[Friendless] Does this make sense?

[Jake Richmond]

Hi. I've been trying to come up with a simple GMless game system. Something I could use for "plug-in-the-setting" one off games. Something that would allow a group to choose a series of challenges and then work through them. Not so much a role playing game as as a challenge based storytelling game. Players create a story around 5 challenges they face. Completing all 5 challenges wins them the game.

The system I came up with is below. It's 2 pages, plus a 2 page example. That's still a bit to read, I know. But I would appreciate your feedback. I have some specific questions I'd like to ask

1. My major concern is whether something like this is playable.  The basic idea is that players take turns describing what happens, then roll a die to see if the scene escalates. After escallating a set number of time the challenge is over come and the scene ends. Doe sthis make sense and is it playable?

2. Does the Target have a large enough role?

3. Are three failures appropriate for mission failure? Should it be less or more, or some kind of sliding scale?

Any feedback or comments would be welcome.

Thank you very much.

Jake

What it's all about

Characters: One player will take the role of the Target, all other players will take the role of Operatives. Players can switch roles between missions. All characters are provided as pre-generated profiles.

Missions: The Operatives must complete a specific task listed in the Targets profile. Once the Target becomes aware of the Operatives she will work against them.

Goal: If the Operatives complete 5 missions (represented by the 5 Targets) they win the game!

Dice: This game uses a single 8-sided die. If asked to roll 2 dice at the same time, simply roll the same die twice. Easy!

Characters

Operative Profiles: There are 4 Operative profiles. Each Operative has 4 Traits, rated 1-7. Each Operative has a Weakness and a Gambit.

Target Profiles: There are 5 Target profiles. Each Target has 4 Traits, rated 1-7. Each Target has 3-5 Challenge Numbers, a Weakness, 2 Encounter Locations and a Description.

Profile Key

Traits: Operatives and Targets have the same 4 Traits: Surprise, Stabbing, Romance and Strength. Each of these Traits is rated between 1-7.

Weakness: Each Operative and Target has a Weakness. If an Operative is able to narrate a Targets Weakness into his Turn Description, he can add +1 to his Challenge Roll that Turn.

If a Target is able to narrate an Operatives Weakness into her Turn Description, the next Operative to make a Challenge Roll will suffer a –1 penalty.

Gambit: Each Operator has a unique Gambit that they can attempt. Attempting a Gambit raises the Challenge Number for that turn by 1. Successful Gambits unlock bonus dice that Operatives can use in future turns or missions.

Challenge Numbers: Each Target has 3-5 Challenge numbers. To defeat this Target, Operatives will have to make Challenge Rolls that meet or beat these numbers. Operatives always roll against the lowest number first, and once a number has been beat, the Target crosses it off her profile..

Encounter Locations: Each Target has 2 locations where they might be encountered.

Description: The Targets Profile includes a description of the Target.

Missions

Each Mission starts with the Target choosing the Encounter Location, and proceeds as a series of Turns. You'll need to decide in which order the Operatives take their turns. Each Turn an Operatives will make a Challenge Roll, trying to meet or beat the lowest of the Targets Challenge Numbers. The result of the roll is narrated and a new Turn begins. Operatives continue to take turns until the Mission is complete or ends in failure.

Mission Turn Sequence: Follow these steps to proceed through a turn.

1.   Roll the Trait die
2.   Narrate your action
3.   Make a Challenge Roll
4.   Narrate Success or Failure

Decide which Operative Goes first:

Roll the Trait die: Roll a die and refer to the Trait Chart. This will determine the Active Trait for this turn.

If the Operatives score in the Active Trait is higher then the Targets score, the Operative can roll 2 dice when he makes his Challenge roll.

Trait Chart
1-2: Surprise
3-4: Stabbing
5-6: Romance
7-8: Strength

Narrate your Action: The Operative narrates the action he wants to take, basing his action on the turns Active Trait. For example, if the Strength Trait were selected, the Operative would narrate an action involving Strength in some way.

An Operatives narration can be as long and elaborate as he wants. Operatives should use narration to tell their part of the missions' story. Think of this part of the turn as a cool action sequence that you have complete control over.

Make sure your narration ends with a clear challenge that you can either succeed or fail at.

Make a Challenge roll: Roll a die to meet or beat the Targets lowest Challenge Number. Make sure to roll bonus dice or apply Weaknesses.

Narrate Success or Failure: If the Operative meets or beats the Targets Challenge Number, his action succeeds! The Operative gets to describe the nature of the success! Anything goes! If this was the Targets last Challenge Number, then the Operative gets to describe the missions success!

If the Operative fails to meet or beat the Targets Challenge Number, his action fails! The Target gets to describe the nature of the success! Anything goes! If this is the 3rd time the Operatives failed, the Target gets to describe the missions' failure!



Mission Example:

Operatives: Mike, Dan and Jill are kids.

Target: Candy Store, Challenge Numbers 3, 5, 6

Mission: Steal Candy!

Encounter Location (Target describes): Downtown! This fancy candy store carries treats imported from all corners of the world! It's glass display cases and stuffed racks are famous all throughout the neighborhood!

Turn 1 (Active Trait: Surprise)

Dan narrates: I want that candy sooooo bad! I have a plan, so listen up! I sneak through the door while the clerk is busy with a customer. So far so good. I'm not going to be able to get my hands on the candy right away, but I can provide a distraction. I'll sneak right up behind the clerk, and once the customer is gone, I'll scream out as loud as I can and start crying! That will throw him off!

Challenge roll: Dan needs to meet or Beat the lowest Challenge Number, 3. Dan rolls a  4, a success!

Success (Dan narrates): I let out a scream, and the clerk jumps like 3 feet in the air! At first he's scared, then he's just confused. He's paying attention to me now, and not looking at anything else!

Turn 2 (Active Trait: Strength)

Mike narrates: Dan did a good job distracting that clerk. Now it's my turn! I walk right in and start stuffing my pack full of candy! I start with the big chocolate bars, then move onto the sweet and sour stuff that Jill likes. After just a minute my bag is full!

Gambit: Mike the "Greed" Gambit. He decides to use it to increase the difficulty of the Challenge Roll. If he succeeds, he'll gain a bonus die to use at a later time. Miketinues his narration to reflect the use of the Gambit:

As I turn to leave I see a big box of gumi bears, waiting to be unpacked and put on the shelf. It's heavy, but I think I can carry it out of the store before the clerk turns around!

Challenge roll: Normally Mike would just have to meet or Beat the lowest Challenge Number, 5. But Mike used a Gambit, so he'll have to roll 6 or better! Mike rolls a 2, a failure.

Failure (Target narrates): Just as Mike is about to escape, the bottom of the giant box bursts, and gumi bears spill all over the floor! As Mike scrambles to gather his loot, the clerk vaults over the counter and grabs him by the arm. In his free hand the clerk holds the store phone. He's already dialing the cops!

Turn 3 (Active Trait: Stabbing)

Jill narrates: Crap! Things have gone bad fast! But if I act fast, we can still get out of here with the candy before the cops show up! I abandon my lookout position and into the store, jumping onto the clerks back! He struggles and tries to throw me off, but he can't deal with me and hold onto Mike at the same time! I hang on with one hand, and use my other hand to pull my knife out of my coat pocket.  I stab at the clerks hand, forcing him to drop the knife and let Mike go!

Challenge roll: Jill needs to meet or Beat the lowest Challenge Number, 5. Since Jills score in Stabbing (this turns Active Trait) is higher then the Targets, she'll roll 2 dice. Jill rolls a  1 and a 7, a success!

Success (Jill narrates): The clerk screams like a little girl and drops the phone! He's actually bleeding! I can't believe it! I grab mike and we run out of the store! If we're fast we can make it to the park before the cops show up!

Turn 4 (Active Trait: Romance)

Dan narrates: Jill and Mike got away, but they forgot the bag of candy! Worse, I'm trapped in the store, with the clerk between me and the door! His hand is all bloody! Boy does he look pissed! He grabs me by the shoulders and starts yelling in my face. I don't know what to do!

Weakness: The Targets Weakness is "easily confused employees". Dan decides to use this to his advantage.

The clerk is freaking out, and I can hear the police sirens getting closer! All of the sudden a brilliant plan forms in my mind! I lean forward and give the clerk a big sloppy kiss! He's so startled, that I can push right past him and out the door!

Challenge roll: Dan needs to meet or Beat the lowest Challenge Number, 6. because he used the Targets weakness, he'll add +1 to his roll. Dan rolls a  5 (which after adding _1, becomes a 6), a success!

Success (Dan narrates): The look in the clerks' eyes as I planted that kiss on him was priceless! He jumped back so fast; you'd have thought I kicked him in the nuts. I make a dash for the door, grabbing the bag of candy on the way. I can see Jill and Mike waiting for me across the street in the park. I'm home free. Mission accomplished!

[danielsan]

Hi there. Are you calling your game Friendless? How lonely.

Is it playable? Well, technically. Anything can be playable to some extent. I like some of your ideas, like the escalating target number so show that the scene's tension is ratcheting up. I think that this would work for your group and for the stories you envision playing with them, but I'm not sure it would be universal in the way you would like it to be or for others to play it. Already you are skewing the game to a certain genre with terms like Operatives and Missions. (Or maybe I'm more keenly aware of that since I'm creating a spy-ish game myself.) So, can your universal system run romance? horror? comedy? sports drama? Do you want it to? Why use d8 when the wider audience probably doesn't have that? Heck, I'm new here, too, but it's helpful to try to answer the Big 3 and then the Power 19. (See the "Rules" thread sticky at the top of the main page for links.)  You'll be surprised how some big-picture questions about players and themes will affect your system and rules.

[Jake Richmond]

Thanks for the feedback. I actually already ran the idea through the Big 3 and Power 19, but thats still good advice. Thanks. "Friendless" is just what I'm calling the game at the moment. When I post a design very often people spend more time commenting on the name then the design, so I wanted to avoid that here.

I guess I should have pointed out that I used terms like "Operative" and "Mission" as generic place holders. these could (and should) be replaced by game specific terms like "Girlfriend" and "Date" or "Quarterback" and "Playoff Game", depending on the type of game being played. So my intention is that, with the proper modification, the game can handle any genre that allows for action to be played out as a series of objective based scenarios. The modifications you would make would of course be the names and nature of the Operatives, Targets and Missions, as well as the Gambits and Weaknesses.

I decided to use an 8 sided die because I didn't feel like a 6 sided die gave me the kind of range I wanted. I'm not overly concerned about the availability of 8 sided dice.

So what do you think it would take for this to be workable for other people? Would plugging in a setting help provide context?

[pells]

Hi Jake !!!

Answers to your questions, and some comments (I do find some elements kind of strange) :

1. My major concern is whether something like this is playable.  The basic idea is that players take turns describing what happens, then roll a die to see if the scene escalates. After escallating a set number of time the challenge is over come and the scene ends. Doe sthis make sense and is it playable?

Well, I guess so. But a question : I would tend to believe that this would generate very fast games. Am I right ? Is that your goal ?

2. Does the Target have a large enough role?

In my opinion, no. If everything goes well (ie the operatives always succeed), then the target would do nothing.

3. Are three failures appropriate for mission failure? Should it be less or more, or some kind of sliding scale?

I would prefer some kind of sliding scale. Maybe a failure on one of the first "low priority" objective might not generate a failure and thus need more than one failure. But, maybe a failure on the last objective might means mission failure ? I don't know, but this sounds intuitive to me.

Okay, now my comments (if you prefer, questions), but first, an overview.
The idea seems to me like very nice !!! And your game example is very good (I couldn't help but smile while reading it). I guess a lot of game play are objective based and a lot of examples (with different settings) come to my mind. That said, here's the comments :

Why rolling for the trait dice ? This seems strange to me. Let's suppose operatives are spies on an undercovered mission. Why not let them choose how they start their mission ? And on failure, why not let the target choose the next the trait (you've failed ... now, come into my playground) ? I think it would give a more active role to the target and enhance the results of a failure.

About weakness : how is it defined ? Are they known to the operatives ? As I understand it, weakness could be used on any trait. Is that so ? So, is weakness just color ? Same thing about gambit : could they be used on any traits ?

Challenge numbers : must they be from the lowest to the highest ? From my point of view, the biggest challenge might be the first (one example could be sport games, where you meet the strongest opponent in "quarter finally") ? It might also be fun to put a mechanic that could allow the target to change the order of the challenge, maybe following a failure.
Also, be careful about this phrasing : "Beat the lowest Challenge Number" which should be "Beat the lowest undefeated Challenge Number".

My guess is that you want to keep this game very simple, no ? I'm not sure my suggestions would tend to simplify things ...

[Jake Richmond]

Hi Sebastien! Thanks for the feedback. Very helpful. Let me address some of your questions and comments, and ask a few more questions of my own.

But a question : I would tend to believe that this would generate very fast games. Am I right ? Is that your goal ?

Yes. I'm seeing each mission as something that can be played out in just a few minutes. Like a combat in D&D. So a game of 5 missions might last 30 minutes to an hour. Something that you can play in a restaurant, or while waiting for a movie to start.

In my opinion, no. If everything goes well (ie the operatives always succeed), then the target would do nothing.

You are right. I think the target needs to be able to take a descriptive action at the end of the turn, so that during the next turn, the situation has changed. So the target could say something like " I jump into this car" or " I pull out my gun". Now the next Operative has new information she has to deal with.

I would prefer some kind of sliding scale. Maybe a failure on one of the first "low priority" objective might not generate a failure and thus need more than one failure. But, maybe a failure on the last objective might means mission failure ? I don't know, but this sounds intuitive to me.

I could see something like that. I'll think about that.

Why rolling for the trait dice ? This seems strange to me. Let's suppose operatives are spies on an undercovered mission. Why not let them choose how they start their mission ? And on failure, why not let the target choose the next the trait (you've failed ... now, come into my playground) ? I think it would give a more active role to the target and enhance the results of a failure.

My idea was that the Trait for each turn acted as a randomizer. But i like what you are proposing here. Thats much more interesting.

About weakness : how is it defined ? Are they known to the operatives ? As I understand it, weakness could be used on any trait. Is that so ? So, is weakness just color ? Same thing about gambit : could they be used on any traits ?

Weaknesses are know facts, and would be defined with statements like "doesn't wear a helmet", no alarm system" or "one beer will get her drunk". Weaknesses and Gambits are just color. Using them creatively lets you get a mechanical advantage. What I forgot to add was that operatives can only use a Weakness once per mission.

Challenge numbers : must they be from the lowest to the highest ? From my point of view, the biggest challenge might be the first (one example could be sport games, where you meet the strongest opponent in "quarter finally") ? .

Challenge numbers could be presented in any order. I hadn't considered that before, but there is no reason that wouldn't work.

Also, be careful about this phrasing : "Beat the lowest Challenge Number" which should be "Beat the lowest undefeated Challenge Number".

Thanks! That's the phrase I was looking for.

My guess is that you want to keep this game very simple, no ?

My goal is for a super simple system, but I think the suggestions you've made will allow it too be more interesting without becoming more complicated. Thanks!

[Filip Luszczyk]

This looks kind of playable, but I don't really like the lack of choice in the game. You roll the dice, then you narrate. Then, you roll the dice again, and narrate some more. Feels somewhat bland.

Also, the modifiers don't seem like they would make a whole lot of difference.

One thing that occurred to me is that the game could use cards instead of dice. Say, each suit corresponds to a particular Trait. At the beginning of the mission, you draw a number of cards (possibly, depending on your profile). These give you a choice of traits. Then, instead of rolling the die, you play one of these cards and add the Trait to the value. Possibly, you can play more than one card of the same suit. Possibly, face cards give you some special effects - e.g. they can be played to trigger some special story stuff listed in the profile. After each turn, you draw additional card. Gambits give you more dice.

Now, the Target, instead of having fixed Challenge Numbers in fixed order could also have a hand, and play his or her cards to generate Challenge Numbers. Operative's weakness could actually be used the same way as Gambit.

This would add more choice to the game, and the players would be involved in some planning ("Do I want to go for Romance now, or should I leave this for a later turn?"). However, something like this could actually add a stronger competitive level to the game, and I'm not sure if that's what you'd want. If narrative value of each choice was enough to counterbalance their tactical values, it could work well enough.

How important the possibility of failure actually is? Removing it could actually create conditions that would remove the tactical importance of choices, leaving only narrative importance of choice and allowing only for purely narrative planning ("Do I really want to win THIS turn with my high Romance card, knowing that the Target will use his high Romance card to create a romantic setback later, and I might be left only with brutal Strength solutions?"). Possibly, you could create conditions in which failure of the mission is still possible due to player's choice, but disaffected by player's tactics.

[Jake Richmond]

This looks kind of playable, but I don't really like the lack of choice in the game. You roll the dice, then you narrate. Then, you roll the dice again, and narrate some more. Feels somewhat bland.

Is this really a lack of choice? It seems to me like pretty much every game comes down to this. How I envision this being used is that the players decide on the kind of game they want (a Metal Gear Solid action/espionage adventure, or a shoujo beat style romantic comedy). Then one of the players, the target I guess), comes up with a challenge they'll face. How that challenge is overcome is decided by playing through the system. Dice rolls determine success or failure, but narration puts everything in context and drives the story forward. That's how I'd use the system, and thats what I want it to be.

But is that what it does? And is that enough? I'm not seeing it as a lack of choice, but maybe thats because I already accept that it's going to be a game about X, where X is going to happen. Or maybe I'm missing something here? 

Or am I totally missing what you are saying here?

Also, the modifiers don't seem like they would make a whole lot of difference.

You may be right. I want to actually play this before I commit to the modifiers in one way or another.

One thing that occurred to me is that the game could use cards instead of dice. Say, each suit corresponds to a particular Trait. At the beginning of the mission, you draw a number of cards (possibly, depending on your profile). These give you a choice of traits. Then, instead of rolling the die, you play one of these cards and add the Trait to the value. Possibly, you can play more than one card of the same suit. Possibly, face cards give you some special effects - e.g. they can be played to trigger some special story stuff listed in the profile. After each turn, you draw additional card. Gambits give you more dice.

Sure, that could work. One of my original goals with the game was to make something that could run off a single die. A single deck of cards isn't that different though.

On the other hand... while I like what you are suggesting, It may (maybe) complicate the game more then I want it to. Or maybe not. I'll have to think about it (I promise I will. I'll respond more after the weekend). I was actually trying to think of ways to make the system a little simpler.

How important the possibility of failure actually is? Removing it could actually create conditions that would remove the tactical importance of choices, leaving only narrative importance of choice and allowing only for purely narrative planning ("Do I really want to win THIS turn with my high Romance card, knowing that the Target will use his high Romance card to create a romantic setback later, and I might be left only with brutal Strength solutions?"). Possibly, you could create conditions in which failure of the mission is still possible due to player's choice, but disaffected by player's tactics.

Good point. Failure is built in as a kind of a kill switch at the moment. Fail three times, and the whole thing shuts down. In hindsight, that doesn't really work for me. I think I'd rather see.... hmm... I'm having an idea. I'll get back to you.

Jake

[Filip Luszczyk]

But is that what it does? And is that enough? I'm not seeing it as a lack of choice, but maybe thats because I already accept that it's going to be a game about X, where X is going to happen. Or maybe I'm missing something here? 

Or am I totally missing what you are saying here?

I have a trouble relating to this. The thing is, what you write sounds like everything important is decided with a single initial choice and the rest is only filling in the details. Unless, it's the details that are important. If so, my guess is that such a game would benefit from mechanics that would help the players in coming up with the details and maintaining their aesthetic consistency.

Now, looking from this perspective I don't think the rules you presented are the optimal solution. Notice that the game provides the players with very, very limited tactical choice (but the game isn't about tactics, so they're largely meaningless) and suggests the rythm of the story in very broad strokes (basically, the dice let you know the very general method you use to approach the challenge and whether you succeed or not). I don't think this would be very inspiring in coming up with fun details. It leaves the players with some extremly broad narration guidelines, and that's hardly enough to really fuel my creativity.

However, consider a game geared towards creating the creative spark. Say, some oracular system that would feed the player's imagination with more concrete ingredients, but at the same time without suggesting specific creative results.

Hmm, think about design contests - it should be a good parallel, I'd say (maybe because this prallel actually helped me work out a key mechanic for my own game, heh). The rules you currently have are an equivalent of "write a fantasy game". What I suggest is rather "write a game around any three of the following four words: RED, ICE, ISLAND and BIRD". The first is likely to leave you with a blank page in mind and produce a creative block. The second - you probably already have some concept in mind?