Tales [Power 19]

[Vulpinoid]

Hi Everyone,

I now realize that a game simply stuck on a page without any real comment on it isn't very appealing as a topic for discussion. Since reading through this forum a bit, I've discovered the concept of the Power 19.

http://www.angelfire.com/psy/vulpinoid/TCRP_wPictures_.pdf

So here's the Power 19 for "Tales"...

1.) What is your game about?

This is a game about the stories that shape our culture and our world. It is a framework to re-tell the historical events of our world as they might have been if different things had been involved. What if world-war two ended with the supernatural beings of the world saying "enough is enough" and waged a new war on humanity to reclaim the planet? What if the aliens at Roswell really are being covered up by the US government? This game is about exploring the potential of what lies behind the scenes. There will be a wide range of modular add-ons which enable different types of tales to be told in many different eras and with many different types of protagonist.


2.) What do the characters do?

In the wider rules, the characters are beings known as outsiders. Existing in both the physical plane and the spirit realms they are forced to walk a balance between the two worlds. They may do as they wish, within the confines of the world that the GM/Raconteur has set up for them. The characters will find that if they become involved in the world that has been woven around them, their place in that world will become more significant. Otherwise they can simply react to events, or just do their own thing (of course in these latter two cases they will never really make an impact on the world and probably never be remembered as heroes by future generations). Some characters may instead choose to follow the spiritual path becoming less like mortal heroes and more like demigods and deities. All have their own paths to walk, but all have been drawn into the events at hand for a reason. If they deny their destiny, they will be forgotten and left behind.

3.) What do the players (including the GM if there is one) do?

In this game the GM is referred to as the Raconteur, and this helps define their primary role. The Raconteur weaves a story in which the main characters are played by the other members of the group. It is their job to devise a setting and events which push the narrative forward. The Raconteur can define the world they are describing in crystal clarity, defining every location and NPC in the finest detail, or they can describe only that most significant locations and the sweeping events that will be remembered by future generations (leaving the minutiae to be defined by the players through the course of play).

The most important job of the Raconteur is to keep the narrative moving and keep the game from stagnating. It is also the job of the Raconteur to keep a level of continuity in the game by stopping events from getting too far out of hand, or at least ensuring that there are appropriate ramifications for players who do push the envelope.

The most important job of the players is to bring their characters to life in the context of the world. This could be done competitively or co-operatively in response to the stories being told.

4.) How does your setting (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?

The overall rules are designed to function independent of a specific setting. But there will be modular attachments to the game that will allow its sweeping generalities to focus on specific times and places. These settings could range from furthest primeval eras in the distant past, through to the most high-tech settings of the far future. They can include details of magical systems, super powers and exotic races. The idea is to generate a system capable of telling virtually any story.

In any setting, the characters must choose how much they bring their powers to bear in the situation, and how much impact they choose to have on the world around them.

5.) How does the Character Creation of your game reinforce what your game is about?

One of the key concepts in the game is that if you simply choose to follow the rest of the world, it will be easy for you to survive, but you won't make very much impact on history. If you choose to do your own thing, life gets harder, but there is far more chance that you will be remembered for your successes and your failures.

Characters may choose their level of supernatural power, but as they choose higher levels of supernatural power, their influence in the mortal world gets weaker. One of the key aspects of supernatural character generation is that the more powers a character has, the harder it is for them to maintain their mortal allies, financial status and fame. Characters who become more supernatural start to fade from the mortal consciousness, they can either struggle to keep a low profile and maintain their ties to the mortal world, or they can risk instant fame, recognition, and possibly a few hunters by making dramatic impacts on the world through their powers.

Throughout the character generation system, there are templates that reflect pre-defined paths that a character can take (effectively following the masses), it is slightly more cost effective to take these templates, reflecting how it is easier for characters who simply follow the masses. Otherwise characters can pick and choose individual skills and benefits to gain a more specialized character concept that fits their needs more directly.

The core rules leave out the aspects of supernatural character generation, because they are just designed as a basic system to get new players used to the concepts involved in the game.

6.) What types of behaviors/styles of play does your game reward (and punish if necessary)?

The game rewards risk...

Think of it this way, you get a point for just attempting the feat. Then you either gain two points or lose two points depending on whether you succeed.

If you don't take a risk, you'll be safe and you'll never lose any points. If you take enough risks, you'll lose a few points but the law of averages says that you'll come out ahead in the long run. You'll be remembered for your failures and for your successes, not for sitting on the sidelines.

Rewards may come in the form of experience points, advantages for later scenes, or simply knowledge that helps the story progress in some way. Character's who don't take risks are punished by simply not getting access to the potential rewards on offer, and the fact that their stories will rarely be remembered.

7.) How are behaviors and styles of play rewarded or punished in your game?

Players who use their characters to push the envelope or who enhance the storyline will be given bonuses because they are accepting their place in the storyline around them. The characters are the dynamic forces of change at critical points in history.

For example, if the Raconteur is telling an alternate version of history, a player who studies the events of the setting and brings that history into the story may find mystic energies come to them more easily, because they are in tune with the events around them. Players should be actively bringing these events into being, if they sit on the sidelines and react then reality will start to ignore them and they may even start losing their powers as destiny moves its focus to more interesting individuals.

This also means that min-maxing is inherently punished in the game. A player who maximizes stats to perform killer combos effortlessly isn't taking much risk and therefore their rewards for pulling off these tasks will be tiny. An expert sniper who can perform an instant kill shot 90% of the time doesn't make for good storylines, unless the story is about the sniper dealing with their emotional detachment from the rest of society and how they are starting to attract the energies and spirits of death.

Players who are ready to take their characters in new directions at the hands of the Raconteur will be rewarded with enjoyable stories and character development. Players who bitch and whine, and only want to keep their character alive through min-maxing and meta-gaming will find that their character's stagnate while everyone around them becomes more well rounded and more important to the stories of the world.

8.) How are the responsibilities of narration and credibility divided in your game?

Narration is divided between the players and the Raconteur, with the Raconteur defining the settings and the events that will take place. The players define how their actions impact on the world and change the events that are occurring.

This is a process of communal storytelling, in which the Raconteur has the most influence over the story but everyone has their part. Some groups may chooe to have a rotating roster of raconteurs who each take turns weaving episodes of a series together for the group. Others may choose a single individual to be the main teller of their stories.

9.) What does your game do to command the players' attention, engagement, and participation? (i.e. What does the game do to make them care?)

The game is all about care and interaction with the world, indeed if they characters don't care they get left behind and end up faced with dramatic climaxes where they face overwhelming odds. At a player level, if the events of the game aren't addressed, higher stakes are faced at every turn. If the events are addressed, these stakes may still be faced, but now the characters have an appropriate arsenal of equipment, skills and knowledge at their disposal to face these challenges.

Players should have a vested interest in manipulating the events of the story so that their characters have the best chance of succeeding (or at least surviving) the events at hand. Of course there may be other players who want to tell the tales of a dramatic downfall, or a heroic sacrifice, and these stories are also within the scope of the game.

10.) What are the resolution mechanics of your game like?

There are three types of test in the game: Static, Dynamic and Opposed.

Static tests are the simplest level, they use d6 + modifier (based on skills, attributes and other effects) versus a flat difficulty. A roll meeting that difficulty is considered to succeed.

Dynamic tests are used when the player doesn't know all of the variables involved and the Raconteur doesn't have time (or inclination) to calculate them all out. These use d6 + modifier (based on skills, attributes and other effects) versus d6 + difficulty. Again, a roll meeting the difficulty succeeds.

Opposed tests have each opponent using d6 + Modifier (based on skills, attributes and other effects), the higher scoring result succeeds, with ties going to the aggressor. This helps push the dynamic narrative of the tales, by rewarding players who are active in the game.

There are a few complications to focus these mechanics to specific situation types. But everything reverts to these three test types in the end.

11.) How do the resolution mechanics reinforce what your game is about?

At the most basic level, the game is designed to be free flowing. If a player has a good chance of pulling something off, and the storyline isn't affected too much by either a success or failure, then the die rolling mechanics can easily be ignored. They only come into play when a character is really laying something down on the line; when they are taking a personal risk.

To reflect the heroic mentality underlying the game, anyone has a chance to pull off a task that would be beneficial to the story, even if the task is well beyond their capacity. If a task has no real impact on the story, or it's more important that the character's fail, then this can be pre-defined by the storyteller. In most cases though, characters have a pool of Essence points that reflect their willpower and mystic potential; as long as the player rolls a 6 on the die, and spends a point from this Essence pool they automatically succeed on a task. This gives all characters a chance to perform heroic feats, but they still have to be careful which heroic feats they attempt.

12.) Do characters in your game advance? If so, how?

Characters advance, but as they do so they have to choose if they want to follow the established paths of the world around them or if they want to forge new paths for others to follow.

Characters will pick up skills, advantages and disadvantages based on the events that have occurred through the course of play. If they want to learn a specific ability, they will need to find tutors who can develop their skill in such areas, or they will need to refine their skills through the course of play.

13.) How does the character advancement (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?

Development occurs through an experience point system, where characters gains points to improve skills when they use them successfully or otherwise. In fact a person learns more from their mistakes than their successes, so a character gains more benefit for failing at a task but for at least giving it a go.

The actual point expenditure involved in character advancement should be more a case of rounding out the character and cementing their place in the world around them (or specifying how the character is different to the rest of the world). The more the character develops, the more personal they become.

14.) What sort of product or effect do you want your game to produce in or for the players?

I want the game to tell the kinds of stories that you talk about in anecdotes for years to come. It should produce the kinds of memories that roleplaying is all about. Not the boring "then I rolled a 6 and got a critical hit, and when I rolled on the critical hit table I got to roll an extra die and got another 6 and that made the demon die without even getting a hit in...".

I want the sort of game where the memories remind you of reading a good novel, but one where you helped define the outcome and climax.

15.) What areas of your game receive extra attention and color? Why?

Attention and colour are what this game is all about. Players who want to tell a Martial Arts story should be able to use the core rules with the modular "Martial Arts" expansion. Those who want to tell a story in the age of high-piracy should be able to draw on the expansion sets that cover this type of story...

...and those who want Asian Pirates should be able to combine both of these expansions with no real problems.

I'll be the first to admit that the general rules are pretty generic and flavourless, but this has only been done to keep them as relevant as possible to a wide variety of genres that will be detailed through the various expansions.

16.) Which part of your game are you most excited about or interested in? Why?

Given that I've created a virtual blank slate framework for telling virtually any type of story, I'd love to see the different directions where people would be interested in taking the rules. I imagine the game to be like a new incarnation of GURPS from Steve Jackson, except that it focuses a lot less on game mechanics and far more on telling a good yarn.

17.) Where does your game take the players that other games can't, don't, or won't?

With the collaboration of others through some sort of open licence, I'd love to be able to produce a wide range of interconnected products for this game, that allow tailoring to any genre, anywhere, any time...and then to develop ideas of cross-genre concepts that haven't been addressed. The game should be open enough for anyone to get into with a minimum of fuss, but should be able to address anything that might arise through the telling of any type of story.

18.) What are your publishing goals for your game?

Grand Goals: To revolutionize the industry with my new story based game system, a cascade of associated products, spin-off computer games, series of novels and a television show. (Oh, that's not me...that was White Wolf 15 years ago).

Realistic Goals: A good core books and a few supplemental books, with a range of other developers helping to progress the system through their own settings under an open licence. This could take a few more years to achieve though.

19.) Who is your target audience?

My target audience is those roleplayers who've grown sick of trying to min-max their systems and are looking for something a bit more mature to play. Also new players who have never played a roleplaying game before but have been turned off by the overwhelming mechanics and numbers.


Mostly, I've posted a link to the core game here as a means to get people to look through it and tell me if they think the core concepts are workable.

I know that there is still plenty more work to go on it, and heated discussions with my current development group over the game have caused its current development to stagnate. Hence opening it to a wider community for discussion.

V

[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:

want the game to tell the kinds of stories that you talk about in anecdotes for years to come. It should produce the kinds of memories that roleplaying is all about. Not the boring "then I rolled a 6 and got a critical hit, and when I rolled on the critical hit table I got to roll an extra die and got another 6 and that made the demon die without even getting a hit in...".

I want the sort of game where the memories remind you of reading a good novel, but one where you helped define the outcome and climax.

You give an example of what you do not want, but I am interested in seeing examples of what you want to have. So can you give an example of a story or type of situation which will give this effect?

- Anders

[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