[PUNK] Two possible minor revisions to task resolution

[Daniel Solis]

Quick recap, 'cause it's been a while since the last update.

PUNK is a game of rebellion against the Man. It lays out a basic system tailored to the more anarchic side of the -punk subgenre. PUNK will provide sample gameworlds that mix n' match prefixes to "-punk," including lycanthropunk, superpunk, psipunk, fupunk, kaijupunk and more. Each world shares the basic elements of an oppressive society and rebels in a variety of guises working to subvert the establishment.

The basic task resolution for PUNK is as follows:

Traits are all do-it-yourself. Gather a d10 for every relevant beneficial trait. Remove a d10 for every relevant detrimental trait. Roll 'em. 10s explode. If the highest result is above a difficulty number, you succeed.

Now here are the two directions I could take this mechanic.

a)

If you succeeded, narrate the outcome while incorporating each beneficial trait that led to your success. If you failed, the Man narrates the outcome while incorporating each detrimental trait that led to your failure.

b)

For each die that beat the difficulty number, you get one action that you can do relating to one of the beneficial traits. For each die that didn't beat the difficulty number, you get one action you can do relating to one of your detrimental traits.

I like how (a) provides a bit of structure like an improv performance where the performer asks for some simple ingredients from the audience but must put them together on his own on the spot. I dislike that it acknowledges the possibility for failure and thus a whiff factor. I don't want PUNK characters to fail and just give up. Perhaps instead of success/failure it could be success/anger? Failure may be a failure, but that's also how you gain Punk Points. The only way to get punky is to be beaten.

I like how (b) blends success and failure into a single narrative, but breaking things down into "actions" can get tedious. The rest of the system maintains a distinct shade of grey with regards to the nature of "advantages n' disadvantages" so it would be nice if the task resolution reflected this in the outcomes.

Questions
Should I choose one revision over the other? If so, which one? Is it possible to blend the two cohesively into the resolution or should resolution itself be streamlined into something even simpler?

[Shreyas Sampat]

Why not go the Donjon way and go with 'facts' in (b)?  Having it broken down into 'actions' is, I agree, too granulated and distinct.

Possibly, you could have a thing where people throw ideas at you, and you have to use X of each type in your narration, somehow.  There are countless ways to go with this.

[Daniel Solis]

Why not go the Donjon way and go with 'facts' in (b)?  Having it broken down into 'actions' is, I agree, too granulated and distinct.

I've not read Donjon yet, can you explain how it uses "facts"? I'm familiar with the concept as implemented in octaNe, is it something similar?

Possibly, you could have a thing where people throw ideas at you, and you have to use X of each type in your narration, somehow.  There are countless ways to go with this.

Kind of a democratic resolution. Hm... Sounds promising. How many ideas would you have to use and why? And by "you" do you mean the player or the GM?

[Lxndr]

My personal preference, such that it is, is for (a) over (b).  I'm not a big fan of the "facts" method of Donjon, nor an "actions" method, mostly due to the fuzziness of what constitutes a fact and/or action.

Plus I really feel good about the whole "success/anger" duality you suggested, and I like the improv-acting method of (a).  It feels much simpler than (b), in my eyes.

I have to wonder if this following additional tweak to (a) might fit, though.  I'm going to toss it out for consideration:

If you succeeded, The Man narrates the outcome while incorporating each beneficial trait that led to your success. If you failed, you get to narrate the outcome while incorporating each detrimental trait that led to your failure.

[DevP]

Reclassify failure as more like anger, and otherwise I find (a) a faster and more intuitive resolution.

[Daniel Solis]

If you succeeded, The Man narrates the outcome while incorporating each beneficial trait that led to your success. If you failed, you get to narrate the outcome while incorporating each detrimental trait that led to your failure.

I like that a lot. It pretty elegantly negates the Whiff Factor and softens the GM-as-adversary angle. Perhaps I could include a use for Punk Points that lets the player decide who narrates?

Okay, I think I'll move forward with (a), but further input would still be very welcome. :)