An old twist on fantasy... (longish)

[szilard]

Hi. I'm new here.

I've had this idea for a game in my head for awhile now, and it has been slowly nibbling its way free.

Basically, in the typical fantasy RPG, everyone plays a protagonist. In the vast majority of fantasy novels (at least those which aren't basically transcriptions of someone's D&D campaign), there are an assortment of heroes, apprentices, mentors, and sidekicks of various sorts. There are few "well-balanced adventuring parties" - but there are plenty of groups that make sense being together from a narrative standpoint.

The basic idea that inspired the game was to develop a system where:

(1) it was possible to play a child of prophecy/great potential who may not be aware of that fact at the start of play (Frodo, Harry Potter, Luke Skywalker, etc). In particular, it should be possible to play a character who is from mundane reality who somehow finds him or herself in the game world (The Chronicles of Narnia, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, Harry Potter, Neverwhere, and many others...)

(2) it makes sense for a player to want to want to play what would normally be termed a support character (The Lord of the Rings has Frodo and Aragorn and Gandalf. If the Fellowship were a gaming group, though, why would someone want to portray Peregrine Took?), and the system encouraged such characters to remain in their roles

(3) characters are potentially of central importance to the game world.

I don't want to go into too much detail about the setting, since I am still torn on a few major details.

What I am looking for right now is some feedback on a particular narrative mechanic that I am currently thinking would be central to the game. (For those keeping track, yes, I posted some of this on rpg.net, but I didn't get much of a response.)

Instead of character creation/experience points this game will have Story Points. Each player begins the game with a certain number of story points. These can be used to create a character, translating into attributes/skills/special abilities/starting equipment/etc. They can also be used to purchase plot points. If you want to be central to the plot (Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter, Aragorn, etc.), you need to purchase your possible destiny with story points. This cost might vary with how much your character knows about that destiny. Story points could also be kept past character creation and used during play (see below).

Now comes the vaguely interesting (I hope) part. Each character would choose a loose archetype based on the character’s role in the story (Hero, Mentor, Apprentice, Sidekick, Love Interest, etc.). It is important to note that this isn’t a character’s personality archetype (such as in the White Wolf Storyteller games), but truly focusing upon the role the character is expected to take in the developing story of the game. It may be possible to buy a second archetype (or change archetypes) with story points.

The archetype determines how you can earn and spend story points once play starts. Story points are earned when you accomplish goals that fit within your character's role. A Hero would receive story points for slaying a dragon. A Sidekick probably wouldn't. The Apprentice will be able to develop skills much more quickly than the Mentor, for instance. Each of the Archetypes will also have the ability to influence the story (or the other PCs) in some way by using story points. The Love Interest can turn heads… or even cause another PC to fall in love with her. The Sidekick (who would be particularly bonded to another character) can be conveniently overlooked (In Star Wars, it seemed that the druids regularly walked through fields of fire unscathed), and can influence the actions of the protagonist to whom they are bonded. The more story points you put towards making yourself the protagonist of the story (through the purchasing of plot points), the more susceptible you would be to the influence of the other PCs through story points. The idea here is that the control of characters generally belongs to the players of those characters, but by becoming central to the story you undertake a certain burden of sharing your character.

My concern is that this allows players to potentially have significant influence over the characters of other players which could either (a) breed resentment in the player of the protagonist or (b) result in the other players never exercising their abilities to avoid that resentment. I would, of course, put in some guidelines and safeguards in an attempt to prevent abuse.

One goal here is to try to develop a system which will be designed with the aim of developing better stories by encouraging characters to take on roles in the narrative, and by giving all of the players both a bit more control and a bit more stake in the development of that narrative. Does this seem like a plausible attempt?

~szilard

[Walt Freitag]

Hi Szilard, and welcome to the Forge!

The general idea of different archetypes with different advancement and story point mechanics sounds like a great idea to me.

It also sounds very difficult to design and execute. I discussed a similar but far simpler idea in this thread, in which there were only two basic archetypes (one with high skills and slow advancement, one with low skills and rapid advancement). Even that was regarded as potentially difficult to pull off.

Not that it can't be done; I think it can and should be.

However, I'm not certain about using susceptibility to other characters' influence as a counterbalance for increasing importance in the story. I'm not sure whether or not it would breed resentment, but it doesn't seem a very good match for what happens in the stories you want to emulate. In the mentor-hero relationship, for example, the mentor loses rather than gains influence over the hero as the hero comes into adulthood. It's a problem on the other side too, actually; being ignored is not a very good reward for any player even if it gives the character an effectiveness advantage (e.g. the bad guys don't bother to shoot you).

But perhaps I'm not understanding what sorts of things players would do to influence susceptible player-characters with story points. Did you have any particular examples in mind?

In general, the main issue here is making sure all player-characters are protagonized to the players' satisfaction. That doesn't mean that all player-characters have to be literary protagonists (though this may be a requirement for considering the game unambiguously Narrativist), but it does mean that the "niche" issues (niche selection and niche protection) must be well thought out. Every player has to be engaged. Sidekicks and love interests have potential problems with this. Being the love interest in a story doesn't mean using a seduction power against every character that comes along, and serenading one's true love has only so much entertainment value in it -- so there has to be a lot more to a "love interest" role than that (or "love interest" has to be only a part of the character's entire archetype map).

On the other hand, the idea that a love interest relationship makes a character more susceptible to story point influence from the beloved character seems to fit pretty well. There's a lot of good ideas here. It's not an easy design task you're proposing. But it could be a very worthwhile one.

- Walt

[Paul Czege]

Hey,

The more story points you put towards making yourself the protagonist of the story (through the purchasing of plot points), the more susceptible you would be to the influence of the other PCs through story points.

Can you give me a better idea of how this might work. You only mention "plot points" one time in your post, and I'm not understanding how you envision them contributing to protagonism. What kinds of of things does the player of a "protagonist" get by buying plot points? I'm also not clear, were I playing a protagonist, on how story points used by other players would influence my character. Perhaps an example of play that makes it more clear how these different kinds of influence might work?

Paul

[Paul Czege]

Dammit Walt!

Paul

[Sidhain]

What about taking a side view. In Ars Magica grogs are a stable of warrior types that are shared by the Mages, and played when that players are mage is off screen or involved in other things.

    Why not fashion a similar idea? Let some of the players be PC's and other character be-- for lack of a better term narrative foils? Characters shared by the PC's to be used to tell parts of the story they aren't able to tell with their "normal" owned characters?

In this style of gaming the mentor of Luke Skywalker Obie Wan, is instead not a PC, but a sometimes player controlled NPC...

[Shreyas Sampat]

It seems to me that you're taking the first steps toward demolishing the identity relation between players and characters - a decisive push out of Actor stances toward Director, for everyone involved.  That sounds like something very difficult to pull off, especially with players deeply ingrained in the player=actor habit.

I'd love to see it done, but I think that what you're proposing is still a step away from that; giving players *partial* control of other characters is a risky proposition at best.

[Walt Freitag]

Dammit Walt!

I live to cross-post with people making similar points or asking similar questions. It gives me the enjoyable illusion that I know what I'm talking about. :-)

- W

[szilard]

Hi Szilard, and welcome to the Forge!

Thanks.

The general idea of different archetypes with different advancement and story point mechanics sounds like a great idea to me.

I'm reassured to hear that. Sometimes I wonder if I am mad.

...

However, I'm not certain about using susceptibility to other characters' influence as a counterbalance for increasing importance in the story. I'm not sure whether or not it would breed resentment, but it doesn't seem a very good match for what happens in the stories you want to emulate. In the mentor-hero relationship, for example, the mentor loses rather than gains influence over the hero as the hero comes into adulthood. It's a problem on the other side too, actually; being ignored is not a very good reward for any player even if it gives the character an effectiveness advantage (e.g. the bad guys don't bother to shoot you).

But perhaps I'm not understanding what sorts of things players would do to influence susceptible player-characters with story points. Did you have any particular examples in mind?

I am, unfortunately, still at the idea stage here.

There is, arguably, a distinction that can be made between the mechanics at work here. The Influence mechanic might allow the sidekick to influence the actions of a more central character. This is an instance of a more general class of mechanics that allow characters to spend story points in manners dependant upon their archetypical role.

One general example of the influence mechanic is what I could call the Moment of Truth, in which a sidekick-type character confronts a more central character in some dramatic (possible very personal) fashion, resulting in a significant change in the goals of the latter.

I can try to think of some examples from inspirational sources for the influence mechanic, I suppose.

As far as the more general thing, I just tossed out that "Ignore Me" idea as an example. I realize it isn't the most exciting and enticing example. Another possibility would be the Fated Reunion, in which a sidekick can make it to just the right place in the right time to meet up with a more central character when they have been separated.

In general, the main issue here is making sure all player-characters are protagonized to the players' satisfaction. That doesn't mean that all player-characters have to be literary protagonists (though this may be a requirement for considering the game unambiguously Narrativist), but it does mean that the "niche" issues (niche selection and niche protection) must be well thought out. Every player has to be engaged. Sidekicks and love interests have potential problems with this. Being the love interest in a story doesn't mean using a seduction power against every character that comes along, and serenading one's true love has only so much entertainment value in it -- so there has to be a lot more to a "love interest" role than that (or "love interest" has to be only a part of the character's entire archetype map).

Right.

I am toying with the possibility of having a major archetype and a minor archetype. To use the Star Wars example (largely because the archetypes are very clear in it), Chewbacca would be a Sidekick and a Savage Warrior whereas C-3PO would be a Sidekick and a Scholar. This might allow for a bit more well-roundedness. I don't want to pigeonhole characters into roles that limit them unecessarily.

I am also thinking that archetypes like Sidekick and Love Interest would be bonded to specific other characters (with some ability to shift that, particularly for the latter)... so, for instance, a Love Interest wouldn't have any built-in incentive to seduce everyone.

On the other hand, the idea that a love interest relationship makes a character more susceptible to story point influence from the beloved character seems to fit pretty well. There's a lot of good ideas here. It's not an easy design task you're proposing. But it could be a very worthwhile one.

I know it isn't going to be easy. Largely, that's why I posted this... to see if people thought it was worthwhile for me to attempt to go through the effort. Not that I'd likely be dissuaded from trying it anyway....

~szilard

[Gwen]

It sounds like a great idea!  I'd play it if the finished product was well done and not confusing!

[szilard]

Paul - On plot points.

Stories are full of characters who are lost princes, have some great prophecied destiny, or who will come to hold the fate of many in their hands, due to something that they may have had little or no control over. In the Lord of the Rings, for instance, Frodo is bequeathed the One Ring, and Aragorn is the prophecied King. I'm sure you can come up with your own literary examples for this.

Basically, story points could be spent at character creation to provide a character with such a birthright/destiny. Generally speaking, this will tend to make them rather central to the plot of the game.


Sidhain - on the Ars Magica alternative

It certainly isn't a bad idea, but I don't think it is quite what I am looking for. I often find myself thinking that sidekick-types are more interesting characters than stereotypical heros. My concern is that I want sidekicks and such to be fully developed characters. Having them be shared between players or the secondary characters of players makes that less likely. It also tends to play down interaction between the sidekick and the protagonist.

four willows weeping - on the Actor vs. Director stance

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "giving players *partial* control of other characters is a risky proposition at best." What is it that you are pointing out is at risk?


~szilard

[Le Joueur]

What about dark destinies?  Do the players get rewarded for plowing into their doom?  We've got something like this and 'light' destinies in Scattershot's personal Genre Expectations.  Can we compare notes (when you're closer to a finished product)?

Fang Langford

[Sparky]

Regarding the Protag/Sidekick connection...
What if Protagonists were limited to using Plot points only in relation to the Big Problems (Sauron, etc.)...
while Sidekicks can only spend Plot points on things only tangentially related to the Big Problems?

I'm thinking of the something like the Indy Jones movie with Short Round. While Indy is barely holding his own against several thugs, Short Round manages to scrounge up a pistol and then throws it to Indy. Since these are just thugs of the Bid Baddie, Indy cannot spend a plot point to finish them off easily. But later when Indy needs to make a trick shot to kill the Bad Guy, he can while Short Round could not have.

Maybe call it something like Purpose (or Quest) for The Protag and Conicidence for Sidekicks?

Sparky

[Paul Czege]

Hey,

Paul - On plot points...

I'm still not getting it. Are you using "plot" points and "story" points interchangeably, or am I just not understanding the distinction you're making between them?

Paul

[szilard]

Sparky -

A neat idea. I have been thinking of various methods of limiting protagonist point-spending in-game. One thought I had that might mesh nicely with something like what you have here was to limit protagonists by the number of points spent by other players in assisting the protagonist. That is, if there is a Sidekick and a Protagonist, and over the course of the game the Sidekick has spent 15 story points, 10 of which seemed to be beneficial to the Protagonist, then the Protagonist could spend up to 10 story points at a dramatically appropriate moment. This provides incentive for the protagonist to keep sidekicks around (when it would often make pragmatic sense to ditch them). It also provides the sidekicks with a bit more freedom in the narrative (as they aren't so limited in their narrative-altering abilities).

~szilard

[szilard]

Paul -

Not exactly. I need some better terminology.

Story points serve at least three purposes: character generation build points, experience points, and in-game odds/narrative-alteration (many games have Karma or Hero Point type mechanics that may be analogous to the last).

In character creation, story points can be spent to provide the character with a special background that I had referred to earlier as a "plot point" - but my use of the word point here was probably confusing. Think of it as a potential 'plot twist' maybe? In any case, it is largely buying your way to the center of the story at character creation.

Does that help?

~szilard