (by how you read player intentions), rather than the rules in the book doing more to determine that. Wouldn't it?

[eyebeams]

Hi Malcolm,

In terms of

I typically follow the players' intentions and err on the side of generosity for the latter.

That'd be quite a rewarding benefit for you, as your in the pivotal position of deciding rewards (by how you read player intentions), rather than the rules in the book doing more to determine that. Wouldn't it?

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. I have no interest in saying that this week, my players deserve 5 brownie points, but last week, they only deserved 2. I have no interest in saying John deserved 4 points this week, but Jane only deserved 3.

My players have no interest in these largely useless shenanigans, either. My "pivotal position" is to talk about how we do rewards until we all have something we like.

However, if I were to award XP and such by book-model, I'd probably just tell the players to give themselves the reward they feel they deserve.

[Callan S.]

Brownie points or experience points aren't the only reward method.

Let's say they aren't being used. There are still rewards present though, even once these brownie points have gone.

Which are distributed by you as GM. That's should make my question clearer and easier to answer.

[Marco]

Ben,

Would you say that playing a Narrativist GURPS game is Drift seeing as GURPS is usually considered a Sim system?

Also: I don't recall rules for normal people in early V:tM--so if there were rules I'm not sure I'd consider it drift. If you played V:tM without Vampires I would consider it a very strange use of the rules (John made a fairly convincing argument on this point concerning non-adventurous D&D characters)--but I think using Drift as the term weakens it and puts the speaker in a position of claiming to know what "canonical play" of the game is--something that I think you'll find quickly becomes unwelidly.

-Marco

[eyebeams]

Brownie points or experience points aren't the only reward method.

Let's say they aren't being used. There are still rewards present though, even once these brownie points have gone.

Which are distributed by you as GM. That's should make my question clearer and easier to answer.

Well, you'd have to provide some examples of what you mean. I can't think of any reward that I give that fits your description. Play is its own reward, really.

[Matt Machell]

Malcolm,

other reward systems might be bonuses to dice rolls for situations (+1 for attacking from behind!) or rewarding a player for cool description with bonuses to rolls (Exalted's stunts),  that kinda thing.

Good example from WW is morality in Darkages:Vampire. You get modifiers to your social interaction rolls based on morality level. So keeping morality is rewarded by bonuses, losing it punished with penalties. There's a reward system right there that's not related to XP.

-Matt