I've just started making a P&P RPG and need help. (Warning LONG)

[EvlDragonMonkey]

My story is a bit odd, and long, so bear with me. In order for you to know how I've gotten in the situation I'm in now, I'll have to start from the beginning. About 8 years ago I found a program to make CRPGs, it was some version of RPG maker it wasn't even the English version it was a partly translated Japanese version. I started work on a game I called Eye of Darkness. I made a short version that only took about 4 hours to beat, if you didn't get slowed down by the bugs caused by the crappy version of RPG maker I was using. When baulder's gate came out I played that and decided that I hate turn based combat and random battles, so I gave up on RPG maker but not on EoD. I began designing a version of the game that was more similar to baulder's gate in terms of gameplay. When Gothic came out in 2002, it was the first RPG I played that was 3D and used the arrows to move instead of a point and click method like in baulder's gate, I then modeled EoD's gameplay after Gothic and it remains my biggest influence to this day. Sometime during the following year I completely re-designed every aspect of EoD except for the gameplay that I based (now more loosely) off gothic. I'm not sure when I realized it, but at some point I realized that I'll never be able to make EoD the way I imagine it without formal training. I had heard of a college that is dedicated to game design, it's called Digipen, I decided to go to that college and get a degree so I could finally make my game. Fast forward to 2005, I realize that I'll be graduating high school soon and don't have any way to pay for college, it's hard to get a scholarship for an out of state college with only a 3.5 GPA. I decided to join the army then go to Digipen after I get out.

A few games have been coming out in recent years with features similar to ones I've designed for my game, making mine far less impressive. Luckily my story and setting remain different enough from any game I've seen (which is pretty much all of them) but I think it's only a matter of time before somebody comes up with a game that is by chance so similar to mine, that when my game comes out everyone would think I was copying that game. I won't be able to start making my game for another 8 years, so I've decided to make a P&P version in the mean time, I've decided to do that for two reasons. First, I want my ideas out there in published form, even if I have to publish it myself as long as it has an ISBN and receives a moderate amount of attention, so that I have proof that I came up with the ideas when I claim I did. Second, I like RPGs of all kinds (P&P, CRPGs, MMOs) so if I can't make a CRPG like I had originally planed, I want to make my game somehow, just so people can play it and I can finally accomplish something.

If you have managed to sit through the history of my game, I thank you and I can get to the point now, I thought it was important for you to know the history so you could understand my problem. Since I never attempted to program the game, I have very little information regarding the game's system. Most of the massive amount of information I've compiled over the years is about the setting and the story, and with the exception of the history of my game's world, most of the story is irrelevant when it comes to making the pen and paper version. My problem is that I don't know what kind of game to make. I've read articles on the GNS system but I can't decide which of the three groups should be my target audience. I want to include all of the information I've created about the setting and all of the history of the games world. I don't think I could make a narrative game because I still plan to create the CRPG and will need to design the system in a way that it can be converted to a CRPG without upsetting the few dozen fans of the P&P version. I can't decide between a gamist or simulationist approach. I want the people who play my game to enjoy the world I've created, I don't want people to feel like the game is too setting heavy and feel trapped by the setting.

I want to thank everyone that reads this post. I'd also like to thank in advance everybody that takes the time to help me.

[Thunder_God]

I'd go for Simulationist feel with certain Gamism thrown in. But let me ask you this, straight on, what makes your game unique and why not just use D&D for it?

Also, take a look at The Shadow of Yesterday, available for free under Creative Commons agreement, if you like what you see you can publish your game using tSoY engine under the CC agreement yourself, cutting up the basic system design for you.

[Tommi Brander]

Games are not designed around a creative agenda. Make a game, and make it a good one. Don't limit yourself by boxing before even starting the game itself.

So, what will the game be about?
What will the players do?

[greyorm]

I can't decide between a gamist or simulationist approach. I want the people who play my game to enjoy the world I've created, I don't want people to feel like the game is too setting heavy and feel trapped by the setting.

First off, welcome to the Forge!

Second, do you have a real name we can call you by? It's the preferred thing around here since it makes it easier to interact with you as a person. I'm Raven, BTW.

Alright, here's my advice: is the game about showing off how cool your character is and revealing your game-prowess in play, with setting taking a back-seat to the steely-eyed glint of showing off? To me, it doesn't sound like it. It sounds like you'll want to focus on a Setting-centric Sim approach. Now, you merely need to come up with mechanics that highlight what's cool about the setting, what's cool about exploring, interacting with and revealing the setting during play.

Also, while Tommi states:

Games are not designed around a creative agenda. Don't limit yourself by boxing before even starting the game itself.

I would beg to differ, and point out my own game, Orx, which was indeed designed around a CA (the Gamist CA, to be precise). While not boxing yourself in unnecessarily or slavishly is good advice, knowing what you want and expect out of a game -- that is, out of play -- is a very helpful tool in creating a game, since it solidifies concepts and directions of design in one's mind. Almost no one starts a painting (or much of anything) without knowing what the finished product should look like and what style they will be attempting to emulate -- even if they change their mind mid-way through.

So, what will the game be about? What will the players do?

Don't dismiss these questions! These are very useful to concretizing a draft of your design. If you can give us an example of how you would want to see a session of play proceeding in your game, what happens, what the people at the table do and why you think they would do that/enjoy doing that, we can give you a better idea of direction. (Actually, I lie, by writing out such a sample session of your game as you envision play occuring, you will be giving yourself a better idea of the direction to take. Tricksy, aren't we?)

[Tommi Brander]

I would beg to differ, and point out my own game, Orx, which was indeed designed around a CA (the Gamist CA, to be precise). While not boxing yourself in unnecessarily or slavishly is good advice, knowing what you want and expect out of a game -- that is, out of play -- is a very helpful tool in creating a game, since it solidifies concepts and directions of design in one's mind. Almost no one starts a painting (or much of anything) without knowing what the finished product should look like and what style they will be attempting to emulate -- even if they change their mind mid-way through.

I'll rephrase: Don't start to design a game thinking "This will be the ultimate Gamist game. I will use this resolution system, this reward system..."
That is far too vague.
First decide what the game will do. If that clearly matches a creative agenda, good. If not, nothing is lost. Take an interesting concept and work on that. The agendas are too broad to provide clear direction by themselves.

[EvlDragonMonkey]

I'd go for Simulationist feel with certain Gamism thrown in. But let me ask you this, straight on, what makes your game unique and why not just use D&D for it?

Also, take a look at The Shadow of Yesterday, available for free under Creative Commons agreement, if you like what you see you can publish your game using tSoY engine under the CC agreement yourself, cutting up the basic system design for you.

I'm not sure what you mean by your first statement. It terms of system the only thing that makes it unique so far is my alchemy system, which is a little too complicated to explain here, I believe the way I have it explained now takes up 3 pages. As for the setting, it's darker (best term I can think of at 3AM) than a lot of games, best way I can describe it in one sentence is "D&D with less monsters, more emphasis on interacting with people and less emphasis on combat, and using material from the book of vile darkness", but then again I'm horrible at summing things up, as you can see from my first post. I hate D&D's classes and races and I hate the D20 system. I don't want my game to just be a modified version of some other game.

Games are not designed around a creative agenda. Make a game, and make it a good one. Don't limit yourself by boxing before even starting the game itself.

So, what will the game be about?
What will the players do?

I'm designing it around a creative agenda because of these quotes from System Does Matter by Ron Edwards "Here I suggest that RPG system design cannot meet all three outlooks at once." and "I suggest that building the system specifically to accord with one of these outlooks is the first priority of RPG design.". You ask rather vague questions but I shall try to answer them. The game is a medieval fantasy game about the nature of evil. The players fight evil (not always literally fight) in it's various forms, whether it be in the form of a demon, an evil person or an inner struggle against evil.

First off, welcome to the Forge!

Second, do you have a real name we can call you by? It's the preferred thing around here since it makes it easier to interact with you as a person. I'm Raven, BTW.

Alright, here's my advice: is the game about showing off how cool your character is and revealing your game-prowess in play, with setting taking a back-seat to the steely-eyed glint of showing off? To me, it doesn't sound like it. It sounds like you'll want to focus on a Setting-centric Sim approach. Now, you merely need to come up with mechanics that highlight what's cool about the setting, what's cool about exploring, interacting with and revealing the setting during play.

Thanks. I have no name! But if you must call me something, you can call me Jason. I have come up with one feature that highlights the inner stuggle with evil, I'll go into that in another post.

Don't dismiss these questions! These are very useful to concretizing a draft of your design. If you can give us an example of how you would want to see a session of play proceeding in your game, what happens, what the people at the table do and why you think they would do that/enjoy doing that, we can give you a better idea of direction. (Actually, I lie, by writing out such a sample session of your game as you envision play occuring, you will be giving yourself a better idea of the direction to take. Tricksy, aren't we?)

I'm working on a play example but I'm having trouble with it. I'm good at coming up with stories and situations but really bad at thinking how people would react to them.

[Callan S.]

Hi Jason,

Do you have any accounts of table top play you've enjoyed in the past? Like you could give one in the actual play forum we have here. One way to make a difficult descision is make it based on what you've actually enjoyed in the past.

[greyorm]

I'm working on a play example but I'm having trouble with it. I'm good at coming up with stories and situations but really bad at thinking how people would react to them.

Quick, important point: it isn't about how you think people would react to situations, it's about how you would want people playing your game to react to them. It is your idea of the perfect session, where the players actually engage in the behaviors you want to see happening at the table. Describe this is the context of play.

Let me see if I can clarify that a bit (and if you think you get me, then just ignore this so I don't confuse you):
Let us say you are dreaming up the game of chess. You can't ask yourself, "Gee, when confronted by all these pieces, what would the players do? Would they do this thing or that thing?" You say to yourself, "When someone sits down to play this game, I want them to be strategizing their moves, thinking ahead, planning what sacrifices to make so they gain ground, so that's what play would be like."

Note you write from the second example, not the first. Then write the example.

I hope that made sense and helps. Let me know.

[pells]

Hi Jason,

Just my two cents about what you're doing. From what I understand from your little history, especially the comment about Baldur's gate, you seem to wish to present an interesting setting/plot for CRPG. I mention plot because I cannot see a CRPG without one. Am I right on this ? What would make your CRPG different is the setting/plot or the rules ? If it's the setting/plot, then there might be something you want to understand. Setting/plot can be understand thru the big model, but there are not GNS related. I think that's important in designing your game if you want to put the emphasis on those matters.

Now, I strongly encourage you to propose actual play experience you enjoyed. I think it is a good exercice to know how you play, what kind of play you enjoy. But, keep in mind that this doesn't mean that your setting is made for a specific creative agenda. Maybe, you'll come up and say I play SIM !! But, maybe, some players would enjoy fighting evil using GAM or NAR mechanics related.

That might seems trivial, but I suggest you keep this in mind.

[Anders Larsen]

best way I can describe it in one sentence is "D&D with less monsters, more emphasis on interacting with people and less emphasis on combat, and using material from the book of vile darkness", but then again I'm horrible at summing things up, as you can see from my first post. I hate D&D's classes and races and I hate the D20 system. I don't want my game to just be a modified version of some other game.

Be careful with this.

Don't design your system based on what you don't like in an other system. I have seen many people that try to make a better D&D, and end up with something that look very much like D&D (see, you become your enemy).

Instead, design a system based on what you want with the game. You say you have some very unique ideas. These ideas have to be reflected in the system if you want your game to be unique. Like a computer game, it is not really the setting that will sell a p&p rpg, but the gaming experience. So that is what you have to design.

But what do you want to be the selling point of your game?

- Anders

[Tommi Brander]

The game is a medieval fantasy game about the nature of evil. The players fight evil (not always literally fight) in it's various forms, whether it be in the form of a demon, an evil person or an inner struggle against evil.

A game about exploring the nature of evil that you have provided, or a game that gives players (including the GM, if any) the ability to form and shape the evil? IOW, who decides the nature of evil? Or is that the entire point of play?

The player characters confront evil, right? Do the players decide what is evil they will fight, how to fight it, how to best survive fighting it, or what?

[Paul Strack]

I'm not sure what you mean by your first statement. It terms of system the only thing that makes it unique so far is my alchemy system, which is a little too complicated to explain here, I believe the way I have it explained now takes up 3 pages. As for the setting, it's darker (best term I can think of at 3AM) than a lot of games, best way I can describe it in one sentence is "D&D with less monsters, more emphasis on interacting with people and less emphasis on combat, and using material from the book of vile darkness", but then again I'm horrible at summing things up, as you can see from my first post. I hate D&D's classes and races and I hate the D20 system. I don't want my game to just be a modified version of some other game.

D&D is not the only game you could base things on. There are a lot of generic rules engine out there that can apply to a variety of settings. For example, you can look at Hero, GURPS, Tri-Stat, Fudge, Fuzion, Story-Engine, etc. You might try looking at those rules to see if they would fit your setting. If nothing else, they would give you a lot of rules background to base ideas for writing your own rules.

Even if you don't want to copy someone else's game, looking at a lot of games gives you more ideas to draw from.

[EvlDragonMonkey]

First thing I'd like to say is that the only reason I mention D&D, is it's the only medieval fantasy P&P RPG I've played. I have no intention of "fixing" D&D, I think that the game sucks, for me to "fix" it there would have to be something right with it, in my opinion D&D has no good features. The only similarity is that my game also has a medieval fantasy setting, I don't usually compare my game to D&D but I suck at describing things, so I thought comparing it to D&D would at least give you an idea of what my game is like.

I can't share actual play I've enjoyed because I haven't really found a game I like. Like I've said the only game I've played with a medieval fantasy setting is D&D, and one of the major things I hated was the lack of purpose, I always wondered "Why are we killing these kobolds, what did they do to us?", I believe my game has more of a purpose.

I'd also like to point out that I don't intend to supply players with the plot of the game, that is a task for the GM. All I wish to create is a game that consists of a very detailed setting and a rather vague purpose (but still a purpose none the less), along with the system of coarse. I think the system is of less importance to my game, but I still want to create it myself.

I'm sure this will come up at some point in this discussion, so I guess it's worth mentioning, my game does have classes, races, stats, levels and the like.

Some of your questions I am unable to answer at this time. I apparently did not put as much thought into this game as some of you expected me to. I have just recently began work on the P&P version of my game, and while P&P RPGs and CRPGs are both RPGs, they have many differences. Much of the work I have done on EoD can not be used for the P&P game I am working on, the plot and main quest for example can not be used at all, the name can not be used because Eye of Darkness gets it's name from it's story.

The more I think of it, the more sure I become that my game can not be a narritiveist game. My game focuses more on setting than anything else, as that is what most of my effort was focused on. I don't think I have to define the purpose of the game as well as some of you think I should. Since I have a fully developed setting, I believe having a very well defined purpose would make people feel trapped by my game, it would be like telling them they have to do everything my way or not at all. All I really need help with is the system, the purpose of the thread/topic was to determine a starting point for my system.

[dindenver]

Hi!
  Yes, many people on the Forge are enthusiastic about focused design, or designing with a purpose. However, that purpose can be as simple as "giving the players the tools to explore my setting." Unfortunstely, GNS does not have a lot of give, if you are going to embrace it, then you need to realise that to succeed you must determine what experience you want the players to have and then find a design that evokes that.
  For instance, if your game is about exploring your world in an adventure setting, then you don't need to design rules for farming. Farmers don't explore, they stay put for the harvest and the reaping and sewing and they hunker down for the winter. Adventurers don't work a 12 hour day looking at the backside of a mule and they certainly don't hunker down when the weather gets bad. So, by not wasting time and energy writing farming/harvesting rules, etc. You can keep your design focused on exploration without trapping the players in your idea of a perfect session, no?

  And to repeat, because it bears repeating:
1) What is your game about? (The answer doesn't have to be eloquent or eloborate, but it should address why you want to write it and why someone would want to play it)

2) What do characters do in your game? (Again, it can be a simple description and it doesn't have to be a limiting description, something as vague as "explore my beautiful setting" is fine)

3) What do the players do? (simpler is definitely better here. What is your idea of roleplaying? Lengthy flowery descriptions of exciting moments, managing your character's resources in a world set against you, saying what your character wants to do and rolling some dice? something else entirely?)

  Remeber, these questions are not an attempt to pigeon-hole you into a designer niche or as a way to dismiss your game because its not the kind of game that we prefer. But, it is an attempt to find you what you are trying to do so we can make suggestions that are constructive instead of random ideas that may or may not fit in your design idea.