I don't quite understand what happened.  I sat down after dinner, started reading Forge threads, and then it was past midnight and I had written a rough draft of a game.

---

Conquer the Horizon
A Game of Discovery

This is a game in which the players take on the roles of an exploratory mission from the Old World, exploring the unknown wilds of the New World.  You will need two or more players, some pens and paper, a pile of dice, and a willingness to create collaboratively.  There is no Game Master.

Creating the Old and New Worlds
The Old World might be Europe; the New World might be the Americas.  The Old World can just as easily be Earth and the New World Mars, or the Old World can be the Reunited States of America and the New World a post-apocalyptic Europe, complete with zombies.  The first phase of the game will be to determine the specifics of the Old and New Worlds.

On a blank sheet of paper, draw a line dividing the paper into halves.  Label one side "Old World" and the other side "New World."  Choose one player to start with and go around the table.  Each player can do one of three things: (a) add a statement about the Old or New World (write it down), (b) confirm a statement made by another player (underline it), and (c) deny an unconfirmed statement made by another player (cross it out).  Go around the table until there is more than one statement each about the Old and New Worlds, and there are more confirmed statements than there are players.  Once you're done, you might want to write the confirmed statements on a new piece of paper, if only for legibility's sake.

Creating the Characters
After the New and Old Worlds are sketched out, each player will create their primary character.  In play, everyone will portray lots of different people (it is assumed the mission includes dozens of NPC mooks), but the primary character will be each player's focus.  To start with, each character has a Role, at least two Competencies, and a Capsule Description.

Roles
Starting with the player who confirmed the last statement in the World Creation and continuing around the table, each player should pick a role from the list below and write it on their character sheet.  Once a role is taken, no other player may select that role.  If there are roles left over, go around the table again.  Players may elect to take a second role or pass.  If everyone around the table passes, ignore the leftover roles.

Each role has a bonus, a restriction, and a goal.  The bonus allows the player to gain a bonus whenever adding narration of a particular theme.  The restriction prohibits the player from adding any narration of a different theme.  The goal is what the character is after in the game; at the end of the game, some players will have succeeded in reaching their goal, while others may not.

The Governor
If you play the Governor, you gain a bonus whenever adding narration in which the Governor is in charge.  However, you cannot add any narration in which the Governor follows someone else's orders or submits to their leadership.  To succeed, the Governor must establish a viable colony in the New World; the colony must exploit at least two resources.  The Governor does not need to return to the Old World -- it is assumed the colony will eventually send ships of its own.

The Missionary
If you play the Missionary, you gain a bonus whenever adding narration in which the Missionary overcomes an obstacle through tenacity and faith.  However, you cannot add any narration in which the Missionary denies the dogma of the Old World's Faith.  To succeed, the Missionary must convert at least one native race.  The Missionary does not need to return to the Old World.

The General
If you play the General, you gain a bonus whenever adding narration in which the General uses martial power. However, you cannot add any narration in which the General backs down in a confrontation with the natives of the New World.  To succeed, the General must conquer at least one native race; the General does not need to return to the Old World.

The Anthropologist
If you play the Anthropologist, you gain a bonus whenever adding narration in which the Anthropologist deduces the customs or actions of New World natives.  However, you cannot add any narration in which the Anthropologist fails to pursue information about New World races.  To succeed, the Anthropologist must meet at least two native races and talk about the other race to gain perspective.  The Anthropologist does not need to return to the Old World, and can "go native."

The Naturalist
If you play the Naturalist, you gain a bonus whenever adding narration in which the Naturalist finds a use for native wildlife.  However, you cannot add any narration in which the Naturalist leaves his samples behind or lets them come to harm.  To succeed, the Naturalist must return to the Old World with at least three specimens of New World life.

The Merchant
If you play the Merchant, you gain a bonus whenever adding narration in which the Merchant convinces someone else to do something for a price. However, you cannot add any narration in which the Merchant abandons an opportunity for gaining wealth.  To succeed, the Merchant must exploit one New World resource and return to the Old World.

Competencies
Once all the roles are taken, continue going around the table.  Each player suggests a Competency for the next player's character.  Competencies are things that the character are good at -- it may be navigation, finding shelter, or travelling by canoe.  The next player may accept that Competency or pass it on to the next player, who may accept it or pass it along, et cetera.  If the Competency goes all the way around the table, the player who first suggested it must take it.  Whoever ends up with it writes it down on their character sheet.  Go around the table until each character has at least two Competencies.

Capsule Description
Now that each player has a Role and a few Competencies, you can name the character and write a short description of who they are, what they look like, where they come from, and that sort of thing.  Write it down in fifty words or less and read it aloud to the other players, along with your Role and Competencies.

The Rest of the Page
You should have a lot of whitespace left on the page.  Label this space 'Discoveries'.  During the course of the game, the things that you discover will be listed here.  As play progresses, you will gain a bonus whenever adding narration concerning your discoveries.

Supplies
Grab a handful of dice.  Grab a bigger handful if you want a longer game.  They can be of all shapes and sizes.  Put them in the middle of the table.  These represent the exploratory mission's supplies, in terms of food, potable water, clothes, camp gear, ammunition, or whatever else the Old World thinks is necessary for continued existence.  The exploratory mission can only remain in the New World as long as there are dice left in the middle of the table.  When the last die is removed from the middle of the table and rolled, the game is over.

Players begin with no dice in front of them; they will accrue dice as the game progresses.

Landfall
Play begins with whichever player took the Governor role describing the beginning of the mission. The description should briefly summarize the trip from the Old World (creaky ship, spare rations, card games to pass the time, etc) and the arrival in the New World.  The player must introduce a Discovery (see below), which is usually a beachhead or landing site, but may be a hurricane or similar good news for the mission.

Narration
When a player narrates, they may describe the actions of their character, the actions of any NPCs, or the details of the New World already introduced.  As long as they do not introduce any new information, they may narrate whatever they like.  It is only when the player wants to introduce something new that they have to Make a Discovery or Exploit a Discovery.
If no dice are rolled, the next player around the table narrates next.  If any dice are rolled, whoever's dice rolled lowest narrates next.

Making Discoveries
If you want to introduce some new element of the New World in your narration, you will have to make a Discovery.  A Discovery can be a mountain, a river, a native race, an ancient ruin, a species of wildlife, or any other piece of the setting that you want to introduce.
To make a Discovery, pull a die from Supplies and roll it.  Narrate your character finding the first clues of the Discovery's existence.  Roll another die from your pile if the narration includes your Role bonus or an applicable Competency.  For every Discovery on your sheet that is somehow in the narration and related to the new Discovery, roll another die from your pile.  Keep all the dice that you have rolled in your pile.
It's possible that no one will attempt to Qualify your Discovery.  In the unlikely chance that that happens, write it down on your sheet and narrate your character verifying and exploring the Discovery.  For the rest of the game, that Discovery is 'real' and the other players should narrate accordingly.

Qualifying Discoveries
When another player makes a Discovery, any other player may Qualify that Discovery by proposing details to add to it.  If someone just Discovered a mountain, you might want the mountain to contain gold veins, for instance.  If the Missionary's player wants to discover that the natives' religion includes a figure much like the God of his religion, you may want to add that the figure is the native's conception of Evil.
To Qualify a Discovery, roll a die from your pile.  Narrate the additions that you want included.  Roll another die from your pile if the narration includes your Role bonus or an applicable Competency.  For every Discovery on your sheet that is included in the narration, roll another die from your pile.
It is now up to the player who made the Discovery to decide whether or not to accept your Qualification.  If they refuse your additions, the value of your dice is subtracted from their dice.  If the Discoverer's dice are reduced to zero or less, the Discovery turns out to be nothing significant -- the mountain on the horizon was only clouds.
If they accept your proposed additions, the value of your dice is added to theirs.  If the Discoverer's dice remain above zero and is accepted, write it down on your sheet, including your additions.  The player who made the Discovery should also include your additions when they write on their sheet.

Exploiting Discoveries
Instead of making a Discovery, you may want to Exploit a Discovery that has already been accepted.  Exploiting a Discovery is when your character brings something from the Old World to bear on the New World.  You may want your character to charm the natives into growing tobacco for your pretty beads, or you may want to gather seed samples for your scholarly publication when you return.  Each Role must Exploit at least one Discovery in order to fulfill its goal.
To Exploit a Discovery, draw a die from Supplies and roll it.  Narrate what your character does to make the Discovery useful in the character's terms.  Roll another die from your pile if the narration includes your Role bonus or an applicable Competency.  For every Discovery on your sheet that is included in the narration, roll another die from your pile.
The other players can Qualify as normal -- they may add, for instance, that the ore extracted from the mountain is substandard and not worth selling in the Old World, or that the mines are manned by enslaved natives.
If the Exploitation is successful, underline that Discovery on your sheet and return your highest die (the one with the most sides) to the Supplies pool.  If you have Exploited a Discovery on someone else's sheet, add it to yours, underline it, and steal a die from their pile to add to the Supplies pool.

Using Supplies
Any player may, when Qualifying a Discovery, draw one die from the Supplies pile and add it to their roll.  The die thereafter stays in their pile.
The same holds true for Exploiting Discoveries, except the initiating player may draw as many Supply dice as he already has in his pile.

Returning to the Old World
Most of the Roles must return to the Old World before the Supplies run out in order to fulfill their goal.  Treat Returning to the Old World as a Discovery -- any player may attempt to return to the Old World on their turn.  They may narrate the entire party returning or just their character.  Other players may Qualify the Return as normal.  The game does not end if someone returns to the Old World -- more than one trip may take place, or explorers 'left behind' may continue exploring until the Supplies run out.

Winning the Game
Only players who fulfill their Role's goal can win the game.  If more than one player has fulfilled their goal, whoever among them with the most Discoveries on their sheet wins.  The New World will henceforth be named after their character.

Looking good!

You know what it reminds me of, though?  Breaking the Ice.  Odds are you haven't yet seen this game, and I think you'll want to take a look at it.

So, knowing that I'm coming at it from this angle:  Why do you want more than two players, one for the explorers (as exemplified by one of their number, a-la John Smith) and one for the explored territories (perhaps as exemplified by one of their number, a-la Pocahontas)?

Because, basically, I don't see how any of the roles are going to interact with each other, under the rules.  If you could elaborate on how you see these roles playing off of each other (either helping each other or getting into conflicts) more than just playing their interactions with the discovered territory in the same room as the other players (but not substantially impacting them) that would help me a lot.

No, I haven't seen Breaking the Ice -- I thought I was ripping off what I understood of Polaris!

Tangentially, did you get visions of Disney's Pocahontas when reading this?  Because I couldn't banish those characters, either, as much as I tried.  I keep trying to replace them with the First 100 from Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars/Green Mars/Blue Mars, but the cartoons keep sticking around.  Disturbing.

On to the salient points: First and foremost, this is a game about communally creating the New World.  I really should put a heavier emphasis on that at the beginning of the game to make it clear.  The game isn't about conflicts -- in fact it doesn't have conflict resolution or task resolution; the dice mechanics are pure credibility-dispensing.  The game isn't about the characters you create, either.  The characters only exist as waldoes with which to manipulate the fabrication of the setting.  Consider this closer to Once Upon A Time or even Robo Rally than your 'standard' roleplaying game.

Nobody plays the territory, because the territory is created by everybody.  Nobody has absolute authority over the territory, but some people have a little more authority when it comes to something their character is good at (Roles/Competencies) or something that they helped establish already (Discoveries).  I am totally riffing off of Kirk Mitchell's The Order thread, in which the players collaboratively create the Transgressor's story.

As far as interaction goes, the emphasis is not on character interaction, but on player interaction.  The players' most useful tools are the characters, and so most of the player interaction is expressed in character interaction.  Each player has a different win scenario (although I think I may tweak this -- but different goals will still be involved), some of which are complementary, some of which are at odds.  So while the Missionary wants to convert the natives, the General wants to conquer them.  The Merchant wants to control one resource himself and get back home; the Governor wants to control resources for the colony and doesn't want Supplies spent on a return trip.  The players will qualify Discoveries either to 'jump on board' (we can conquer them and convert them at the same time!) or to stick a poison pill into the mix (on your return trip, you encounter a hurricane and have to return to the New World).

Is that any clearer, Tony?

Oh, additionally -- after a Discovery is resolved, either accepted or rejected, the narration goes to whoever rolled lowest in the resolution.  This means that players may hop in with Qualifications, roll a d4, and hope to roll a 1.  Then they get to make the next Discovery.  Again, this isn't character-oriented, but it does promote more player interaction.

Okay, so at lunch I figured out how to revamp the scoring and win conditions.  Ignore everything about what a Role has to do to 'succeed', and ignore the Winning the Game bit.  Replace with:

Winning the Game

When the last die is taken from Supplies and used in a Discovery or Exploitation, the game is over.  Everyone tallies points for their character to see who will go down in history as the Cortez, Magellan, or Christopher Columbus of your New World.

* Every player scores one point for every Discovery on their character sheet.

* The Governor scores three points for every Exploited resource the colony has access to (underlined on the charater sheet).
* The Missionary scores two points for every race that has been converted (underlined on the character sheet).
* The General scores two points for every race that has been conquered (underlined on the character sheet), or three points per conquered race if the character returns to the Old World.
* The Anthropologist scores three points for every race which was studied and interviewed about another race (underlined on the character sheet).
* The Naturalist scores three points for every sampled species (underlined on the character sheet) that is transported back to the Old World.
* The Merchant scores four points for every Exploited resource the Merchant has access to (underlined on the character sheet), but only if the Merchant returns to the Old World.

Whoever scores the most points wins the game; the New World is thereafter named in their honor.

---

I was also thinking it'd be keen to have the players draw a map of the New World as Discoveries are accepted; at the end of the game, the winner gets to label the map with some variation of their name: "I hereby name this land... Seymouria."  Then you have a neat little artifact that the winner can take home... and people can ask what it is, and spread the game virally.

Now, however, I'm going to refrain from continually posting to my own thread.

Okay, assume that I (because I'm a greedy, grasping sort) am playing this game to win.

So, are native races "resources," as defined in the Governor's winning conditions?  If so then the Missionary can never win, as the Governor will always get more points.

Is there ever any reason for (say) the Governor to not Qualify a statement and take Supplies to do so?  He seems to benefit the most from running the game's clock down quickly, before people can return Home.

The game seems (to me) as if it's going to resolve in favor of whoever manages to finagle two or three turns of Narration before everyone else is on seconds.  Is that intentional?  Is there ever any reason not to Qualify someone else's idea, hoping to get narration rights?  What happens when three or four people all tie for the lowest die in the narration?

Play to win, man.  Play like you mean it.

Native races can certainly be resources -- slave labor or something more palatable -- as defined by the Governor's win conditions.  They can also be converted for the Missionary's win conditions.  But just because the Missionary has exploited the natives doesn't mean the Governor has.  Sure, the Governor can run in and slap down a Qualification, but the Missionary has to accept it in order for the Governor to get bandwagon credit.  If the Missionary is also out to win, however, he can (a) not accept the qualification, taking the hit to his Discovery's numbers, or (b) prevent the Governor from jumping in quite handily by beginning his narration with the Governor not being in charge -- it's far away from the colony, the natives are independant-minded, the Governor looks like their religion's devil, whatever -- in which case the Governor can't add narration due to his restriction.

Consider the television show Survivor.  It was really simple in original conception -- compete in silly games and vote off the people who lost the silly game for your team -- and then Richard Hatch introduced the concept of alliances, and the 'game' got really really complicated in terms of intraparty conflicts, tensions, trust, and the like.  Conquer the Horizon, I imagine, can very quickly go down that route, as the Governor cooperates with the Merchant to exploit resources together, but the Governor will eventually turn on the Merchant when she tries to Return to the Old World.  Or actually, a better example might be Catan -- the different players are rivals, not enemies, and so they help eachother out, to a point, but then turn around and sprint for the finish line.

The Governor certainly wants the Supplies to run out as quickly as possible -- once the exploratory mission is over, it's time for the colony, right?  So he's going to blow Supplies trying to establish a colony, exploit nearby resources, et cetera, instead of trying to head over the horizon like (say) the Anthropologist.  Currently the only restriction on how many Supplies you can blow is that you can only double your dice in an Exploitation.  I think there may need to be some sort of player-mediated restriction as well, but I don't see it yet.  Perhaps your Supply-fueled qualification must be accepted or else the die returns to Supplies.

There is very little reason not to jump in with Qualifications -- that is intentional, yes.  The game encourages everyone to collaborate.  The Discoveries portion of your character sheet very quickly eclipses your Role bonus and Competencies, too.  Zebulon Pike discovered Pike's Peak.  I have no idea what he was doing there when he discovered it, or what kind of guy he was, or what he was good at, but I remember that he discovered Pike's Peak.  So too are you turning your simple character who has a Role and Competencies into a guy who Discovered things -- oh, and he was a naturalist at the time.

I do not have a tiebreaker, though, so thank you for pointing that one out.  Probably just rerolling the tied dice, since who-goes-next is determined after the Discovery is accepted or rejected, so there's no reason to leave the dice untouched.

Lastly, whether or not the game ends after 'two or three turns of Narration' is a function of the Supply die pool.  Since this just came out of my head last night, I haven't been able to playtest this, so unfortunately I have no idea how many dice translate to how many turns in the game.  But while you can certainly garner a quick lead, the other players can very easily turn on you, rejecting your qualifications or preventing you from even making qualifications.

Oh, I wasn't talking about ending the game in two or three turns.  Heck, give me a thousand supply dice if you want.

What I was talking about was that, once I get a certain amount of lead in dice in my pool, I can count on having more chances to Narrate than anyone else (because I keep qualifying... who cares if it's rejected, the ones are still what determines narration, right?)

Is there any import to what your total is on Discovering or Exploiting, so long as it's greater than zero?  Is there, in short, any first-order reason to accept a Qualification that you could reject without losing?

You get that big stinking lead of yours -- you grab narration four times and make four Discoveries while everyone else has one.  From then thereafter, yes, you can toss in a d4 Qualification and you'll get the opportunity to make a Discovery or Exploit again.  But.  As long as that big stinking lead of yours is public, the other players will just keep giving you poison pill Qualifications on those Discoveries and Exploits.  All you get to discover is the Mountain of Shit.  If you don't accept the Qualifications, your die total plummets, you make no new Discoveries while the other players happily collaborate with eachother to narrow the margin.  If you do accept them, sure, you get a new Discovery on your sheet, but so do the people who threw in the Qualifications.  Your 4:1 lead turns into a 5:2 lead, turns into a 6:3 lead, et cetera -- and actually, assuming the others will still be narrowing your lead down with their own collaborations, your relative lead will shrink even faster.  I think it pretty much becomes self-regulating.  The only way to win is to with the support of the others, but they'll only support as long as you aren't plainly in the lead.

At present, there's no difference between having 1 or 101 for your Discovery or Exploit.  There is no advantage to accepting Qualifications you don't need as long as they don't endanger your positive die total.  However, you don't know if, after you reject Player A's Qualification, Player B will throw one out, too.  I should probably clarify the procedures of who announces qualifications in what order to make this danger more plain.

Ahhhh....  I think I see.

Each Discovery you make is going to be loaded with Qualifications.  You're going to accept some of these and reject some of them.  Basically, if you accept something from someone powerful than it will allow you to reject (say) two lesser lights.  Likewise, round-about, you need to accept two small-fry's qualifications in order to reject the one of someone who is way in the lead (because they've got so many more horkin' dice).

And thus, you have a resource-distribution situation that pays very nice homage (as you said) to the dysfunctional alliances of reality television.  You want to create a firm, unbreakable alliance of which you are the leading light.  And then you want to mistreat the people involved in that alliance as much as you can get away with (without it fracturing) so that your lead over them widens.  Meanwhile, you want to portray other people doing the same thing (with other alliances) as mercenary bastards who are nothing whatsoever like yourself, both to prevent defection from within your own group and to promote it within theirs.

Interesting...

Have I got this just about right?

It can certainly be played that way. ;)  Or the slightly less cut-throat Catan version, in which you convince other players that cooperating with you now serves both your needs, and besides, you have to do something or else the other player is going to wipe the board with you.

Either way, hopefully the underlying dynamic will encourage qualifications -- which is a somewhat-combative term that disguises what this really is, collaborations -- so that every Discovery added to the New World is textured enough to be interesting.  Then later Discoveries and Exploits which hope to gain a die by referencing past Discoveries will riff off of those textured details.

So:

I Discover Pine Tree Mountain.  Susan Qualifies that there is a river with gold flakes in it.  Albert Qualifies that there are cave paintings.  Robert Qualifies that there are interesting trees on the south slope.  I accept Susan's and Robert's Qualifications, but refuse Albert's.

On Susan's turn, she Discovers the Mile Wide River; she adds in a die because the river that comes off of Pine Tree Mountain is a tributary of the Mile Wide.  I Qualify that there are fish in the river; Albert Qualifies that the river is easily navigable; Robert Qualifies that the River is teeming with life.  Susan denies my Qualification and accepts Albert's and Robert's.

On Albert's turn, he travels up the Mile Wide River, navigating by keeping Pine Tree Mountan in view, and discovers a village of natives way up near the source of the Mile Wide.  And so on.

On Susan's turn, wouldn't you (and Robert) also get a die for having Pine Tree Mountain on your sheets?

That's genuinely not meant as a nit-pick.  The difference in rules between whether you do or don't is pretty huge, long-term.

First off, I made an error when I said Albert would want to navigate by keeping Pine Tree Mountain in view -- he doesn't get any bonus, it's doubtful he'd care.  But the concept of riffing off of prior Discoveries is still clear, I hope.

On Susan's turn, I don't get an extra die unless my Qualification includes Pine Tree Mountain.  If I just say there's fish (because I want my colony to eat them) but don't reference the mountain, I get no bonus.  If I say there's salmon that use the Mile Wide to get to spawning grounds on Pine Tree Mountain, then yes, I get a bonus.  Similarily, just by saying that the Mile Wide is teeming with life does not gain Robert anything; by saying that the Mile Wide has beavers that use the lumber from those south-slope trees, then he gets a bonus.  Played to advantage, every addition draws the elements together in a tighter weave.

Sounds cool.  I'm looking forward to hearing how it plays (though not, in fact, enough to go out and forcibly manhandle my friends around a table just yet).

Is there anything I can, I don't know, give back?  Any questions that are preying on your mind?  Places where you'd like wacky, nonsensical suggestions from which you might mine a nugget of goodness?

Right now, I just have to polish it a bit, include the changes we discussed here, and give it a whirl.  Maybe tomorrow night at my brother's going-back-to-college shindig.  We'll see.

Thanks, though, for your input thus far -- it's helped me refine a great deal!

Its funny how these games just sneak up on you like that, particularly after you've spent a while here. I haven't the time to have a really in-depth look at the thread at the moment, but after skimming the first few posts, yes I immediately got Disney's Pocahontas in my head. Then Interplay's Fallout series. Also various other "New World" films and books that I think would be awesome to cram together and play (Columbus, El Dorado, Swiss Family Robinson...). I'll save the thread and come back tomorrow, hopefully with some constructive comments!

One thing I really think you should keep is the fun and slightly playful feeling that everybody seemed to get (or at least you and me with the Disney movies). The mechanics can be all crazy cutthroat and tactical, but the playful nature, or at least the potential for being playful is what struck me immediately, and I think that's wonderful.

Kirk

>cough< Dune >cough, cough<

That one never occured to me...strange, because it is my favourite book(s) of all time. Yeah, I can see how that works, but the theme and tone doesn't seem to gel for me. Perhaps like a prequel or something...I could just imagine what it would be like for the first people to discover spice...

Kirk

The spice is just the McGuffin.  Nobody has to discover that, it's the New in New World.  But there are plenty of other resources.

The worms are a native race, as are the Fremen (by the time the Atreides family gets there, anyway).  That cavern complex with the water is a resource.  The wind is a resource ("desert power").  The family Atomics are supplies, spent to exploit the Desert Power resource.

I can't quite trick out who gets their winning conditions.  Archaeologist looks good, as there are, indeed, multiple races all of whom talk about each other incessantly.  Bene Gesserit Missionary had a great start, but got shafted by a well-played Qualification.  In fact, the whole final confrontation could be seen as the narration of Archaeologist just barely edging out Conqueror in the winning conditions.

But then, I've been thinking heavily about Dune while reading Sorceror and Sword.  So maybe I'm just seeing applications everywhere.

Kirk wrote: One thing I really think you should keep is the fun and slightly playful feeling that everybody seemed to get (or at least you and me with the Disney movies). The mechanics can be all crazy cutthroat and tactical, but the playful nature, or at least the potential for being playful is what struck me immediately, and I think that's wonderful.

Best of luck with the playtest, Joshua.  This game has some great ideas in it.  Having to Qualify the ideas of others in order to get dice into your own pool, by which you can accomplish your own goals through exploitation.  And any old dice will do--put that in your pipe and smoke it role playing world!  I'll be curious to see how the dynamics play out, and if there are issues with establishing conditions for the goals, ie will people rush right out and finish up, while others are taking their time sight seeing the world?

Also, I'd put the indigenous folk in as a player.  They are/were a part of the alliances & issues going on in situations like this. Our view of history overlooks this rather shamelessly, leaving just faint traces like Pocahontas, and forgetting Tecumsah and Crazy Horse.  Leaving them out would both be a shame from a player perspective and, frankly, a continuation of the original dispossession.  With North America the disease war could just as easily have gone in their favor as ours--guess it's a matter of isolation & exposure.  In Dune, the fremen make all the difference, though their leader is an off-worlder. 

I'd love to talk to you about Breaking the Ice some time, if you're interested. Definitely related stuff.  And Polaris was the big inspiration, huh? Funny. : )

best,
Emily 

Thanks, Emily.  We played the game a bit last night (Actual Play thread coming soon), and the qualifications really worked well, bolstered by and bolstering the dice mechanics.  We had a really nice synthesis of simple exploration and self-serving exploitation, too.

As far as the 'natives' go, they're not in the game as a played character because the game is about Discovery -- what fun is it to play an Algonquin and roll dice to say "Hey look, the Appalachians!  How'd those get there?"  I certainly understand why they were important historically and how it is important not to gloss over them or marginalize them in-game.  Given that our playtest last night involved a civil war among the natives over the intrusion of the explorers, I think that danger of marginalization is not, at least, systemic.  The natives will be involved in events as much as the players make them involved -- which is about as good as you can get in game design.  Also keep in mind that the natives might be zombies or ewoks (as in last night's game) -- not to mention that you can play the game as some native americans paddling across the Atlantic to 'discover' Europe.  I guess it's an "equal-opportunity" game.

All I know about Polaris is that it runs off of a "Yes, but"/"Yes, and"/"No" negotiation mechanic, which sounded interesting.  CtE just doesn't have the "No" option -- poison pill, instead.

But aren't the natives making Discoveries about the colonists?

Great, Joshua.  Sounds like you've got some great material to work with here. I look forward to the actual play.

And as for the indigenous people, I'll provide some more arguments, though it is of course your call to make.  If you leave them out of the roles:
1) you lose the ability for players to make alliances for the interests of the local folk,
2) you place the people there on the same level with respect to narration as the land, plants & animals, and
3) they will remain tools in the hands of the players to be used to gain the goals of the non-natives. 

That's fine, it reflects the views of the indigenous folk by European colonizers and explorers of the period(s) you're portraying, but it's also a choice you are making with this game right now.  The metaphor of Discovery is just that, a metaphor.  If the players hold the position of people already occupying the land, it won't change how the mechanics work any, and will probably enrich the players' experience because it will be a less one-sided representation of the events.  The inhabitants of the land are obviously already exploiting the resources within it, narration about it would reflect what had been so.  You are establishing what is in the world, how long that had been known by the character isn't in question really.

The only issue I can see would be if the conflict of interest between the indigenous peoples & the newly arrived is so great that it sows dischord among the players.  Given the real events of history, I can absolutely see that being the case. Also, having one role be indigenous and all the rest be foreign is problematic since so many more of the actual people there would have been native. 

So, that's more to think about.  I'd suggest play-testing it with a broader view & see if it hurts your vision.  If not, why not include more? If it does, then you'll have hard experience showing you why you're making that choice rather than preference & simple aesthetics that may end up supporting the whole, usual racist cultural shebang we're all a part of.

Hope that's useful to your endeavor.

Best,
Emily

1) you lose the ability for players to make alliances for the interests of the local folk,
2) you place the people there on the same level with respect to narration as the land, plants & animals, and
3) they will remain tools in the hands of the players to be used to gain the goals of the non-natives. 

Emily, I think you corrected yourself as I was going to.  The players can certainly make alliances for the interests of the local folk if they think that:
(a) they can get something out of it later, citing that discovery as support for their later discoveries and exploits,
(b) it can be in-line with an exploit right then (the Missionary providing medical care for the people he converts, for instance), or
(c) it can block another player's goals (strengthening a native race so that they are in a position of power, so that the Governor can't be in charge regarding them).
And there's the very real (d) "I just like the New World when it includes this element where the natives have X".

It does place the indigenes on the same level as the plants and animals -- but then, we do that all the time by making some 'people' in the game NPCs and some are PCs.  They will serve the goals of the PCs just like the nameless mook guard at the door serves the purpose of 'displaying character competence'.

That said, as Tony points out, the natives could discover things about the explorers; I could see a 'Native Guide' role whose goal was to learn about/exploit the invaders.  As a role, it would sometimes be involved, and sometimes not, and not significantly change the focus of the game as a whole -- something which 'the players play the indigenes too' worries me on.

Playtest Notes!

Okay, I started yammering design issues over on Actual Play, but then realized it would be better off here.

About establishing group consensus about what types of New World are possible, and integrating character roles:  I'm going to recommend that this is the role of the Journey From Home.  Folks can describe the vessel they travel in (hide-bound skiff or chrome space-cruiser) and what they do to annoy/occupy the crew and colonists during the voyage (showing what archetype they're playing).

If you wanted to get totally wonky, you could have people using the Discovery/Qualification mechanic to discover (and maybe Exploit) things about each other, but that's probably too loony-tunes.

I don't know if it's too looney-tunes.  It could certainly work, I just don't know if it would contribute to the overall design goals.  I tried to make character creation a hurry-up-and-it's-over sort of thing, so the players could get to the 'meat' of the game -- creating the world.  It's also a sort of easing-in to the collaborative creation.  Not quite propose/qualify/ratify/reject, but propose/accept.

Mostly, though, I want to avoid the situation described in this thread.  Freeform is great and all, but it needs context or else it quickly goes  incoherent (literal sense, not Forge-speak).  By giving the players a forum which allows them to toss out ideas and have them ratified or rejected, they can come to consensus on context in a relatively quick and easy fashion.

In the end, it doesn't really matter if you get to Bush's New Order or whatever you determined was in the New World.  What matters is that the Discoveries you make share the same sort of flavor.  Of course I need to do more playtesting to verify that it actually does this, but at least the first time through lived up to expectations.

All that said, a character creation where the entire group contributed elements for each other which were then peer-reviewed sounds neat -- just for a different game. ;)