Topic: Mind, Body & Soul
Started by: Matt Gwinn
Started on: 5/10/2004
Board: Indie Game Design
On 5/10/2004 at 6:51pm, Matt Gwinn wrote:
Mind, Body & Soul
After nearly 2 years of stagnation, I have finally updated my game Mind, Body & Soul
The game is about relationships and how they effect our lives and how we handle different situatins. I was kind of going for a character study type of feel with narrative characteristics.
I'm pretty sure the game is playable, but I'm not 100% sure it does what I want it to do.
Any input on what the game might need would be helpful.
,Matt
On 5/12/2004 at 6:22pm, Matt Gwinn wrote:
RE: Mind, Body & Soul
Ok, I know people have checked out this post, but no one is responding. So, either you all really really hate me, or I'm asking the wrong questions. So let's try this again.
I really want this game to be about how a person's past effects their present. I also want the game to be an exploratory journey through a character's inner being. When you finish playing the game I want you to be able to look at any given character and be able to say, "I know and understand him".
Do you think the game accomplishes that?
Does the card mechanic work?
Does the game need more crunchy bits?
What the game does lack is a something for the characters to do. I suppose in a game about character exploration it doesn't really matter what the characters are doing as long as they are doing 'something'. I still feel the game needs a little more focus though. Any suggestions?
,Matt
On 5/12/2004 at 6:34pm, Kryyst wrote:
RE: Mind, Body & Soul
I haven't read you game yet so I'm not going to comment on the mechanics specifically.
This however:
Matt Gwinn wrote:
When you finish playing the game I want you to be able to look at any given character and be able to say, "I know and understand him".
How can any mechanic actually do that? You are effectively just trying to understand someones made up character. So no set of rules will reflect that unles the rules specifically dictate how that person can act in any given situation. If that is the case then no player has free will and it doensn't sound like a fun game to play.
If that's not the case and I'm guessing it isn't. Then every character is simply the projected thoughs of another player. In any action the player is deciding what his character will do in that situation probably based on as much what he would like his character to do and based on whatever factors the rules cause.
The best character insight you can ever accomplish in a game is hoping that as a player you can half assed predict what another player is going to do. It all comes down to role playing and no set of mechanics will make a difference in it. So your game may very well accomplish that but it totally depends on the players.
On 5/12/2004 at 6:53pm, Matt Gwinn wrote:
RE: Mind, Body & Soul
How can any mechanic actually do that? You are effectively just trying to understand someones made up character. So no set of rules will reflect that unles the rules specifically dictate how that person can act in any given situation. If that is the case then no player has free will and it doensn't sound like a fun game to play.
That's seriously making me think about things, because someone said nearly the same thing about the first edition of the game. I guess I'm having trouble seeing it.
The mechanics of the game basicly tie the outcome of any give conflict to either a personality trait of your character or an influential person from the character's past. The system assumes that we are all the sum of our experiences. That may be simply my own flawed view on psychology in which case the game is probaly broken.
Players/characters do have free will to do as they choose, players simply have to tie their reasons for doing things to their past.
,Matt
On 5/12/2004 at 9:38pm, Emily Care wrote:
RE: Mind, Body & Soul
Hi Matt,
Neat mechanics. Have you playtested it? How does it work out? It seems like it should be an evocative resolution system. It gives a lot of latitude to the player to narrate outcomes, and structures it by asking for meaningful association (with past relationships etc) rather than by simply saying an outcome is successful or not. Instead the player has to find some way to relate the action to their character conception. Some association. Associative mechanics work really well for me--I wonder if some people would take a while to get into the swing of it. Have you seen the actual play thread about the Shadows in the Fog variant here?
What happens to the list of 30 relationships?
What it seems to be missing are guidelines for playing, such as distribution of gm tasks, suggestions for setting etc. Is it intended to revolve around relationship oriented plots, or is it meant to be a generic system that can be set to a variety of settings? Maybe some examples of play would help people get the idea of how to apply the mechanics to their ideas.
The system assumes that we are all the sum of our experiences. That may be simply my own flawed view on psychology in which case the game is probaly broken.
Nah. It may not be "true" but that doesn't mean it can't be a darn fine way to structure your play. Or it could "be true" and suck as a mechanic.
yrs,
Emily Care
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 10812
On 5/13/2004 at 3:55am, Andrew Martin wrote:
Re: Mind, Body & Soul
Matt Gwinn wrote: Any input on what the game might need would be helpful.
From your site at: http://errantknightgames.com/mbs.html
This sentence:
Premise wrote: Does a person’s past relationships dictate his future or is each event in our lives dictated by fate.
should be written as:
Premise wrote: Does a person’s past relationships dictate his future or is each event in our lives dictated by fate?
This line:
The second pile should contain the rest of the deck with the exception of the jJack, Queen and King of Spades (which will not be used).
should read as:
The second pile should contain the rest of the deck with the exception of the Jack, Queen and King of Spades (which will not be used).
Your writing in the sections "The King", "The Queen", and "The Jack" has grammar and spelling errors and is either sexist or trips up the reader disturbingly in "The Queen" section. But these problems are easy to fix. Try this solution:
The King wrote: This person can be the character's father, son or someone else but should be considered the most influential male in your character's life.The Queen wrote: This person can be the character's mother, daughter or someone else.The Jack wrote: The Jack represents your character’s strongest relationship with someone who has betrayed or been betrayed by your character in the past. This person can be of any gender, but must involve some kind of betrayal either on the part of the person or your character.
Karma wrote: During character creation draw a card from your spade deck to determine how many points of Bad Karma you start with. Then draw a second card to determine how many points of Good Karma you start with.
Should the spade card deck be shuffled first or can the player choose the cards they prefer?
This section:
Gaining Karma wrote: Gaining Karma
Karma is gained by doing good or bad deeds. If the game Master thinks a particular scene’s outcome was particularly good or bad he can grant you 1 to 3 points of the appropriate Karma. For example: Saving a person’s life might warrant 3 points of Good Karma, but doing so only to get a reward might grant 3 bad Karma.
seems to need a list of good deeds and bad deeds, along with appropriate Karma award.
Would it be easier and quicker to just have:
[code]
Good deed: 2 Good Karma
Bad Deed: 2 Bad Karma
Good Deed done for Evil motive: +1 Bad karma
Evil Deed done for Good motive: +1 Good Karma
Contortionist or legalistic reasoning by player: -1 Karma.
[/code]
?
That seems to cover the 1-3 range you have, and would avoid having players negotiate in a play session the punishment of various sins (not to mention virtues...), which even politicians, judges, lawyers and prison officials have a lot of trouble with.
Spending Karma wrote: Whenever a player makes a successful draw he may chose to spend Good Karma to add a bonus outcome to the scene that was not indicated previously. For example: Let’s say your character was at a bar and tried to get a gril’s phone number. He makes a successful draw indicating that he gets the number. Now, the player can spend a point of Good Karma to add something special to the successful outcome, like she asks him for a ride home *wink wink* after giving him her number.
What's a "successful draw"? Conversely, what's the opposite? It doesn't seem to be explained before this point?
Spelling: "gril's" should be: "girl's".
Grammar: confusing gender use, "he" is sometimes the character and sometimes the player. Try writing "the player" or the "the character" instead of "he", "him", and other gendered pronouns.
Step 1 - Declare Intent wrote:
The player calling for the draw announces his intended goal for the scene. This can be something simple like, “I want to get this guys business card” or more involved like, “I want this guy to give me a job.”
The above paragraph is a little confusing. There needs to be a apostrophe before the "s" in "guys". By this phrase: "his intended goal", do you mean the character's goal or the player's goal?
Step 6 - Narrate the Outcome wrote:
The outcome of a successful draw is narrated by the player. The outcome of failed draws is narrated by the Game Master.
Have you considered using the reverse form where success is narrated by the GM, with input from the player, and failure is narrated by the player, with input from the GM? It seems to work quite well in TrollBabe.
I hope that helps!