Matrix Games: Gamist, Narrativist, and Sim

[MatrixGamer]

the general approach represented by all these games is stunningly obvious, once you encounter it, and the real mystery is why it's not the default method of role-playing design and play.



Ah ha! I've waited years for someone to say that! Exactly. The only thing keeping people from taking the small step from playing a character to playing a whole story is so small. Once the barrier is crossed a lot of RPG rules seem pointless. Who cares if you have a plus fifty sword of vengence if it is not used in the story?

I fully expect that this method will become a standard default approach. It will just take time (and a few people willing to do the foot work.)

It is neat to see these ideas appearing independently of one another. While I've done this stuff for 17 years I doubt very much if any of the other designers knew I was there. I have run Matrix Games at GenCon every year since 1991 and written hundreds of articles on it but again I doubt that any of these other designers saw them. Ideas do seem to pop up when the time is right.

Now I think that all the various companies work helps all the other companies out. To the wider world this idea is still just beyond the pale. They need to see a stead flow of really well made product to believe it is real. I think the tipping point is close, maybe this year.

Chris Engle
Hamster Press

[MatrixGamer]

Thanks for the reply. I know that I'm personally very narrativist. The story opening for me is just the opening. After that I want to tell a good story. I don't care if my character dies (so much for gamism) as long as the social event flows well.

I can't say that I totally follow all your points, I'll have to read the post more closely. I know I'm coming into this discussion years late. For years I didn't mess with the Internet because that wasn't where game design was happening. Now this is where it's at.

It is interesting how design communities don't intersect. I'm a long time role player (since 1976) but my design work has always been more in the historical miniatures/war game world.

Chris Engle
Hamster Press

[Grover]

I think matrix games are strongest for sim - I was in a game several years ago that was gamist focused, and I found it very unsatisfying.  The resolution mechanism is so straightforward that the most effective strategy seemed to be  to propose the most advantageous thing for you which is vaguely possible, and then hope for your 1 in 6 chance of success.  This doesn't pose a problem in non-competitive games but it's really frusterating in competitive games.

Steve

[contracycle]

Oh I don't know about that Grover... I found it an interesting trade off to guesstimate "what I would get away with" against "what I would like to happen".  I wonder how many players there were in your game, as the Hwa Rang Do game had something like 5 or 6, and my impression was that failing to get an argument out of your turn was a lot like missing a move, and just as potentially fatal.

But that said the sheer range of options kept my head spinning and I'm not sure I ever got a proper gamist grip on the situation.

But certainly, the whole exercise was specifically employing the criteria "what is plausible", which I agree is good sim.  On the down side, its not "objective" sim, in that the plausibility of any proposition rests purely on the referees judgement.  But, that then allows the ref that latitude to suspend sim temporarily for something akin to Maximum Game Fun.

But the huge caveat here is that this is how the game was set up; it was boardgame done with Matrix game methods.  It does not appear to me to be inherent to the method, and arguably the freeform subjectivity of the refs decisions may run counter to sim.

--

Chris, is any of your documentation on the matrix games still online?  I'm thinking of the sheets that lay out different types of games and give examples of structures.  They were very interesting.

[MatrixGamer]

Chris, is any of your documentation on the matrix games still online?  I'm thinking of the sheets that lay out different types of games and give examples of structures.  They were very interesting.[/quote]




There is my web page http://www.io.com/~hamster and the archives of the MatrixGamer and MatrixGame2 yahoo groups. There are now three Live Jounral pages going on games being run now (World of Titans (super hero world building) a Firefly sci fi game, and I'm running one of my commercial games "Cthulhu on Campus" and a solo game "How to succeed at business without really trying" on my page. I know there is a Wiki for World of Titans. If you type Matrix Game or Chris Engle into google you'll also come up with British and Spanish web pages on games they run. So there is a web community out there.

Chris Engle
Hamster Press

[MatrixGamer]

The resolution mechanism is so straightforward that the most effective strategy seemed to be  to propose the most advantageous thing for you which is vaguely possible, and then hope for your 1 in 6 chance of success.  





You know it would seem that this is the best strategy but my experience is that it isn't. The Ra Hwan Do game being a perfect example. I made big decisive moves and failed most of my rolls. This pissed the other players off and they wiped me out. When I played again at the con I used an indirect strategy and did much better.



An indirect strategy by the way is to make preparation arguments that don't show what you really want until you say it. They lead referees to rule arguments very strong because it flows from what has been happening.

BTW which game did you play in? Was it one of mine at Gen Con?

Chris Engle
Hamster Press

[Grover]

It was on the mailing list - I forget the name, but it was the New Zealand Maori war one, where the Maori won by having one of their leaders pretend to surrender, and then assasinate the British leader at the surrender ceremony.

Steve

[MatrixGamer]

Ah yes, the Maori game. That was run by Marcus Young and used his brand of Matrix Game - the thrust and parry game. In that game you make a thrust (say what happens) that will automatically happen unless it is parried by the other sides arguments.

Thrust and parry play very differently from Engle Matrix Games (the title I publish my rules under because I think there are many ways to do the same thing - as is evidenced by Universalis) I think you will find that my games are much more role play like. Thrust and parry is really a wargame method that doesn't handle political maters well.

A recent thrust and parry game illustrates why extreme plans don't work. We did a game about the Montrose campaign in Scotland in 1644. I was Montrose and my arguments were pretty much word for word what the historical general did. I was parried and cut to pieces. Over extending as I did my rear was not secure, my front was worse and my army was disintegrating.

Marcus is a lawyer which I think explains some of his style of game. I'm a psychotherapist - so my games are much less confrontational. I like cooperation.

Chris Engle
Hamster Press

[Emily Care]

Hi Chris!

Glad to have you posting here. The Matrix games are kissing cousins to lots of stuff going on here. Good to have direct cross pollination.

REF: Who wants to go first?

TOM: I do. Jane's character goes out on a date with my character and falls for him in a big way.

REF: (Looking at Jane) Do you want to do that? (Jane nods her head NO!) Very Weak. You will need to roll a six on a six-sided die for it to happen.

JANE: I go on a date with the cad but I don't fall in love with him, he falls in love with me!

REF: (Looking at Tom) What do you say to that? (Tom nods his head yes as his mouth waters) Okay, Very Strong. You will need to roll anything but a one. These two arguments are in competition so we will do a dice rolling contest.

This was illuminating.  From reading the text I hadn't gotten that part of how the ref judges the strength of the argument was by assessing the reaction of the opposing parties.  That makes a lot of sense. Also bases the decision on more than the ref's judgement & preferences only.

I have some questions for you. This may be how you think of it already, but it seems to me that the scenarios are a crucial part of your rules set.  Each of them (murder mystery, spy intrigues, quests, mysterious encounter et al) creates an expectation on the part of the participants about how conflicts will be created.  They are like rules modules that get added to help the players formulate a narrative with oppositions within the framework of the negotiation and resolution of conflicts. It seems to me, not having played it, that the system would be incomplete without the scenario structures. Or at least, would be weaker without them. Have you found this to be so?

The thrust and parry version takes this a step further by creating the team structure and even adding new rules to the overall framework to help support the confrontations. Are there other such variants?

And also, it's interesting that the referee is the one that chooses the scenario, but then they only moderate what the other players create within it.  Is that always the case? Do people rotate the referee role, or give other duties to the ref?  I can understand why if not, the streamlined ref has gives least likelihood of conflict of interest arising.

Great game by the way! Ironic that you and the folks who wrote Aria were doing similar things around the same time--but with polar opposite approaches!  Thanks for helpin forge the way for group contribution in rpgs.  

best,
Emily Care

[MatrixGamer]

it seems to me that the scenarios are a crucial part of your rules set.  


The scenario is a vital part of the game. A good scenario provides enough structure to get things going but then has to step out of the way to let the players do whatever they want. [It is also a sneaky game seller trick. The rules of Matrix Gaming are so short that they would never be a good product. Scenario books on the other hand are good products. I hope that people will buy them because they are fun to read. Fingers crossed.]



The thrust and parry version takes this a step further by creating the team structure and even adding new rules to the overall framework to help support the confrontations. Are there other such variants?


Bryan Roberts has written an RPG version of Matrix Games called Cinematrix. He is doing an on line version of it now on Live Journal (Here Walk Titans or World of Titans).  Mike Underwood came up with doing a round robin MG when running a game for me at Gen Con in Milwaukee. In that game you go aroudn the table and make arguments and roll immeidately. Tim Price has done a lot of military campaign an military sim stuff in England (he's in the British Army). The Society of Ancients just put out a Matrix Game called De Matrica Bellae to go along with DBA. There are probably more that I don't know about. I can't read Spanish so I don't know what the Spanish language pages are doing.  So there are a lot of games that have had direct influence from my work.



Do people rotate the referee role, or give other duties to the ref?  


YES!!! When I'm running face to face I ask other players to be the referee. After they do a turn they see how easy it is. Referees make up argument strengths just like players make up arguments. You can't do it wrong. In Bryan Roberts' World of Titans game they just did a "Lightning Round" about the Battle of Britain (with superheroes). Players would put an argument on the Live Journal page. Antoher player would jump in and judge it and roll for it. In a single day there were 80 posts on the page! Each of us got two arguments each. It was cool. I checked the page during the day and watched as the battle unfolded. It was like watching the Spitfires fly over as I read. Pretty soon we will do another lightning round for the Battle of Stalingrad. I'm looking forwad to trotting out the Soviet supers I created earlier in the world creation game.


Ironic that you and the folks who wrote Aria were doing similar things around the same time--but with polar opposite approaches!


I will have to look up Aria. I am please that so many games are now coming at this idea. I've been waiting to not be alone for such a long time. 17 years! Steve Jackson told me players would have to have Phd's in philosophy to play - in 1989. I'd already had mentally retarded players by then so I knew he was wrong. Since then I've been writing and talking and running games and writing games etc. hoping and waiting for people to pick it up. In the last few years the Zeitgheist has seen fit to make that happen. The "problem" for me is that I'm only slowly hearing that others are working in the field with me now. The idea of allowing players to do what GMs have always done is so simple. I'm glad other people are seeing that as well.

In 1988 I figured out I would know my work was done when I described the game to someone and they asked why I was saying the obvious. I'm glad to see that is closer to happening.

Chris Engle
Hamster Press

[MatrixGamer]

From reading the text I hadn't gotten that part of how the ref judges the strength of the argument was by assessing the reaction of the opposing parties.  That makes a lot of sense. Also bases the decision on more than the ref's judgement & preferences only.



The referee looking at the players for reactions is not in the written rules. I could not think of a way to include something subtle like that in a brief way. The Engle Matrix Game that I publish is meant to be a very simple robust beginners game. It is like the Model T of Matrix Gaming. I fully expect other designers to come along and do it better than me. In fact I'm looking forward to that day. Then I can go back to being a player again. 17 years on the radical fringe has not always been fun (I've do a lot of Solo gaming because I couldn't get players).

Looking at the players and responding accordingly seem like being a good host to me. As  host I pay attention to what my guests want. I try to give that to them and in so doing create a pleasant memorably time. At Thanksgiving this means I'm always busy washing dishes and making tea. I don't know that that can be put in rules. It seems so personality based. I've run group therapy for years so I'm good at observing lots of people in dynamic situations. I guess I thought other people might not be as good at that. I hope I'm wrong. I'm certain some game designer better than me will show me how it should be done.

Chris Engle
Hamster Press

[Emily Care]

Chris,

Looking at the players and responding accordingly seem like being a good host to me.

It is obvious isn't it? But again, not congruent with common ways that gaming has evolved.  What I was struck by in seeing it was that if this was the primary basis for the strength of the arguments, then what the referee is doing is interpreting the communication of the players to and for one another, rather than (necessarily) imposing hir view of what was likely to occur. That's subtle and strong distinction. One I like.  

Have you seen M.J. Young's  article Theory 101? It does not addres GNS, but does cover several key concepts of the big model, including the concensus basis of all role playing games.  I think you'd enjoy it. What's colloquially known as the lumpley principle speaks strongly to your game.

I fully expect other designers to come along and do it better than me. In fact I'm looking forward to that day. Then I can go back to being a player again. 17 years on the radical fringe has not always been fun (I've do a lot of Solo gaming because I couldn't get players).

Does anybody live close to Chris, so they can run Primetime Adventures for him? : )


Best,
Emily Care

[MatrixGamer]

Have you seen M.J. Young's  article Theory 101?

I had not seen this before. I now understand these big model concepts more. Matrix Games defintely fit in the Director stance - and I am very aware of player's resistance to the idea that that can make things up. "But that's cheating!" Ugh!

Before players see that they can do more than just move their character around they look for proabilities. Once they start directing they look fo possibilities. It is so neat to see people make this mental shift. They become reenergized to gaming. They see possiblities again - just like we do when we first start gaming.

Chris Engle

[Emily Care]

Before players see that they can do more than just move their character around they look for proabilities. Once they start directing they look fo possibilities. It is so neat to see people make this mental shift. They become reenergized to gaming. They see possiblities again - just like we do when we first start gaming.

It also brings in people who would have had no interest in the "character as a mini" model of role playing.  One of the players in the Primetime Adventures campaign I'm in was very uninterested in rpg before. PtA is very player empowered. As a result, she jumped in with both feet & has really shone in this game.  She loves it. That's a major success.

MatrixGamer

Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 40
Location: Ellettsville, Indiana

Chris, any chance of you going to GenCon Indy this year?

best,
Emily

[MatrixGamer]

[/quote]
Chris, any chance of you going to GenCon Indy this year?

best,
Emily[/quote]


Oh yes! This year Hamster Press will be in a corner booth. I don't know where. We will have Matrix Games, hand puppets, marionettes and new this year "Minion" puppets. I've also got four referees running a total of 16 MG events (Sherlock Holmes, Cthulhu something, a two more I haven't decided yet, maybe Nazi Spies or my Law and Order murder mystery games)

Chris Engle
Hamster Press