The Framework, a thingie

[Epoch]

I just wrote up http://wso.williams.edu/~msulliva/campaigns/ag/framework.html">The Framework, an alternate way of looking at player control of the game than the traditional player/GM breakdown.  (It's for use with any game).

It incorporates a lot of the ideas I've read in The Forge on stance and shared control over the game.  It takes, perhaps, a slightly different tack on how to apply those than the games I've thus-far seen.

It's very avant-garde and almost certainly unplayable.  I would appreciate any suggestions aimed towards making it easier to use.  Naturally, all comments, up to and including, "What the hell are you smoking" are welcome.

[ Editted because I'm a goddamned moron. ]

[ This Message was edited by: Epoch on 2001-09-10 17:39 ]

[Jack Spencer Jr]

Jeez I hope it's playable because this is very similar to The Wheel.

(It is encouraging to see several other people working along the same lines as my silly ideas.  It means I'm not too far from something worthwhile.  Damn.  I should really work on that thing.)

Your idea doesn't work quite the same as my idea, just similar.

I would suggest that you could make The Framework could be made into its own system rather than a tack-on for any system.

My two cents.

[editted because editting is fun.]

[ This Message was edited by: pblock on 2001-09-11 09:48 ]

[Epoch]

Got a link to The Wheel?

The Framework could definitely have a system attached to it (that was my original plan, in fact), but I started to think that it didn't make any sense.  After all, the part of the Framework which currently exists is exclusively meta-world.  I realized quickly that I didn't want to tie that meta-world stuff to any aspect of character ability (I didn't want to say, for example, that you had to have good social skills in order to be a protagonist in a social scene)...  At which point the meta-world stuff becomes pretty wholly mechanically distinct from the in-world stuff.  At that point, why should I bother making a new gaming system for the in-world stuff which almost certainly nobody will like as much as whatever system they regularly use?

I'm open to arguments that I should create a new system for in-world resolution, but I'm not seeing the advantages right now.

[Jack Spencer Jr]

Arguement to follow:  Why do you need in game or game world mechanics?

What you seem to be thinking is The Framework is a metagame mechanic that can override or is above the "real" game system which is the typical game world physics model stuff.

Try this, instead of worrying about the character's lock-picking skill to be able to open the lock, have The Framework handle that for you where the character picks the lock because he needs to or because the player who purchased control really really wants him to.

Just an idea.

[and don't worry about The Wheel (I'm starting to annoy myself about that) it's be coming from Green Cat Games as soon as I finish it.  I should really shut up about it until I do have it done but I've recently had a revelation on the dice mechanics that will take time to work out.  Clinton currently has the "best seller" over on GO's Gaming Library with his d20 Henchman.  We can't have that.]

[Epoch]

Well, naturally, one system you could put into place for The Framework would be a freeform "GM decides," or an ultra-narrativist "Player-decides" system, or it could be something not quite that but almost, like Xiombarg's Success.

For me, personally, using a player-decides system for The Framework would kill the point.  I don't want Author or Director control when I'm the protagonist.  The Framework is set up so that I don't have to take such control, but I can still use those stances at other times.

I think it's rather strongly implied in the text of the document that non-protagonists are only lightly bound by the system "under" The Framework.

Anyhow, the long and the short of it is that I can totally see advantages to using a low-impact system beneath The Framework, but I don't see an advantage to restricting The Framework to such a system.

[Paul Czege]

Hey Mike,

It's a cool concept. I really like the way it formalizes supporting cast and protagonist roles for players prior to individual scenes.

...I can totally see advantages to using a low-impact system beneath The Framework, but I don't see an advantage to restricting The Framework to such a system.

I think that, of necessity, the system used underneath The Framework would have to be fairly light. The stumbling block is in the spontaneous GMing sequences. I know that I personally couldn't effectively improvise NPC's into existence for Vampire or D&D3e. And I don't think I know anyone who could do it for GURPS or Champions.

Still, I think the idea of currency for directorial power that works only external to scenes where your PC is a protagonist is a compelling concept.

Paul

[ This Message was edited by: Paul Czege on 2001-09-16 23:27 ]

[Epoch]

Paul,

I agree that being able to improvise-GM is the stumbling point for the system underneath.  Honestly, I think that it's the stumbling block for almost everything -- while I'm personally very comfortable doing improvised stuff in pretty much any system I'm familiar with¹, a lot of the other GM's I'm used to dealing with really flounder when they haven't done a lot of prep-work.  Then again, maybe they just need a bit of practice before it clicks for them.

Anyhow, I'm glad you found it interesting.  If anyone actually gives The Framework or any similar system a try, please tell me how it goes.  My current gaming groups are not suited to trying out experimental gaming concepts, so, sadly, the only game I've designed that I've actually managed to playtest is The Vietnam Game.

Epoch

¹ I believe that I could effectively improvise GURPS, for example.  Don't get me wrong -- NPC's I created on-the-fly wouldn't conform to all the rules, but I think I could make it fairly transparent to the players.  Haven't tried recently, though.

[contracycle]

Hmm, the mechanics are of secondary significance - unless you're going to get down-n-dirty, your probably don't need much in the way of system stats for an improvised PC; just make 'em walk and talk and player imagination will paper over the cracks.

Or, one could make this system a little bit more solid by having pre-generated NPC's which are, say, on cards in a basket to be drawn for non-active players.  In the Vamp case, a little bundle of Ventrue and Toreador... in fact it just occurred to me that you could even use CCG cards from The Eternal Struggle (whatever) for this purpose.  I bet most people would have a less difficult time improv'ing a character they could look at.

However, I'm now starting to make this much more driven by a single GM with a central core storyline..  Nice idea, food for thought anyway.