Dramatic Redemption

[Jay Hatcher]

Hi all,

I've been struggling with how to represent redemption in a game I'm working on.

Characters in this game each have a Dread.  This is not simply fear (a man with a knife is chasing me so I run away) or a phobia (I'm terrified of spiders) but rather a deep dark horror that the character will try to avoid at all costs.  Dread is always relational in some sense.  It affects how the character interacts with others.  It is usually pretty broad, such as:
Isolation
Rejection
Powerlessness
Vulnerability
Failure
etc...

Someone with a Dread of Rejection might try to always be popular and well liked by the crowd they are a part of.  Their dread might turn this into an obsession so that anyone they perceive as threatening their acceptance by others will be a target to be dealt with in some way.

Someone with a Dread of Vulnerability would do everything they could to feel safe and protected.  Their Dread might drive them to push people away to avoid being hurt and they might have great difficulty trusting anyone.

How a Dread is expressed will vary from character to character, but the main result will always be that Dread results in broken and damaged relationships.  Often what a character does to avoid her Dread will result in her manipulating others with their own Dread, and vice-versa.

Most characters are unaware of their Dread.  It is subconscious even though it influences everything they do.  Players can play more than one type of character or designate someone to play most of the non-protagonists.  Protagonists are either aware of their Dread but not sure what to do about it, or they have sought help and overcome it, and now are trying to help others.  Dread is so all-consuming that a character cannot beat it alone, save for perhaps brief moments of willpower, but in such cases it always returns to dominate a character's behavior.  The only escape from falling further and further under the influence of Dread and destroying all their relationships is to seek help from others, rather like beating an addiction.  This opens the character to risk, as people can use their Dread against them to manipulate them, but if honest help is found (usually in the form of some or all of the Protagonists) then a character can find redemption from their Dread and try to atone for the terrible things it convinced them to do to others.

I'm looking for something along the lines of Redemption Earns Life or a Last Second Chance.  I want the Protagonists to oppose the harmful things characters consumed with Dread are doing, but at the same time trying to save them because they've been there.

How can I create or encourage this dynamic with the rules/system?  I want the acceptance of help to be difficult, and to arise as naturally as possible from character development.  Protagonists will probably have to build some kind of relationship with the person they are trying to help and risk getting hurt for their efforts.  That relationship may well be strained when they oppose the harmful things the character they want to help does.

I don't think a character's acceptance of help should be modeled by a fortune or karma mechanic, as that feels either arbitrary or forced.  Any ideas how I can achieve or at least encourage this kind of behavior through drama in ways that feel appropriate to a good story?

Thanks for your time,

-Jay

[Paul Czege]

Hey Jay,

That's an interesting design challenge. So...you want player characters who're surrounded by Dread-compelled NPCs? You want Batman reaching out his hand to save a poor deluded villainess from falling into the reactor core?

I think you need some sort of threshold that the player characters have to overcome before they can offer help. Maybe they have to deal with a certain amount of crap from an NPC before they can offer help. And then, in the best tradition of subconscious design, I think you've already set the stage for determining how the NPC reacts. You've said that characters don't know their Dread. So, if it's obvious from all the roleplaying leading up to the player offering help to the NPC that the player character and the NPC have the same Dread, then the offer is accepted, the NPC unconsciously recognizes that the player character can help, and accepts the offer, and you get your Last Second Chance or Redemption Earns Life. Otherwise, no, she falls into the reactor, or whatever. "Poor, deluded child."

Paul

[Locke]

it sounds like this could be a role play module for another game.  The concept seems like it can be applied across the board to any existing RPG.  You might want to think of it from that perspective.

[Necromantis]

very interesting concept. Roleplayers heaven.
Is this supposed to be the premise of the game or just one aspect of it?

Someone with a Dread of Rejection might try to always be popular and well liked by the crowd they are a part of.

Sound's like Michael Scott from "The Office" Hahaha.

anyway back to the questions.

If this is supposed to be "just one aspect of it"
Is this a requirement - every character must take a flaw. Some will be the savers and some will be the savees?

Could you describe the gameplay?
perhaps with an example?
Maybe a comparison to a game already in exsistance?

[stefoid]

whoah.

So, who decides how the NPCs act?  What type of system are you looking for - something rules-lite where you just give a verbal description of how you want things to work, or some kind of dread mechanic that models how NPCs behave due to their dread?

From your description of you want, the latter would involve something like     

Dreadiness:  how much hold on the character has their dread got -  determines maybe how far they are willing to go because of it, and also how difficult it is to chip away at.
Self-awareness:  how aware is the character of their problem? - determines the likelihood of  them actively doing something about it, such as seeking help and resisting dread-based negative actions.

Every time the character is faced with a situation where they could act based on dread or not, roll both self-awareness  and dreadiness, by rolling a number of dice equal to their respective scores.  Take the high dice of each roll and compare , which wins out, dreadiness or selfawareness?   

self-awareness <=   half of dread  =  character acts out in a negative way to its fullest extent, unhindered by self-awareness
self-awareness <  dread = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, struggling against the negativity itself, but not understanding why
self-awareness >= dread  = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, struggling to control their dread and the damage it is doing
self-awareness >= double dread  = character successfully struggles to control their dread and the damage it is doing, acting in a positive way instead

This kind of behaviour has a -ve feedback, +ve feedback loop, if you want to model it that way, where success or failure leads to leads to corresponding decrease or increase in dread, and also for self-awareness, however I think self-awareness can only move forward or stand still (from a low base)  it cant go backwards.   

you could read a lot of stuff into it - high dread + high self-awareness = posibility for self-harm etc...

you got your work cut out for you.

[Jay Hatcher]

That's an interesting design challenge. So...you want player characters who're surrounded by Dread-compelled NPCs? You want Batman reaching out his hand to save a poor deluded villainess from falling into the reactor core?

I'm toying with the idea of players playing both protagonists and antagonists, taking some of the pressure off of one person having to play all the Dread compelled antagonists (traditional GM).  Batman and the villianess about to fall into a vat would certainly be one example of a hero trying to offer an antagonist redemption, but the important think is not just that Batman wants to save her life, but that he wants her to rehabilitate.  To continue using Batman, another example might be Bruce Wayne visiting Harvey Dent in Arkam, encouraging him to resist the Two-Face persona and seek help and support.

I think you need some sort of threshold that the player characters have to overcome before they can offer help. Maybe they have to deal with a certain amount of crap from an NPC before they can offer help. And then, in the best tradition of subconscious design, I think you've already set the stage for determining how the NPC reacts. You've said that characters don't know their Dread. So, if it's obvious from all the roleplaying leading up to the player offering help to the NPC that the player character and the NPC have the same Dread, then the offer is accepted, the NPC unconsciously recognizes that the player character can help, and accepts the offer, and you get your Last Second Chance or Redemption Earns Life. Otherwise, no, she falls into the reactor, or whatever. "Poor, deluded child."

That's certainly an idea.  How much crap would be enough crap?  How to measure the degree of trust that has been built up between characters?  Also, I'm not sure that two characters with different Dreads couldn't still relate.  After all, both of them are/used to be deeply terrified of something.  I want Dreads to be something decided at character creation and not chosen from a list, for maximum flexibility.  That means the possibility of having the same Dread would be quite small unless it was done deliberately as part of the design.  I'm afraid that matching up a protagonist's and antagonist's Dreads might be to limiting to character concepts.

It sounds like this could be a role play module for another game.  The concept seems like it can be applied across the board to any existing RPG.  You might want to think of it from that perspective.

It probably could be.  I'm looking for some way to encourage this behavior through rules, either simulating the process somehow (High Concept Sim) or somehow involving it in the premise of the game (Nar).  That said, such a system might be easily tacked on to other games as some kind of meta-game rule set perhaps.

Is this supposed to be the premise of the game or just one aspect of it?

Well, I'm not yet sure if I want the game to encourage Nar or High Concept Sim (or some hybrid).  If this game ends up with a premise, dread and redemption will definitely be greatly involved in it.  I'm not quite sure what sort of question I want to use to frame such a premise.  If this ends up being High Concept Sim, there is no premise to speak of, but I do want dread and redemption to be pervasive elements.  Dread should motivate every antagonist, escape from dread or defiance of it should motivate every antihero, and redeeming others from their Dread should motivate every hero (as they have found redemption from their own).  That said, I don't want this to preclude protagonists doing other heroic stuff (investigating crime, rescuing hostages, uncovering conspiracies, solving mysteries, opposing invasions, saving lives, etc.)  So perhaps this is just one aspect of it, but a very large and important aspect that is in a sense behind everything both protagonists and antagonists are doing.  It is a large part of their motivations.

If this is supposed to be "just one aspect of it" Is this a requirement - every character must take a flaw. Some will be the savers and some will be the savees?

Pretty much.  The third option is basically antiheroes.  People who know that they Dread something but don't know what to do about it or are too prideful to seek help, and instead try to weaponize their Dread or control it through willpower (which only works temporarily).  An antihero who Dreads losing a loved one, has their loved ones killed, snaps, and hunts down serial killers to prevent it from happening to someone else.  Even though their loved ones are gone, they are still ruled by the Dread of losing loved ones because the event haunts them and they cannot escape from the pain and fear.  They are perpetually stuck in that moment of tragedy, perpetually reliving it.

Could you describe the gameplay?
perhaps with an example?
Maybe a comparison to a game already in exsistance?

I wish I could.  Part of why I posted this in First Thought is because I'm not aware of this being done before.  I'm seeking a way to promote this kind of thing in gameplay, so I can't give a concrete gameplay example, just the descriptions of scenarios above.  I can give a somewhat counter example I think from an existing game.  Dead Inside labels itself as a game of loss and redemption, and is in many ways thematically similar to what I have in mind.  The difference would be that in Dead Inside you basically earn your soul back by doing good deeds.  In what I have in mind, the only way out is outside help.  You cannot rescue yourself from your Dread.  It is too deeply embedded in who you are, even if you want to change.  Just like an addiction, you've got to be willing to trust other people and get help and support in order to overcome it.

So, who decides how the NPCs act?  What type of system are you looking for - something rules-lite where you just give a verbal description of how you want things to work, or some kind of dread mechanic that models how NPCs behave due to their dread?

Either the GM or other players play characters.  There may or may not be NPCs.  I would like this game to be optionally GM-less.  I'm leaning toward a Dread mechanic, which would probably promote High Concept Sim, but I am by no means sold on this.  I'm looking for a good way to handle this, and if it's not something that can be modeled convincingly with mechanics, then I need something else.  I think I'd prefer some sort of Drama resolution instead of Fortune or Karma, but I'm open to ideas.  I'd like this thread in some respects to be a brainstorming session, to determine possible approaches to dealing with Dread and redemption in a game.

Dreadiness:  how much hold on the character has their dread got -  determines maybe how far they are willing to go because of it, and also how difficult it is to chip away at.
Self-awareness:  how aware is the character of their problem? - determines the likelihood of  them actively doing something about it, such as seeking help and resisting dread-based negative actions.

Every time the character is faced with a situation where they could act based on dread or not, roll both self-awareness  and dreadiness, by rolling a number of dice equal to their respective scores.  Take the high dice of each roll and compare , which wins out, dreadiness or selfawareness?   

self-awareness <=   half of dread  =  character acts out in a negative way to its fullest extent, unhindered by self-awareness
self-awareness <  dread = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, struggling against the negativity itself, but not understanding why
self-awareness >= dread  = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, struggling to control their dread and the damage it is doing
self-awareness >= double dread  = character successfully struggles to control their dread and the damage it is doing, acting in a positive way instead

This kind of behaviour has a -ve feedback, +ve feedback loop, if you want to model it that way, where success or failure leads to leads to corresponding decrease or increase in dread, and also for self-awareness, however I think self-awareness can only move forward or stand still (from a low base)  it cant go backwards.

Something like this might work.  I don't like self-awareness though.  There is no intervention by other people or reaching out on the part of the person struggling with Dread described in your example.  I would perhaps replace self-awareness with trust or hope.  Addicts can be very self-aware and still give in despite not wanting to.  It usually takes daring to hope that rescue is possible and trusting in someone to help you though it to beat an addiction, both of which are enabled and facilitated through unconditional friendship.  I want Dread to be a kind of addiction to protecting yourself from your deepest fear.  Even if you know it's going to hurt someone you care about, you usually can't help yourself.  You CAN'T let your deepest fears be realized, even if that means manipulating the people you love.  There is a lack of trust and hope there.   That's what makes it so dangerous and destructive to relationships.

You got your work cut out for you.

No kidding.

Thanks for the input everybody.  Keep it coming.  I appreciate any ideas or suggestions you may have.  If you need more clarifications, just ask and I'll try my best.

-Jay

[Jay Hatcher]

One quick thing I forgot to mention.  While a gradual struggle to beat Dread like stefoid described is certainly fine, I want to leave room for dramatic reversals.  This is very common in stories.  Vader suddenly betraying the Emperor to save Luke, for example.  This still fits with the addiction idea.  You can't beat an addiction overnight, but you can resolve to act against it and get help overnight.  The thing is that without outside help and support, you will certainly relapse (willpower is temporary), but the start of a change can certainly be triggered by a burst of fresh resolve, as long as it is followed up on by the heroes.  I'd like to try to take this into account if at all possible.

[stefoid]

Jay, personally I like including self awareness  because it supports the character  acting in different ways, depending.
Others help the character by acting on SA - when helping, they add their ? stat to the characters SA stat.  Its the SA >= 2 times dread outcome you are looking for - the vader moment.

[Jay Hatcher]

stefoid,

I see what your getting at.  My concern is one of emphasis.

Others help the character by acting on SA - when helping, they add their [Hope] stat to the characters SA stat.

I named your question mark Hope for the sake of discussion.  If you think another term works better, that's fine.

The concern I have is that this seems to mean that a character can overcome their Dread without ongoing support from others, while help from others provides only a temporary boost in a specific situation.  The character's SA provides the strength to overcome Dread, while the help of others augments SA.  Jessie thinks "I don't want to do this(SA), but I'm so afraid they'll kick me out if I don't!(Dread)."  A hand clasps Jessie's shoulder.  It's Alex.  John thinks "Alex wouldn't want me to do this either.(Hope bonus)"

This feels to me like an inversion of what I'm after.  Trust in the people providing healthy friendship and support provides the strength to overcome Dread in the long term, even when those people are not present in the situation.  A character facing a struggle with their Dread might think, "I'm afraid they'll kick me out if I don't do this (Dread), but I know Alex wouldn't want me to, and he believes in me.(Trust)  I won't give in!(Willpower bonus)"  Alex appears in the scene and puts a hand on Jessie's shoulder (Hope bonus).  Hope or Willpower or whatever provides a temporary situational bonus.

Do you see the difference?  If SA is a character trait, then it is what a character relies on when they are away from support.  Support only helps when it is present in the scene.  SA feels too much like Willpower to me, which doesn't provide lasting resistance and doesn't provide a connection to other characters.  If Trust is a character trait, then the character relies on the trust relationships they have built with others who support them regardless of whether that person is present in the situation.  Willpower and the Hope offered by someone reaching out helps the character to resist, but Trust is what anchors them against Dread.  Their Trust is what makes them aware of the harmfulness of their actions, because they start thinking in terms of "Alex wouldn't want me to do this," or "I would never do such a thing to Alex."  They start to see others as people rather than threats that inspire Dread.

SA doesn't intrinsically draw strength from others and doesn't connect to other characters.  Trust does.

As for allowing different responses, I think both approaches work equally well:
Trust <=   half of dread  =  character acts out in a negative way to its fullest extent, not caring how it affects others.
Trust <  dread = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, feeling that their actions betray those they are beginning to trust, but feeling they have no choice.
Trust >= dread  = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, struggling to control their dread and the damage it is doing to those they care about.
Trust >= double dread  = character successfully struggles to control their dread and the damage it is doing, drawing on the strength of the friendships they have developed and acting in a positive way instead.

Does this clear up where I'm coming from?

[Jay Hatcher]

To clarify, John mentioned in my first example above was supposed to be Jessie.  I was trying to keep the names gender neutral but slipped up.  Sorry.

[stefoid]

If thats the way you see it then great! 

Playing devils advocate, how can you have only one trust stat?  wouldnt each relationship you have different levels of trust?

What you call hope and /or trust, I would just call 'relationship', where the character has one for each relationship.  It could be a number that is positive or negative depending.  Different characters might have different defaults for this....  Optimistic people might have default trust of strangers at 0 or 1, whereas most of us would be in the slight negatives I think....

So when you want to leverage that relationship, you use the applicable number for  that person.... add it to the SA stat maybe in full if they are present, or half if they are not.

The reason I like the use of SA specifically is because it does convey that level of awareness... or responsibility and consequences.  A negative act perpetrated by a low SA,, like someone who is a sociopath or a hardened ignorant criminal etc, is in some ways worse than the same act perpetrated by the high SA roll.. like someone has done something bad in full knowledge of their responsibility and its moral implications, but still goes through with it because they are unable to face their dread.. kind of more pathetic and contemptible at the same time.

ramble off......  make sure you post what you come up with when its finished, would love to see it.

stefoid,

I see what your getting at.  My concern is one of emphasis.

Others help the character by acting on SA - when helping, they add their [Hope] stat to the characters SA stat.

I named your question mark Hope for the sake of discussion.  If you think another term works better, that's fine.

The concern I have is that this seems to mean that a character can overcome their Dread without ongoing support from others, while help from others provides only a temporary boost in a specific situation.  The character's SA provides the strength to overcome Dread, while the help of others augments SA.  Jessie thinks "I don't want to do this(SA), but I'm so afraid they'll kick me out if I don't!(Dread)."  A hand clasps Jessie's shoulder.  It's Alex.  John thinks "Alex wouldn't want me to do this either.(Hope bonus)"

This feels to me like an inversion of what I'm after.  Trust in the people providing healthy friendship and support provides the strength to overcome Dread in the long term, even when those people are not present in the situation.  A character facing a struggle with their Dread might think, "I'm afraid they'll kick me out if I don't do this (Dread), but I know Alex wouldn't want me to, and he believes in me.(Trust)  I won't give in!(Willpower bonus)"  Alex appears in the scene and puts a hand on Jessie's shoulder (Hope bonus).  Hope or Willpower or whatever provides a temporary situational bonus.

Do you see the difference?  If SA is a character trait, then it is what a character relies on when they are away from support.  Support only helps when it is present in the scene.  SA feels too much like Willpower to me, which doesn't provide lasting resistance and doesn't provide a connection to other characters.  If Trust is a character trait, then the character relies on the trust relationships they have built with others who support them regardless of whether that person is present in the situation.  Willpower and the Hope offered by someone reaching out helps the character to resist, but Trust is what anchors them against Dread.  Their Trust is what makes them aware of the harmfulness of their actions, because they start thinking in terms of "Alex wouldn't want me to do this," or "I would never do such a thing to Alex."  They start to see others as people rather than threats that inspire Dread.

SA doesn't intrinsically draw strength from others and doesn't connect to other characters.  Trust does.

As for allowing different responses, I think both approaches work equally well:
Trust <=   half of dread  =  character acts out in a negative way to its fullest extent, not caring how it affects others.
Trust <  dread = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, feeling that their actions betray those they are beginning to trust, but feeling they have no choice.
Trust >= dread  = character acts out in a negative way, to a lesser extent, struggling to control their dread and the damage it is doing to those they care about.
Trust >= double dread  = character successfully struggles to control their dread and the damage it is doing, drawing on the strength of the friendships they have developed and acting in a positive way instead.

Does this clear up where I'm coming from?

[Lance D. Allen]

Here's a thought: Perhaps Self-awareness is the stat that must be increased to a certain level before the character can accept help. It could be used as a boost stat in certain circumstances... Or possibly a penalty stat in other circumstances.

[Jay Hatcher]

Playing devils advocate, how can you have only one trust stat?  wouldn't each relationship you have different levels of trust?

A great question.  I was in fact thinking that you would have multiple trust ratings for each person you were in contact with, and the highest one would be used to overcome Dread.  My thinking was that if you only had one or two relationships, and you were lead to believe (whether or not it was true) that your high trust relationship had betrayed you, you would lose your trust in that person and fall back to your next highest trust relationship for fighting Dread.  Thus someone with a group of close friends would fare better than someone with only one significant relationship even when betrayed (or tricked into believing they were).

If you want to call Trust/Hope a Relationship instead, that's fine.  I think we are just debating semantics here.  To me relationship sounds kind of generic, as it doesn't suggest the nature or character of the relationship, but the rating could suggest that instead.  You could even replace numbers with words like in Fudge to suggest the strength of the relationship.

The reason I like the use of SA specifically is because it does convey that level of awareness... or responsibility and consequences.  A negative act perpetrated by a low SA,, like someone who is a sociopath or a hardened ignorant criminal etc, is in some ways worse than the same act perpetrated by the high SA roll.. like someone has done something bad in full knowledge of their responsibility and its moral implications, but still goes through with it because they are unable to face their dread.. kind of more pathetic and contemptible at the same time.

I get what you mean.  Awareness of one's actions is certainly important in determining responsibility.

Perhaps we could use both SA and relationship/trust ratings together somehow?  I see the importance of measuring how aware someone is of their harmful actions, but I also want relationships to be a very strong aspect of fighting Dread.  It would seem to me that self awareness would steadily increase with time as long as someone was helping you to become aware of your Dread and helping you try to fight it.  That said, I don't think SA should be the cornerstone of how one fights against Dread.  I don't want a situation where a person constantly can face down their Dread simply by being aware of their Dread (SA) and opposing it with willpower.  I don't think such an approach should be successful in the long term, because it doesn't promote relationship building or risking.

In short, the goal of the Dread/Redemption idea is to allow some way to represent the building or restoration of relationships, and the breaking of those relationships through manipulation and fear.  The core idea needs to involve connections to other characters in some way.

Here's a thought: Perhaps Self-awareness is the stat that must be increased to a certain level before the character can accept help. It could be used as a boost stat in certain circumstances... Or possibly a penalty stat in other circumstances.

That's an interesting idea Lance.  One question I would have is how SA gets raised to a sufficient level if help cannot be accepted beforehand?