NOVEL RPG System

[Eldrad]

Okay imagine just making a character in a freeform way.

For example...

I look through the book and decide I want to make a Science Officer for my STARCLADS Sci Fi universe.

Scientific – You are a scientist and have a broad knowledge of all science or you could be a specialist in one or more sciences.
Starting Equipment: Scanner, Translator, Comlink, Mini Tools, and 2000 Credits.

I also add a few sentences about the character...

He wears scanners and prefers to look at the world through electronic eyes. He was educated in a prestigious university and is quite snobby. He is not athletic and is not combat trained. He is quite good looking but really says irritating things around the ladies. He likes to drink a lot and thinks himself very street savvy. Being of upper class he has no idea how the lower class live.

His name is Dr. Will Sayer, Human 35 years old.

There a character is made! No skill points, no Hit Points, yes you have heard it all before from the freeform crowd how great this is.

How are things done in the NOVEL RPG system?

The Universal Chart.

Simply roll a D20.

THE NOVEL RPG UNIVERSAL CHART

20   Perfection
18-19   Extremely Good
16-17   Very Good
13-15   Good
9-12   Neutral
6-8   Bad
4-5   Very Bad
2-3   Extremely Bad
1   Disastrous


For example Dr. Will Sayer decides to create a Force Field system that causes damage as well. A D20 is rolled resulting in a 4 which is a Very Bad result. It then would be deemed by the Novelist (Game Master) that the experiment did not work and many of his colleagues mock him. If Ted the Janitor tried to do the same thing and came up with a Very Bad result then he might have the device blow up in his face. It depends on who you are!

Another example would be a lovely blond haired 16 year old gymnast in pink tights and a 60 year old bum decide to do a triple somersault flip. A 14 is rolled which is a Good Result and the gymnast does a great flip. The old bum scores a Good result which for him would be he only half way flips and does not bust his ass. It depends on who you are and what you are trying to do.

I originally had a bunch of modifiers to the roll and result but this took time and slowed the experiment down.

Now for an example of combat.

Dr Will Sayer is being chased by a couple of alien wolf like plant creatures. A 6 is rolled on the Universal chart which is a Bad result. The Novelist says that Dr. Will is overran by the wolf like plant creatures and is knocked down a hill with the creatures in pursuit. He has suffered a few bites and bruises and is somewhat injured. He picks up a sharp stick and then rolls a 3 which is an Extremely Bad result! The wolf like plant creatures tear into him and he now thinks he is about to die. He then rolls a 20 which is Perfection! He somehow finds a reserve in strength and starts flailing with his sharp stick and kills them both! He is alive and bleeding profusely. He tears off pieces of his clothing and tried to stop the bleeding. He rolls a 1 "gulp" a Disaster and falls over dying. If there are no other character looking for him he is dead...

Well what do you think? A freeform system. Get you a D20 and try this out and post it!

 

[Filip Luszczyk]

It depends on who you are!

In that case, are you sure you need the die roll here at all? Does it add to the session anything that wouldn't be there anyway?

Or, if it does, is such a granurality of results needed? I don't think there is a practical difference between three separate steps of good/bad results. So, I'm not sure if using d20 would really bring to the game anything more than a binary success/failure toss of a coin could bring.

If you examine these rules carefully, the end result of character's action, as well as the consequences of it are completely up to the GM.

[Justin Nichol - BFG]

I agree that basically this is a freeform system of GM fiat and could result in many arguments between players and the novelist over "What the friggin hell do you mean I don't jump across the space worms maw? I'm a soldier and I only rolled bad!" In other words, what difference is the granularity between Bad, Very Bad, Extremely Bad and Disastrous. That being said, as a freeform system it is very simple, quick and easy, but remember that all those numerical values were originally installed so you could say "look I have an Athletics X and the Difficulty was X, I made it across" and noone could tell you otherwise, hence fewer arguments about success (and more about rules).

Look at it another way, with no modifiers for difficulty or skill, you're essentially stating that a highly trained technician with a degree in Astronautics can fix a spaceship just as often as a monkey beating it with a stick, only when the monkey beats it with the stick it wont be as nice or last as long. This is an exaggeration of course, but if someone is a beginner at Car Repair (i.e. can change oil and spark plugs) can they really succeed as often as a mechanic in overhauling an engine, albeit a little less well? Also, does %5 of the things people attempt end in disaster? Of course maybe none of that matters to you, realism is not important in roleplaying games but it helps to have some consistency. I'm not trying to discourage you or disparage the idea, but every idea has to go through the wringer.

[Eldrad]

Thanks for the critique! All comments negative or positive are wanted for these First Thoughts.

The dice roll is not truly a skill or attribute check but more of a direction of plot check. A negative roll does not always mean a failure it could also mean a negative twist to the plot.

This is completely different than most RPG rule sets.

Like the example below with the gymnast, an expert and a complete novice in basket weaving both try to weave a basket. A 13 is rolled which is a Good result. This result would not be the same for the expert as compared to the novice.

I was going to have modifiers to the result as in going up and down on the scale depending on how much of an advantage you had but decided to leave the plot up to the judgment of the GM.

I am trying to make it where you can think of a character concept and just start playing. A rules lite system that would allow a GM to just create and write without huge set of rules.

A system where one could take any novel, movie, or anime and just start up an adventure with it.

There is another freeform randomizer that one person used. It was to pick a number from 1-100. If your number was close to the GM's number  then you succeeded. This was also modified by how skilled you were at what you were trying to do.

Anyway just try these simple rules out and get back with me in the Playtest section, and thanks for the comments!

EW

[Eldrad]

The Plot Roll and the skilled character...

Let us just say you have the gymnast I mentioned above and she is going to jump a 6 ft. ditch. This should not be a problem. Let us say she rolls a 2 which is an Extremely Bad result. The GM could say she falls on her face or she makes it across totally well BUT she lands in thorn bushes, she attracts the attention of the giant spiders she was trying to escape, she sprains her ankle, or whatever would turn the plot against the Players. A low roll is not always a failed skill check. It is the plot going against the players.

Is this concept making any sense?

[Charlie Gilb]

I understand your concept completely, but I must say, I think it is not a good idea. This kind of "free-form system" basically gives all narrating power to the DM; I would hate to play a game like this, since it will basically end however the GM wants it to.

Here's my thoughts: If the GM wants to create a novel, then he should just write one.

I do think if you laid some guidelines and turned it into a more narrative structure (in the favor of the players), it would be a lot better. Give those players some control, and maybe lower the dice size to a d10 or something; i think a d20 would allow for too much variation. Maybe even switch to 3d6 or something to have more consistent results?

[Justin Nichol - BFG]

I agree with the 3D6 recommendation. I understand better what you mean. I don't think it's a bad idea, I don't mind playing in a story driven game but if this game were run by an inexperienced or unimaginative gamemaster it would be like pulling teeth because as was stated, it's pretty much GM fiat. Would you consider giving some sort of points to the players or some sort of bidding system so that occasionally the players can exert some narrative control in certain situation? It wouldn't complicate things much, all characters could have an equal amount of the points to start, and it would mean that occasionally if it were important to a player to do something, they could do it without the GM fiatting against them. Obviously you're not targetting gamists, so you should give somenarrative influence for the players other than roll and pray.

[Charlie Gilb]

I don't think it's a bad idea, I don't mind playing in a story driven game but if this game were run by an inexperienced or unimaginative gamemaster it would be like pulling teeth because as was stated, it's pretty much GM fiat. Would you consider giving some sort of points to the players or some sort of bidding system so that occasionally the players can exert some narrative control in certain situation? It wouldn't complicate things much, all characters could have an equal amount of the points to start, and it would mean that occasionally if it were important to a player to do something, they could do it without the GM fiatting against them.

Yeah, I think I may have come off a bit harsh; I agree with Justin on this point. What I meant to say was that I wouldn't enjoy playing in a game where the GM has such broad control over what happens after I roll a dice. PC's need to be given some kind of power; remember it is just as much their game as it is the GM's!

[Justin Nichol - BFG]

so yea, short recap: I think if you changed it to 3D6 instead of a D20 and used some sort of currency to give players narrative control at important points, then this would be a great little freeform one page rules game.

[Filip Luszczyk]

Ok, so randomness has a concrete function here, despite the whole thing being pure GM's Fiat - i.e. it serves as an inspiration for the GM, suggesting him plot developments. Consequently, I could suggest a different approach, as it doesn't seem like various steps of sucess and failure are a good source of inspiration.

Consider this  - depending how the GM interpretes the roll, the character can fall down or wind up in the thorny bushes. Would it add anything to the game, or would it even differ from jumping over in the long run? On the other hand, attracting the attention of spiders is a serious plot twist. The thing is, you have all these things under the same result on the dice - so, it doesn't really tell the GM which eay to push the story. "Bad" can mean anything, so you either stare at the die like it was a blank page, or you already have an idea in mind and don't need the roll.

It's not in the size or the number of the dice, but in the way the results are read. Switching to 1d100 or 3d6 won't change anything.

Now. What if you had different categories of plot development under different die results? Things like "1 - attracts spider", "2 - sprains her ankle", "3 - loses an important item" etc. - only in more general words? "Attracts trouble", "Limiting condition", "Goal gets complicated" and the like.

Or, you could use some kind of olacular system to inspire the GM. Dunno, Tarot, runes, tea divination, random websites, various online random stuff generators or whatever. This would give more concrete - but still open for interpretation - suggestions for plot twists or new elements to add to the story.

Also, I can see equipment listed in your character's writeup, along with money. What's the importance of equipment list in this system, and what's the purpose of knowing exact resources of the character? It's up to the GM to determine if the player can acquire something or not, anyway (i.e. he's the one to set costs).

All in all, I suggest that you check out games like Primetime Adventures, Everway and InSpectres for inspiration. These are good examples of systems that use different methods to achieve results close to your design goals.

[David Artman]

It's not in the size or the number of the dice, but in the way the results are read. Switching to 1d100 or 3d6 won't change anything.

That's not entirely true, from how I read the Universal chart. It has a "rasterized" ("digitized") bell curve of results (mostly):

-	-	-	-	12	-	-	-	-
-	-	-	8	11	15	-	-	-
	3	5	7	10	14	17	19
1	2	4	6	9	13	16	18	10
D!	EB	VB	B	N	G	VG	EG	P!

...but it doesn't use a bell curved randomizer; it uses a linear randomizer (1d20). 3d6 results, however, tend towards a "smooth" ("analog") bell curve; so, frankly, its results will better match the chart's distribution of success.

Now. What if you had different categories of plot development under different die results? Things like "1 - attracts spider", "2 - sprains her ankle", "3 - loses an important item" etc. - only in more general words? "Attracts trouble", "Limiting condition", "Goal gets complicated" and the like.

Now you're getting warmer, I think. Less fiat, more meaty, more inspiring to GMs.

But, that pretty much pushes those character "traits" right out of the window. For example, if any roll of a 4 is "goal gets complicated" then what difference does it make if I am a scientist or a monkey with a stick? Whatever I tried to do made my goal more complicated, never mind HOW I tried to do it. I realize you're sort of helping with the brainstorm, but this direction would have less meat if there are never metrics for the traits.

So, you still have a sticking point, in my opinion, when it comes to gauging the "baseline competence" of a PC without any form of metrics, just a list of "traits." In your original (Good to Bad) roll system, a GM's interpretation of what is "Bad" for a given PC is a two-way fiat: how competent is the PC and what is a "bad" or "good" result for that level of competence. So, at this point, you've only mitigated one of the fiat handles, and made the randomizer, basically, a plot creator rather than a success gauge.

Or, you could use some kind of oracular system to inspire the GM. Dunno, Tarot, runes, tea divination, random websites, various online random stuff generators or whatever. This would give more concrete - but still open for interpretation - suggestions for plot twists or new elements to add to the story.

Now you're redoing Everway, but with no Elements or Background. Everyway's a great system... but even it has 4 stats on a character sheet.

What's the importance of equipment list in this system, and what's the purpose of knowing exact resources of the character? It's up to the GM to determine if the player can acquire something or not, anyway (i.e. he's the one to set costs).

1) More fiat, if the GM is now setting prices and, presumably, apportioning the money in situations as well (i.e. having total ad hoc control of the entire economic cycle).
2) Still no metrics: "equipment" means exactly as much as "scientist": nothing. Without a metric, it will always be a game of negotiation between the GM and PCs, to decide what possession of equipment (or skills or money or traits or...) really means.

I'm all for rules light, to get at story faster. But "rules null" is, basically, playing the "Uh-Uh Game" (also called "My Guy" or "My Daddy's Gonna...") that we played as kids: mostly arguments, with little story and almost no drama (how dramatic is random success or failure dictated by one person?).

I'd recommend, as Filip did, that Eldrad play Everway, Unistat, Universalis, or even TWERPS.

Then, decide what those games lack (or have overdone) for your tastes, and try to work up a new system from there. In general, if you find yourself writing "the GM will" too often, you're heading away from the ideal, for cooperative story telling (i.e. your GM really ought to be a novelist, not a "Novelist").

HTH;
David

[Filip Luszczyk]

David,

Notice how the description of the character affects only color of the performance here. This is the only thing it can affect without any competence metric and rules that would make the metric matter, indeed. However, it doesn't mean that it actually needs to affect anything else. This meat you see "less of" here might not be necessary in the design (i.e. only because most games out there do something doesn't mean that this must do it as well).

About the probabilities I couldn't care less - not until randomness itself is justified in the design, and its purpose is clearly identified. This purpose seems to be suggesting plot twists for the GM, who has the primary input in the fiction here anyway, unless some apparently fundamental assumptions are changed.

So, I'd work from this point, eliminating everything that doesn't add anything to the game, taking into account these assumptions.

[Eldrad]

In response to the debates

Posted by: Charlie Gilb 
Insert Quote
I understand your concept completely, but I must say, I think it is not a good idea. This kind of "free-form system" basically gives all narrating power to the DM; I would hate to play a game like this, since it will basically end however the GM wants it to.[/size]

The GM is god anyways in most games. The players still have control over their actions for the most part. No offense taken as I have had this response until someone tried this game.


Posted by: Justin Nichol - BFG 
Insert Quote
I agree with the 3D6 recommendation. I understand better what you mean. I don't think it's a bad idea, I don't mind playing in a story driven game but if this game were run by an inexperienced or unimaginative gamemaster it would be like pulling teeth because as was stated, it's pretty much GM fiat.

Some GMs suck no matter what though. This would not be a game for an unexperienced or unimaginative DM.

Would you consider giving some sort of points to the players or some sort of bidding system so that occasionally the players can exert some narrative control in certain situation? It wouldn't complicate things much, all characters could have an equal amount of the points to start, and it would mean that occasionally if it were important to a player to do something, they could do it without the GM fiatting against them. Obviously you're not targetting gamists, so you should give somenarrative influence for the players other than roll and pray.

Nope no points, modifiers, or any additional math or rules. The very first version of this went from a simple chart to five pages in no time. I scrapped it for a "One roll to rule them all". This really does work if you can unwrap you mind from a ruleset for everthing.


On Filip Luszczyk's comments you get it completly!

A "chart" could be made but that would defeat the whole "theory" of what I am trying to test.

Now. What if you had different categories of plot development under different die results? Things like "1 - attracts spider", "2 - sprains her ankle", "3 - loses an important item" etc. - only in more general words? "Attracts trouble", "Limiting condition", "Goal gets complicated" and the like.

THAT would make me have to write alot of charts! The Universal chart can do all this with a bit of imagination.

Also, I can see equipment listed in your character's writeup, along with money. What's the importance of equipment list in this system, and what's the purpose of knowing exact resources of the character? It's up to the GM to determine if the player can acquire something or not, anyway (i.e. he's the one to set costs).

Well equipment, ammo, and money are good things you should track.  There would be a character sheet in a game such as this. Just no numbers to skills and attributes.


The D20 result could be a skill check or plot twist good or bad.This might be a good thing to use in FF Chat Rooms also.

Has anyone tired this concept out as is to see how it works out?  I will try the suggestions above to see how they work and most of all are they fun and quick for the GM and player.

Please more Critiques! positive or negative they give me more ideas!

[Justin Nichol - BFG]

well I really think not having any player control over narration and using a d20 is a really bad idea, but it is your game. I don't think the other poster meant for you to have charts for each action but rather for you to modify your existing charts to spell out actual narrative occurrences both positive in negative instead of just saying good or bad. Yes, Gms can be bad and yes they do usually assert a lot of power, but you're on an indie designers forum where half the games designed make some sort of mechanic for players to take narrative control at some point, and it doesn't take a bad GM to randomly read a result of bad in a way that alienates and pisses off several of his players. You can be a good storyteller and still completely fuck up a fiat that amkes everyone suddenyl lose interest, and with this game there wont be a lot of meat or other things to hold onto if suddenly the GM takes the story in a direction that some of the players hate. The point is that metrics and rules for narrative control by players exist so that there is some recourse, so that you as a player have some level of control, whether it be through buying high stats in things that are important to you, or bidding points to ensure that the way the game goes is the way the players want it to. You've eliminated all player control other than the chance to roleplay a little and roll a linear die. You say players have control over their actions but this is not entirely true, they are free to act as they please but they are not free in any way to control the direction of the game other than to say something to convince the GM.

[Filip Luszczyk]

THAT would make me have to write alot of charts! The Universal chart can do all this with a bit of imagination.

Indeed, you would have to have about ONE chart with 10-20 results that would suggest general direction

Well equipment, ammo, and money are good things you should track.

OK. Why *exactly* are they good things that the player should track? What *exactly* does tracking these things add to the game?

Has anyone tired this concept out as is to see how it works out?

No, but I tried things that were similar enough in the past (i.e. GM-driven freeform with no metrics and no "hard" rules, with the dice providing only easy to ignore suggestions for the GM, in practice), and they didn't work out well due to their inherently flawed assumptions and rezulting fuzziness of everything.

I suggest that you head to the connections forum and make a call for playtesters. Chances you find any are slim, though (almost everyone who reads these forums has at least one own game that needs playtesting). But you can just as well try that.

Posting your own playtesting report wouldn't hurt, too.