Meaningful-quick World-Generation for spacerpunks

[DevP]

(Ah, the eternal progress of space-western setting...)

The lowdown: human-centric Space-Western & Space-Noir. PCs hopping around from planet to planet each episode. (Planet-of-the-week, Bounty-of-the-Week, slightly arc-y threads throughout, etc.)

I've been trying to figure out how to help GMs and PCs create new and rich worlds on the fly. One concept I had with the setting is not providing excessively rich Tomes Of Planets (intimidating!) but instead some basic ideas for creating new worlds on the fly, pulling them out of thin air - I'm mean, it's a big enough 'verse, EVERYTHING should be out there. (One idea I like is having the players, OOC, collaboratively suggest an interesting "planet-of-the-week"; the GM will bring it into play in some fashion (probably with some surprises). I like this idea.)

The problem is that a lack of a framework has made on-the-fly Planet creation hard. I'm also having trouble figuring out how much detail - and moreover, WHICH detail - matters in the end. So here are my train of thoughts so far:

* What matters for the theme: places provide some consistency or history for a groups' adventures, but really places are just means of challenging th e players (a means for Exploration of Character, perhaps?). Some details are necessary for flavor, but fundamental to a place is the challenge in represents. (i.e. a city may have the flavor of Boston, but the purpose of that city is really to challenge to claustrophobic inclinations of the bounty hunter).

* Retroactive Consistency: keep a journal of places you've been, and be consistent in mentioning them in the future!

* It's okay to mix-and-match existing themes from Earth to quickly evoke flavor in players' minds.

* Specific Planets/Geography/Asteroids/Sun-types for the most part WON'T matter; what matters are specific places, their stylings, and their inherent challenges. (For consistency track *which* planet in the system has this place, but this is mainly just assigning a number; you can land on Sigma IV while ignoring Sigma I - III.)

* Define places in one of three types: COLONIES, of about 100-2000 folks (evoking remote towns of the Old West); DEVELOPMENTS of more like 10k - 100k people (evoking mining colonies and the projects, etc.); and CITIES of up to a million (urban development). [For the purposes of the Frontier, this is as large as we'll see, but more important as thematically clear as necessary.]

* Assume a single government type (or lack-of-government) is in control of the system at large, except in special cases (and this is not made for those special cases). Define this authority and it's political leanings; assume it's effects are strongest in the City, and weaker in the Developments and Colonies.

From this, I can imagine creating blank sheets with open slots, reducing most world-creation choices to checking a box or filling out a single prompt:

SYSTEM
Government: (e.g. Limited Republic with Corporate Autonomy)
Socioeconomic: (e.g. Mixed Martian refugees in a moderately successful system)
Connections (e.g. alliances, trading partners)
Competition:
Threats: (e.g. Pirates, Confederates, etc.)

PLACES
Planet #
Type (Colony/Development/City)
Key Industry
Key Environmental
Hazards (i.e. zero gravity)
Style: (i.e. Thailand-esqe)
Twist: (i.e. vertical city!)

Most of these are summed up in descriptions, but could any of these benefit from reduction to types (i.e. establishing specific government choices), or reduction to numbers (i.e. an economic axis instead of description).

Let me know what you think,  or especially if I should refine anything I've said.

[Wasabi]

Sounds like an awesome idea, I'll hafta try it out sometime. This is an issue I've found myself facing a few times, and it CAN be daunting Nice job, and keep it up!

[DevP]

I realize I didn't ask any specific questions. My mistake.

SYSTEM
Government: (e.g. Limited Republic with Corporate Autonomy)
Socioeconomic: (e.g. Mixed Martian refugees in a moderately successful system)
Connections (e.g. alliances, trading partners)
Competition:
Threats: (e.g. Pirates, Confederates, etc.)

PLACES
Planet #
Type (Colony/Development/City)
Key Industry
Key Environmental
Hazards (i.e. zero gravity)
Style: (i.e. Thailand-esqe)
Twist: (i.e. vertical city!)

So suppose the GM throws at you a blank sheet with prompts for the things above; you're told if a few far-reaching powers (the Confederacy, the Mars Republic) but you're told to wing it as you like, and you really are given the responsibility of creating culture and political faction from whole cloth. Your task is to create a sample place that you might find fun for your character to visit (this takes place OOC, of course). And that's it.

Chances are, you're feeling lost. Why? What is missing, and in what ways can I make the framework more helpful for my players, especially more timid or passive ones? (Or other GMs, for that matter.)

[contracycle]

Chances are, you're feeling lost. Why? What is missing, and in what ways can I make the framework more helpful for my players, especially more timid or passive ones? (Or other GMs, for that matter.)

I don't know whats normal, or whats weird.

[Daniel Solis]

Were I given that sheet, I'd like at least a few of the blanks already filled so I know what the GM has in mind. This would also still leaving me some options for the nature of the world. Given the few filled-in blanks as a sort of prompt, I may actually be able to create a more interesting world.

It might also be cool to have players call dibs on certain world traits, but I suspect that's just my own preferences creeping in there.

[Mike Holmes]

While the Explorer in me thinks that detial like this is interesting, other sides of me are flashing warning signs. I've played a lot of Traveller. And one thing that I find is that, despite all the information on worlds, etc, it never gets put into effect in play unless it directly affects the PCs. That is, unless the "adventure" involves going outside into a wilderness area, the characters aren't going to need to know about the local Flora and Fauna. They don't need to know the govemental type unless they're going to run afoul of it. Etc.

Worse than this, even when you do work out the details, they're never enough to be realistic. Can any short description of an entire planet's government ever do it justice? My favorite is when a world gets listed as a Desert World or a Water World, etc. Other than the vaguest of ideas, these things mean very little overall in describing the action the players will encounter.

What I'd suggest is a system that produces detail in the context of the play. For example, when coming to a new world, unless a player asks some question about it, the answer should be left indeterminate. When the player asks, the GM then comes up with something, either via some random method, from notes, or by other Director Stance method. For example, I like the idea of PCs rolling some skill (computer lookup or something), and on success having to choose a detail themselves. The cool thing about this is that it makes creation a group effort. Meaning that, unlike in Traveller in which players would often ask questions that I had no way to answer, and expected an answer, they'll understand that there's a creative task going on at that point, and the effort behind it. Meaning they won't ask unless it's important, and they want to know.

Then I'd also have a way for the color to inject itself at intervals all by itself, without player request. For example, when doing a resolution of some sort, there can be cues to produce such information. Maybe every conflict should produce at least one piece of color information, and more with particular dice results, etc. As these aren't voluntary, they'd probably be the GM's responsibility.

This should alleviate some of Dev's problems. OTOH, that sort of a cop out in that a good game ought to give players a better ability to create, not just leave them awash. The way to do this, IMO, is via Genre Expectations. That is, this sort of feel for what might exist needs to be strongly established to start. If this were a Star Wars game, for instance, you'd start out with a lot of advantage in terms of shared understanding. Not having that to stand on, you'll have to rely instead on establishing it more with cliches. Have a dozen points or so that players should understand thouroughly about the universe of play. You'd be amazed how far that little information can go in creating consistent creativity.

The point is that you can't have all the detail you need, it just can't be done. I have databases full of Traveller information, but it only scratches the surface of the much deeper world that we have to imagine exists beneath it. The important thing is to remain internally consistent, and that means adhering to the Genre Expectations. As long as that's well understood, this sort of detail can be created as needed.

Further, once created, it would be cool to have some sort of system to incentivize revisiting ideas already inserted. That is, if a player failed at a repair task once because of lack of availablility of Chemiosmotic Neural Filtering Quadrex, then it should become an ongoing problem. So, not only recording these things for future continuity is important, but finding a way to actively get them back into play is a good idea as well.

Does that all make sense?

Mike

[DevP]

That is, unless the "adventure" involves going outside into a wilderness area, the characters aren't going to need to know about the local Flora and Fauna. They don't need to know the govemental type unless they're going to run afoul of it. Etc.

I agree entirely; the purpose of determining specific social traits is to turn them each into potential challenges, ultimately. THat is what I'm trying to provoke.

Can any short description of an entire planet's government ever do it justice? My favorite is when a world gets listed as a Desert World or a Water World, etc. Other than the vaguest of ideas, these things mean very little overall in describing the action the players will encounter.

I'm not sure that's true. To some extent, I'm just invoking different Cliches mixed with different Cliches: Miami with a touch of Chinatown, floating cities on a water planet, scummy industrial sprawl, a monarchy and economically depressed people. How's that?

I don't think building on these one-world Cliches works for some worlds - if I plan on bringing a world into the plot-arc, I may design it in more detail before - but if I'm trying to create the planet-of-the-week, I think one-phrase lucid descriptions can be a great help. And indeed, looking above, each cliche points to a potential conflict or flavor point. I have some idea how to fit into this kind of world.

What I'd suggest is a system that produces detail in the context of the play. For example, when coming to a new world, unless a player asks some question about it, the answer should be left indeterminate. When the player asks, the GM then comes up with something, either via some random method, from notes, or by other Director Stance method. For example, I like the idea of PCs rolling some skill (computer lookup or something), and on success having to choose a detail themselves.
...
This should alleviate some of Dev's problems. OTOH, that sort of a cop out in that a good game ought to give players a better ability to create, not just leave them awash. The way to do this, IMO, is via Genre Expectations. That is, this sort of feel for what might exist needs to be strongly established to start. If this were a Star Wars game, for instance, you'd start out with a lot of advantage in terms of shared understanding. Not having that to stand on, you'll have to rely instead on establishing it more with cliches. Have a dozen points or so that players should understand thouroughly about the universe of play. You'd be amazed how far that little information can go in creating consistent creativity.

I did in fact try this at first, although I pushed authorship on the players somewhat clumsily, hence their request for more strucure. (I had my player describe a name on the spot; hence, we now have a planet in the universe named "Bananaplanet". I expected a wee bit better. <g>)

contracycle said it kind of clearly, as did Mike: without a more clear Genre Expectation of normalcy, we'll have nothing but cliches to fall back on. (I still have faith in juxtaposed cliches, but its not everything.) I do think I can sum up the Universe Premise in about 5-10 points, so I good feature of these Planet-Generation sheets could be a quick checklist on the side to encourage staying within the consistencies of the setting.

Further, once created, it would be cool to have some sort of system to incentivize revisiting ideas already inserted. That is, if a player failed at a repair task once because of lack of availablility of Chemiosmotic Neural Filtering Quadrex, then it should become an ongoing problem. So, not only recording these things for future continuity is important, but finding a way to actively get them back into play is a good idea as well.

In my evolving playtest, I'm keeping a notebook where I record any places my players have been (eventually I'll use a pre-configured printed form instead, as i've suggested). This is useful for other things - improv'd NPCs, factions, pirates, enemies - but the thought of incentivizing it has never occurred to me. I can only think of simplistic solutions - making tasks easier if you re-introduce past continuity, or getting a extra Resource to spend as a metagame reward for maintaining continuity.

[Mike Holmes]

Yep, without seeing the rest of your system, the metagame resource is the only thing that comes to my mind. If you wanted to work that out better, we'd need more info.

I do think I can sum up the Universe Premise in about 5-10 points, so I good feature of these Planet-Generation sheets could be a quick checklist on the side to encourage staying within the consistencies of the setting.

That's what I'm against. What the checklist does, like in Traveller, is limit the input to certain areas. Thus we know that it's a water world, but not anything about the water. Thus, every water world that I've seen in Traveller to date implies a world-wide salt sea with life in it. The point is that by only allowing set answers to set questions, you get consistent pat answers.

What I'm advocating is forgetting about the checklist, and allow the questions to be more freeform. This allows for better answers. If, instead of the question, "What's the planet's Governmental Type?" asked because of the checklist, the player asked, "Who runs this world?", you get a very different answer potentially. And if they ask, "Hey, do they have anything valuable to trade?" and that's completely not on the list, you get the creation of information that would otherwise not get created at all.

Even if the checklist is only about how the world meets the genre exectations, then in answering each question, you make up more information than you'll likely need in play. Again, why make up the answer until the information becomes neccessary in some way?

Those "points" about the universe should be guides to answers, not to questions. So, if one of the points is that everyone has cybernetics in this universe to some extent, the answer to the "What do they have to trade?" question can be something like, "They do the galaxy's best cybernetic eyes." So the point about Cybernetics is not to rate each world in how well it makes cybernetics, but as a guide for how to answer any question interestingly. "Who rules the planet?" "Well, it's this totally cybered up dictator." "What's the place that's most fun to go to on this planet?" "It's the Cyber-arena." Think of how the single "western" point makes answering a lot of questions easier.

Give the player one resource point or something for each of the Genre Expectations that his answer touches on (I think this is stealing from Scattershot, now).

See what I'm saying? The lists in Traveller channel creativity into little boxes. From which we then all spend our time trying to escape in play. If you have infinite questions, with guidance on how to answer them all, then there's no channeling, except as benefits the exploration.

Am I getting this idea across?

Mike

[DevP]

Those "points" about the universe should be guides to answers, not to questions. So, if one of the points is that everyone has cybernetics in this universe to some extent, the answer to the "What do they have to trade?" question can be something like, "They do the galaxy's best cybernetic eyes."

What I meant by the Universe Premise "checklist" was just this, guidelines around the possible answers. i.e. I assert "No aliens" and "All systems are Independent, except a few under the Foo Repbulic" and "Nitrogen is a valuable resource," or whatnot, so I think that this in particular is in line with what you're saying. (Actually, the Universe Premise could easily be changing. Although some tenets are preset as per setting, some will be made up in play. I didn't know that Nitrogen mining was a key industry until I made it up last week, for example.)

Nonetheless...

...quick checklist...

That's what I'm against. What the checklist does, like in Traveller, is limit the input to certain areas. Thus we know that it's a water world, but not anything about the water. Thus, every water world that I've seen in Traveller to date implies a world-wide salt sea with life in it. The point is that by only allowing set answers to set questions, you get consistent pat answers.
What I'm advocating is forgetting about the checklist, and allow the questions to be more freeform.

So some kind of guidelines/genre-expectations are loose, but you would find my sort of Checklists/Form creation stifling? This is kind of a tough problem. You mention your Water worlds being similar; and yet, if a world is mostly a "water world", then I would say specifics other than "covered in water" are not so relevant, and can be made up on the spot. I don't see the quality of the water/life being a very prevalent part in the locale description or the conflicts. (If the players go scuba diving, I would have to describe it then.)

I do think that a few items of the "checklist" need to be established for the GM's sake, if he is expected to describe the place in question with meaningful detail. If the players simply don't suggest any environmental conditions or the colony type (urban/rural), there is no default, and the GM can't go about describing the place without deciding these himself. So in effect, I feel that there have to be some "checklist" items, at least in practice.

But I do see your point, Mike, especially that:

Even if the checklist is only about how the world meets the genre exectations, then in answering each question, you make up more information than you'll likely need in play.

which is whole reason I'm trying to avoid some of the pitfalls of Traveller, as you've said.

I think the problems previously with letting players create the world themselves were (a) lack of Genre Expectations, (b) a sort of murky distinction between IC/OOC desires, and (c) no framework at all. Also, simply answering questions they get asked is a problem, since many PCs would be going to a planet for a reason. We had this problem:

Me: So you're going to Bananaplanet I.
Reb: What's the goverrnment?
Me: It's friendly to Mars...
Reb: Bugger that! Why the heck would I go near them???

It was stupid on my part, but this sort of problem crops out if the players have any choice about where they're pointing their ship next. But suppose I center this planet creation around a dialogue about "where to go next", with the players in-character, staring at the holomap and readouts:

GM: So the closest planet to jump to is <randomname> Viggerly.
Reb: Viggerly, eh. So what's up there that we can score some cash on? (get 1 Resource for asking a good question)
Erin: (pay 1 Resource) I heard the Symptotic Gears are real cheap this week! We should have an easy time of it.
Doc: What about the Cops? Gears are usually "hot", by which I mean stolen. (get 1)
Reb: I know the Viggerians, the cops are useless. (get 1) It's the Mob we have to worry about.
Erin: Not to mention to toxic atmosphere and extreme temperatures. (pay 1)
Reb: That's only on Viggerly I. Viggerly II is a gas giant, lots of nice floater-colonies. (pay 1)

The exact economics have to be balanced of course, but this could work out. Later in the game, you could gain a Resource by asking a question that poses a potential challenge, and pay 1 to answer the question. (Usable to define political trends, social groups, local cityscapes on the fly.)

So I've found a way to make question-based planet-creation make sense, and got rid of some of the "checklist" feel; however, alongside the explicit Genre Expectations I plan on providing several (~25) sample planetary Traits or Cliches that could help spark ideas when creating planets. Of course, a planet trait like "water world" is precisely the kind of pat answer I'd want to avoid, but from my experience many players will need simple choices like these, at first, before freely composing answers. (Also, if there is pressure to improvise smoothly, a diverse list of fallback options is good to have.) I think it could help if I could keep the traits as non-generic as possible. (i.e. Perhaps not "Republic" as a trait, but "Decadent plutocratic republic"; thus, if players want something different, they will improvise their own "Populist Agrarian Republic" or such.)

[Mike Holmes]

I think we're mostly on the same page.

I do think that a few items of the "checklist" need to be established for the GM's sake, if he is expected to describe the place in question with meaningful detail. If the players simply don't suggest any environmental conditions or the colony type (urban/rural), there is no default, and the GM can't go about describing the place without deciding these himself. So in effect, I feel that there have to be some "checklist" items, at least in practice.

What if the players only go to the starport, and don't hit the planet below? I mean, if what you're saying is that you have a list of things that players will note as soon as they step off the starship onto the planet's surfact, I suppose I agree. But I just don't see the need for the items in the checklist. That is, if they get off into a starport, then I need to be able to describe the starport. Then, if they get into some sort of public transportation, then I need to be able to describe that form of transportation. If that transportation goes outside, then I have to be able to describe the local environment.

See where the waterworld thing is problematic? Assuming that, I come out of the starport on a waterworld, the "answered" data tells me to describe water as far as the eye can see. And that's not bad. But if the "question" is effectively "what do the players see?" when they come out, then I may get the answer "Everything is a haze; Planet Rigelia is covered with water in a vapor form. The heat and pressure keep it from forming water. But it still takes contained vehicles to travel through it." Or whatever. By only answering questions as they need to be answered, you avoid pat answers, and create a larger, more vibrant world. If you're stuck, and decide that one planet is your typical water planet, that's also fine. You just aren't informed that this planet should be like the last one rated as a water planet. In any case, you don't ever need to answer what the goverment is like unless the PCs run into it, or the players ask.

Instead, you get to address things in terms of their relation to the Genre Expectations. "As the transport comes out of the starport, you note that there's a saloon on a foating island nearby." The point here is that it doesn't matter if the water is salt or fresh, like you say. But the checklist says that it is important. The real point of interest, however, is that it relates to one of the points. So the "waterworld" part becomes just a color detail in the more important description of the saloon.


BTW, remember this - the characters have their own equivalents of Genre Expectations. Fang called them Sin Non Qua. Traits without which the characters are not themselves. These are even more important to consider when coming up with an answer. Is one of the characters Anti-Mars? Then the answer to what he sees in the transport as he comes out of the starport is, "On a tower platform sticking up out of a the water all around is a demonstration of The Mars Freedom Alliance. They're all got on those ridiculous cyber-horses, and are parading around the starport flight control tower."

I have no problem with the cliches as long as they're meant to inspire, and not as selections to take to fill in a blank. Because when that's the case, that's what you get. If you're rule is, "Put something like the example, in blank A" then you'll get the example most of the time.

I'm probably overstating all this, but I think it's important. BTW, I also have no problem with having things already figured out in terms of what's where. Not everything needs to be made up on the spot. But when revealing previously generated data, always make sure to do so in the context of the action somehow. That is, don't detour the characters just to be sure that they see some marvel on the planet in question. Instead make it color on their way to shoot the bad guys. Or whatever they're up to.

Mike

[DevP]

What if the players only go to the starport, and don't hit the planet below?

So if I let the players go about "talking out" the description of the planet in the manner above, they probably would cover a few unnecessary points of information in the process, but then again, I would only require them to create detail until, as players, they agree to go to the planet; once-at the location, either player-resources or GM-invocation could shore up the rest, as-necessary per player actions.

I think I'm good now, and just need to rewrite/playtest this for a bit. Thanks all.