Tales [Power 19]

[Vulpinoid]

url=http://www.angelfire.com/psy/vulpinoid/TCRP_wPictures_.pdf]http://www.angelfire.com/psy/vulpinoid/TCRP_wPictures_.pdf<V[/colorhttp://www.angelfire.com/psy/vulpinoid/TCRP_wPictures_.pdfV

[Anders Larsen]

It is always hard to give feedback on a game which is this far in development, because if I disagree with something in your game it is hard to suggest any change which will not course you to have to redo most of the game.

I do have a number of problem wiht what you describe here, but before go further into it I would like to know a bit more about what kind of experience you want to produce with the game.

You write:

	Logged

My blog: Wisdom of the Three Eyed Pike

[Vulpinoid]

Ok...

To put it simply, I've tried to generate a game where the mechanics are sound yet simple. I don't want the kind of mechanics that rely on multiple die rolls to generate a specific single effect in the game.

I've always found is distructive to game continuity when a system requires flipping through books looking up charts rolling dice that then refer to new charts (case in point - Rolemaster).

My point here is that many role-playing anecdotes end up as a stereotypical description of die rolling and chart checking. I've tried to devise a game where the anecdotes should be about the story being told, years after the fact a player should find it easier to remember the thrill of their character killing a dragon, and how imprtant that was to the story. They shouldn't just remember how they rolled the dice to accomplish the feat.

The following is a personal opinion, based on years of playing with dozens of groups and GMing at over twenty conventions, and helping to run a twice monthly LARP campaign that went for over six years. I don't claim to be an expert, but I do claim to know a bit about my topic.

Dice rolling anecdotes are the kind of thing that reinforces the "geeky", "nerdy" and "socially-negative" stereotypes of roleplaying. Yet consider how much more socially acceptable it is in recent years to play computer games and watch movies of the action or fantasy genres. Such action and fantasy genres are becoming more a part of our culture. "Kindred: the Embraced" was based solidly on White Wolf's "Vampire: the Masquerade" yet it didn't include the "Tremere" with news groups of the time citing that this was because Americans didn't want to see the occult on Television. A few years later, "Charmed" hit TV screens, then shows like "Supernatural". Now if "Kindred: the Embraced" were being done it wouldn't include "Assamites" because they are pseudo-religious killers from the middle east and that's a touchy subject. Meanwhile the latest Harry Potter book is considered the highest selling release ever.

My point is that all of these concepts can be addressed in roleplaying, and there has been plenty of interest in these concepts (whether action, sci-fi, fantasy or period pieces). What has held back the hobby of role-playing, what has stooped it from becoming more accepted by the wider community in the way that computer games have.

I theorise that it's the dice rolling, the chart checking and those games with aspects that try to make a set of rules as detailed and simulationist as possible. Once you combine this with those players who min-max characters to the ultimate degree and you turn a social gathering into a competitive dice rolling match.

I've tried to develop a game where the rules are pretty straight-forward and easy to understand. These rules should be virtually transparent in the context of the storytelling process that is underway.

The game should draw a vested interest from it's players at an emotional level as well as a cerebral level. It should be a launching point for exploration of ideas and concepts. If you want to use the framework of magic to delve into specific subjects, then this can be added to the core system. If you want to use religion, or high technology to explore other areas then the same applies.

The games which focus on story are still some of the best games I remember over the years, and some of the games that are still talked about in the seedier drinking establishments after conventions. In most of these story oriented games, we've forgotten the specific die rolls and in some case we've even forgotten the systems that were used. What makes these games more meaningful to us is that we were each a part of the creation, we each helped to define the outcome of a world that we all remember. It wasn't just a bunch of guys and girls sitting around a table rolling dice.

If you want a specific example of the thing I'm looking for...

I ran a fairly free flowing D&D game a few years ago. The concept was a group of assorted characters who would usually never work with one another, I let the players pick anything they wanted (including monster races). These characters awoke chained in a brig aboard some type of abandoned ship with no idea how they got there. Gradually they learned that they had each been abducted from their homes by slavers, but the slavers had been killed in some type of mystical ritual. They had to learn to survive as a group who would normally hate one another, and had to uncover the secrets of why they were there. The actual mechanics of the game weren't that important, it was the exploration of each character's back story that each of the player's still remembers. I also made sure that those characters who built combat beasts faced more personal journeys that forced them to confront underdeveloped part of their characters.

This is a game that the group still talks about. The balance of treachery within the group as they brought back traditional racial rivalries, opposed to the friendships they had forged by working together as an unlikely team to solve the mystery of their abduction. No-one remembers die rolls, they just remember the colourful NPCs, the exotic places they visited on board the ghost ship and the social interplay. I'm sure that if some of the players hadn't chosen D&D specific races like the player who picked a Drow and the other who played the Illithid, no one would remember the system used either.

Instead they remember..."that time when they were conducting a jail break, there were all sorts of creatures trapped, but a changeling had a great idea that involved squeezing through the iron bars, while being pushed by an ogre...this worked well and the ogre grabbed the prisoner next in line. He didn't consider the fey might have a violent reaction to the cold iron bars of the jail cell and as he pushed her through, he skinned her alive."

Certainly not your typical D&D but memorable none the less. We simply assumed the Orge had the strength because he had so easily passed on his earlier test and we played the fey weakness for it's dark comdey value. It was a learning experience for everyone involved and helped bring new plot elements into the story.

I'm hoping this gives you a better idea of the type of thing I'm aiming toward.

V   

[Anders Larsen]

First I have to point out that I have only skimmed through the rules, so there may be something I have missed.

I must say that I am still a bit confused about what you want with this game because there seem to be a few contradictions. I think I know what you are aiming for, but I am not really sure you are getting there, or at least, if you are, it is not the direct route.

The question I now could ask is: Now you have given an example of what you want the game to do, then how does the rules get you there?

You seem to point at two thing: A simple system and that the rules will motivate you to be active (or punish you if you are not active). I will agree that simple rules is a good thing, but it does not do anything in itself. To motivate the players into actions is also a good thing, but again the question is: does this lead you to where you want this game to be? The motivation is that you get more point when you take some risks, but what kind of risks are you talking about?

There is also other thing which I am wondering about. It seem to be the centre of the game to change historical events, but I do not see any mechanic for how to do this. If a player want to change some events, what should he do? As it is now it seems to be up to the game master to make the overall story changes, which will mean that this will really not be interesting for the players.

But in the example you describe above it actually seems to me that the overall story is of little importance for the players. Their interest seems to be on the characters and the interaction between the characters, while they are exploring some interesting situation. So maybe you do not want the players to focus too much on the story, but just engage in the situation that the GM provide? If this is the case, though, I think that there are a number of things that need to be changed.

 - Anders

[Vulpinoid]

You've got a point Anders.

The core rules don't have a whole heap of depth to them. Nor do they have inbuilt motives or agendas.

That's where sourcebooks and specific flavour texts will come into play.

You probably haven't missed anything, because these rules don't have the motivating elements you refer to. Once I throw this sort of thing into the system it expands out the system by quite a few more pages, but that's not the point of posting these core rules.

My agenda for posting the core rules was to see if the core mechanics looked sound. Forget the metagaming aspects of transforming historical events for the moment. (That's a whole other section of the 200 page main rulebook, I'm developing.)

If someone had instantly said "Hey, this bit doesn't make sense at all !", then I could start working on refining that aspect of the system.

Based on my experience with the industry over the past twenty years or so, too many games have tried to delved into the arcane aspects of their world, or have tried to get too conceptual without getting the basic right. A decent number of these games sit on my bookshelf, but they never really made it into the Roleplaying top ten, nor did they last.

There are probably a hundred other theories about why these games didn't work, but that's the perspective my experience has shown me.

Consider it this way, I'm trying to produce a blank slate for games of any type. But a blank slate that will seemlessly integrate dozens of other concepts to produce a wide variety of possible gaming experiences. The tendency will be for these additional concepts to focus on narrative stories, because this is the way I tend to run gaming nights no matter what system I use.

I guess I haven't made it too clear because the [Power 19] I've written is more for the overall modular concept, while the only part of the game being presented so far is the core mechanics.

So please, offer suggestions for how you think modifications and amendments to the system would facilitate the kinds of concepts I'm aiming toward. At this stage most of the points of reference I'm using are assorted GMs guides for various systems, because most systems seem to place the player experience solely in the hands of the GM, and there are a few good perspectives on social dynamics hidden in the pages of a few of these books.

And thankyou for the feedback, it's helping me clarify thoughts regarding the system.

V

[Anders Larsen]

The thing is, you seems to have a very strong idea of what experience you want to have out of this game. You are talking about these unforgettable moments, but I do not see how you want a group to achieve this. What you are presenting are some very basic rules. Yes, I know you have the intention of building on top of the core rules, but the focus on getting these kind of unforgettable moments seems to be so important for you that it should be a part of the core rules. You may be able to get this role-playing experience when you run the game yourself, but other people, using these rules, will not necessarily get there.

For example, one thing you should think about is how the story is told: Who control what part of the story (and who control the setting). Here are some example of how the control can be distributed:

* The GM make the story beforehand and tell it scene for scene, the players will then play their characters' reactions to what happen in the story.

* The GM set up a situation and then take the backseat as the players try to find a solution of that situation. (Dogs in the Vineyard do it this way).

* The player create the situation he want his own character to engage in, the GM job is then to give him obstacles and challenges along the way. (like Kickers and Bangs from Sorcerer).

These three method will give three different role-playing experiences. You may think that it is up to the group (or the GM) to decide which approach to take, but then you - as the designer - will not have any control over what kind of experience the group will have.

This is only an example, there is of cause other aspect that have to be considered. It is hard for me right now to give you any concrete suggestions because I do not have a strong enough idea of what you want to achieve and even less of an idea of how to get there. What you have to think about is not so much the mechanics (the numbers and dice); you seem to have those in place. What you have to think about is what kind of role-playing procedures and player interactions are necessary to get to the experience you want.

As an example I will try to dissect the play example you gave earlier:

I ran a fairly free flowing D&D game a few years ago. The concept was a group of assorted characters who would usually never work with one another, I let the players pick anything they wanted (including monster races). These characters awoke chained in a brig aboard some type of abandoned ship with no idea how they got there. Gradually they learned that they had each been abducted from their homes by slavers, but the slavers had been killed in some type of mystical ritual. They had to learn to survive as a group who would normally hate one another, and had to uncover the secrets of why they were there. The actual mechanics of the game weren't that important, it was the exploration of each character's back story that each of the player's still remembers. I also made sure that those characters who built combat beasts faced more personal journeys that forced them to confront underdeveloped part of their characters.

This is a game that the group still talks about. The balance of treachery within the group as they brought back traditional racial rivalries, opposed to the friendships they had forged by working together as an unlikely team to solve the mystery of their abduction. No-one remembers die rolls, they just remember the colourful NPCs, the exotic places they visited on board the ghost ship and the social interplay. I'm sure that if some of the players hadn't chosen D&D specific races like the player who picked a Drow and the other who played the Illithid, no one would remember the system used either.

Ok, what do we need to get to this experience? First, when the player make their characters, they should decide one some problematic relations between the characters. This can be conflicts of races, culture, politics, religion and so on. The player should note which conflicts they have with the other characters - this also define their own characters. The payers should then note some troublesome aspect of their characters' background. These aspects should be kept secret for the other player so they can be reviled and explored during the game.

The character should start in a situation where they are alone and have to depend on each other. What this situation is should be decided by the group. The GM will then create a mystery that the characters have to resolve throughout the game. The GM will also prepare some key scenes, key scenes are scenes which revolve around either some of the troublesome realisations between two characters or around a background aspect of a character.

In the game it is the GM who sets the scenes and controls the pacing. he should regularly throw in a key scene to focus the game in the characters background and relations. The players will then explore the character interactions and the issues from their characters' background.

Well, this is probably not an exact match of the experience you are aiming for, but I hope you can see what I am trying to do. Instead of focusing on numbers and dice, I look more on rules for how to tell the story and how to role-play, because this is really what is important in a role-playing game. And as you self say in the example, you don't remember the dice rolls afterwards, what you you remember is the story and the role-playing.

I know this does not really help you with your core mechanic. But I hope it can get you some ideas of what you can add to the game to make it stronger.

 - Anders