Everyone,

In this thread, we'll handle 2 different subjects:

1. What to do with Time Travel?
2. Do we have a 'party' - or at least, how can this game be fun for a group of players (since Archivistdom seems a lonely job, at first glance)?

One of the options that popped into my mind is that we might not need to over-define Time-Travel, causality, paradoxes, etc., but could just resolve it with a meta-statement about Time Travel being a game tool to be able to create cool cinematographic scenes in different settings, and that we really don't care or don't have to worry about the normal Time-Travel handicaps. Observing Parallel worlds is of course also an option (but what of the ethics of messing in those?), or maybe Archivists can only re-create a scene in the past by accessing the deeply-hidden genetic/racial/unconscious memories in human brains. In that case, 'party' work is logical - to accurately re-create a scene in the past, several 'key' Hosts with a link to that past event are needed, as well as getting them together physically in the important location where the scene in the past is set - possibly together with key items as well.

(I'm getting a bit of a Indiana Jones the Posessor vibe here, but it doesn't feel too bad... ;) )

Thanks!

I like the idea of time travel -- the game would be totally different without it. That's cool, too, but it means we'd have to think in a different direction. So, anyway, my vote is definitely in favor of time travel.

Causality's not a big problem; in fact, in can be the solution. The reason an evil Archivist doesn't go back in time and possess Hitler is that he can't. Hitler and his actions are part of recorded history, which even Archivists can't alter. They have to work on the periphery, where there's no records to conflict with their actions. Of course, after the Archivists visit a particular incident, it locks that incident down, and no one else can get in to those hosts at that particular time and place.

Parallel worlds is another easy fix. We can just go with the stock, "Yeah, infinite worlds, infinite variation, blah, blah," approach. Or we could say that intervention by time travelers can change the timeline, which spontaneously creates a new dimension.

Or we could just say, "Hey, it's a game world, anything can happen that we want to happen," and just let players change the timeline willy-nilly. Maybe that's the game, changing the timeline until...something happens, and one side or the other wins out forever.

Andrew Morris wrote: Causality's not a big problem; in fact, in can be the solution. The reason an evil Archivist doesn't go back in time and possess Hitler is that he can't. Hitler and his actions are part of recorded history, which even Archivists can't alter. They have to work on the periphery, where there's no records to conflict with their actions.

Of course, after the Archivists visit a particular incident, it locks that incident down, and no one else can get in to those hosts at that particular time and place.

Parallel worlds is another easy fix. We can just go with the stock, "Yeah, infinite worlds, infinite variation, blah, blah," approach. Or we could say that intervention by time travelers can change the timeline, which spontaneously creates a new dimension.

Or we could just say, "Hey, it's a game world, anything can happen that we want to happen," and just let players change the timeline willy-nilly. Maybe that's the game, changing the timeline until...something happens, and one side or the other wins out forever.

Tobias wrote: Possible. Where chaos theory smoothes out the minor differences that take place, instead of amplying a butterfly into a storm.

Tobias wrote: This seems problematic to me.

1. If you miss the clue, all bets are off. If there are new developments, meaning you need to go back - not an option
2. It would seem to make group play more difficult.

Tobias wrote: A good fix in that it allows intervention and cool new worlds. A bad fix in that it reduces the impact of the one true reality they are fighting for (although splitting 1 reality into 2 bad ones is of course even MORE bad).

Tobias wrote: What do you think of the "Hey, it's just a game, Time travel all you want to cool scenes, but expect none of this time paradox/causality BS?" option? Or the "back into ancestral memory at time and place X with items Y" option?

May I inject a cautionary note here?

Time travel is a very cool aspect of the game. It allows us to exploit multiple historical settings, and - literally - adds another dimension to gameplay.

However, it is also very tough to handle. I'm a proud owner of the Continuum RPG, which IMHO is essential reading for anyone considering a time travel game. It has a brilliant setting, a great 'pseudoscience' explanation of how time travel works, and innovative rules for dealing with time travel itself.

It's also by far the most mind-bendingly difficult game I have ever read, and I despair of ever being able to play it.

So, my advice is - don't get to caught up in the science of time travel. Find a convenient way of disposing of most of the paradoxes and problems with time travel itself, while retaining the sense that time travel is specially important. Then concentrate on making it fun.

I am now going to go away and have several drinks and try to find a way of following my own advice... see you later.

Andrew Morris wrote:
Huh? I'm not understanding your points. Can you clear them up for me? To clarify my statement, sure you can go back, but not into the same host at the same time. Sort of like matter can't occupy the same space, different Archivists can't occupy the same host at the same time. Why would it make group play more difficult?

Andrew Morris wrote: Okay, but the second reality doesn't have to be quite as "real" as the "real reality." Perhaps it will fade out of existence, unless someone actively tries to keep it going. Maybe that's the conflict between Archivist and Nemesis right there -- the Nemesis is trying to create a new reality that will supplant the main line reality and the Archivists go in to the new realities and try to shut them down, by bringing them back in line with the main reality.

Andrew Morris wrote:
To be honest, I don't really get those ideas. The first sounds like just saying, "We don't have an answer, but don't worry about it." I'm not sure what you mean by the second -- that it's all just a hallucination shared by the characters?

I've had my doubts, but hell -- time travel. Let's go for it as a default option (though with a provision for some game groups to turn it off). It's full of surreal fun possibilities. Parallel worlds looks like a cop-out next to changing your own history. But how to implement it without going blind and mad (as Doug warns?)

Suggestions:


1) Schrodinger's War

Paradox is represented mechanically in-game. Let's take Andrew's idea of "if an aspect of history is documented, it's impossible to change" and tone it down to "if X is known to have occurred, it's harder to change." In game terms, this means that if an event of importance X has already been established, either by backstory or in-game events, then when people are back in time before that event happened, there is a modifier of +X to any action they take which makes the event more likely, and a modifier of -X to any action they take which makes the event less likely. I'm inspired by The Riddle of Steel's "Destiny" Spiritual Attribute, but adding the possibility of Destiny working as an impediment to character actions as well as a bonus.

The Hitler example: In our (real) timeline, it's a huge fact of history that Hitler became leader of Germany, slaughtered millions, and brought his nation down in ruins. Let's say Hitler's destiny is a level 10 fact. So if Archivists try to assassinate Hitler back in 1912, or just get him into therapy so he can work out his issues about having only one testicle, they run into a whopping -10 penalty to their every action -- Murphy's Law comes after them with a vengeance and every thing goes wrong at the crucial point. Conversely, if the Archivists are trying to protect Hitler and make sure he becomes the warped, hateful figure that history is counting on, they get at +10 bonus.

Conversely -- and here Schrodinger's Cat comes in -- if something is not known to history, then it is essentially undetermined until the Archivists show up. No bonuses or penalties either way.

As for the consequences of successfully changing history, this require huge GM flexibility on the fly. I wonder if anyone has read Feng Shui, which I hear does this -- though in a rather lighthearted way -- and might offer some tips.


2) Don't I know you?

The big problem with time-travel and changing the timestream is not actually paradox -- which is merely a plot tangler -- but human scale: If you're moving from century to century and changing the fate of entire civilizations, it becomes easy to get detached from actual human beings. You meet Chen in 5th century China, have a nice cup of tea, then go back to 4th century China and change history so he was never born. Shrug. Too bad about Chen. But, well, there were dynasties to topple. What's one person?

I suggest turning this on its head. From one iteration of history to the next, dynasties come and go, evil empires are replaced by benign republics, war and peace flicker in and out like voices on your cellphone. But the people involved area always the same. You meet Chen the pleasant peasant in 5th century China, go back to the 4th century, change stuff, come back to the 5th century, and Chen's still there: Only his circumstances have changed. Maybe you established a benign dynasty and Chen's farm is doing better; maybe you encouraged trade and Chen's become a small merchant; maybe you really played havoc with history and now Chen is the Emperor. But it's always the same guy, with the same basic personality traits, just altered by his new circumstances: Maybe Chen the peasant was polite and humble, Chen the prosperous farmer is a bit of a pompous prick, Chen the merchant is greedy and dishonest, and Chen the Emperor is drunk on power.

This makes no sense from a chaos theory standpoint: If you changed anything in the past, Chen's parents probably didn't meet, let alone conceive with the same egg and sperm at the same exact moment, so Chen is almost certainly not born.

But it's essential from a story standpoint. If you wipe the slate of history clean every time and change all the people involved, you don't get emotionally attached to them, so all the huge historical changes don't really matter on a personal level. But if the same individuals persist despite all the changes in history, then you have people you can care about, whose changed circumstances will make your changes to history real, tangible, and personal.

"Well, I feel good about the last game session, because we made sure the evil Thing Dynasty will never take power and... uh-oh! Look at Chen! The new dynasty has enforced strict laws requiring medicine to be practiced only in the traditional way and now his daughter is dying for lack of proper treatment! What do we do? Is one family's happiness worth changing history for? Or are our goals so important we are justified in sacrificing any individual?


3) Time Travel Party

Remember we have disembodied superhuman PCs. Presumably they can be scattered all over space and time and still communicate with each other telepathically. This means you can have Sorcerer-style play, where there is no "party" moving around as a group but instead each PC follows his/her own plotline and the multiple plotlines intersect into one great big story; but whereas in Sorcerer only the players (not the characters) can see the whole story and how the subplots fit into it, in this game the Archivists as characters can be in communication across space and time and see the big picture in-character.

And with time travel in particular, you can get some exciting cross-cutting effects. Hypothetical snippet of play:

PLAYER 1: I'm running from the knights, across the courtyard of the castle...
GM: OK. Jane, what are you doing?
PLAYER 2: I'm driving furiously to get away from the Men In Black. I pull off the road and hide in the ruins of the old castle....
GM: Back to the 12th century, now.
PLAYER 1: Damn, where do I go?
PLAYER 2: Lady Charlotte.
PLAYER 1: We can't trust her.
PLAYER 2: You have a choice?
PLAYER 1: Okay. I go into the Keep and run into Lady Charlotte's room. "Please! Milady! You must hide this for me! You cannot understand, but trust me when I say the fate of all history depends on it!" And I give her the amulet.
GM: She takes it. Then the knights break down the door and drag you off to be hanged. They don't search Lady Charlotte's room for the amulet, though. Okay, Jane?
PLAYER 2: I'm searching through the ruins for where Lady Charlotte's room was, with the Men in Black searching for me. I'll risk using my Uncanny Perception trait -- that shouldn't burn out my Host.
GM: Your superhuman senses pick up a faint scratching on a stone: C-H-A-R-L....and the rest has been worn away by time. The stone's loose. But the Men in Black are near -- they'll hear if you make any noise.
PLAYER 2: I wrench the stone loose!
GM: The Men in Black surround you, guns drawn. But you have the amulet.....

Two things...

Tobias, i understand your point on time travel really just being there for color, but i feel that we can get a lot of really interesting stuff out of making it CORE. One thing is that i have been spending so much time thinking about time travel that i do not really know what the game would look like if you chose not to have it. Perhaps if you can outline what the game looks like in your head i could see where you are coming from a bit better.

I really like Sydney's take on things... a lot.

Thomas

Whoa, Sydney, your brain is like a goldmine. Time travel is hard, of course, I agree. But I just realized - would the game be as cool as it could be, without it?

*edit: and that last realisation comes together with lordsmerf's crosspost of mine. Harmony, what? ;) *

1) Schrodinger's War:

It's really cool as a mechanic to prevent key history things. It does negate the 'Dark archivists are the ones struggling to actually change history, Archivists want to learn from it and keep it going.'

*BRAINFREEZE*

Actually, it doesn't, not at all. It just means the Darkchivists will need to take actions that will really impact the world outside the place(s) and issues that everyone already knows about. So the easy answer for the Archivists "they are trying to influence the presidential election? better protect the president, then" would not apply...

2) Don't I know you, Chen?

Cool as well. Especially if you tie the method of transcendance into some aspect of the human mind/reality that makes a 'souls' presence at a certain time a give.

Hmmm. One thing, of course, with flexible time or time travel - what if there is no 'now'? All times are as relevant? Or who determines what the present really is? I presume travel into the future will be impossible?

3) Time Travel Party

That cross-cutting is cool - and the chain/event tree can be longer, and complexer, of course. Multivariable analysis. And you can witness the impact on Chen immediately.

Of course, the archivists should grow numb to individual suffering as an effect of the changes they make - karma: when some get off better, some get off worse. UNTIL they run into that Hosts that really reminds them of the old human they were.... >:)

Let me second how cool Sydney is. He has just drawn me forcibly into a whole set of threads I'd only been lurking intently on, by sheer force of his creativity.

I love the idea of a cross-time party, because of the way it aligns tactics with the theme of the story.

Suppose you're trying to make life better for Chen. You've got an Archivist in the third century working at the foundations of the empire, and an archivist in the fourth century working to prevent the ascension of one particular warlord to power. But who is the essential, sine qua non Archivist of the party? The one in the fifth century having tea with Chen and observing the results of the actions the other two take in the past.

He's the forward observer to their time-travel artillery. They wipe out a warlord, he notes what happens to the tea-shop, and says "Looks like things got worse. Did you remember to get his vengeful lieutenant?"

Mechanically, this is a natural for players to roll their successes across time to aid their comrades. 5C-Archy rolls Perception, notes changes, sends successes back to 3C-Archy who works to enact a little-used clause in the inheritance laws, rolls Legal (or whatever), sends successes forward to 4C-Archy who uses the fiddly little legal clause to discredit the ascent of a dangerous leader.

Thematically, this means that building relationships with humans isn't just something Archivists do in their spare time, it is a vital part of their task.

Sweet... I like the idea of all these differing tweaks and twiddles giving a final group success amount on 'improving life for chen'. And sharing out successes is also cool, of course.

TonyLB wrote: But who is the essential, sine qua non Archivist of the party? The one in the fifth century having tea with Chen ...

Tobias wrote: Schrodinger's War: ....It just means the Darkchivists will need to take actions that will really impact the world outside the place(s) and issues that everyone already knows about. So the easy answer for the Archivists "they are trying to influence the presidential election? better protect the president, then" would not apply...

Time travel

Hi guys... mmm... time travel... Ok. I like so much the idea of "We can hardly change the history!" Let's call Knots Time these events that can hardly changed. Archivists cannot time travel at will, the can only stop at a Knot Time. We can make it harder and request a check, the difficulty could be set on 2 factors: detailness of the event and distance in time.

More an event is detailed and known and easier is to travel to. More a knot is near and easier is to travel to.

I can reach Hitler Time Knot by reading a history book, then there I speak with Joanna, a fair sad girl that tell me about Claus, her true love died 5 years before. I travel to Claus Time Knot. There Claus show me a book... and so on.

Party

I like the idea Archivists are specialist... an Archivist of Phone, an Archivist of Agriculture and so on... it's easy to find a reason to travel together... I hope so...

See ya, Da

Hmmm. The more details you know about your destination time, the easier to travel to, as JediBlack said; but the harder it should be to change (using the Schrodinger's War model). This creates an interesting trade-off. And JediBlack's idea of connections might work very nicely as a way to get around the trade-off: Sure, I don't know much about Time Period X, but I do know exactly what Klaus was wearing and holding, because this girl gave me an old photo of him -- so I have something to home in on, but otherwise the historical details are all unknown and thus changeable.

Note that the "if it's known, it's harder to change" principle also makes it hard to return to history you've already messed with and keep trying to get it right: By definition, it's known in detail, because you were there. So if you mess up one intervention, you have to go back to different time -- one that's not locked down -- to fix it.

Guys,

I take back everything I said about time travel being too difficult... you are all fricking geniuses! Especially Sydney.

Y'know I think all three of these themes may be relevant to our campaign.

Firstly, Schrodinger's War: This explains precisely why a bunch of historians (the Archivists) are key players in the conflict. If observing and recording an event helps to 'lock' it into a more stable reality, then the act of observation itself is an offensive tactic. Every time an Archivist settles down into an era and 'takes notes' for posterity, they are gaining ground. And the Nemesis will be attempting to do the same thing, except they are not observing, they are changing, which means that the Archivists have to try and change it back... and so on.

(BTW, that Kerry/Bush post is an excellent (and topical!) example about how a conflict is going to begin on the fringes of a major event, but could escalate rapidly.)

Secondly, 'Don't I know you?': If we accept that Chen's circumstances may change, but Chen remains the same, we are close to embracing the notion that Chen is somehow a 'disembodied soul' awaiting rebirth in a particular incarnation - but the incarnation may vary depending on past events. Isn't that very close to our original definition of an Archivist? This opens up a whole new realm of possibility: Archivists have managed to 'break out' of the whole birth/death/rebirth cycle, and as a result stand Outside Of Time.

Which links us directly to the 'Time Travel Party.'

I think that the only other thing that's needed is the idea that Archivist and Nemesis actions, despite being outside of 'normal time', have a sequential direction within the special timeframe that they occupy. By this, I mean that you can go backwards and forwards in 'normal time', but you can't undo, rewind, or go behind, actions in 'Archivist-time.'

Please let me know whether this makes sense - I'm rather excited about this, so my critical faculties are a bit out of whack right now.

Okay, I'll take this Observation-Locks-Reality thing to its next strategic implication.


"What the hell was that? I saw something moving in those bushes!"
"Leave it be."
"What? It could be a Nemesis?"
"Yeah, but more likely it's us coming back later to fine-tune what we're doing right now."


As Sydney says, if you've observed something in detail that makes it much harder for you to change it. Which gives you a good reason for not obsessively observing everything in detail. Leave yourself some ambiguity and you'll be able to come back later if you need to.

TonyLB wrote: "I saw something moving in those bushes!"
"Leave it be.... likely it's us coming back later to fine-tune what we're doing right now."