Hey there, all,
I've been pounding on this horse for well nigh two months now, and I think it's dead. I'm not sure, though...
If any of you would be willing to take a glance at this game and tell me what would make it more playable, I'd appreciate it.

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/hosted/sdemory/monmouri.doc

Thanks in advance,
Sean Demory

Wow, you made it sound like it was hopeless. I think you've got some really good stuff there. I like how the stats work to push action that fits the mood of the game.

The game seems to be very Narrativist, IMO, but what it lacks is a statement of Narrativist Premise. What are the characters to be about in play? Is it "Should I hold on to the vestiges of my life by playing a mockery of it, or should I just fall into death's abyss?" Hmmm. The problem with this is its a very depressing Premise (the Goths should love it). But I can't think of any that won't be in this setting. Of course, if you place a new premise in, then you have to rework the rules to drive it.

Mike

The problem I had reading it was a cultural one. Because I didn't have any context to cue into the French names, it was very difficult for me to remember what something "is" and was constantly having to go back to the glossary- which made understanding the mechanics a struggle. Not because the mechanics were obtuse (I don't think they are) but because in order to appreciate a Guant with six dice in Gros-Mal-Ange preforming a necromantic travay needs to remove 2 dice from either Ti-Bon-Ange or Grangou or 1 dice from each, I have to constantly reference Guant, Gros-Mal-Ange, travay, Ti-Bon-Ange and Grangou. After reading it a couple of times, I can remember that the G-M-A, T-B-A and Grangou are the parts of the soul, but it still doesn't make quite sense why the successes are subtracted from the Aspe or what the Aspe is.

I blame the American educational system rather than your writing. But the lack of any context for the terms for me is the first, immediate problem and something I'd have to overcome to really analyze the system itself in a meaningful way. Fortunately there are smarter people than me like Mike and Jared and Ron just to name a couple of names who can probably do so without much trouble.

Very interesting game. The names are great, pray don't change them.

I'd like to know more about the cosmology of Le Mon Mouri- does it relate somehow to the real world? i.e. is this the way the san-souf see it? Is Il Danye Chans a hounted, shunned by-the-respire island in the Caribbean? Or a stop on the way from the land of the living to the land of the dead? If so, is there a (last) chance of returning to the land of the living?

Or in case the Mon Mouri has no relation to the real world, since the players come from other places by ships as recently formed San-Souf, it may be useful to include information on the world and (hypothetical) lands of the Respire, level of technology, societies etc.

I loved it.
Gizem

In-depth background stuff will follow once I make sure this bastard's once and for all dead. It still squirms when I look away, alas...
First and foremost, I'm sure there's a way to cheat the system. It's inevitable, as my math's really bad and I'm not looking for a system that's uniformly uncheatable as much as I'm looking for something that simulates internal and external struggle. Having the different Aspe at odds theoretically simulates an uneasy rebirth, having something very alien in one's body, at times working at cross-purposes from one's own goals. In theory. In practice... that's why I'm throwing it at you guys.
As far as central statement and hopelessness... I don't know that it is, necessarily, hopeless. In a very real way, Le Mon Mouri is what the San-Souf make of it. The mockery, as Mr. Holmes aptly referred to it, has to be a sincere one. Every single San-Souf wants to be involved in an intense, passionate story, as that will create the necessary motive force to stay alive and, hopefully, thrive. Hence, they fall in love, hate and fear, plot evil plots and do good works because they're a way to ensure connection. In a way, I consider it a very hopeful afterlife, in that one is capable of making one's way in it regardless of one's past. If Jack the Ripper is reborn in Le Mon Mouri remembering field surgery, the word "Whitechapel" and two incidents of being out on the town with women, he'll have a very different perspective and a chance to be something new and strange to his former, living self.
General cosmology... the place isn't here, I know that much. There are other places like it within the "world," I know that much. It's an abandoned colony, and there are other places to the east and west that try to make their presence felt there. I don't know that there's a chance of finding a way back to life, but things find their way over. The living natives are definitely human, but they're not normal humans obviously. Beyond that, it's a jab at colonial policy in the Carribbean, a touch of debased Voudoun imagery and a chance to use my rusty and rapidly disappearing Haitian Krio while I've still got it. Cool class in college, rarely used in the workplace.
The Krio's one thing I am curious about... is it too much of a stumbling block? It makes sense to me because I didn't want to stick to a physical thing for something that's pretty metaphysical. In the end, the San-Souf (and Respire, for that matter) are different kinds of will stuffed into a shell. The will's doing things in Le Mon Mouri, which is why Travay work as they do. Or something.
Cosmology, in-depth description and the like would be included in the sale version or, at least, the website version with the pretty pictures and clever layout.
At one point, I had several different Necropoli (eek, the word makes me think "gamerish") in play, all representing different places. I was advised (quite soundly, I might add) to stick to what I knew and try not to get syncretic hodgepodge on the setting. Focus is important, and I think the end result worked better for that focus. And if I want to do other places, there are always expansions. (lol)
Thanks for the comments thus far. Current question is this: is this game playable? Could you, as GMs, think of things for people to do? I've got plot concepts shooting out my ears, but I've lived with this thing crawling in my head for a while now, so I should have something.
Once again, I really appreciate the input.

Sean

Sean--

As I've already told you, I love this game. And yeah, I know what I'd do with it if I were to run it (at which point you chime in with "Then run the damn thing, chief!"). I'd write up a relationship map of NPCs, based on romantic & sexual ties, & then have the players create characters & run from there, with the relationship map serving as backdrop & the PCs driving the narrative to resolve their own issues.

I will admit, I had some problems with the Krio--not as much as everyone else, I think, because I've read up on voudon before. But I think a pronunciation guide wouldn't be a bad thing.

As for exploiting the mechanics--I'm about as far from a system monkey as you can get. Math, except at its most abstract, is not my thing. So I have no idea if the game is mathematically sound or not. But I like it.

1) When I referred to debased Voudoun, I wasn't casting any aspersions on the faith. Voudoun is a vibrant, growing and, in many ways, very rational and beautiful faith. My use of terminology's debased, as it's a bit on the half-assed side... leading to

2) Best way to think about the traits, and I think I'll add this to the final version, is this: It's all about desire.

Grangou: The desire to be.
Ti-bon-ange: The desire to last (to create things of substance, impact others and the like).
Gros-mal-ange: The desire to end.

The relationship map thing makes perfect sense once people land on the island. Or does it? I'd tend to think that characters make their own stories here, but some people aren't comfortable with that degree of open-endedness.

I'm going to start sounding smarmy with the thanks, but I do appreciate input and will put it into play when the final revisions are done.

OK, system monkey on the spot.

There are a couple of concerns. First is the idea of shifting Aspe. It's easy enough to raise a high Aspe by sacrificing a low one. The opposite is very difficult by comparison. As I said, I love this as it means that characters will tend to trend to imbalance and that's where the fun stuff is. The problem is, how do they get back?

Lets say I start with Aspe of Mal3, Bon4, Gou3. By far the most common result of a contest between Bon and, say, Mal is for both to roll one success, and nothing happens. I assume that ties result in a failure to change? Anyhow, the second most likely result is a one point shift from Mal to Bon. Lets say that after a couple of attempts that happens. Now a roll of my Bon against either of my other stats is most likely to result in a shift of yet another point. But going the other way is really difficult.

We need a few clarifications, if I roll Aspe A against Aspe B, in an attempt to raise A, what happens if B rolls higher? Does the attempt backfire, or is it just a failure? If its just failure, then you can rebalance your stats, though it might take several attempts. If it can backfire, then you are more likely to drain a low Aspe to zero than to be able to rebalance it. All this assumes that the dificulty of shifting is seven for both stats rolling, is that correct? If, OTOH, the GM is able to set the difficulties due to circumstance, then he can ameliorate this effect.

Can a player refuse successes to diminish the return on a successful roll (in order to, say, prevent the loss of his last point in the losing Aspe)? Again, I am assuming that Aspe can be reduced to zero by this method. Also, I'm assuming that the losing Aspe is never reduced below zero, and the winning Aspe is only increased by the amount that the losing Aspe was actualy lowered. This to prevent the character from gaining total points more than ten. Are any of these assumptions incorrect?

Also, how often can one change their Aspe? I'd think that it would require special circumstances, and that rolling repeatedly would not be allowed. But again, that's an assumption. If you can get down to zero in an Aspe via shifting, how do you get it back? You have no dice to roll, making that impossible. And if you were allowed to "heal" back to your original value or something, you'd then have to lower the other Aspe automatically to compensate, or get a character that had more than ten total points. Or is that intended? Healing Aspe seems like it just wouldn't be available for shifted Aspe, because, after all, they haven't really been hurt. At least it seems that way to me. Unless I'm mistaken in this, you'll also have to keep separate records of current max and current level for each Aspe, so that you know how much you need to heal in a particular Aspe.

Imbalances are not likely to occur ever, anyhow, unless I misread the rules. First, by "winning an internal roll by more than four dice" I assume that you mean that the roll generated four more successes from one Aspe than another. This is only likely if the one stat is six higher than the other. In which case, the lower stat is going to be zeroed by the result anyhow (again assuming that what I have above is true). The character will be beset by maladi long before and soufri. And if you have a stat at seven or eight to get these things to happen, the opposing stats are so low, they are really hard to adjust back up. Which means that you don't have anything to roll against to get more Imbalance, which means you'll never get to five of them.

Another area that needs clarification is resolving Imbalance. I'm assuming it works like this. You keep a running total of Imbalance for each Aspe. When it reaches five, the character suffers the apropriate Soufri. Then, when that imbalance is resolved and reduced below 5 the Soufri ceases. Or do yo uneed to resolve the Imbalance to zero for the Soufri to cease?

I hope these criticisms are clear. Is there any confusion, above?

Here's an idea of what a fix might look like. For shifting Aspe, perhaps the soul is elastic, and once stretched to a new shape will slowly come back to it's original shape. So, for each time period (span? how long is a span and what is it anyhow, a session, a day?) if a character is not at their original stats, the player must shift a point back towards the characters original stats. This would be cool, IMO, as it would mean that characters would still have a sort of statistical uniquness to them, instead of being totally maleable. Also, it means that high stats can get an opportunity to bend the lower stats again, and thus more frequently achieve Imbalance.

To fix Imbalance, you could just keep track of internal successes, and when that total gets above ten, Imbalance occurs. That means that there is always a price for shifting or healing. If using this rule a resolve attempt should rid the character of as many Imbalance and successes rolled (which is simpler than the two for one deal).

Another point I'd like to make is that the Maladi for Grangou (Baylegen) seems odd. While the other Maladi seem to be the opposite of their respective Soufri, Baylegen seems very similar. Wouldn't a Maladi of Grangou, the urge to hunt, result in a lack of will to hunt? Perhaps the character refuses to eat and withers away.

Hope that helps,
Mike

Good calls all around, on the system things. I'll take a look and figure out how to implement them. And Baylagen was, pretty much, crap. What I MEANT to institute was something that wouldn't allow one to be able to take sustenance, basically pulling Aspé from people as it was harvested. That's what will be instituted in the final draft.
My only real problem with not having a totally malleable set of Aspe is that I'd like people to be able to get past 13 dice if they try... it should malform and unbalance them, but it should be doable and, in some cases, relatively easy.
Allowing players to break 13 will potentially allow them to regain memories, which I hope will be a regular focus of the game.
Like the internal success thing, as it'll allow Soufri to pop up more quickly. I think I'll keep the number at 5, though, as I'd like them to be somewhat common inconveniences. The Soufri are quashed once a San-Souf drops below 5 points of imbalance, making it relatively easy to kick if one's got the time without conflict (which should be tough to get in and of itself.)
I'm very big on GMs modifying die rolls, incidentally. I like the thought of well-described or justified actions being slightly easier.
Excellent advice. It'll definitely get put into play at some level.

O.K., let's try this one on for size:
"What price would you pay to be what you want to be?"
The game's about transformation at all levels... The San-Souf can change their physical being with a certain degree of effort. Their former lives are changed into a set of snapshots which they use to reinvent one's place in the world. As soon as they arrive, they're able to become whatever they want, as long as they're willing to make the effort to achieve their goal.
To achieve their goal, though, the San-Souf have to do and be some horrible things. Torture, murder and anthrophagy are par for the course for them, partially because they're all things which will create an impact. The San-Souf have to do things other beings would consider bizarre, horrific or unspeakable to become and remain what they want to be. The fact that they're in a world where everyone else is forced to do bizarre, horrific, unspeakable things to become and remain what they want to be makes it that much tougher on them.
Put another way... if you knew you'd have power over life and death if you cut your face off, would you do it? If you knew you could reach a state of perfect love by killing, skinning and eating your beloved's spouse, would you do it? Would you keep doing it to maintain that state of perfect love? Would you wallow in horror if the end result was apotheosis? Would it make Godhead more worthwhile?
Maybe this is a better statement: "Can grace be achieved through transgression?"
Thoughts?

Hey Sean,

I printed Le Mon Mouri when you first posted, but it's only today that I finally had a chance to read it thoroughly. And geez I think it's pretty damn great. The setting is absolutely fantastic. I wish I had the mind for setting that you do. And although I generally hate fictiony bits in games, they're often long and rambly, antiseptically architected to reveal the setting and generally pointless as fiction, the intro piece you've written for Le Mon Mouri is none of those things. I think it's perfect. And the examples within the game text are also wonderful. I love them all, the characters in them. And I love the locations you've described and the fantastic and creepy NPC's. There's something intangible about the way you've sketched the NPC's that makes them so useful-seeming, and engaging, very much in contrast to the static and non-useful NPC's presented in V:tM, for instance.

Most impressive perhaps is just how ripe the situation embedded in the game is for Narrativism, the Respire trapped in a mockery of life, outnumbered and exploited by the dead embroiled in that mockery. I mean, damn!

But I do have some questions.

1) At one point you write, "...if a Gaunt with six dice in Gros-Mal-Ange performs a necromantic Travay..." And I've looked and looked, but I can't find where you tell what a Gaunt is?

2a) For Gros-Mal-Ange and Ti-Bon-Ange, you're reasonably clear about what's represented by the extremes of the scores. I can perceive the difference between a high score and a state of Maladi for both Gros-Mal-Ange and Ti-Bon-Ange. It's Grangou that I don't really understand. At one point you write, "High levels of Grangou make a San-Souf appear bestial..." And in the glossary section on Maladi of Grangou you write, "BAYLAGEN...loss of all Grangou and regression to a bestial state." And that seems like the same thing. Consistently it seems to me like high and low Grangou are described in the same terms. What am I not getting? What's a meaningful way to think about the difference beween high and low Grangou? I'd think a low Grangou would be an absence of the beast, but that's not how you've written it.

2b) And peripherally related to that, what's being demonstrated by the masochism and self-mutilation among the San-Souf in the fictiony intro? Low Grangou? Low Ti-Bon-Ange? High Gros-Mal-Ange?

3) The one thing I like least about the game is this, from the Combat section: "If a combatant loses more than three dice in any Aspe, he must succeed in a standard Ti-Bon-Ange roll to keep from fleeing." I think it's potentially deprotagonizing. One of the things I like about Humanity in Sorcerer is that it's never a control mechanic. You can have a character at Humanity 1 decide to save the life of an enemy. The player doesn't have to roll against Humanity to try and have his character make that decision. He's never prevented from deciding to author a turnaround for the character. Decisions on character behavior are never taken away from the player. I think I see what you're trying to do with the mechanic. You want to motivate the player to use Fre, or to decide to make an opposed roll to move Aspe to prevent the fleeing. I'm just not sure about it. Perhaps you could have a rule where the player can shift Aspe, just for purposes of preventing fleeing, without needing to make the opposed roll?

4a) The example of Nanette's two Gros-Mal-Ange Travay doesn't specifically state that her player is rolling against a target number of 7, making it difficult to understand how the two dice rolls precipitate a loss of four dice from her Grangou and Ti-Bon-Ange.

4b) That also brings up another interesting issue. If Nanette had rolled more successes, she would have lost fewer dice from her other Aspe. I'm not understanding how that makes sense if the mechanic is designed to consequence her for having "shown favor to her Gros-Mal-Ange at cost to her other Aspe." I would think you'd want a mechanic that created more consequence the greater the number of successes, a reflection of the greater investment of effort and skill she's placed in Gros-Mal-Ange. As it is, the higher her Gros-Mal-Ange, the lower the likelihood of consequences to her other Aspe. What am I missing?

5) In the example of Oswald's Ti-Bon-Ange Travay, you write, "While Cecily is wearing the locket, any Ti-Bon-Ange she gains from her affair with Amelia will force a second test against her Grangou to stop from losing her Grangou dice..." Could you give an example of how that sequence might happen, both the gain of Ti-Bon-Ange and the loss of Grangou? I'm guessing Cecily would roll a number of dice equal to her Grangou and reduce the loss of Grangou by one for each of the dice that come up 7 or less. Or do you intend that if she gets at least one 7 or less it completely prevents loss of Grangou? Maybe it's just me, but I always have trouble wrapping my head around game mechanics when the target number can fluctuate and the total number of successes are important in some situations, but not in others.

Despite the questions, I think Le Mon Mouri is pretty fabulous. I totally envy your mind for setting. Thanks for posting it.

Paul

Should the player characters be a cohesive group with largely related stories, or are they a varied group of San Souf with only-occasionally inter-connecting dramas? (I'm thinking like Pulp Fiction or something)
It would seem the game lends itself more to multiple storylines about single protagonists.

To do it the other way... Perhaps the players and the GM create a bunch of NPCs, (twice the number of players, or some such), and only one or two defined player characters. Those two PCs are newly arrived San Souf, (perhaps they stick together because they have memories of being brothers). As they meet NPCs, those NPCs are controlled by other players. If an NPC looks like it's going to become a permanent and important part of the story, it becomes a permanent player-character. For example, perhaps a wealthy old San Souf takes the brothers under her wing as the sons she never had.

Thank you very much for looking over the game stuff. I'm pretty sure the horse is ALMOST dead, which is somewhat liberating. It's still very much a work in progress, but something that's not trying to change as I'm working on it is a little easier to handle.
Point by point responses, now, and I give advance warning: I'll be saying "That's in the latest iteration" quite a bit.

1) Use of the word Gaunt- That's gone. I had an extended hierarchy-type thing at one point based on one's life/death and time in Le Mon Mouri and I cast it aside about five iterations ago. Dead's dead, I decided, and being longer dead isn't necessarily a boon or a hindrance. It's just a thing. Hence, ignore the word and replace it with "San-Souf."

2a) Grangou... that's cleaned up in the newest version. Losing all of one's Grangou makes one incapable of feeding, basically... one cannot "metabolize" whatever experience or matter from which one wishes to gain sustenance. Made more sense, worked with the term Baylegen much better... I literally do not know what I was thinking at the time. I blame the drugs.

2b) The self-destructive behavior upon approaching Port-Mal-Ange is a Gros-Mal-Ange backlash, more or less. It's not so much "masochistic," per se, as they aren't really THINKING about feeling pain. They're expressing the fact that they're in dead flesh. Odd concept to wrap one's head around and it's a bit contrived, but it worked at the time. Once again, I blame the drugs.

3) Combat- I like the proposal about shifting gears to keep from fleeing. Might work to "shut down" the Aspe in question, signifying a degree of cowing or surrender.

4a) Target numbers were put in at a later iteration.

4b) Actually, if Nanette had rolled more successes, she'd have to take more dice from her Aspé. The higher her Gros-Mal-Ange, and the more successes she rolls, the more she's got to reconcile that in her other Aspé. I need to examine the rules to see if that's something I've fixed yet. If it isn't, it will be.

5) O.K. This was changed in the seventh or eighth draft (the person doing my layout and design is a saint for putting up with the number of drafts... he should prepare for another one relatively soon.) However, an example would serve. How about this:
Cecily and Amelia are enjoying a relaxing, romantic rowboat jaunt down one of the many rivers twisting through Charnel-Fields. Amelia breaks away from her tales of derring-do to give Cecily a token of her ardor, a poppy cupped in the hand of a Respire rebel she killed that morning.
Cecily swoons, as she is oft wont to do, and takes advantage of mingled horror and joy to harvest some Ti-Bon-Ange. She rolls six dice, target seven, and makes four succeses... she gains four Ti-Bon-Ange, but risks losing more Grangou than she has. She then rolls her three Grangou, making one success. She loses three dice of Grangou and is, suddenly, not hungry.

Once again, I appreciate the input... it'll get put to good use.

Sean

Nomad wrote:
Should the player characters be a cohesive group with largely related stories, or are they a varied group of San Souf with only-occasionally inter-connecting dramas? (I'm thinking like Pulp Fiction or something)
It would seem the game lends itself more to multiple storylines about single protagonists.

Hey, all...
I'm inches away from being really, truly, actually done with Le Mon Mouri (or "The Beast," as I've referred to it too often of late.) One thing I'm curious about... what do you think about a degeneration mechanic of some sort? Do the San-Souf need to lose Aspe on a regular basis? Right now, I like them being somewhat inviolate unless they act or are acted upon. However, I could see an advantage to losing a point of Grangou every day, for instance. Thoughts?