Super Action Now! (and the Way of the Disco Samurai)

[Marshall Burns]

So I was thinking about a comment Sam "wreckage" made about an old, old game I had designed in this thread.  He said: 

Dwogres? Robots? Flesh eating owls? Grotesque character death as the driving goal of the game?

That so totally rocks.

And, I realized, yeah, he's right, that does totally rock.  Problem was, the game in question wasn't intended to that whacky.

So, over the weekend, I designed a game that *was* intended to that whacky, and I giggled like a maniac the whole time.  That game is called Super Action Now! - A Crazy-Ass Roleplaying Game and you can grab the quick and dirty first draft at http://www.angelfire.com/indie/btw/san.html  (be forewarned, there is a popup; please don't shoot me)

In addition to the aforementioned goal, I had a few other design goals:

1.  To link metagame and in-game struggles constantly in a feedback loop (through a mechanic called TILT!).

2.  To make the game accessible to non-roleplayers (I'm not sure how well I did in that regard).

3.  To make the game require not only a certain level of tactical acumen, but also characterization and imaginative acumen.  That is, it's not just numbers, but also getting into the role of the character and interacting with the situation and other characters.

4.  To make a game in which Hardcore gamist play wouldn't produce dysfunction (a lofty goal, and time will no doubt prove that it didn't work, but it was a target to shoot for).

5.  To encourage a style of play that, in my head, I term  "The Way of the Disco Samurai."

The Way of the Disco Samurai
(I use the word "Disco" because to me it connotes a certain flamboyance, aplomb, and a radically ramped-up machismo (or machisma, depending on your sex or preferred gender role))

The Way of the Disco Samurai is a certain approach to any sort of objective, competitive activity.  The most accessible parts of it are the rush of responding to a challenge ("bet you can't do it." "Oh YEAH?  How MUCH?") and the thrill of victory (which is at its core the thrill of demonstrating your power to your friends, yourself, and the universe at large).

Another aspect of the Way of the Disco Samurai is something I like to call "Gettin' into the Jam." Gettin' into the Jam is when you're in the thick of it, and the wheels are turning, and you're hitting on all six cylinders, despatching foes (literally or figuratively) with grace and aplomb; playing at the top of your game.  For the Disco Samurai, just being in this state of mind is beautiful and immensely rewarding, regardless of what ultimately results from it, as it is an artistic expression of the Disco Samurai's very soul.

There is also the Harrowing, the thrill of being faced with a challenge of greater difficulty than you have ever encountered before.  It's exciting and new, and you're not sure whether you can defeat it, but you can't wait to find out.

Trash-talking is part of the Way of the Disco Samurai, but is employed only to goad (in the sense of encouragement, not annoyance) the opponent and as a display of respect, although voiced ironically.

The final aspect of the Way of the Disco Samurai, and probably the least accessible, is the Delicious Agony of Defeat.  This is the moment in which you lose and recognize the superiority of technique and acumen in your victor.  In this moment, you relish the loss because you received the benefit of witnessing the other guy's skill, for which you have a deep, artistic appreciation.  This is the moment in those movies when the defeated samurai, spewing pressurized blood, says with his last breath, "At last I get to see the Shoruya Horse-Killing Technique," and dies with a smile on his face.

The running theme of the Way the Disco Samurai is that competition is not merely fun, but an ART, an expression of one's most fundamental properties.  Win, lose, or draw, it is always rewarding as long as one invests the totality of one's self into the challenge.As they say in a million samurai movies, "To battle is to ask yourself who you truly are."

TILT! or METAGAME YOUR MOTHER!

TILT! is a player resource (as distinguished from a character resource) used to "tilt" the game in your favor.  You can use it to re-roll dice (yours or someone elses) or cash it in for some character resource, but the best part is The Twist:  add a permanent, unrevokable fact to the situation.  "Twist!  I find a chainsaw under the bed," "Twist!  There's an alligator in the corner.  You just didn't notice it before."  "Twist!  A coconut falls on Greg's head" (Greg: "What?")

The catch is how TILT! is earned:  everytime your PC's in-game actions prompt another player to giggle, guffaw, grin like an idiot, gape, gasp, or gag, you get a point of TILT!.  If they fall out of their chair, you get 10 points.

I'd greatly appreciate anyone giving the text a look and responding with thoughts on whether or not the game meets my design goals; and if it doesn't, suggestions for fixes would also be greatly appreciated.  I'm in the process of organizing a playtest involving a few experienced role-players, a few inexperienced role-players, and several people who have never played an RPG in their lives.  I'm feeling optimistic, and I think it'll be a blast.

And, hell, if you feel in the mood to playtest it yourself and tell me how it went, that would be AWESOME.

(What I don't want to hear is that competitive RPGs have a limited audience.  I don't care.)

[Callan S.]

Hi Marshall,

I think it's me, but I've got this kinda dyslexia when it comes to reading RPG's on the web. I don't know how other people, like Ron, manage to read through so many and actually hold it in their head, let alone playtest some. But it's not really dyslexia. Its that without a central context, every bit of text is meaningless to my eyes. That central context would be 'THIS is the winning condition'. The all the text falls naturally into place in relation to how useful it is in terms of obtaining this condition. But alot of RPG's - all they have is options, and options, and more options - and those options just go in one of my ears and out the other. Because an option is as useful to remember as it is useful in obtaining the central context. Without a central context, none of them are useful to remember. I can briefly shift my mind to choosing options like I try on differing combinations of clothes, but I can only glimpse it, it is not me.

You can see I'm saying this just from my perspective. But at the same time, I would like to pimp this perspective. Write at the start of the text how to win the game (or atleast how to win some prize within the game). Like a boardgame does. The sim rpgs, the nar rpgs, I forgive cause their grasping for their own thing and reject giving a central context (even though that hurts the design, imo). Currently the design seems to be like putting a bunch of boys into a room that has giant foam hammers in it - then just leaving them there. Yeah, they'll probably start swatting each other and that will be gamism. But we don't need to read several hundred words and internalise dozens of options to do that level of play - if I have some friends around, we can already wrestle or throw tennis balls at each other or whatever loosely defined, emergent/spur of the moment game play. Having a 'how to win' text would raise the game above the wrestling and tennis ball throwing.

I'm impressed with the amount of effort in the document. That's why it's almost upsetting that I can't try it. I'm just locked out because I can't internalise it (unless I start internalising rules as if they are interesting for their own sake).

[Marshall Burns]

Callan,

Hm.  I never even thought of that.  Lemme try flying by the seat of my pants here:

Short-Term Victory Conditions

1:  If the character survives the current situation, you win.

2:  If you prevent another character from accomplishing a goal, you win.

3:  If you beat an opponent in combat (by whatever means), you win.

4:  If your character accomplishes a goal (derived somehow from his/her/its Drive), however small, you win.

5:  Every time you earn a point of TILT!, you win.

Long-Term Victory Conditions

1:  If your character is alive at the end of the game, you win.  (In this case, end the game when all other PCs die or after a time/scene/turn limit)

2:  If your character actually accomplishes his/her/its goals in a way that totally satisfies his/her/its Drive, you win.  (In this case, end the game when said goal is accomplished)

3:  Keep score, giving a point for every individual situation the character comes out on top in.  If your score is highest at the end, you win.  (A time limit would probably be most appropriate for this)

3.1:  Award points also for acquiring items and treasure and valuables, surviving combats, and/or for the short-term victories.

4:  If you won the most points of TILT! during the game, you win.  (Again, time limit looks like the best way to end it)


Victory Conditions of the Disco Samurai

1.  If you win, then you have won, but also lost.

2.  If you lose, then you have lost, but also won.


Do those help?  (aside from the last two, at any rate; those were a joke)
I'll probably work this in somehow.  But, hey, just jumping in a room with foam hammers sounds like fun to me, too

Thank you for the thoughts.  Like I said, I never even thought of that.
-Marshall

[Callan S.]

Ah - if you have multiple wins rather than just having one (ie, 'I won a game of super action now'), your going to have to define them more. Saying 'you win' isn't actually true, you haven't won the whole game - so what have you won? It needs to be solidly defined or it's being neglected and that's not at all supportive of gamism.

I'll describe an idea to illustrate what I mean - for all the win states you described, imagine you have some shiny tokens. Personally I was thinking perhaps even medalion, like a funny take on the disco era fasion of wearing a medalion. Okay, for these wins you are presented (not just given - presented!) these medalions - so it's totally like a pile of trophys! You'd probably just have them during the game until you pack up, but you could be totally blinged up if your good at playing. Okay, I know your just writing a text document - perhaps there could be some tokens to print and cut out. Whatever it is, it just has to be considered nifty for its own sake (see below, how it shouldn't be considered nifty for its in game use).

Avoid at all costs any token which gives a bonus in game - they quickly lose their lustre as a trophy and simply end up a means to an end. When all the trophies end up like that, there are no trophies (and I suspect group play in that situation might mutate to simulationism because of it). A token which is completely useless in terms of gameplay is either a completely metagame reward for a player, or a player just doesn't get what it's for (and is probably never going to enjoy any recognition of prowess outside of the game either - ie, I don't think he's gamist inclined at all).

I know your victory conditions of the disco samurai were a joke, but I still get an alergic reaction to their ambiguity, I'd really avoid suggesting that anywhere. I wonder if you bring it up because at first glance the roleplay gamist seems a bit in conflict with himself. Take beasthunters, for example - IIRC as a player you give the GM a budget to kick your arse. At first that doesn't seem to make sense, why would you give your opponent resources against you? But it's not terribly mysterious - he isn't your opponent at that point. You can be using rules, yet not actually playing yet - just using the rules to set up an arena for combat. Maybe I'm making to much of your joke, but I was wondering if you were trying to reference the certain point in the rules that seperates setting up competition Vs actually being in competition. Side note: An old post, where I've brought up the idea before (just returning to it now).

[Marshall Burns]

There really isn't any "whole game."  It's a moment-to-moment thing.  It's like, for example, when I get out my videogaming console and put in a fighting game like Guilty Gear X or something, and me and a bunch of my friends play.  Yeah, so you win a match, and the loser hands his controller over to the next guy.  You "won," but nothing was settled.  It just keeps going around and around, loser hands his controller off to the next guy, until everyone gets tired of playing.  Nothing gets settled, which is fine, because nothing was supposed to.  Just *playing* was fun.  Winning individual matches was also fun (losing matches is also fun), and yeah there's some "Step on Up" going on but it's momentary and ephemeral.  Maybe some guy gets on a winning streak, or one player won more matches overall, but, hell, nobody was even counting.  Winning "the whole thing" doesn't even enter into it.  (That is the Way of the Disco Samurai.)
So, yeah, I entirely disagree with your first paragraph.

Now, as for trophies, that's not entirely a bad idea.  I think I'd prefer to do it after the session has ended (due to time constraints or because the scenario has reached a logical conclusion), and have players vote for who was the best tactician, who was the funniest, who got screwed over the worst, etc.  These could be like Olympic medals, and the players could take them home with them, then bring them to the next session and defend their titles.  Yeah, I think I like that.

(That might seem contradictory to my own first paragraph, but really it's not.  "Defending the title" would be an ongoing thing as well, and nobody's really be counting.  Someone might say "Holder of the Best Tactician Title for a record Three Weeks!" but that still doesn't settle anything.  It's essentially just trash-talking.)

The only reason I brought up the "victory conditions of the Disco Samurai" was the joke.  They're absurd little pseudo-Zen statements, which I always find hilarious (the Sphinx from the Mystery Men film had some really good ones).