octaNe: pings and knocks

[Jared A. Sorensen]

Okay, the good news is that octaNe is pretty much rarin' to go. The system is done, the text is written and its all very cool.

Blood & Steel is also done -- that's the free octaNe mini-supplement that deals with Sword & Sorcery characters.

Also, the esteemed Paul Elliot and I have been working together to create octaNe: Against the Reich!, a pulp 30's supplement where you bash Nazis from one end of the globe to the other (and beyond!). It's very cool and contains some highly unusual features (which I'll probably talk about some time in the near future).

So that's all the GOOD news.

The bad news is the goddamn default setting. I HATE writing settings. HATE IT. HATE HATE HATE it. The problem is despite all the cool ideas a'spinnin' in my head, it's a bitch to actually pick and choose which ones get put down.

On one hand, I want to clue the reader in on all the whacky stuff I love about psychotronic films (and that means writing lots of cool octaNe setting). On the other hand, I don't want to churn out pages of stuff that a) the reader coulda done himself or b) runs counter to my "create during play" philosophy.

Then there's presentation. Should I just write it out as per the rules on "describing game setting" (as provided by GameCo. Setting Descriptions, Inc.)? Or should I attempt some kind of wry "flava" text? It sucks, basically...and I don't mind telling you.

[Gordon C. Landis]

Oh, man, Jared - I can't believe I get to say this to you . . .

"What do YOU want to do?"

*I* think it would be mega-cool if your setting material was essentialy a . . . system/process/guideline/whatever . . . that folks could use to design their own setting.  Anything from a "two from column A, 1 from column B" thing to an actual, honest-to-beeswax "system" where folks build the setting (ala Universalis?  Not that I really have a clue as to what Universalis is . . . ).

But really, you know the drill - it's your game, handle the setting the way you want to.  Which I suspect mean that, if you go one of the more "standard" routes, don't try and over do it - put in a little flava text, do a little outline of the major places . . . and yeah, discuss the source material from YOUR particualr angle.

Hope that helps,

Gordon

[unodiablo]

Hi Jared,

You don't need to write it 'as setting', like it's the way the Octane world has to be, but I love all the references the previous versions have had, and I don't think you should skimp on it at all.

I think if you present it as you say above - "On one hand, I want to clue the reader in on all the whacky stuff I love about psychotronic films", rather than cut-and-dried setting, or icky-flava text, the players can then pick and choose what they want to use. I won't ever play Hell On Earth, but the books are chock-full-o' wacky b-movie post holocaust ideas...

Can't wait to see the new OctaNe. My brother and I started working on a Dust Devils / Sorcerer & Sword / OctaNe game last time I was up north. (using a variant set of DD rules, the philosophy behind S&S, and some of the setting and attitude of Octane and HOE.)

All hail Jared, the ayatollah of rockandrolla! Ruler of the Wasteland!
Sean

P.S. Have you ever read any of the old 'Traveller' books? Not the RPG, it's an old action-adventure book series like a sci-fi Road Warrior. Very OctaNe.

[Rich Forest]

What do players and GMs need to know in order to play in a hellomatic, psychobilly world like octaNe?  

That’s what goes in the setting chapter.  

I know, I’m making it sound easier than it is.  Really, I’m thinking along the same lines as Gordon and unodiablo.  OctaNe’s rules already offer players and GMs tools to play octaNe and create an octaNe world in play, right?  But what if I’m not familiar with the material that inspired octaNe?  What do I need to know in order to get going with a game of octaNe?  I think there is a lot of room for talking about the style of octaNe without having to write a traditional setting chapter.  That is, instead of writing a bunch of setting/color (which you clearly aren’t interested in), is there a way to tell the reader what kinds of settings and color are most fitting to octaNe?  

I’m not so interested in charts/tables, but a “how to” sections would be a great replacement for a pre-set world.  Can the “setting” chapter be replaced with a toolbox for setting creation?  As someone who is looking forward to octaNe, I’d like to see a set of tips that I can read, and afterwards, have what I need for my group to get going on making our own high octaNe world.  So, for example, there could be more a set of archetypes and ideas from psychotronic sources that players and GMs can use when developing the game setting.

I’m not sure what this would look like in practice, however.  I’m trying to think of examples from published sources, but they are sparse.  I think some of what Ron does in Sorcerer, especially Sorcerer & Sword, gave me this kind of support.  I also remember the Agent 13 supplement for Top Secret/S.I.  having a really useful chapter that did a remarkable job of this in very little space.  It was actually geared toward typical characteristics of a variety of pulp stories (Gangbusters, Mystery Men, Jungle Adventures, Daredevils, etc.) for purposes of writing adventures and designing campaigns.  It provided a lot of good information to get the reader’s creativity going, but it didn’t fill in any pre-set world (there was also a pre-set world, of course).  

I hope some of this is useful (the sooner you write this chapter, the sooner I’ll have it in my greedy little hands).  I just wish I had a clearer idea of what this kind of “toolbox” chapter would look like physically, so that I could present what I’m trying to get across more clearly.  

Rich

[Jared A. Sorensen]

It was actually geared toward typical characteristics of a variety of pulp stories (Gangbusters, Mystery Men, Jungle Adventures, Daredevils, etc.) for purposes of writing adventures and designing campaigns.  It provided a lot of good information to get the reader’s creativity going, but it didn’t fill in any pre-set world (there was also a pre-set world, of course).

Actually, Paul Elliot and I are using this kind of idea for the pulp game, "Against the Reich!".

I might as well talk about the Toybox Model.

Gaming usually goes down one of two paths:
Game as wargame/boardgame or game as movie/book.

The analogies break down once you start mixing and matching terms (witness all the heartache and headache from the various threads on "story" gaming throughout the Forge).

So I'm taking a different approach. What other activity uses characters, settings, rules and a built-in play structure?

Playing "guys" (aka, playing with toy action figures).

So I've developed a pretty simple way to use the same principles that were used when we (global we) were kids having various adventures with He-Man, Luke Skywalker, the Micronauts or whatever. This line of thought actually first blossomed when I wrote down that action figure RPG "points of articulation."

The idea is that there is a community chest (literally, even) of action figures, each a unique character with its own built-in "role" to play in the story (because kids do create stories during play when playing with toys). Additional material is given to produce plot elements: locations (the Secret Volcano playset), villains (Skeletor and his evil henchmen) and a general play structure for the game (Skeletor is using the volcano to do something evil, the heroes must stop him). But because everything is controlled by those playing the game, complications may be introduced without fear of "getting hosed."

Anyway, I'm at work now or else I'd go into more detail. Hope that whets someone's appetite.

[Rich Forest]

I really like the Toybox Model.  

It's like one of those connections that somebody should have thought of by now, but nobody had.  It's especially interesting because so many RPGs have included some mention of childhood play in their "What is Roleplaying" section, but no one took the next logical step.

So where does the Toybox Model first get put in one of your games?  Is it in process for the Pulp style adventures material for octaNe?  Will it make it into the main octaNe rules?  

Rich

[Jared A. Sorensen]

So where does the Toybox Model first get put in one of your games?  Is it in process for the Pulp style adventures material for octaNe?  Will it make it into the main octaNe rules?

Well, the Toybox Model was a bit of an epiphany for me.

It will definitely be incorporated into "Against the Reich!". I don't think it will be used for octaNe...at least not at first. The idea of the characters-as-action figures doesn't hold up quite as well for the octaNe Roles because there aren't any unifying elements (well, thinking about it...yeah, Scene is the unifying element...that's "where the character is from" -- but it's still not as evident as the "Style" qualifier for the pulp Roles).

One cool thing about Against the Reich is that because of the Toybox Model, players will be able to "wield" different character Roles from game to game...but they'll always have their single pool of Plot Points to use with each character. They'll also be able to modify their character's Styles from game to game if they choose to play the same Role. If you're playing Doctor Phantom, the spell-casting occultist, you can make him more Daring for the "Assault on the Alps!" game and then boost his Magic Style for the "Mystery of the All-Seeing Eye!"

[Joe Murphy (Broin)]

I don't know enough about octaNe to comment specifically (there's a capital N but no capital O? What decade do you think this is, man?), but...

It would be nice to see examples of what the setting _is not_, as well as what the setting _is_.

I'm thinking of the 'pulp' genre, which messily ranges from gloomy Lovecraft to shiny Buck Rogers, stumbling by The Shadow on the way. When I read a pulp game, I want to know it's a little more Shadow, and a little less Rogers, say.

So you could scribble up the kind of suckage players might employ that you think would ruin the octaNey vibe. If it's fairly Mad Max, is it definitely not A-Team? Etc.

Joe.

[Jared A. Sorensen]

It would be nice to see examples of what the setting _is not_, as well as what the setting _is_.

I'm thinking of the 'pulp' genre, which messily ranges from gloomy Lovecraft to shiny Buck Rogers, stumbling by The Shadow on the way. When I read a pulp game, I want to know it's a little more Shadow, and a little less Rogers, say.

So you could scribble up the kind of suckage players might employ that you think would ruin the octaNey vibe. If it's fairly Mad Max, is it definitely not A-Team? Etc.

Well, Against the Reich! is going to handle this in a very simple, direct way. It uses what Paul and I have termed "Play-sets" -- as in, "settings" like you'd buy in a store for your action figs (Castle Greyskull, the Snake Pit, Skeletor's Lair, etc.). That play-set gives you everything you need -- it establishes who the players are, who they face, what they're doing and where they're doing it. And there's really no deviation (apart from things which can develop within the play-set).

Again, octaNe's a slightly different beast. it's most assuredly "pulp" in the classic sense: lurid, slightly distasteful to "civilized" folk...definitely stuff to appeal to "the masses" (and this ranges from silly schlock to bloody, sexy exploitation fare). Frankly, using the A-Team as a model is just as valid as using Mad Max (if not more so?). I don't want people to confuse the setting (psychotronic hellbilly post-apocalyptic funk/metal action) with the style of the game...the style is what really makes a game an "octaNe" game. Hi-octaNe action, thrills & spills, schlocky weirdness and a sense of insane creation. If the world ends, THIS is how it should end up. That kinda thing.

[xiombarg]

Personally, I have to agree with everyone so far regarding the setting.  If I had my druthers, there'd be all these funky ideas in a blender in one chapter. Give us more Jared-style coolness that we can use or disregard at well. I don't care if it's coherent so long as it's cool. ;-)

Regardless...

So I'm taking a different approach. What other activity uses characters, settings, rules and a built-in play structure?

Playing "guys" (aka, playing with toy action figures).

So I've developed a pretty simple way to use the same principles that were used when we (global we) were kids having various adventures with He-Man, Luke Skywalker, the Micronauts or whatever. This line of thought actually first blossomed when I wrote down that action figure RPG "points of articulation."

I hate to do this to you, Jared, but I must: How is this different from Simulationist "exploration of chraracter"? Haven't you just given the formula for Simulationism, Memento-Mori style?

[Jared A. Sorensen]

I hate to do this to you, Jared, but I must: How is this different from Simulationist "exploration of chraracter"? Haven't you just given the formula for Simulationism, Memento-Mori style?

Zak asked the same question. I give to you more or less the same answer:

What? Are you going to "explore" what it's like to be a pulp action hero? No. You're manipulating a character to either obey or rise to the standards of a "hero." And you kick Nazi ass. That's what the game is about.

Watch kids play with action figures: Goal-oriented play, using game elements (toys, characterization) and story elements (heroes, villains, conflicts, resolutions). It's all there.

And frankly, I'm pretty much jettisoning GNS from my life as far as discussions go. My little tirade in Theory was a final salute before stepping on the boat,  as it were. I'm not interesting in "goals in play" because well, I'm trying to design games...and unlike the typical RPG, a true games doesn't even need to be played to be "a game." It merely needs to establish its "gameness" (ie: establish conscious goals of the game). I don't need/want/like having my games "exist" only in the space between the start of the session and the end. I don't like the concept of a GM. I'm not all that crazy about the idea of players either...

Jesus christ, I'm turning into the George Lucas of game design. I'm a crazy indie bastard and love it!

- J

[reptile2k1]

Hmmm... how about quotes?

What kind of feeling did you have while making up a special idea/concept/rule/whatever?  Can a piece of music, an image, a short quote from a book or movie subsume this feeling?

[xiombarg]

Warning: Serious topic drift here. ;-)

What? Are you going to "explore" what it's like to be a pulp action hero? No. You're manipulating a character to either obey or rise to the standards of a "hero." And you kick Nazi ass. That's what the game is about.

Hmmmm. This strikes me as hand-waving, but considering the following, I won't develop that idea any further...

Watch kids play with action figures: Goal-oriented play, using game elements (toys, characterization) and story elements (heroes, villains, conflicts, resolutions). It's all there.

Again: Hmmmmm. I'm not sure when I played with action figures I ever had an explicit goal. Perhaps we just had different childhoods. But, again, moot point, as we move on to...

And frankly, I'm pretty much jettisoning GNS from my life as far as discussions go.

Well, that's cool, it's your option, and I certainly don't think the GNS is the end-all be-all. But expect to get poked a bit if you use GNS terms. ;-)

My little tirade in Theory was a final salute before stepping on the boat,  as it were. I'm not interesting in "goals in play" because well, I'm trying to design games...and unlike the typical RPG, a true games doesn't even need to be played to be "a game." It merely needs to establish its "gameness" (ie: establish conscious goals of the game). I don't need/want/like having my games "exist" only in the space between the start of the session and the end. I don't like the concept of a GM. I'm not all that crazy about the idea of players either...

Uh, whatever. While I think a lot of your theory amounts to "I'm going to categorize what I don't like as not a game, because I can," I do like the directions your designs are going, so I think I shall just sit back and enjoy the ride, knowing that I can enjoy your style of play (or proposed play, as it were, because if I read you right, it matters not to you if your games actually get played at all) and I can enjoy other styles as well. It's all gravy to me. You got chocolate in my peanut butter! You got sim play in my Memento Mori! ;-)

[Henry Fitch]

I'm tangenting, but I'd like some expansion on a previous point. What the hell is up with the capitalization?

[Jared A. Sorensen]

Maybe I should have a contest? "Guess why the N is capitalized. win a prize!"

Heh.