Ed Designs A Game: Topos

[Mike Holmes]

In practice, IIRC, the game they played had the genre decided up front by consensus. Maybe that ought to be written into the text.

Mike

[ejh]

It's been suggested that a pre-paragraph round of Topos Suggestions would be a good way to decide these things.  Since Topoi are voluntary to follow, everyone's desires would be out on the table, and there'd be a good source of points for the initial poster (otherwise he gets kinda screwed since there are no topoi to follow), and if topoi came up that don't get used, they can always be cashed in later on.

[ejh]

Just updated the rules again.

http://www.lostthoughts.orgremovethis/phpwiki/index.php?Topos

Much simplification.  Added one complication (delayed granting of Points for Topoi) which had the side effect of letting me eliminate several other rules.

I also completely, completely revamped Avatars.  "Avatar Status" is now nothing but a very specialized, unusual Topos.

[Lxndr]

Hi!  I finally got over my distaste of internet bulletin boards that don't have a "guest function" long enough to register.  I suppose I should finally chime in here, being that at least two people (Ed, Mike) posted in here specifically saying that I should be here for this.  

:D

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that "charging per words" or "charging per paragraph" is a good idea.  Honestly, I feel that charging characters per 100 words or something is a much BETTER way to keep paragraph lengths down than just assigining some arbitrary 250 point limit (or did Ed finally get rid of that?).  The particular rule change I suggested was exponential:

"Your first 100 words cost you 1 point.  Your second 100 words cost you 2 points.  Your third 100 words cost you 4 points.  Your fourth 100 words cost you 8 points."  Thus, people are encouraged to keep things short but are not prohibited from posting by some completely arbitrary upper limit.

I also considered (separate from or in addition to the above mechanic) that, in order to keep scene jumping from happening too often (which happened in the first Topos game), that any scene change should cost points.  Specifically, it should cost some points to end a scene as well as start a scene.  Thus a person could say "There, I want this scene to be ended!" and pay points to end the scene.  If he also wants to start a NEW scene, he'd have to pay MORE points.  

But upon reflection, I don't think that'd work after all.

Ed has made it pretty clear that he wants to keep Avatars, but I honestly don't understand why.  Although the new "PC" and "GM" Topoi that he emailed me yesterday (but hasn't told the board about yet) are better than any previous offering he has, I feel that the existance of Avatars disrupt the focus of the game, which are topoi, literary themes and conventions.  It's turn-based story writing, to be blunt, and putting a claim on characters instead of influencing the story through literary themes just feels... I don't know.  Intrusive.

Ed told me once (I'm paraphrasing here) that he wants to keep Avatars in order to make the game just seem more like a standard roleplaying game (since it still has characters).  I feel that it's detrimental, since that rule encourages people to claim characters and say "MINE!"  Look, once again, at the wiki game and the clusterfuck at the secret meeting - a large part of that seemed to be the players all claiming avatars as soon as the starting pistol went off.

[Bob McNamee]

Welcome to the Forge Lxndr!

[ejh]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that "charging per words" or "charging per paragraph" is a good idea.  Honestly, I feel that charging characters per 100 words or something is a much BETTER way to keep paragraph lengths down than just assigining some arbitrary 250 point limit (or did Ed finally get rid of that?).  The particular rule change I suggested was exponential:

"Your first 100 words cost you 1 point.  Your second 100 words cost you 2 points.  Your third 100 words cost you 4 points.  Your fourth 100 words cost you 8 points."  Thus, people are encouraged to keep things short but are not prohibited from posting by some completely arbitrary upper limit.

I did indeed get rid of the 250 word limit, so there's no need to worry about paragraph length anymore.  If you want to write a novella, you may do so -- however, other players my find it tiresome and ignore you.  Oh, and you can only Visit a Topos once per Page.

(it's Page now, not Paragraph.)

One motivation for getting rid of the 250 word limit is that I realized there is no particular reason that people have to post paragraphs of a continuing story.  Why couldn't somebody submit, say, a "character sheet" noting the abilities and background of one of the characters as their "page"?  Why couldn't someone submit a drawing as a page?  (The thing I loved most about Amber was doing Trump Portraits...)

It's all good.  Hell, get a bunch of talented artists playing Topos and you could do it in comic form.  Holy CRAP that would be cool.  I gotta ping James West about that...

I also considered (separate from or in addition to the above mechanic) that, in order to keep scene jumping from happening too often (which happened in the first Topos game), that any scene change should cost points.  Specifically, it should cost some points to end a scene as well as start a scene.  Thus a person could say "There, I want this scene to be ended!" and pay points to end the scene.  If he also wants to start a NEW scene, he'd have to pay MORE points.  

But upon reflection, I don't think that'd work after all.

I don't agree that scene jumping is a bad thing.  I do think that pressing Points into service doing something they're not intended for is a bad thing.

Points exist for one reason: to influence others through Topoi.  You get them for one thing: allowing others to influence you through their Topoi.  That is the central mechanic of the game.  By allowing others to influence you, you gain the ability to influence others.  You play nice, and you are rewarded with the power to reward other people for playing nice.

You want coin-scarcity economics, you play Universalis.  It's a very good game.  Ask Mike and Ralph. :)  I like Universalis a lot.  Topos is not Universalis.  In many ways its mechanics philosophy is the exact opposite of Universalis, or at least completely out of joint with Universalis.  That's cool.  That's why I can enjoy both of them. :)

Seriously, if Universalis didn't exist, I might be doing certain things differently.  But it fills a niche in the universe of games, and by doing so, it allows Topos to fill a different niche.  I'm going to be rejecting any rules suggestions that make me think "if I take this to its logical conclusion I would rewrite Topos to become Universalis."

That has meant rejecting a lot of suggestions so far.

Ed has made it pretty clear that he wants to keep Avatars, but I honestly don't understand why.  Although the new "PC" and "GM" Topoi that he emailed me yesterday (but hasn't told the board about yet) are better than any previous offering he has, I feel that the existance of Avatars disrupt the focus of the game, which are topoi, literary themes and conventions.  It's turn-based story writing, to be blunt, and putting a claim on characters instead of influencing the story through literary themes just feels... I don't know.  Intrusive.

Ed told me once (I'm paraphrasing here) that he wants to keep Avatars in order to make the game just seem more like a standard roleplaying game (since it still has characters).  I feel that it's detrimental, since that rule encourages people to claim characters and say "MINE!"  Look, once again, at the wiki game and the clusterfuck at the secret meeting - a large part of that seemed to be the players all claiming avatars as soon as the starting pistol went off.

That part of the Wiki game was played with rules that only mildly resemble the current ones, and so isn't a very good example.

But you'll be happy to know that in my current rewrite (which will make it to the wiki when I get some spare time, or somebody volunteers to post it for me ;) I've taken the PC/GM rules and ripped them out of the main section of the rules and basically made them into an appendix, so it's clear they're completely optional.

I took out the catchy name "Avatar" and just called them "Player Character/Gamemaster" rules, since that's what they're for.  That should make them seem less shiny and essential to the game.

[Mike Holmes]

Is the page of rules in the link above updated to account for everything? It seems to still be out of date.

Mike

[ejh]

It's updated now.

[Thierry Michel]

interesting game, I take it 3.1 is the latest version, right ?

I'm not sure I have figured out the economics of the story-building, though.  

If I propose a topos that is of high interest to everyone (a cool idea, in lay terms), not only am I not rewarded for it, but on the contrary I improve everyone's position relative to mine by paying them everytime they use it. Is that a correct interpretation ?

[Lxndr]

The idea, I believe (as a playtester and gamebreaker), is that you're rewarded for it because people are using it.  You're rewarding others for doing what you want, and your reward is "hey, people are doing what I want."

Ed and I recently had a discussion about rewards to individuals whenver their topoi are successfully used, but nothing formal has happened yet to include it in the rules.  In short, I believe this is what was discussed (Ed, feel free to correct or update me):

If the person who posted a Page claims a Topos of yours, and you give them points for it, you get 1 point, period.  If the person who posted a Page doesn't claim a Topos of yours, but you feel they addressed it in that Page anyways, you can give them points for it, but you won't get any points for it yourself.

The second part would keep people from arbitrarily creating a bunch of 1 point topoi and randomly decreeing everyone has visited them for the points; this reward system was designed so that you'd be rewarded for other people PURPOSEFULLY visiting your Topos.

For the record, I still believe that Pages (formerly Paragraphs) should have some sort of cost.  Right now my vote is for "one Plot Point per Page, regardless of size."  It's a trivial charge, really, especially compared to the numbers that both games have seen thrown around (really, it's hard not to make AT LEAST that in any one Page through visiting Topoi) but I believe it would encourage slightly more cooperation (since if you never visit other Topoi, you'll eventually be silenced, but if you visit even ONE Topos, you'll make enough to keep going).  Ed doesn't like that idea, but I haven't gotten around to shutting up yet.  *wink*

[Thierry Michel]

The idea, I believe (as a playtester and gamebreaker), is that you're rewarded for it because people are using it.  

I understand the intent, but I see potential problems.

[Lxndr]

What problems are you visualizing, if I might ask?

Could you give an example of what you think might be a problem?

[Thierry Michel]

Player A submits topoi that provide good storyhooks (that is, the other players want to play along). Presumably A's cost is low, because he needs less in-game incentives to get reactions from other players, so that's OK.

Player B get points for playing along with A's good ideas and use them to submit topoi that only interest him, and do not really fit the common story.  Sure, it costs him more, but since he basically gets a free ride on A's good story (that is, he would have played along anyway), it doesn't really matter.

In the long run, cooperative players will accumulate more points than selfish ones (since they get more points for playing along and spend less), and thus will be able produce more topoi, so I guess the system works as written. Yet, I'm not sure it's totally efficient.

[ejh]

Just did another big rules revision.  The goal here was to simplify bookkeeping.

Essentially I gave the value of Topoi a far far coarser granularity.  

Topoi are all one point.  If you want a topos of greater value, you just get two topoi that duplicate each other, and that's a 2-point topos.  or three, or four....

You don't "buy" topoi anymore.  You have a certain number available at any time, and you can change or rearrange them as long as you don't buy any more.  It's as if you have a certain number of "topos slots" and it doesn't matter what is in them, they slots are constant.

You start with 3 topoi.  You start with zero points.

When you accumulate a number of points equal to the number of Topoi you currently have, you can spend them all to add another Topos -- that is, another "slot," so that your total number of Topoi rises by one.

I took out the PC/GM stuff cause the confusion to usability ratio was too high.  If I find a way to write it back in more elegantly I might.

Mike has been challenging me to make it less freeform and more of a game.  I have explained to him why, up till now, the suggestions to do so have violated some of my design criteria, but he thinks there may be a way to get the game thing in anyway.

We might hack things up a bit.