[Fastlane]: Facets and Styles

[Lxndr]

I am considering a new addition to the Fastlane rules (which can be downloaded at www.twistedconfessions.com), but I'm wondering whether or not I'm making the game needlessly complex by adding it.

The basic concept has been seen in many games before - descriptors attached to attributes that influence how easy or difficult certain things can be done with such attributes.  In Fastlane, these attributes are called Facets - and the "Descriptors," if I use them, will be called Styles.

Here's how I imagine things working (shorthand):

* A Style for a Facet would costs one chip, same as raising the Facet. Characters start with one Style per Facet free, but can buy more (or can have none).
* Without an appropriate Style, a Facet's value is halved when using it, rounding down.  Life modifications apply AFTERWARDS.
* A Style can be burned for success just like a Facet or a Favor.
* Styles aren't stepped - either you have it, or you don't.

My motives behind adding this step:

1.  It increases the individuality of characters, in terms of what the facets mean TO THEM.
2.  It rewards characters for staying "in style" while not totally destroying them if they do something that's "not their style."
3.  It is another choice for players - do they want to be better at one thing, or do they want to branch out and be good at multiple things?

I admit, though, that I have a penchant for sometimes overcomplicating (or alternatively, oversimplifying).  So I'm asking you, the viewers at home, to weigh in with your opinions.  Does this seem to complicate, or does it seem to add something valuable to the game?

(yes, Actual Play will show all the niggling problems, but on a purely basic level, what's your gut reaction?)

[Mike Holmes]

Complicated good.

Or, I think it does add some needed color to the characters. I'd call it a playtest issue.

OTOH, it would do to better tie it into the overall theme somehow.

Mike

[RaconteurX]

I'm with Mike (seems like I'm saying that a lot, lately)... more color is definitely a good thing but tying it to the theme is very important. I don't see where "Fastlane" would suffer too much from their inclusion, as it should still play as quickly. It does give players more burnable resources, which could prove to be game-breaking in the end. Playtesting is the best solution.

[Lxndr]

Both you and Mike have given that advice, and Mike even made an Austin Powers reference last night on IRC in an attempt to explain it (too bad I've never seen the movie).

The theme comes directly from the dictionary definition of "fastlane."  The fastlane, according to dictionary.com is a "reckless, self-indulgent, and free-spending sphere of activity, often involving dissipation."  The roulette wheel is right there, rewarding greater risks with higher chips, encouraging spending and indulgence, et cetera.

"Styles" I think already fit into this theme.  They're one more resource to dissipate (i.e. burn), and they're also one more way to differentiate characters.  On the flip side, sure, they have more burnable characteristics, but remember that working OUTSIDE of a style cuts a facet in half - which seems to fit a lot of media where characters refuse to do certain things because they're "not my style".  So players are encouraged to act more "in character" and I think play balance is maintained.

I will add it to the rules for the next playtest, but I won't "formalize" it until after the playtest.

[Lxndr]

AFter running Fastlane in real life today (using the American dice variant - the roulette wheel is a bit too cumbersome to transport on a motorcycle, and it was too short notice to arrange alternative transportation) I've pondered another idea for Styles:

* Burning a Style before the spin doubles the effective winnings of a spin.  So say you got a Nerve Style of "Strong" - you want to do something strong, so whammo, you burn your Style and bid.  If you win one chip, you get one "phantom chip."  If you win ten chips, you get ten "phantom chips."  And so on.

The game we played today was "by the book."  I'll be posting in Actual Play shortly.

[Lance D. Allen]

An idea that just occurred to me.. Each style has a counter style that balances it. You get to add one free chip to the bet if the conflict fits the style, but if it fits the counter style, ALL elements against which you are contesting add +1 to their difficulty. For example..

Scratch has the Nerve Style "Ballsy" with the counter-style of Physical Strength, because he's got a devil-may-care attitude, but isn't physically imposing. Whenever he goes into a dangerous situation in which he uses nerve, such as staring down a pitbull, he gets to add one chip to the bet. Alternately, if he's slugging that same pitbull in the skull to stun it while he runs away, and the pitbull's owner is trying to grab him, both the pitbull and the owner get +1 to their difficulty.

Just an idea that occurred to me after you left..

[Lxndr]

Although I like the idea of counterstyles, I want a style to be a positive thing, so people can justify spending their chips on them.  I've managed to work something out I'll be posting in a few days, once I get the other changes to the document (mainly better examples of play) completed.