Persona - Just in Time Roleplaying

[Tim C Koppang]

Imagine if you could simply announce a character concept to your group and that would be enough--that would be character creation. Imagine if you could change your character at any point during the game. Imagine if you could buy the skills your character needs at the exact moment he needs them. Now imagine that I'm not talking about a namby-pamby freeform storytelling game. That's PERSONA.
 

Discover the character that you want to play as the game progresses.
 
Every die roll is an opportunity to develop character.
 
Built in customization allows a group to shift narrative power from the GM to the players and vice versa.
 
Complete list of modifiable character traits, or Fragments, to choose from.
 
Pragmatic advice (from one of the game's original creators) offered throughout the text.[/list:u]

View the game.



Greetings all,

This post has been a long time coming.  With the responsibilities of real life overwhelming me... blah, blah... let's just say I've been really busy since GenCon.

Let me get right to the point.  I posted my new game, Persona, on the web.  However, I don't want you to think this is a "look what I can do post."  I have some very specific questions that I'd appreciate your help with.  Although the game as it stands is presented in a finalized form, it doesn't have to stay that way.

1) Persona doesn't have any sort of setting, etc built-in by default.  Much like The Pool et al, I intend players to insert all of that on their own.  However, do you think that the premise of the game is obvious, or rather do you even notice a premise?

2) Do the three switches in the game offer the players anything of value?  What I mean is: should I keep the switches or just pick one setting and write the game from that perspective?  Preferences?

3) I feel a bit like I'm wasting the character advancement mechanic.  I know from play-testing sessions that it's important for players to have a sizable pool of points to draw from at all times.  However, as the rules stand now, there isn't really a reward mechanic per se.  Rather the GM just dishes out points whenever reserves are low.  Suggestions, comments?  Perhaps, I don't need anything more substantial?

I suppose three question are enough for now.  However, I am curious to see how people react to Just In Time Character Creation.  It's not a crazy-original idea, but Persona was designed from the ground up around fast character creation.  It's something that Ben, Mike, and I have been interested in for some time now.

Thanks.

[eldae22]

As a guinie pig for some of Tim and Mike's many creations, I have to say that persona was definitely their best.  On the fly character creation was a great way to jump start any game at the drop of a hat.  Taking the time to make characters, NPCs and all the book thumbing that slowed down many other games we tried (and enjoyed) is gone.  

To emphasize a confusion/dislike I had, is assigning skills or traits on the fly.  At first it seemed untrue to character building.  But as I got used to the game, you realize that your character had these abilities all along, but because you haven't "rolled" for them yet, you haven't assigned them a number yet.  Also, this allows the party to be more cohesive.  Many times, characters don't mesh or overlap.  In persona, your character is fluid enough that he can change instantly.  You don't have to trudge through several sessions building up points or just start from scratch.

In any case, Persona is one of the best systems I've played under.  It's greatest advantage it had in our group was the big decision of what system do we want to play tonight.  The question now becomes, who wants to GM tonight.

[phewner]

Hey all...I'm Mike, one of the orginal co-designers of Persona.  I'm also the person who is babbling inanely at you in all the "Mike Says" boxes scattered throughout the text...the gruff and loveable hardened roleplayer "who just dosen't put muh' truck in all that fancy-smancy roleplaying theory, consarnit"

Which really isn't much like me at all, mostly - I'll usually debate roleplaying theory till the cows come home.  But I think that too much theorizing detracts from the main point I want to make to you - Persona is a really playable game.  Really.  So playable that even your angry "I'll never play another homebrew roleplaying system in the world" gamers might be converted to it.

The thing Persona is best at is a standard pick up game.  I'm totally not kidding you when I say this is how my Persona game startup times look:

[3 minutes]  I explain the setting for the game.
[4-10 minutes]  People come up with character's and describe them (and, if I'm looking for a fast/funny game, these descriptions could literally be as short has "some sort of super cyborg ninja"...but cool characters are the heart of any Persona game, so some thought isn't entirely unwarrented)
[begin playing]

And if you have to explain the system to people, that's an extra 10 minutes max - (plus maybe five minutes dealing with the question 'So you're saying I buy my skills *after* I roll?  Isn't that cheating?').

As far I am concerned, Persona makes pick up roleplaying possible for me.  If my group had to spend an hour making up characters every time we wanted to just try out something different, we'd loose all motivation.

So if you're planning on a pick up game one of these days, I encourage you to try out Persona.  I mean, this game is so fast, if you don't like it after 2 hours, you still have time to play a totally different game.

Mike

[ejh]

Haven't had a chance to read it yet, but it sounds like a good game-length treatment of something I slipped into Fudge 11 years ago... :)

http://members.dsl-only.net/~bing/frp/fudge/fudge7.html#sec7.41

[C. Edwards]

A couple questions about the format. Are you only offering the print pdf by email request because you plan on selling it? And if not, then why not just offer a link on the website? Bandwidth issues?

Thanks,

Chris

[Ben Lehman]

I think that this is a cool idea but...

1)  I think it will get unwieldy fast -- once the number of fragments gets large, it will be impossible (or just unpleasantly slow) to run the damn game.  My suggesion here is to have an "expiration date" on Fragments.  Either a certain number / session "dissolve" back into the CP pool, or all those that aren't used for 1 (or 2 or whatever) full sessions dissolve.  When fragments dissolve, they just give you their purchase CP back, so they aren't exactly "lost" at all -- they come back whenever you need them.  They are just no longer narratively important for the character.  This also means that "character advancement" doesn't need to exist at all -- characters merely adapt as appropriate to the situations at hand.

2)  The rules about extra dice are just silly.  Get them out of there.

3)  It seems to me that the sample difficulties are very very high.  Is this intentional?  A guideline for difficulties would be very useful.
 I also find the comment that difficulties represent character definition, not difficulty, to be very important, and I think it needs to be emphasized more -- generally speaking, you won't fail unless you want to.  Difficulty is a matter of how much the character is invested in the challenge.

4)  Spending points to "block" interesting scenes seems totally counter productive.  Interesting scenes are good.  Also, just losing two character points seems wildly contradictory to the nature of CP in the game.  Perhaps the 2 CP could shift to the blocked character, rewarding them in "character coolness" for their inability to do their cool scene.

5)  I find "mike's notes" not particularly helpful.  I know how to make this more like a normal RPG.  I don't need some fellow cutting in and telling me all over the place.

6)  Why do talents and equipment take more CP?  Wouldn't it be easier to go 1 for 1 on CP, rather than 2 for one with strange mods?

yrs--
--Ben

[Tim C Koppang]

ejh,

Hey, good ideas get recycled all the time.  :-)

I assume that you have some experience then with on the fly character development.  How did this change the way players looked at their characters?

One of the things that I tried to emphasize in the Persona text was the notion that a player will constantly think about where he wants to used his unspent points.  In other words, a player might be thinking to himself, "where do I want to take this character in terms of development?"  And I'm not just talking about skills in the traditional sense here either.

A very powerful take on Persona Fragments gives players the ability to create things out of thin air.  Because Fragments are used for everything from combat skills, to comrades and enemies, to an emotional link between a location and a character, by purchasing a Fragment you can really direct the flow of play.  Doing this on the fly, or just in time, can create some interesting plot twists.  For example, a character might be an Arthurian knight, fighting to save his dearest love.  Well, there's nothing stopping the player from spending a boat-load of points to suddenly discover that his boring old sword is really the cousin of Excalibur.  Bam, the story goes off in a wildly different direction.  This of course works with any genre.

What's important to me, when I play Persona, is that I have the feeling that I, Tim, don't know exactly what kind of character I'm playing.  It's a mystery to me.  It's not until I purchase a Fragment that I know how my character would handle a particular type of situation.

Regards.

[Tim C Koppang]

Chris,

The email request format serves mostly as a means for me to gauge interest.  Given time and depending on what I decide to do with the game in the future, I may just post the print version alongside the html one.  But for now, flood my inbox.  :-)

Regards.

[Tim C Koppang]

Ben,

Let me take this point by point:

1) From chapter 6: "When you are rolling 6D6 and have well over 500 Character Points, the average Challenge isn't really a challenge. Do not be afraid to set a character aside and begin again, tabula rasa. A blank sheet gives you the chance to discover a new set of personae, and a different person altogether. If the group decides to end a campaign and start another, you may try bringing an old character back, but throw away your old character sheet. Do not try to recreate a character. Discover him again."

I think putting an expiration date on Fragments is a interesting idea.  In my mind however, a character is defined for the length of a short campaign, at which point all of his Fragments expire so to speak.  Then, if the group decides to start up a new campaign with the same characters they do so from scratch.  Of course players could just buy up similar Fragments, but they aren't limited in this way.

And please notice that I said short campaign.  I agree with you.  Over the long haul a Persona character needs to be reset, or else you run the risk of making challenges very predictable and boring.

2) Ahh, you've hit on one of the great Persona debates.  It was Mike and Ben vs. Tim in the design phase.  This is also the reason I included the Mike Says box wherein he recommends ignoring the rule.  However, I'm still not convinced.  Can you give me more details?  Why do you think it's a "silly" addition?

3) Sample difficulties weren't really set intentionally high.  For the most part I wanted to make sure that there were enough interesting things going on in the examples so as to show off the system.  Let's face it, if all of the examples had DRs of 2, they really wouldn't be very helpful examples.  On the other hand, speaking from experience, you really do want to have DRs around the example numbers.  Remember, the point is to force players to purchase Fragments.  It's not going to happen on every roll, but in order for the game to progress, it has to happen on many of the rolls.

As for difficulty representing character definition, you're right on.  Let me just clarify by saying that you won't fail unless you want to most of the time.  You are also limited by character points, especially if you're the type of player that likes to spend them as soon as the GM dishes them out.  In such cases, it's easy for a spend-happy player to get left in the lurch.  He'll be stuck making harder DRs, waiting for the other players to spend all of their points before the GM gives out a new supply.

4) I really like the idea of giving the "blocked" character a reward, instead of punishing the "blocker."  This of course, would encourage players to interject with scene requests.  There is however an abuse factor that may crop up.  Player thinks, "Hmmm... I need some points.  How about I just request a totally outrageous scene that I know someone will block?"  Social contract would go a long way to prevent this though.

I'm going to think some more on this.  Actually, this is one of the few rules that received a lower amount of play-testing than all the rest.  So, I'm very open to suggestions.

5) I'm wondering if others wouldn't appreciate a few designer's notes however.

6) Not really sure what you mean here.  Maybe you misunderstood.

All Fragments are purchased at the ratio of 2 to 1 except for the two Fragments discounted in Switch #3--they're 1 to 1.  The purpose here is to allow a group to emphasize certain Fragments that coincide with their collective goals/preferences.

Or maybe I misunderstood your comment?

Regards.

[ejh]

ejh,

Hey, good ideas get recycled all the time.  :-)

I assume that you have some experience then with on the fly character development.  How did this change the way players looked at their characters?

I wish.  Cool ideas come much easier to me than opportunities to game, especially with open-minded players.  I came up with that after reading some Umberto Eco, actually, suggested it to Steffan O'Sullivan on Usenet and he threw it in as a rules variant.  I think I may have actualy played it once long ago with one friend.

I'm thrilled to find out that there are people actually playing that way. :)

The only variation on it I'd like to see is a probabilistic rather than points-based version, i.e. instead of "you spend your points to find out things about your character" it's "you roll to find out things about your character, perhaps spending points to affect the outcome."

I discussed an idea like that in another thread on the forge, under the name "Oraculum."  It's probably findable with a little search.  But there it was mixed up with the idea of solo games.

[LordSmerf]

A few things:

First, your requirement for an email to get the print PDF will probably limit your feedback since a good number of people on the Forge like to download a PDF and look over it carefully a few times before making any comments.

Second, as i'm not one of the afformentioned careful readers anything i say will be based on a single read-through.

The Fragment list seems superfluous.  Why not simply provide some guidelines instead of building an artificial (seems that way to me) breakdown of ways to describe a character?

The resolution (3d6) doesn't seem to fit.  Why use it at all?  Why not simply decide on a difficulty and just require that many Fragments?  Or perhaps roll Fragment number of d6's (similary to Universalis).

Why do you get points for things like Fear?  They are an integral part of the character and could just as easily be advantages as disadvantages.  If you have a deathly fear of dogs then when you are running from them the burst of adrenaline should probably help instead of hurt you...

Why can't you assign your own Wounds and stuff?

I also second the idea of 1 CP per 1 Fragment level.  It seems kind of silly to do a 2 to 1 just so you can then offer a special discount...  I would think that focusing on a single (or pair of) Fragment type(s) could be handled through Social Contract.

That's what i get from my first read.  I just thought i'd make the comment that this seems very similar to Ralph and Mike's Universalis except that you have a traditional GM/Player split going on.

Thomas

[Tim C Koppang]

Thomas,

Let me just say this: I don't really want to make this into a discussion of delivery methods.  I understand that by requiring an email to get the print version, I will cut off some people, but that's the choice I made.  And just to satisfy everyone's curiosity, the print version isn't really suitable for easy print jobs at all.  In fact I made it up as a booklet, suitable for binding at a place like Kinkos, as something cool for all the people involved in play-testing.  It looks pretty good if you ask me, and anyone who wants it is welcome to request it.  Otherwise, the web site isn't going anywhere and you can peruse at your leisure.  Still, I appreciate the input.  Enough said on that.

In a way, the Fragment list is that set of guidelines that you're talking about.  Of course a GM or the players can modify that list by creating new Fragments or deleting existing ones.  Out of curiosity, can you be more specific on why you think the list seems superfluous?  I might be better able to address the issue if I had a few examples to work with.  Or maybe you'll convince me to change it.  :-)

The Fear Fragment again points to using the Fragment list as a set of guidelines.  You get points for Fear because it's supposed to be implemented only as a hindering addition to your character.  Of course if you don't agree, then there's nothing stopping you from making an adrenaline rush Fragment, or the like.  However, I think it's nice to have the option of positive and negative Fragments.  There's very little a player can do to gain points on his own.  The negative Fragments address that issue in a small way.  To be sure, negative Fragments are in the minority in Persona.

As for the GM-awarded Fragments, all I can say is that the game was designed as a GM/Player split experience.  Mechanically, this is expressed, among other places, in the Fragment list.  A player gets ultimate control over the development of his character from an internal/relationship/emotional connection standpoint and the GM can impose situational Fragments on the character.  Wounds are definitely a situational Fragment, and so they squarely fall within the realm of GM control.  You might make the argument that the emotion Fragment, for example, is something dealing with emotional control and so should go to the player, but really I don't think so.  As written, it's situational and serves also as a GM awarded bonus.  Now, whether this choice is good or bad is of course a matter for debate, but at least now you know where I'm coming from.

Onto Fragment costs.  Yes, you could handle a focus through social contract, but if I can easily emphasize that focus through mechanics, then I'll do so.  If you still don't believe me, then I'd suggest giving the game a whirl.  :-)  In practice, the 2 to one ratio really isn't any sort of mathematical hassle.

And as for the similarities to Universalis (a game I love), all I can say is, "no."  Well, it's not entirely dissimilar, but the focus is wildly different.  In Persona, the focus is on character development, specifically on the development of your very own character.  No one else can touch that character, and any change in the world that you affect though Fragment purchase is only in relation to your character.  So, really there's a certain lack of freedom as compared to Universalis.  At the same time you have more freedom to develop your character as you see fit without the influence of others mucking it up.

Even the dice serve character development in a way.  They're a tool of luck that can play a role in how your character turns out.  For instance, if you roll high when trying to seduce the local noblemen, then you may not ever purchase that seduction Fragment.  This is a feature.  Really.  It works to keep the player on edge.  Although the player may have a solid concept in mind, the situation and the luck of the dice work to take that concept in different directions.  It's not that a player has to abandon his concept, but rather the specifics are always in flux.  Besides, isn't it nice to know that you may succeed just because you got lucky?

Regards.

[Kainesh]

Hello, I'm not really much of a writer so I'm gonna try to keep this brief.

I really dig persona.  It has already been said before, but I'm gonna repeat it.  This game is absolutely wonderful for pickup games.  I know that having it around was the difference between a night of gaming and a night of pointless character gen for a one shot game.

My personal favorite aspect of the game is its ability to let a group of players try out a world.  I don't mean play testing a new setting, but it is good at that too.  I mean that persona makes it easy to jump right in to a cool setting without the need to know what you are getting in to.  By allowing the players to get to know the way the game world "works" before they have finished character gen persona makes it possible to play the character you want to play when you want to play them.  This can apply even if a player makes a completely wrong character for the world he is playing in.

For example, say you make a character for a cyberpunky game with the PCs forming a  small gang out to protect their turf.  As a initial concept you may decide to play a cool runner wannabe who is more flash than substance, call him lip.  Now suppose that the game takes an unexpected turn and Lip finds himself running with the corps way more than street trash.  In most games, Lip is almost guaranteed to be a fish out of water.  After all, no matter how "cool" you made Lip he just isn't gonna have the skills to carry him in the new environment.  This is perfectly fine.  It can be a lot of fun to play this situation.  But I think it is cool that the Lip's player can, in persona, decide that this whole corp thing is just right for Lip.  Hell, Lip can be a natural.  Given a couple of pointers form a butler bot and an avoidance of spending points too soon Lip can very easily turn out to be a regular socialite!

Well, thats my poorly written case in point.  I hope it makes some sense, because it isn't getting rewritten.

Two more things.  
I strongly believe that the different costs of the different fragment types is a good thing.  Relationships and personas are clearly the most interesting and least useful  fragments that a player can take.  Also, they are not generally helpful.
This brings me to my second point.  Fragments do not have to give bonuses or negatives just because you spent/received points for them.  The reason you get points for fear but spend points on "good at getting away from objects of fear" is because the fear fragment is a overwhelmingly negative thing.  The level a debilitation associated with flaws is not on the order of freezing when you try to walk across that narrow bridge.  Its more along the lines of fainting.  In general, flaws are very bad so you get points.  They are never worth what you get for them but they can be fun.  I suggest that if you want to take a "hindrance" as a minor thing that you either make it a non-point based part of your character.  If you really feel the need, spend some points on it.  One of my favorite characters of all time had a fragment representing her rampant drug addiction.  I spent points on this.  I am glad I did.

Alright then.  That is at least two overly long under thought out rants for this evening.  Not bad considering my intention was to say "yay persona!" and go to bed.  Once again, everyone needs to give this game a try.  And feel free to bend and break the rules as you wish.  It takes so little time to get a game started you'd be foolish not to.

[Tim C Koppang]

Kainesh,

Right on; thanks for reminding me.  I should have mentioned your comments on Fear in my previous post.  If I can just expand a bit...

Graininess is a bit weird in Persona.  Or really, it's just not a very grainy system.  There's only a -5 to +5 range on all Fragments.  As Lee (Kainesh) said, when you take a fear Fragment, or really any Fragment for that matter, you aren't taking a low-level hinderance or a passing talent.  Right off that bat, your character is at the substantial level.  From the fear Fragment description on a level 1 fear: "even thinking about the thing you fear sets your teeth on edge, possibly dizziness or vomiting in its presence."  I'm not talking about your run of the mill phobia.  This is a serious, vomit inducing, hinderance.  And really that's the philosophy throughout the game.

Of course this only exacerbates the lifetime problem of any Persona character.  The recommended fix is to keep campaigns short, but you could take Ben Lehman's suggestion and place an expiration date on individual Fragments if that better suits your taste.

Regards.

[Tim C Koppang]

The only variation on it I'd like to see is a probabilistic rather than points-based version, i.e. instead of "you spend your points to find out things about your character" it's "you roll to find out things about your character, perhaps spending points to affect the outcome."

I think Persona does this in a way.  Maybe not in the way you envision, but to a certain degree.  I don't know if you've had a chance to read through the game yet, but dice can play a very big part in how your character turns out.  Rolling well in any particular situation means that you won't end up buying a lot of new Fragments, and vise versa.  At the same time, a player isn't limited by the dice.  He can choose to fail or succeed and thus develop his character that way.

By spending character points to purchase Fragments when you roll poorly, you at once affect the outcome of the challenge and develop your character.  So there's really two things happening at once.

Is this what you're getting at?  From your post it seems like might like to see the dice (exclusively) telling a player what his character is all about, while the points serve only to affect the outcome of the challenge.

Regards.