[GroupDesign] - Advanced Archivism

[Sydney Freedberg]

Okay, Doug, let's break out the effects of those three axes and see if I'm on the same page as you.

I definitely think we're getting somewhere -- though I'm scared of Proliferating Multiple Axes.

It was suggested earlier that there be some conflict that determines where the balance lies in the axes proposed, but I'd like to see a mechanic that is based entirely on player choice. The game is about making hard choices, after all.

Agreed. And -- to point out the way Andrew's implicit mechanics work -- this means not a sliding scale where losing X points of something always means gaining X points of the opposite (e.g. Humanity + Transcendence = 10 so Humanity 3 always means Transcendence 7) but instead that each opposed pole is represented by a value that goes up and down on its own. I.e. Humanity and Transcendence can be in balance when both equal 1, or both equal 5, or both equal 50...

... which raises the possibility of very different kinds of balance. If you can keep ramping up two opposed things and maintain the delicate balance between them (e.g. Humanity = Transcendence = Really Big Number), you presumably achieve some extraordinary degree of enlightenment -- the "reconciliation of opposites" I think I mentioned back at the beginning of this thread.

Such high-level balance -- i.e. both Transcendence and Humanity at high levels -- should be hard to achieve, of course, a major goal equivalent to making "name level" in D&D. But just the idea that it is possible makes the game much more hopeful than the original Fade vs. Burn mechanic I wrote up, which I described to a few people as "the game of being f***ed no matter what you do."

[Andrew Morris]

And -- to point out the way Andrew's implicit mechanics work -- this means not a sliding scale [...] but instead that each opposed pole is represented by a value that goes up and down on its own. I.e. Humanity and Transcendence can be in balance when both equal 1, or both equal 5, or both equal 50...

Damn, Sydney, you always seem to find more wisdom in my comments than I put in them to start with. I actually was thinking of a sliding scale, but your concept is cooler. Now, how do we make this mechanic work? Because the first thought that comes to mind (assuming the scores are based on pure player choice) is that there's nothing to stop a player from making a super-powerful character without consequence. I'm all for players amping up their characters' power level, but it should hold some measure of danger or risk. So, going back to the gambling mechanics we discussed way, way, back -- here's an idea.

The player chooses where he wants his scores to be, but doesn't know about the host's limitations. For example:

GM: Okay, the Dark Archivist easily counters your attack. A rotting lump of flesh falls liquidly off his host as inhuman powers surge within his weakened body.

Player: Aww, crap. I boost Power to 8 so I can access my Logos, "N-Dimensional Energy Barrier," in defense.

GM: Ouch. Boost Power to 8, you say? Unfortunately, the host cannot take that much abuse, his Power is only a 3. A dull impression of pain makes its way from his mind to yours, as his flesh boils and blood runs from his eyes. He takes 5 points of Burn. You can sense his lifeforce running out. He's on the verge of dying, but you're not sure how close. You might be able to get a bit more out of him. Fortunately, the Energy Barrier absorbs the Dark Archivist's next attack.

Player: Damn, I'll have to worry about the host later. This Dark Archivist needs to be stopped here and now. Let's try a different angle: I'll boost Sacrifice up to 5, so I can have total control of the host. He's not going to make it out alive anyway, so he might as well die a martyr.

GM: Okay. Much to your surprise, the host has a strong resistance. You both currently have a Sacrifice of 1, but after the boost, his Sacrifice is 5, yours is only 3. Instead of leaping on the Dark Archivist, the host takes control for a moment, and dives off the cliff into the ocean to escape confronting the enemy.

And so on... I know, these don't map to the axes effects I just posted, but it was just to give a sense of how it would play out.

[Sydney Freedberg]

OH YEAH!

GM: Okay. Much to your surprise, the host has a strong resistance. You both currently have a Sacrifice of 1, but after the boost, his Sacrifice is 5, yours is only 3. Instead of leaping on the Dark Archivist, the host takes control for a moment, and dives off the cliff into the ocean to escape confronting the enemy.

and then

Player: Damn! I can't let the Dark win this time-juncture, too. [deep breath] As my host turns to dive off the cliff, I say to him....

GM: Hoo boy.

Player:... You have to fight. The fate of the future is at stake.

GM: Okay, roll for Self-Revelation.

Because the one time we depart from our pure Karma mechanics is to represent Free Will: To make sure it really is terrifyingly unpredictable, when the Host gets to make a choice, then and only then do you roll the dice.

[Doug Ruff]

Okay, Doug, let's break out the effects of those three axes and see if I'm on the same page as you.

We're on the same page, but not on the same paragraph! Not that that matters, you and Sydney are coming up with some cool ideas - again.

As a result, my "clarification" of my last post is going to go in a new direction:

Firstly,  I would like there to be one "sliding scale" mechanic which determines whose personality is being expressed within the Host's body. Let's call this Presence (for now) and keep it on that 1-10 sliding scale.

Presence still acts as a limiting factor on the capabilities of the Archivist and the Host. It's a Power-Limiter if you like; you can't perform to your maximum if you are "not all there".

Implications of this are:

Any trait with a rating above 10 is too powerful to contain itself within a human body (max Presence = 10). This may actually work a our definition of Transcendance (as in becoming an Archivist.)

Presence = 0 is the equivalent of Fade; there's "nobody home".

Interesting option: when the Archivst leaves a Host, they don't get any lost presence back straight away. So if my Host is Presence 2 (I'm Presence 8) and I bail out quickly, my Host is suffering severe problems.

Perhaps Burn is simply the result of attempting to load too much Presence into one body. Imagine an Archivist Power which requires Presence 15 to operate. That's 5 more than a Host can sustain, without any points for the Host's own personality. In other words, at least 5 points of Burn.

This also helps to explain why Archivists may wish to "ride" in a Host. Presence is not the same as control. If the Archvist maintains a Presence of 1, then the Host still has a Presence of 9. Alternatively, the Archivist could decide not to suppress the Host's personality at all: 10 points of Presence for the Host, and 1 point for the Archivist = 11 points = minor Burn (I'm assuming this can be maintained in the short term with minimal effects.)

As a bonus, it also explains why "differently sane" people may be useful to the Archivists. Some people already have a lower Presence, so there is plenty of room for another mind!

(Actualy, I'd be tempted to say that most people have Presence <10. 10 would represent someone on the verge of Transcendence, for example a Zen Master. Most of us are 6-8. The chap in the corner who thinks he's Napoleon may be a 2.)

All of the above makes sense to me (so I'm probably a "2" as well...) but it doesn't fit neatly into the axes, as far as I can see. Please give feedback.

EDIT: just wanted to say, the above addresses most of the in game mechanics so far (Burn, Fade, activating Logoi etc) or can be adapted to do so. It doesn't address the issue of free will, as it assumes that the Archivist can change his own (and, scariliy, his Host's) Presence level at will. Yes, this means an Archivist can annihalate the personality of the Host without needing to roll. But then the Archivst has no access to the Host's personality... we need a mechanic to simulate what happens if the Archivist wants something from the Host-Personality that the Host-Personality doesn't want to give... and I thank that Andrew and Sydney are onto something there.

[daMoose_Neo]

*admiring*

WOO INDEED!
Must say I very much like ^_^ This is going to be one sweet finished game :D

[Tobias]

Damn, Sydney, you always seem to find more wisdom in my comments than I put in them to start with. I actually was thinking of a sliding scale, but your concept is cooler. Now, how do we make this mechanic work? Because the first thought that comes to mind (assuming the scores are based on pure player choice) is that there's nothing to stop a player from making a super-powerful character without consequence.

Super-power(ful host) is not a problem IF too much obvious tampering with the timestream (this way) has its own drawbacks.

Go ahead, become super-powerful in that host - and watch reality unravel...

(just a thought)

[Andrew Morris]

Super-power(ful host) is not a problem IF too much obvious tampering with the timestream (this way) has its own drawbacks.

Right. Also, the simple act of increasing power should carry its own risks and drawbacks.

[Doug Ruff]

And -- to point out the way Andrew's implicit mechanics work -- this means not a sliding scale [...] but instead that each opposed pole is represented by a value that goes up and down on its own. I.e. Humanity and Transcendence can be in balance when both equal 1, or both equal 5, or both equal 50...

Damn, Sydney, you always seem to find more wisdom in my comments than I put in them to start with. I actually was thinking of a sliding scale, but your concept is cooler. Now, how do we make this mechanic work?

At risk of blowing my own Mechanics Trumpet, this is accountable for in the mechanics I posted above.

The 1-10 scale is only sliding insofar as it represents relative Presence values within the "safety limits". Actual Presence of the Archivist (or the Host) doesn't have to obey this scale.

However, 10 represents the limits of what the average Host's body can reasonably handle.

Most Archivists will have power levels that way exceed this, and may be capable of using Logoi that have a Presence requirement of 15, 25, 50 even. But if they use them, they will harm the Host.

Similarly, a Host using a trait which requires a Presence rating of 10 is operating at the limit of what is considered "human" ability. Beyond that requires some type of spiritual or mental "enlightenment", unusual physical training (for example, Shaolin monks), strong drugs, or the effects of an extreme emotion (for example, the woman who lifts a car to free her trapped child... compressing her spine in the process.)

The main differences between Archivists and Hosts are that Archivists will have a lot more potential Presence to play with, and that they are less dependent upon "other factors" when attempting to break the 10-barrier. Which is why it's much easier for them to hurt the Host's body through exercising their innate powers.

Hope this is useful, and that I'm not barking up some blind alley. Please let me know if y'all see any mileage in this.

[Sydney Freedberg]

My own take on this is over in Metaplot because of its cosmic-level implications. Frankly I've not figured out how to apply it to the individual-level Host:Archivist dynamic....

[Kirk Mitchell]

Also, maybe when you increase power, if you say, go too far over the presense limit you start to damage reality. So, say 10 presense is how much the host can handle without damage, and 15 is how much the timestream can handle without damage. This could be modelled either through descriptions or some in-game mechanic. Sort of like a "reality burn".

So we have 3 axes that apply to both the host and the Archivist (power, sacrifice, truth). We have 2 axes for the setting (freedom/safety, humanity/transcendence). We have logoi for Archivists (I think that they should be able to make them themselves, but the GM assigns the Power requirement). If we have the presense limiter it isn't all that much more to monitor. So long as we don't expand it too much further with too many more axes or mechanics this should be a manageble and slick system.

Kirk

[Sydney Freedberg]

My one reservation: I'm not sure we need a third axis labelled "sacrifice." I think we can have just two axes for both setting & individual levels -- Freedom vs. [Whatever] and Transcendence vs. Humanity -- and then have Sacrifice be simply what has to happen -- on either the Host's part or the Archivist's -- when these get out of balance.

Now, the idea of a Presence cap (not an axis) that measures how much power the Host can safely channel is an interesting one.

[Kirk Mitchell]

Yes. I think so too, about the presense cap I mean. And it can be extrapolated further to consider the archivist's presense in the time stream without damaging it.

For sacrifice, we could get rid of that axis and have something like:

Freedom is higher that [whatever], archivist loses ability to influence host actions but host takes no burn. Perhaps freedom in the setting applies to all archivists, so the more freedom you give to the humans, the harder it is to manipulate them.

Control [or whatever] is higher, host begins to take burn and the archivist gains control. Again, perhaps the more you "lock down" the humans, the easier to control they become, but the more likely you are to hurt them.

Balance. Minor control, minor burn. Etc.

Just some thoughts.

Kirk

[Sydney Freedberg]

Or when things get out of balance, the player has to choose to sacrifice (burn/fade out) either Host or Archivist Traits until things are restored.... It's always good to give people responsibility for torturing themselves, since they're much more creatively ruthless than any rule-writer or GM can be.

[Michael Brazier]

How about this?

Hosts and Archivists have two attributes: Knowledge (Truth axis, capped by Transcendence for Archivists) and Passion (Freedom axis, capped by Humanity for Archivists.)  When Archivists are riding Hosts, they can choose how much Knowledge and Passion to express, and the difference between their expressed attributes and the Host's determine what the Archivist can do:

Host has:
> Knowledge, > Passion -- The Archivist is a passive witness, experiencing what the Host does
> Knowledge, < Passion -- The Archivist controls the Host, but can only do things the Host could do unaided
< Knowledge, > Passion -- The Archivist communicates with the Host, offering suggestions which the Host might accept, and superhuman aid
< Knowledge, < Passion -- The Archivist controls the Host and can employ superhuman powers

Logoi are rated for the minimum difference in Knowledge needed to unlock them. The cost of using Logoi is points taken from an attribute, either Knowledge or Passion; and either the Archivist's, or the Host's.  (A fall in Knowledge is "Fade", a fall in Passion is "Burn", in the sense already established.) If any of the four attributes is pushed to 0, the possession ceases.  You'll notice that an Archivist can unlock powerful Logoi by using weaker Logoi and paying for them from the Host's attributes only.  This tactic is essentially driving the Host to mindlessness and death for power, so reasons not to do this need to be supplied, probably at the macro level.

Finally, if the Archivist has communication but not control, and the Host chooses to cooperate with the Archivist's intentions, there is a chance that both parties gain points: the Host in Knowledge, the Archivist in Passion.  By the way, Archivists might deliberately cultivate Hosts in this way, guiding them into the paths that the Archivists had followed and improving their Knowledge, until the Hosts gain a native awareness of the Transcendent -- thus becoming new Archivists!

[Andrew Morris]

Doug, can you clear up those mechanics you posted earlier? Maybe an example of how it would work in a game session?

Also, maybe when you increase power [...] you start to damage reality [...] Sort of like a "reality burn".

Nice, I like this idea. We could even use this concept to go back to the societal-level effects of Burn and Fade proposed earlier (by Sydney, I believe).

Or when things get out of balance, the player has to choose to sacrifice (burn/fade out) either Host or Archivist Traits until things are restored

I really like this idea. I was seeing the eventual mechanics of our game being driven mostly by player choice, rather than the randomness of a Fortune mechanic, and this fits in with that idea.

Michael, I just want to be sure I'm understanding correctly. In your system, hosts become (effectively) a non-renewable resource for the Archivist? Using powers wears out the host and/or Archivist?