Deplorable - Victorian "Supers" RPG in progress

[Zak Arntson]

I'm working on an RPG called Deplorable. The idea is this: You are a Victorian-era person gifted with commendable powers and deplorable drives. The PC group bands together under a common banner (literary example: League of Extraordinary Gentlemen) to tackle some situation. Literary sources for PCs include:

The Invisible Man, H.G. Wells
Dr. Jeckyll & Mr Hyde
Dracula
Prometheus Unbound (can't remember the other title, Frankenstein's Monster or something)
The Time Machine
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
[/list:u]

Materials
At least five six-sided dice. Character sheets (or blank paper). That's it.

Setup
Each player creates their own PC, but this should be done as a group activity. A PC consists of one score and 3-5 abilities.

The score is Humanity and can be set to any number between 1 and 5. When Humanity reaches 0, your PC becomes a hellacious brute and is the essence of deplorability. A 5 Humanity is an ordinary specimen of his or her kind, acting within the class and gender roles of proper society.

Abilities are separated into two parts: Commendable and deplorable. These abilities are skills and traits which are beyond the grasp of any normal human. Commendable abilities are those which are seen in a positive light by society. A high intelligence, delicate sensibility, exceptional constitution, scientific wizardry, this sort of thing. Deplorable abilities are useful, though wretched and should be quelled: Insect politics, violent strength, gruesome transformation.

A PC should receive at least one commendable and one deplorable ability, between three and five are recommended.

The group should then decide on the method of organization for their PCs. A clandestine society known only to its members? A group organized by the government, to operate in secret against the foes of civilization? If it helps with PC creation, you should create the organization first.

Gameplay - Opening Sequence
The game opens with the GM providing a task for the PC group. This task should be given a number. 50 should provide for adequate play. The GM presents this number to the group, but secretly rolls 2 dice. The first die is the number to add/subtract from the task number. If the second die is 1-3, subtract the first die, otherwise add it. If, as GM, you roll doubles, do not modify the original task number.

The task presented by the GM may be fallacious, depending on the instructions given to the PCs by their leaders. Your group should decide, before play, the exact split between player and PC knowledge. Some groups like to share all secrets with players, allowing them to knowingly put unwitting PCs into danger. Other groups enjoy the approach in which the player knows as much as her own PC.

Gameplay - The Remainder of Play
When a conflict appears where either the GM determines super-human effort is needed, or a player wishes to temp fate, a dice resolution occurs. In Deplorable, the success of the action is determined by the player before the method is announced. The player simply decides on the measure of success according his PC's Humanity and the chart below. This measure provides a point value, used in the next step.

Humanity 1 to 3
Utter Failure (points: 1)
Ordinary Failure (2)
Mixed Blessing (3)
Bland Success (4)
Towering Achievement (5)

Humanity 4
Ordinary Failure (1)
Mixed Blessing (2)
Bland Success (3)
Towering Achievement (4 or 5, player's choice)

Humanity 5
Mixed Blessing (1)
Bland Success (2)
Towering Achievement (3,4 or 5, player's choice)

Now that you have decided on your success or failure, you use the points given. First, add the points of your outcome to a running total. Once this total has equalled or exceeded the task number (determined in the Opening), any success will complete the task at your discretion, as player.

Now comes the random element. Roll a number of dice equal to the points given. If the highest die is equal to or less than your Humanity, the outcome is a comendable one. If the highest die is equal to or less than your Humanity, you must select one or more of your commendable abilities and utilize it in achieving the outcome. Otherwise, use a deplorable ability.

If you roll any matching dice, add one to your Humanity (maximum of 5) if you achieved a commendable roll. Subtract one (minimum of zero) if you achieved a deplorable roll.

Special Rules:
- If you are at zero humanity, you can pick ANY success or failure you like, only you do not add the outcome's value to the running total, you roll no dice, and you must use a deplorable ability.
- You can increase your humanity by one point at any time by adding three points to the GM's task number. This should be explained by an in-game event. The only time a PC at zero Humanity can use a commendable ability is through this method.

----------

Sample Characters:
Artemis Smythe, The Human Fly
Humanity: 3
Commendable Abilities: Uncanny Climbing, Respectable Strength
Deplorable Abilities: Acidic Regurgitation, Insect Politics

Rutger Clement, The Non-Visible Man
Humanity: 4
Commendable Abilities: Remarkable Non-Visibility
Deplorable Abilities: Violent Megalomania, Brutish Strength

Dorann, Man From the Future
Humanity: 4
Commendable Abilities: Dizzying Intellect, Astounding Scientist
Deplorable Abilities: Superier Attitude, Indecent Mores

----------

Okay, that's the game as presented. It's a combination of Zak-style dice mechanics, InSpectres scenario-has-goal-number, and an attempt to reverse the typical dice-resolution applying fortune to the outcome.

My goal is to provide a play experience where a PC must find their own line between an acceptable amount of proper and indecent activity. It's rewarding to maintain a higher Humanity, but to resolve a task within a decent time, you sometimes do what you have to (i.e., turn into Mr. Hyde and kick the crap out of the constabulary).

Anyone see any glaring loopholes? Questions? Comments?

[Spooky Fanboy]

I think this could be the beginning of a good idea.

How is Humanity determined, again? Is it tethered to anything? Shouldn't it be? What stops people from setting Humanity at five, and if it falls a bit, oh well?

What are "insect politics?"

[Kester Pelagius]

Greetings Zak,

The premise sounds interesting.  For a second I wasn't clear on the intent (for a sec sounded like you were talking baout character devolving) then it clicked.  Sort of.

I had attempted to work out an almost similar mechanic a while back, I think, to what you have for testing disparite traits.  Yours sounds simpler.  But, what I really want to know, is what is the overall setting, as you envision it?  (Just gentlemen adventurers or something more?)

If nothing else it might make a interesting examination of social contexts.


Much Luck,

Kester Pelagius

[Spooky Fanboy]

How is Humanity determined, again? Is it tethered to anything? Shouldn't it be? What stops people from setting Humanity at five, and if it falls a bit, oh well?

Sorry to sound like a jerk in that last post. I recognize that this game depends on the maturity of it's players, and that powergaming is not something that mechanics can ever completely cure. But there's something about the mechanics that I think is...missing. A sense of symmetry, of balance and contrast.

What I'd like to see would be more of a sliding scale between Humanity and Commendable/Deplorable abilities. If Humanity is high, Commendables/Deplorables function sporadically and unreliably. If Humanity is low, then Commendables/Deplorables are easier, until Humanity is 0, then only Deplorables can be used unless a character "buys back" his Humanity somehow in game play. I think the contrast between power and Humanity should be more directly balanced.

I also think this might make an interesting alternate set of mechanics for a Schism-type or Akira-type game. And I like the core idea of the game immensely. I'd really like to see this developed more, Zak.

Other question: since you named the game "Deplorable," are you concentrating on the downside of super-talents, that sense of alienation from the (rigid) society they are trying to save? If so, perhaps a helpful rule would be that, if the player chooses an odd number of super-abilities (1, 3, or 5), then the odd one has to be a Deplorable, so that bad traits tend to outnumber the good. Or if not, if the populace is just hysterical and the heroes can shine in the public eye, then no limits on Commendables/Deplorables save that Commendables shut down if Humanity hits zero.

just some ideas.

[Simon W]

I like it Zak. Had been working on my own LoEG-inspired game in a more traditional style.

Anyway, one thing I noticed is you have 'descriptors' for your abilities - such as 'Astounding' (Scientist) and 'Respectable' Strength. However, these don't appear to mean vey much, except as 'colour' or 'flavour'.

Not that I'm bothered by this, but do you intend to make more of it? - in other words if I had a character with Fantastic Strength, would this be better than Respectable Strength?

Gideon
http://mysite.freeserve.com/lashingsofgingerbeer

[szilard]

I think that I might be missing something. It appears as though the only thing preventing players from increasing their characters' humanity the fact that it might add a bit of time to game play. Is that what you were going for, or did I completely miss something?

Stuart

[Zak Arntson]

Wow! Thanks for the comments, everyone. I'll be a little slow answering, so before the first volley, let me explain the game a bit more. The entire system is based on this idea: The journey is the interesting part, spurred on by the desires of the players. The system itself allows the player to choose the rate of success or failure, so there isn't ever any question of success. It's a question of, "How will my PC react to the situation?"

How is Humanity determined, again? Is it tethered to anything? Shouldn't it be? What stops people from setting Humanity at five, and if it falls a bit, oh well?

What are "insect politics?"

Humanity is set by the player at creation time. I don't get what you omean by "tethered." It's a score. The only score in the game. There's nothing that stops you from setting your humanity to five. That just means you're less likely to approach problems with any deplorable traits. If you want to keep your humanity at five during play, you're going to take longer to complete the task. Unless you start risking things for more points against the task by rolling more dice (you can always just pick to roll 5 dice, giving a high probability of a humanity drop).

"Insect politics" is a term (first used?) in Cronenberg's The Fly movie. The answer to your question: Insects have no politics. The Human Fly, upon using insect politics would approach the problem with no diplomacy whatsoever.

Yours sounds simpler. But, what I really want to know, is what is the overall setting, as you envision it? (Just gentlemen adventurers or something more?)

I picture the popular image of Victorian society, as presented in the source literature. The group decides how to stretch it around. One approach would be like the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, where all literary figures are real people. You could simply assume the PCs (and possibly any important opponents) are the only elevated people and play the world straight. You could make it a "Steam-punk" a la The Difference Engine (by William Gibson & Bruce Sterling). You could even go away from Victorian England, as long as you define what is proper and what is deplorable.

[Zak Arntson]

Sorry to sound like a jerk in that last post. I recognize that this game depends on the maturity of it's players, and that powergaming is not something that mechanics can ever completely cure. But there's something about the mechanics that I think is...missing. A sense of symmetry, of balance and contrast.

Don't worry! I didn't feel hurt by anything in the last post. I can't imagine this kind of game appealing to a "powergamer," since the highest level of success can be automatically achieved, at any time. The lack of symmetry is a design decision. You get stronger as you get more and more deplorable. If you, as player, enjoy this, run with it. Like I already said: The system tries to make the journey interesting, with the tension based on the method rather than the outcome.

What I'd like to see would be more of a sliding scale between Humanity and Commendable/Deplorable abilities. ... I think the contrast between power and Humanity should be more directly balanced.

The problem here is that a high humanity character is rewarded by being allowed to use his commendable abilities. As humanity lowers, the character becomes more monstrous and less a part of society.

Other question: since you named the game "Deplorable," are you concentrating on the downside of super-talents, that sense of alienation from the (rigid) society they are trying to save?

It was unfair of me to label it a "supers" game. The characters are as super-powered as those from the sources. Invisibility (at the cost of sanity), hypnotism and shapechanging (at the cost of drinking blood), super intelligence (at the cost of a contempt for humanity). That sort of thing. The actual society the PCs belong to could be a terrible group trying to shape society to their own vision (the system would best support a vision which still abhors deplorable behavior), as long as their environment retains the Victorian-style social standards.

I'll think about that odd-even idea. I like the thought that deplorable abilities out-number good ones, but I'll have to play around with that and the system.

Anyway, one thing I noticed is you have 'descriptors' for your abilities - such as 'Astounding' (Scientist) and 'Respectable' Strength. However, these don't appear to mean vey much, except as 'colour' or 'flavour'

The descriptors are mostly color, and can help you roleplay the use of the ability. When I write this thing up, I'll probably provide a good list of adjectives for either type of ability. Commendable adjective examples: "Respectable, Proper, Wonderful, Amazing, Astounding, Fascinating" Deplorable adjectives: "Horrid, Terrible, Brutish, Malignant, Rude"

Lastly, Stuart, you are completely right. I don't think zero humanity should be a huge crutch. It offers a slight hindrance, but buying it back up is pretty easy. Again, the system doesn't concentrate on achieving the goals, but how you went about achieving them.

[Spooky Fanboy]

The lack of symmetry is a design decision. You get stronger as you get more and more deplorable. If you, as player, enjoy this, run with it. Like I already said: The system tries to make the journey interesting, with the tension based on the method rather than the outcome.

Maybe I'm just dense (which is, sadly, all-too-possible), but I didn't see that, especially in the success columns, where you are more likely to be successful at *higher* Humanity. If you're supposed to be more powerful at lower Humanity, shouldn't it be the other way around? That's why I thought it would be unbalancing to let players set their own Humanity, as that appears to be the principle stat.

Also, to be honest, maybe an example of a roll is needed here: for some reason, I'm not sure how dice resolution works in this game. Just trying to understand.

Edit: just reread the resolution system again, and I'm right: I am way confused! A sample of play would be most helpful, Zak.

[szilard]

Two questions:

1) Why does utter failure still move you closer to completing the task? It appears that the only possible setback is caused by gaining Humanity... which seems... odd...

2) Why allow 0 Humanity at all? You cap it at 5, is there any reason not to put a lower cap at 1?

Stuart

[simon_hibbs]

I played in a game like this a few months ago. A friend of mine
busked it using a heavily modified version of the Storyteller
system (He'd just read Aberant).

The game was based heavily on the comic series, but we didn't use
characters from the series. Most of the characters were orriginal,
for example The Ancestral Ape (i forget his real name). He was a
descendent of Darwin who used his deep knowledge of evolution
theory to 'awaken' his inner ape and transform into the Missing Link.

Another character was Catmandoo - a former colonial explorer who
learned deep mystic secrets while adventuring in the Punjab and
can transform into various cat including Tigers, Panthers, tabbies, etc.

I played Patrick Payne, a friend of J. M. Barrie. I'll copy the character
introduction here.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The night lamps glowed like terestrial stars across the grime-stained brick landscape of the East End. Small groups of drunken men, a few disreputable women and raucous children milled about the narrow streets. There, tucked between a warehouse on one side and the high wall of a goods yard on the other, the Jolly Roger brooded on it's slipway like an old hen. Only a few scruffy locals dared the alleys here, only a few yards from the roads where the rabble made merry. The clientelle of this old hulk, converted into a poorly frequented tavern, kept themselves to themselves.

The fat old barman bustled about in his usual bumbling manner, wiping tables with a grubby cloth, and gathering up flagons sloshing with the stale remnants of the night's ale. Only a few grubbily clothed sailors remained, lying comatose in corners, or slumped over the benches. he'd leave them be untill morning. He turned back to the bar, and gasped suddenly at the tall dark figure standing at the door, dropping a small stack of wooden plates.

"Oh, I'm so sorry Mr. Payne, I do try to be more carefull, but you gave me such a fright appearing there all sudden and silent and all... I'll just clear this up."
A smooth heavy voice stopped him dead "Where is the box?"
The fat little man pointed to a wooden box on the bar, and the tall cloaked man stepped softly by and into the bowels of the ship, the box tucked under one arm.

Payne moved swiftly down the passage, then down a narrow stair and stopped before the door to the main hold. He reached into a pocket, drew out a large iron key, and unlocked the door. He pushed it open and looked carefully into the inky darkness of the hold.
He whispered quickly under his breath "Tick-tock!"
A scraping, tapping sounds calattered together in the gloom, and a weedy, servile voice snivveled "Oh, please Mister Payne, don't taunt Hookie! Hookie will be good! Hookey will be nice!"
A bent, sinuous creature came tapping and scratching it's way towards him on all fours. It's body was wrapped in filthy rags almost like a mummy, and at the end of each limb was a shiny metal hook.

Payne put down the box and opened it, taking out a platter of meat  and vegetables and a bowl of beer and setting them out on the floor. The hooked thing cowered before him, but made no move towards the food.
Payned reached out one hand and stroked the thing's head gently.
"There, there.. eat now"
Payne stood up as the thing started gobbling and slurping up it's meal. He turned and closed the door, only pausing briefly to look down at the thing that had once been his most implacable and daring foe, before closing and locking the door. He paused again at the locked door, listening to the chomping and slurping, the wooden plate clattering on the deck, and wondered if he had done the right thing.
After the Indian Chief had wreaked his revenge for what the former captain had done to his daughter, was the thing that remained worth keeping alive? Yet Payne could not find it in himself to kill the shattered shell of his old enemy. In the old days he'd have run him through in a fair fight without a thought. To put him down like an animal just wasn't right... yet no one else would do it.

Payne trod up through the passages and stairways of the ship to his cabin. That fool Barrie, what did he know? He'd only been an infant when it had all happened, long ago, as if in a dream. He entered his cabin and closed the door. A small voice, hardly audible, whispered from a small cage hanging in one corner, draped over with a cloth.
"Patrick? Is that you?".
"Yes my darling. Go back to sleep."
Payne changed into his night shirt and lay in his bed, his mind drifting gently towards unconciousness. Perhaps Barrie was right, perhaps their story should be told? A story of beauty and terror, seen though the innocent eys of a lost young boy.


Simon Hibbs

[Zak Arntson]

Maybe I'm just dense (which is, sadly, all-too-possible), but I didn't see that, especially in the success columns, where you are more likely to be successful at *higher* Humanity. If you're supposed to be more powerful at lower Humanity, shouldn't it be the other way around? That's why I thought it would be unbalancing to let players set their own Humanity, as that appears to be the principle stat.

Yoinks. It's my own inability to remain coherent. I'm equating power not to effectiveness, but to "how much you have to worry about your humanity decreasing." Sorry about that.

I'll try to post a sample of play this weekend. I've got little mock transcripts handwritten at home ...

1) Why does utter failure still move you closer to completing the task? It appears that the only possible setback is caused by gaining Humanity... which seems... odd...

2) Why allow 0 Humanity at all? You cap it at 5, is there any reason not to put a lower cap at 1?

1) Good point! The way I see it, the task will be resolved even if you fail. By resolved, I mean going away. Not necessarily being solved by the PCs. Perhaps the task is "prevent the diabolical doctor from releasing an undead horde into the streets of Paris," if you fail a lot and meet the task number, you've got a new task for next time, "Stop the undead horde in Paris from destroying the city."

2) 0 Humanity has special implications: Never being able to use a Comendable Trait. The higher cap is a function of the dice used. If I allow a Humanity of 6, you can never roll above it on a six-sided die. If I were to allow a Humanity 6, it would be an "unmonsterification" of the PC, and result in loss of abilities with the embracing of soceity.

---

As a note: Looking at the chart & math, I have a feeling my probabilities are skewed. Which may result in a change in mechanics (but not system-goal). I'll keep y'all posted.

And thanks everyone for your input!

[Spooky Fanboy]

Please write soon, as this game is interesting.

[Zak Arntson]

Okay, I'm waffling about the Success Chart thing. I may change it to a consistent chart with Failure (1 die), Mixed Blessing (2 dice), Success (3 dice). It would still be as follows: If your highest die > Humanity, you pick a Deplorable trait, if you roll <= Humanity, you pick a Commendable trait. If you roll any matches, your trait goes up or down (depending on your highest die - Commendable increases, Deplorable decreases).

I may also incorporate some fortune into the Task getting done. Such as, the highest die rolled is the number of points to add to your Task total.

In any case, the philosophy remains the same. And, as promised, here's a few examples of play. These examples use the new success chart:

Dorann, Man from the Future, Humanity 4, is attempting to talk to a respected gentleman.
Player: "Dorann approaches the house and knocks on the door."
GM: "A young and pretty maid answers the door. This could be interesting, so to meet the gentleman, you'll have to make a roll."
Player: "I'll make this interesting. I'll take a Mixed Blessing outcome." (rolls 2 dice, adding 2 points to the task total) "A 3 and a 4. I'll use my Dizzying Intellect."
Player (as Dorann): "Miss, might I gain entry and seek an audience with the master of the house? This matter pertains to the higher dimensions and the streams of time."
Player (not as Dorann): "Dorann explains briefly, the theory of time travel, though it is very much lost on the poor maid."
GM: "Not understanding Dorann at all, she simply explains that her master is out, but expecting his arrival. If Dorann could wait in the study, he should not be more than an hour."
... play follows with Dorann snooping around before the master appears, avoiding the servants' eyes.

---

Alternately, what if the roll went differently?
Player: "I'll make this interesting. I'll take a Mixed Blessing outcome." (rolls 2 dice, adding 2 points to the task total) "A 5 and a 5. I'll use my Indecent Mores. And oh! Dorann's humanity is down to 3."
Player (as Dorann): "Young lady, my original purpose was to request an audience with your master. But after witnessing the line of your neck and your supple bust, yet another goal presents itself. But! First I must speak with your master. Is he at home, pretty thing?"
GM (interpreting the Mixed Blessing): "She blushes and explains to you that the master is out for about an hour. He is expecting you, and you are invited to wait in the study."
... play follows with the maid seeking her own 'audience' with Dorann, while Dorann tries to snoop around.

---

A combat situation:
Artemis Smythe, Human Fly, Humanity 3.
GM: "The ruffians size up this scrawny, well-dressed man with a few intimidating and ungentlemanly remarks."
Player: "Artemis is pretty nervous, and lashes out before they have a chance to attack. Can I make a roll?"
GM: "Of course!"
Player: "I really need these guys out of the way, so I'll take a Success. " (adds 3 to task total, rolls 3 dice) "1, 3 and 3? Great! My Humanity is up to 4, and I'm using my Respectable Strength.
  "Artemis simply lifts one ruffian over his shoulders and hurls him into the river."
GM: (interpreting success as avoiding the conflict) "The ruffians are taken aback at what is, indeed, a Respectable Strength. They rush to help their brother, using his plight as an excuse to avoid further confrontation."

---

Or ....
Player: "I really need these guys out of the way, so I'll take a Success." (adds 3 to task total, rolls 3 dice) "1, 3 and 4? Alright, then, Acidic Regurgitation.
  "Artemis projectilve vomits onto the nearest ruffian's face."
GM: "The scoundrel screams and collapses to the ground, clutching his face. Another comes at you with his fist. No need to roll, you succeed. What happens?"
Player: "I sidestep the fist and spew onto his arm."
... and so the fight continues, with Artemis vomiting all over. Ick! Certainly deplorable.

---

See how it goes? The outcome is the same, but the methods are different. I've got some more thoughts, but they'll have to wait until later.

[Simon W]

Zak,

I like the look of this already. I am gonna give it a go as it stands (winging it where necessary) and see what happens. I'll let you know. Hopefully some ideas will come from the 'play-test'.

Gideon
http://www.geocities.com/simonwashbourne/Beyond_Belief.html