I love The World, the Flesh, and the Devil with all my heart, but I'm going to express it by waylaying it, clubbing it, and dragging it off to do unspeakable things to it behind the woodshed. Paul, if I cross the line, tell me where to go.

The game makes a very interesting moral statement: when we're invested in a situation, we can better control our baser impulses; that is, isolation creates moral weakness. Interesting but the game presents it as simply the way it is, no decision to make, no dilemma.

As I've made those appalling, ugly little vampire games, I've thought of it as a stinger in the tail. What The WF&D needs is a stinger in the tail.

Here's one:

New York mafia, circa 1983. The PCs are made guys under a boss like John Gotti: flashy, flamboyant, playing up the godfather image to 'his public,' betraying the family code of secrecy and discretion, a disaster not even waiting to happen. A real problem, and he's going to take the five families more or less down with him.

Reimagine the World, the Flesh, and the Devil as sins, specifically. The World isn't causality and statistics, it's power, it's buying people for money, it's doing things for fame. The Flesh is your bodily passions, appetite, jealousy, lust, rage, revenge. The Devil is acting big because you feel small: bravado, maliciousness, and unneccesary violence.

So: Rolling World-plus means you don't order the hit. Rolling Flesh-plus means you forgive the guy. Rolling Devil-plus means you walk away from a fight you could win. When Sammy the Bull Gravano (Gotti's underboss) went state's evidence, he rolled a big fat plus.

That's pretty good. Already you can imagine using your annotations to reroll plusses, hoping for a minus that will let you 'do what needs to be done.'

But how about this: keep a tally. What you're counting is times you let a minus stand, without rerolling it. Don't count the results of rerolls, which you've got no choice about. But every time you roll, say, Devil-minus and don't reroll it, you get a tick mark in your Devil. (Same with World and Flesh, naturally.)

Whenever you're about to roll, the GM can spend 2 Devil tick marks to make it a Devil-minus, instead of rolling. She can spend 2 more to disallow a reroll.

Now the statement of the mechanics is: when you're invested in a situation, you have more control over your baser impulses, but giving in to your baser impulses gives you power over your situation, but when you habitually give in to your baser impulses, you lose control of them.

Is your power worth your soul?

-Vincent

That brings up an interesting point. I've been considering an idea lately where you'd have a Narrativist system that started sans Premise, but where the players would decide on one, and the system would then support it.

I think that Paul has already written this game. In WFD, the Trial is the Premise. As in Vincent's example above, the Trial he creates is the Premise, and the system supports creation of conflict about the issues within the Premise. Anyhow, all Paul needs to do is to indicate that the term Trial should be taken to mean conflict of two or more principles. These principles should be decided upon, and stated in terms of what they mean for the World, the Flesh, and the Devil, just as Vincent did above.

The rest is all downhill, IMO.

Mike

It's true, actually.

Sit down to set up a game of the WF&D, put even a teeny bit of thought into it, and what you get is a Premise.

That game's a thing of beauty.

Hey Paul, are you open to players redefining what the World, Flesh and Devil mean, and setting up things like my tally system above, or do you see that as violence to your game design?

-Vincent

Mike Holmes wrote:
That brings up an interesting point. I've been considering an idea lately where you'd have a Narrativist system that started sans Premise, but where the players would decide on one, and the system would then support it.

Gordon C. Landis wrote:
But there are doubtless some Premises that work better than others in that model. What can/should be done to help a play group perform the mapping? A text that explains some intricacies? A system for using the system?

Vincent, what have you done TO MY GAME?!

Seriously though, your interpretation of World, Flesh, and Devil as base impulses that jeopardize the soul is substantially more in keeping with their usage throughout Christian theology as the three enemies of man, the forces that oppose us, than my own adaptation of them in the game.

Were you Catholic raised, and influenced by the same Christian theology as I was? I actually don't know of a Biblical passage that names all three. I think theologians just recognized that there are numerous references throughout the Bible to them individually, and started writing about them collectively. The most direct reference I know of is in St. Alphonsus de Liguori's meditations on the stations of the cross:

How can I behold the Savior shamefully nailed to the Cross and seek only comfort, wealth, and honors... and even indulge in unlawful pleasures? Jesus Crucified, help me to esteem and practice true Christian mortification that I may love only Thee and renounce the world, the flesh, and the Devil.

And isn't that quote a perfect representation of the opposition you've set up with your interpretation, and your awesome setting concept in particular, between what what you can get by giving in to the base impulses, and what you gain by controlling them? I'd have a hell of a lot of religious imagery in my scenes, priests in the family, that kind of thing, if I were going to run a scenario based on your interpretation.

And I absolutely have no problem with you doing it. Your setting, and your interpretations of World, Flesh, and Devil are fantastic. But it brings up an interesting issue that I've been thinking about since posting to Ron's "Devils with no Premise" thread. At what point is a game customization substantial enough that the result can no longer be considered the same game? For instance, I think my Camelot/Kennedys idea for WYRD doesn't cross the line. I think it's still WYRD. Do you think your mafia interpretation is still The World, the Flesh, and the Devil? If not, why not?

Paul

Paul,

Well, it's certainly not a new, original game. I think it's still The World, the Flesh, and the Devil, tally system and reinterpretation notwithstanding. If you disagree, though, as game designer your opinion trumps mine.

I hope I'm not putting my foot in my mouth here. Somebody sent me their house rules for my game kill puppies for satan, and, while otherwise they were just fine, they included how many points of evil people are worth. I shuddered. Go ahead and play that way, I thought, I mean whatever, not my problem. But it's sure not my game. (If you're reading this, well, there it is, but this is kind of a lame way for you to get my feedback and I'm sorry for that.)

It sounds like that's probably not the case here though, you shuddering and thinking whatever, dude. Then, cool. Me using my tally system is like you making WYRD characters all out of one purse, a sign of the flexibility and robustness of the game.

So you tell me.

(But I swear, if this game were a person, I'd've proposed by now.)

-Vincent

Mormon raised, actually. Which seems to mean a lot in common with devout Catholics/former devout Catholics (depending), and some of the same religious impulses. But much wackier native religious imagery.

Mike, could you give an example of your grid in action? Or show how my example fits into it? I don't think I understand.

-Vincent