OK,

So I screwed up my GenCon with too much responsibility for or dveotion to our (Game/LEGO User Group) track of LEGO games and didn't get to spend anywhere near enough time at the Forge booth. But! While I was pondering the augmentation of our mostly miniatures games with LEGO-based RPGs, the idea of LEGOversalis swam out of the murk and smacked me in the brain.

So my question is, what should happen to turn fifty-five gallons of LEGO and a copy of Universalis into a fun game that intimately requires both?

I'm thinking starting tenets that look like:

1) Every Component must have a representation built out of LEGO.
2) Every Trait must be likewise represented, at least loosely, by the construction of the Component.
3) Adding particularly gratifying (well-built, felicitous, just plain geekolicious) LEGO models to the game-space is an additional Coin-earning method by...
4) Scale of construction must be defined prior to the exit of Tenet Phase.

Is there anything else that would be needed or suggested? What would this do to the game?

The first thing that I'm thinking is that it would shift some emphasis from story-narration to model building. For the average Joe role-player, I think this would be a probably bad thing. For we LEGO-geek role-players, I think it's a potentially wonderful thing. My only real worry is having players get bogged down in building stuff and not allowing enough resources (time, energy, etc) for playing the narration.

I'm not sure about the fourth Tenet above. If the models are made to be used as minis -- at least to the extent that dioramas are built from scene to scene, if not used for tactical simulative purposes, then scale is really critical and it's probably wise to stick to minifig (those are the little guys in modern LEGO sets) scale. But other stories could call for other scales. And maybe if the bricks are just to be inspirational (proto-fetishes or something) then scale adherence might not matter at all. Thoughts? (It also occurs to me that having these dioramas would facilitate really easy capturing of the story that you do play into comic-book style narration. That would make for a cool post to Actual Play.)

The idea I have for the reward mechanic for modeling is that when a new model was introduced, other players could reward the builder by taking a Coin and dropping it into the bank. The builder then gets Coins equal to the square of the number of people who do this from the bank.

Finally, there must be a butt-load of potential tenets that make the game more interactive with The Brick. Colors and numbers of studs and plate-heights and whatnot could all be given custom meanings depending on the kind of game you wanted to craft.

One thing that just occurred to me about this that I appreciate, philosophico-aesthetically (or whatever), is that I believe the combination of Tenets 1 and 2 above imply that Wicked Gun (x3) really needs to be built from three LEGO elements and this might lead to Wicked Gun (Laser Scope, Big-ass Ammo Canister) or something instead.

I guess comments on any aspect of this idea would be appreciated, particularly any flaws with the premise and any ways to make it especially nifty.

Chris

My experience with Legos ends in the mid 80s when you still had to build horses from standard blocks and before all of the premade plastic stuff.

But it occurs to me that some of the fancier plastic bits could be established as Master Components giving Traits to any fig built with them and requiring a Coin to "Gimmick" that piece into a different useage.

Master Components could also be used for "assembled" items with part of the Master Component being the lego assembly blue print (official or just invented).

There ought to be a way to define 1 block per Trait so the model could literally be dismantled as Traits were removed but that could get difficult for the non physical representations.

But it would make establishing locations and control and introducing components very cool and very visual.

Speaking mainly from my Lego experience, I think this would be cool, but possibly tricky. As you point out, Chris, the building factor would tend to dominate if only by visual factor, which makes it more appealing to Lego geeks and less of an RPG.

What I think it would be best applied to is not so much Universalis with Lego as the medium, but rather Lego building with Universalis as the interface.

Rather than using tenets to control how/what people are allowed to build (although do that as well), I would back it up a step, and redefine what a "coin" in the system is. Make a Coin some volume of bricks - say a 1/4 pound, or a Pick-A-Brick cup. You spend coins by either building something with them or by pouring the cup back into the bank (for establishing new Tenets or challenges).

This shifts the focus and turns it into less of an RPG and more of a co-operative building game, but I think it's a very cool twist on the Universalis idea. I could see a starting Tenets phase being something very like:

"I wanna build a castle."

"Cool! But not minifig-scale. That takes way too much brick"

"Ok, but if we're going to go with a small scale, let's go all out and do trees and stuff as well."

"If we're going with a castle, I don't want just random bricks in the coins; we'll end up with a lot of waste, and not enough grey and green."

Giving:
Castle as focus: 1 coin
microfig (small) scale: 1 coin
landscaped: 1 coin
Part cups are filled by picking not randomly: 1 coin

---

James

I'm really in line with what Blankshield mentioned - in fact, I was going to post almost the same thing, but he beat me to it. If you use Lego as the base, and not Universalis, you won't have the problem of 'how the heck do I build the Universalis concept of a Doom Cannon in mini-/microfig Lego' but you can just bolt some stuff together in lego to make a crude (or fancy, if you're good and have the tools and the time) animal-figure, and then take a few pre-shaped gun-like bits and stick them on - and define the animal figure as a X point compenent depending on size and complexity, with 2 'owns guns (instances of a defined master component)' traits as well.

Just build stuff in lego, assign cost, and keep going. Keep a notepad handy for things that cannot be physically expressed (like 'leadership qualities'), and bedeck your creation with 'jewelry' type things that have the function to remind you of 'additional' qualities that might not be readily apparent from watching the figure. I wouldn't say a coin needs to be a set amount of bricks (although it might be an interesting and elegant variant, but I fear it would lead to crude and unbelievable 'scraps' figures - then again, that may be part of the charm).

Battles in Lego would then be resolved by the Universalis complication method - which is so cool, I'll have to go dry my keyboard later.

Now, where the heck is my Lego? Probably at the parent's attic, right... sigh...

Hmm, interesting idea. Using the concepts of Universalis, drive a cooperative building effort (which as many of the most successeful LEGO creations show, includes story).

I think the Universalis mechanics could easily be adapted to this. The "coin" should be some sort of LEGO piece of course (perhaps the little gold coins, though they're rather small). You could use coin either to buy LEGO pieces, or to add story elements (getting away from the idea that each trait should be represented by actual construction).

So for example, as a scene setter, I pay some coin to grab an island baseplate from the stash, a few more coin to grab some trees and grey bricks for rocks. Then I spend a coin to set the timeframe (a moonlit night perhaps). Then some more coin to introduce some minifigs (characters) and some coin to equip and define them. Etc.

People could be encouraged to build while waiting their turn (which would give folks like me who need something to fiddle with something to do).

I think this would be very cool because we have talked about how to do some LEGO building at GenCon, and this would put some game structure around it.

Frank

Given that the people involved obviously want to be involved in building, I see no problems with pace. What Universalis would provide here is a way to resolve action once things have been built, in a way that matches the builder's goals for the game in question.

So I think it'll work very well. Similar to how the Wiki is like Legos for the internet.

Mike

I've been ruminating on the comments for a few days and something else has popped up in my mind for a con game. But it's pretty removed from an RPG (which suits the tools I'm suggesting, but not the goal).

I'm thinking of using the LEGO to present resources that are also built in Universalis terms (traits on index cards and whatnot) and giving each player some amount of this pre-built stuff and some amount of semi-random LEGO elements -- or maybe just having a common pool of LEGO for everyone. And then framing them into a conflict-rich scene and letting them go.

I guess it's really only a kick-start into the idea that I had before but I'm imagining more of a war-game competition feel, at least in the setup. But where the players take it is totally up to them.

Brikwars is a bit cumbersome and pretty strictly a miniatures event. We've had fun running it, but the play takes too long to evolve, for my tastes. The best thing about it, IMO is reading the after play reports. So I'm wondering if you steer the Universalis story-manipulation engine into a more strictly battle-resolution tool, how does it do? It seems like it would be fine since it's fine for that purpose when playing a normal game.

I think I need to go ruminate some more...

Chris

I guess the question is what are your goals? I think one goal I see is to build cool stuff in a cooperative environment. I think another goal may to have a cool story to write up afterwards.

Frank