An educative rpg idea.

[Alex Abate Biral]

First, I would like to say I am sorry for not being a very consistent poster here. I would like to post around here a lot more than I do, but I am having problems juggling everything in my life right now. Still, I like to read this forum a lot and in the last month I have been trying to understand better the theory as explained here and in various other blogs I have managed to find.

I am posting today because I just had an idea for and educative rpg and I wanted to know if anyone here had any experience with a similar rpg, so I can shamelessly steal ideas draw inspiration from other sources. If anyone here ever tried to create an educative rpg before, any post about the actual experience of how you went through it, how you playtested and worked with educators will also be very welcome.

First, we have all the PCs being apprentice wizards. These wizards work a magic not completely unlike that seem in A Wizard of Earthsea. The idea here is that the PCs have the ability to weave and change spells using language, but this is done using the grammatical rules. Each grammar subject to be studied would be associated with some kind of magical action. This is mirrored to the players who, once they have announced their intent, uses some particular procedure to change some "phrase" in the game (or creates a new one). There is then some process (I still need to think about this) to use the input the player just provided to determine execution and effect. I think that there should be always some effect, though I still need to think how to deal with badly formed phrases.

A simple example: suppose we associate the use of synonyms with transforming magic. A wizard could change a phrase (either an existing spell or a phrase that describes something in the scene) by changing any noun on it to a synonym. Also, he could change the meaning of the changed word by citing the old and the new meaning (these would be two separated procedures). In action, the phrase "the green table is here." could be changed to "The green bar is here". Then changing the meaning of bar to that of pub, we have the final effect of changing a table into a tavern. Changing and creating phrases through magic would be the main currency of the game, what drives it forward. Since this is so important, it probably would be worth to have, at any time, a list of accepted phrases for the game (not unlike Universalis).

I think it is worth noting that this is a very important part of the system. Putting grammatical exercises as a requirement to cast spells is exactly what I don't want to do. The grammar used should feel like the magic the characters are using, that it is part of the experience and fun, instead of a lousy grammar test tackled to the game. The system should be so that the fictional understanding of grammar as a magic path and the real understanding of grammar as a thought and expression tool mirror each other and the transition feels natural (sorry if I am blabbing here, but I am trying to say how important it is that the grammatic add to the game, that the people playing it would rather play with the tests than remove them). Maybe my example is a little too heavy handed for this yet, but I think this is doable by creating a magical system that manages to feel consistent.

Well, that is more or less what I have for now, half of a conflict system. I still need something to make it so that it isn't possible to resolve any conflict with a single change. Something to make it so that the more important the change, the costlier/harder it is.However, I am more concerned with what macro-structure would best suit this game. Here is what I am thinking:

I thought about a simulationist game. The point of play of the game would be to explore magic itself, possibly added of a dark or crazy side (equivalent to malformed phrases?) to drive the story forward by creating situations to explore. Since this is the whole point of playing, I believe this would help to make it easier to focus on whatever rules a teacher might be interested at the time. This approach seems even straightforward, but I fear that it is not the best. First, I think it might drive away possible students/players simply because it is simulationist (which I think has a somewhat limited appeal, even if I happen to like it). Second, since the magic/grammar is a major part of the point of play, since it is a goal by itself, I think that the game will end up appealing only to people who like grammar (even if they don't know it yet). I think that we might lose some people who are simply never going to appreciate grammar, but who would actually like to play with it given the right context.

I briefly thought about a narrativist game, but I don't think this is the best way to follow with this rpg. My main reason for thinking so is that all narrativist are a little risky. The information that is discussed on the table is very personal, and the people who would play this rpg could be far from being mentally mature (and even mature people may have trouble with these things sometimes).

Finally, we have a gamist rpg, which I am favoring at this time. I am thinking something along these lines: all the PCs are apprentice wizards who have come to an island to be taught how to channel their powers. The players would describe for their characters a list of resources, friends, places, and anything else that is important for their characters. These would be important because they both provide phrases that the player could change to create effects and because the act of effecting these changes itself would require some kind of resources (like a wand or ingredients for a potion). Other characters in the island would be described more or less equally, and what does or does not constitute a character is a little variable (a forest might be a character, for example). In each game session, the players are attacked by a "corrupt". A corrupt is a magical phrase that somehow got a life of its own. It begins to change the phrases present in the gameworld (including the ones the players created), adding grammatical mistakes to them, making the world a hostile, weird place.

The point of the game would be to brave the corrupted things in the world and try to set them back in the way they were. In order to do so, they would need not only to see the wrong phrases, but also understand the pattern inside their corruption that changed the meaning they once had to the new one. Eventually, the game would arrive in a nightmare phase, in this phase, the corrupt reveals itself. The PCs would have the things they managed to uncorrupt as resources then, while the corrupt would have what was still corrupt. If the players win, the corrupt would be (somehow) turned into a phrase for the PCs to use as resource. Otherwise, the corrupt takes everything (every character) he corrupted away, taking pieces and attributes away from the island. The campaign would end when the players managed to use uncorrupted phrases to journey to the otherworld, where the source of all corruption would lie (or when the PC's island was so devoid of resources it turned into a gray, lifeless place).

I still have a lot to determine about this game, but I guess that by posting here you people can help me not make stupid, obvious mistakes. So, thank you for reading this, and any feedback will be appreciated.

[Jonathan Walton]

First off, you don't need to stress yourself out trying to make a game that fits a particular Creative Agenda. Just make your game and worry about CA later. In practice, CAs are determined by the group playing the game, over a long period of time, with some games even supporting multiple CAs based on how various groups approach a game.  So, yeah, leave GNS out of it at the initial design stage.  It's too early to get into that.

You might want to check out, if you haven't already, an indie game called Code of Unaris which has word-based magic and "hacking" of language that's already appeared in the game.  It's probably substantially different from what you want to do, but worth looking at just to see a different implementation of this kind of thing.

Also, one of the things that stands out for me, in this concept, is how the GM (or whoever, in a GMless game) generates the corruption that the players are unraveling and trying to fix.  If you can figure that out, seems like the rest of the game could flow from it.  For example, Dogs in the Vineyard has this progression that GMs go through when planning towns, and I can imagine something similar working in this game.  Like....

"The corrupt phrase used to be XYZ."
"Then N event happened, turning the phrase into XNZ."
"Then another event happened, reordering the phrase into NXZ."

You see what I'm getting at?  And once you have the corrupt phrases, then you can figure out what the characters need to do in order to fix them.

[Alex Abate Biral]

First off, you don't need to stress yourself out trying to make a game that fits a particular Creative Agenda. Just make your game and worry about CA later. In practice, CAs are determined by the group playing the game, over a long period of time, with some games even supporting multiple CAs based on how various groups approach a game.  So, yeah, leave GNS out of it at the initial design stage.  It's too early to get into that.

The way I see it, defining the CA pretty much means how people around the table will communicate. My thought was that, since this is an educative rpg, I should choose its CA (and consequently, its premise) to best allow the people playing the game to learn grammar. However, I think I know what you mean. I should let the game tell me what it is about, instead of forcing it to conform to some kind of mold, right? I realize this is a good advice. I thought that since this idea has an educative purpose, I should go the other way around, but I think I was wrong...

You might want to check out, if you haven't already, an indie game called Code of Unaris which has word-based magic and "hacking" of language that's already appeared in the game.  It's probably substantially different from what you want to do, but worth looking at just to see a different implementation of this kind of thing.

Thank you, really! A friend also said that Nobilis might give me some ideas. Any other reference (no matter how tangential) that might help me is very welcome!

Also, one of the things that stands out for me, in this concept, is how the GM (or whoever, in a GMless game) generates the corruption that the players are unraveling and trying to fix.  If you can figure that out, seems like the rest of the game could flow from it.  For example, Dogs in the Vineyard has this progression that GMs go through when planning towns, and I can imagine something similar working in this game.  Like....

"The corrupt phrase used to be XYZ."
"Then N event happened, turning the phrase into XNZ."
"Then another event happened, reordering the phrase into NXZ."

You see what I'm getting at?  And once you have the corrupt phrases, then you can figure out what the characters need to do in order to fix them.

I was going to reply that I thought that the problem of deciding how to make the transition between the imaginary space and the real space, but I realized that this and your concern are so tied that figuring one out means figuring 50% of the other too. I will see if I can make a mock up version of the game so there is more to discuss about. Thank you for replying, by the way.

[Thor Olavsrud]

Jon's right. The players will bring their own CAs to the table. You shouldn't worry about it too much at this stage.

Instead, you've got your premise. If you focus on making sure that everything you write for the game links back to and supports that premise, you'll do fine.

As far as the magic goes, the keys to magic in Earthsea (and just about all magic that's actually interesting) are limits and price. What are the limits of magic? What can't it do? What are its laws? And what is the price of magic? What does magic cost you? What must you sacrifice?

Ged, listen to me now. Have you never thought how danger must surround power as shadow does light? This sorcery is not a game we play for pleasure or praise. Think of this: that every word, every act of our Art is said and is done either for good or for evil. Before you speak or do you must know the price that is to pay!

[Alex Abate Biral]

[Jonathan Walton]

You mention Ralph and Mike, which means I assume you're drawing inspiration from Universalis.  The thing about Uni is, the traits that are assigned to fictional entities (characters, rocks, etc.) are limited by the degree to which players are willing to invest resources in them.  It doesn't sound like your game will work that way, so you probably want to consider how players determine how many traits something has and, if an object potentially has a large number of traits, which ones are relevant in any given conflict.

For example, I can imagine a system by which things are assigned traits in a relatively freeform manner.  Maybe simple natural objects (a rock) tend to have a single trait (a rock is HARD, doing more damage if you throw it at someone, being tougher to break, etc.).  If they are worked by human hands, they can gain an addition trait (a stone dagger is both HARD and SHARP, for example).  And animals and humans and other more complex creations have multiple traits.

Are you imagining something along those lines, or something different?