Topic: [Under Pressure] Exploring Extreme Situations
Started by: Frank T
Started on: 9/14/2005
Board: Indie Game Design
On 9/14/2005 at 8:37am, Frank T wrote:
[Under Pressure] Exploring Extreme Situations
I really should be working on BARBAREN!. Really should. But that’s just when I get the best ideas about new projects. Here’s one game I’d really like to write. The concept: You play a normal guy under high pressure, and see how it feels. The system should allow you to really explore your character and the situation in-depth. Some bits about the system:
The Character: There is just one player character. He is on his own, nobody to help him. He’s just a normal guy like you and me, and he never intended to get caught up in a situation like this. But he is, and now it’s all about getting out.
Players: There is one player who plays the character. Strict actor stance is enforced. He is not being told anything his character doesn’t know. There are at least two other players who take on GM tasks, keeping the pressure up, dividing NPCs between each other and checking on each other to allow for maximum plausibility.
The Situation: Players agree on the situation beforehand. It should be an extreme situation, like being stranded in a country at war where you don’t speak the language, or being kidnapped by terrorists, or getting hit by a bad storm climbing a mountain.
Stats: Stats are all about what it takes to survive. Something along the lines of: self-control, staying focussed, physical fitness, determination, quick reaction, killer-instinct. You determine these stats by rolling dice. No dividing points and optimising your character here. You have to make do with what you get. Also, you don’t roll for self-control, determination and killer-instinct before you first need it. You’re a normal guy, after all. How should you know your own killer-instinct? You’ve never tried to kill anyone!
Resolution: The resolution system is straight old task resolution. It is assumed that you don’t have any special skills to help you in this situation, or if you have, these are incorporated into the difficulty rating. Target numbers are based on how challenging a task is. They are modified if you are overburdened. To each stat, you have a corresponding burden rating, which would be something along the lines of hysteria (for self-control), stress (for staying focussed), exhaustion, pain or wounds (for physical fitness), fear (for determination), being rushed (for quick reaction), and qualms (for killer-instinct). Any burden that exceeds your stat adds to your target number.
Questions:
1. What do you think about the concept ? Would anybody want to play a game like that?
2. Is there anything I should read? Anything like this been done before?
3. What do you think about the idea of “one player, several GMs”? Do you have any thoughts on how to divide tasks between the GMs in order to prevent loads of discussion and confusion?
Thanks in advance,
Frank
On 9/14/2005 at 6:38pm, nsruf wrote:
Re: [Under Pressure] Exploring Extreme Situations
Frank wrote:
1. What do you think about the concept ? Would anybody want to play a game like that?
Well, I'd want to! I've always wanted to design an RPG that emphasizes the role of psychological stress and physical pain for relatively ordinary people in extreme situations myself. But your idea of enforcing absolute ordinariness and stats that are only determined "on demand" is better than anything I came up with so far. I'd love to see how this game turns out - I hope the people waiting for the revision of BARBAREN don't hate me for saying that;)
2. Is there anything I should read? Anything like this been done before?
The Call of Cthulhu sanity rules are probably a good example of how not to do it. At least, I always found them horribly tacked on, like an afterthought to a very conventional system. But since you want to make sanity and such the central stats, you'll likely avoid that problem.
Other games I have seen that deal with ordinary people in horrible (non-supernatural) situations are
- "The Farm" by Jared Sorenson. I haven't seen the actual game, which is available as a pdf, but there is a pretty comprehensive review on RPG.net http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10995.phtml.
- "Bestial Acts" by Greg Costikyan, available for free here: http://www.costik.com/brecht.html.
However, both deal heavily with group dynamics (and the second is more of a design exercise than an actual game, IMO), and less with individual psychology and finding your "breaking point".
3. What do you think about the idea of “one player, several GMs”? Do you have any thoughts on how to divide tasks between the GMs in order to prevent loads of discussion and confusion?
Maybe one for handling the rules, one for the bad guys and/or disasters (plays "evil" NPCs, adds new complications) and one for other victims (plays the PC's loved ones, or just other ordinary people in trouble, adding a different kind of complications). Also, since preparing a game with several GMs is a logistic nightmare IME, the game should probably evolve at the table and require as little advance preparation as possible.
On 9/15/2005 at 7:24am, Simon W wrote:
RE: Re: [Under Pressure] Exploring Extreme Situations
There is a game called Pressure Cooker here that seems to be similar to the type of thing you are trying to do
http://miscellaneousdebris.sitesled.com/index.html
I haven't read it through completely, but on first glance it looks quite good
Simon W
On 9/15/2005 at 3:05pm, Graham Walmsley wrote:
RE: Re: [Under Pressure] Exploring Extreme Situations
Frank wrote:
1. What do you think about the concept ? Would anybody want to play a game like that?
Yes, I'd play it.
Frank wrote:
2. Is there anything I should read? Anything like this been done before?
Well...I had a quick go at something similar recently as a 24-hour RPG. It's by no means perfect, but perhaps worth checking for ideas. http://www.1km1kt.net/rpg/Get_Out_Get_Away.php
(I'm now hoping there's not some Forge rule I don't know about regarding plugging your own game. One of the most nerve-wracking things about posting here is crossing some line accidentally. Anyway..)
Frank wrote: 3. What do you think about the idea of “one player, several GMs”? Do you have any thoughts on how to divide tasks between the GMs in order to prevent loads of discussion and confusion?
I would say: don't divide the tasks. Let the GMs build on what each other says and riff off each other. But have a rule that once one GM's said something, another GM can't contradict it.
I'd also suggest that you rotate the player role, so everyone gets a go. And, if you use different GM roles, then rotate them too. Otherwise you get some guy who's stuck with being the "Rules GM" for the whole game.
I hope that's of some help.
Graham