Topic: A new face with a new game
Started by: Wolfen
Started on: 3/31/2002
Board: Indie Game Design
On 3/31/2002 at 11:58am, Wolfen wrote:
A new face with a new game
Um, Hi.
Name's Lance, and I just found my way to the Forge a few days ago. However, I've been working on my own roleplaying game for a couple years, off and on. More off than on, if you really get down to it.
However, the game is nearing a level of completion that will allow me to playtest it enough to get a feel for the system. A shyte-load of details for the setting still need to be written down, several areas of rules still need to be fully explored, and I'm certain that a great many of the existing rules will need to be tweaked. In addition, I'm going to have to find an effective organizational format, and a layout which doesn't cause headaches... But that's all still in the future.
Mage Blade is a game originally conceived due to frustration. I used to play Ultima Online, and have played many D&D type games as well. The extremes of mages in these games- in UO you had mages in full plate wielding halberds and riding nightmares, and in the D&D-type games you had mages who could barely swing a staff and had better NOT be caught wearing anything decent in armor- irritated me to the point that I decided that I would create a game and setting where mages were the rule, rather than the exception. Thus was Mage Blade born, in a fit of pique.
Since then, I have done a lot more with it, and I think the game is worthy of playing, and perhaps even selling, when I can bring it to that phase. I'm not sure exactly how unique the systems are (reminiscent of the WoD and Shadowrun dice systems without being particularly close) or how unique some elements of the setting, but I think, taken as a whole, it does things in a way that no other game does.
Now that I've yammered on, I bring my questions...
Would it be recommended to post the systems of my game where they can be accessed by anyone (particularly the members of the Forge community) or would I be better advised to keep it to myself, my playtesters, and anyone willing to give me an e-mail to get a copy?
How much active assistance am I likely to find here? For the most part, I need:
-experienced gamers whom I can contact (when I'm able) via AOL or AIM (or eventually ICQ, when I can get my modem fixed) to bounce ideas off of.
-someone willing to look at the layout of information, and able to help me put it into a better format.
-anyone willing to get in on the ground level of my project and provide actual developmental work on the setting and system, within the boundaries of what I've already created.
Those two questions will do me for now. Sorry for the ramble, I have a tendency to do so, so you've been warned. Thanks in advance for any assistance and answers to my questions.
On 3/31/2002 at 3:36pm, Bailey wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Posting your systems is the best way to protect them. We don't need your entire draft, but the core of it would be swank. Be prepared to present answers to the big three questions. (thanks Jared)
What is your game about?
How does your game go about it?
What behavior does your game reward or encourage?
On 4/1/2002 at 9:11am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Bailey wrote:
What is your game about?
How does your game go about it?
What behavior does your game reward or encourage?
What is it about? Well, It's a high-fantasy game, in a high magic setting. The elements exist as forces and as closely linked influences to nearly every aspect of people, with especially strong influences on magic itself. It has many "familiar" fantasy elements, such as being nominally medieval, along with elves, dwarves orcs and other fantasy races very similar to how most fantasy games portray them, though with some (I think) interesting variations.
The system caters almost exclusively to the "world" it is set in, but makes allowances for alternate realms within that setting, besides the realm I will be creating as the base one for the game. It's not one that will easily convert to other existing settings, but a setting tailored for the game ought to be easily enough done.
How does it go about it? That's a harder question to answer in a paragraph or two. The system is based on the use of a single die, a d20. No other die is needed, nor are multiples required, though it is recommended to have at least 1 per player, and several for the GM. Character creation is point-allocation based in a fashion reminscent of White Wolf. All task resolution tests are based on variations of a system of trait+trait to equal a total which you must roll under.
What behavior is rewarded and/or encouraged? Borrowed from various systems, (WoD, Shadowrun, Star Wars (the D6 version)) points are granted at the end of a session of play based on various aspects. Playing the character well, advancing the play-group's missions, achieving goals, etc. will all gain the player points with which to improve their character. Beyond that, it's reliant on the GM to decide what behaviors he/she wishes to reward. If a GM wishes the characters to be good, they will be rewarded for doing good things and punished for doing bad things. The only thing the game mechanics particularly is playing your character well, being a team player, and advancing stated goals.
As for a posting of the core system, I could write up a summary, but at current, modem problems keep me from accessing the 'net from my own computer, and my mother's computer (which I am currently using) has a problem with recognizing floppy disks. Thus, I cannot simply bring the information to the net, which I will need to do anyhow, to distribute to my playtesters.
Anyhow, ciao for now.
On 4/1/2002 at 4:11pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Well, I can take either of two methods to respond, here:
Mr. Mean Mike says: Orcs, Dwarves, Elves, D20, and a system that rewards achieving goals and advancing missions. Why should I not just play D&D? Point based CharGen? That was invented in '77 (so I suppose this is closer to TFT). How am I supposed to get interested in this?
Mr. Nice Mike says: there is potentially lots of support here for a designer looking to finish up a concept. For us to help, however, we need more information. Do you want ideas for your setting? Then we need to know a little about it, and what you need filled. Do you want help tweaking your system? Then we need to see it, and hear from you what your design goals are. Need collaborators? Well, you can't attract us ants without some honey.
In general, give us something to work on, and ask specific questions. I think you'll find the response very valuable. Yes, post your stuff here where "anyone" can get at it. Everyone else does. When you have a salable product is when you put it into a format that cannot be easily stolen. In the meanwhile, any buzz generated here will lead to sales of the final copy later.
Just how I see it,
Mike
On 4/1/2002 at 5:03pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Hi Lance,
And welcome to this odd place ...
My best advice is to cruise through lots of threads here at the Indie Design forum and to get an idea of what happens with other authors in the same position as yourself. You'll see how folks tend to deal with their material and come to your own conclusions.
I think my main point right now for you is this. A lot of role-players design a game mainly as a reaction to or modification of a game that they have played a lot. This is a fine thing, and is probably where anyone starts when it comes to designing anything. However, I have concluded that such game design is a lot like one's first novel. At the time, it seems brilliant and soul-ripping and expressive of one's innermost self, but in actuality, its main virtues are (1) to clear a lot of adolescent trauma out of the way, (2) to familiarize the author with the day-to-day effort involved, and (3) to define the author's goals as distinct from the goals of his main influences. In other words, its best audience is the author; it's a necessary part of his development and people who care about his work need to read and criticize it, but it's probably never going to leave his desk, commercially speaking.
I do not know whether Mage Blade is playing this role for you, and I don't presume to judge it for one second without actually seeing or playing it. I do know that it's wise to take game design step by step. The first step is inspiration, feeling that creative drive. The second is critical - does the bloody thing actually work, and would anyone actually care? The third begins the work of playtesting, clarity-editing, and communication. I also know that people tend to skip step 2 consistently.
It sounds to me like step 2 is your big one right now - correct me if you think differently. If it is, then the Forge can be a great place for you. I'd suggest coming up with a couple of short documents. The first is a "why bother" sheet, or come-on written to fellow role-players (ie not market-oriented), explaining why one might like the basic idea - you've actually done 90% of this already with your post above. The second is a bones-only system sheet that gives a good idea of how one makes a character, how characters change, and how stuff gets done - I'm not talking about distance modifiers and point-breakdowns in detail, just the basics - enough to play without covering all the little angles.
Best,
Ron
On 4/3/2002 at 12:13am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Well, alright then.. I'll do what I can to write up those couple of documents, and bring 'em to the net.
But to answer a few questions/comments..
Mean Mike sez "Orcs, Dwarves, Elves, D20, and a system that rewards achieving goals and advancing missions. Why should I not just play D&D?"
For one, while D&D does make a swipe at rewarding characters for things other than killcount, it does it pretty poorly. D&D, as someone specifically stated in some essay or another on this website, is about killing monsters, and the system reflects this. Mage Blade will have it's share of monsters, but the emphasis of the game will not be on killing them, unless that is what the GM and Players set as their mission objectives.
Ron sez "The second is critical - does the bloody thing actually work, and would anyone actually care? The third begins the work of playtesting, clarity-editing, and communication. I also know that people tend to skip step 2 consistently.
It sounds to me like step 2 is your big one right now - correct me if you think differently."
I think I'm actually somewhere in the middle of Steps 2 and 3. I believe (based on my vast game design experience... ::smirks::) that having playtesting throughout the development highlights areas that need changing, those which work well but need to be expanded on, areas which are glaringly vacant of any coverage, and help the author get a feel for the setting, and the players/co-authors get a bit of enthusiasm for the game.
I have done a brief playtesting game already, a while back, and revamped some of the systems based on that. I intend another very soon, before finishing all of the systems for the same reason. I'm asking myself the questions "Does it work? If not, why, and how can I fix it?"
Ron also sez "A lot of role-players design a game mainly as a reaction to or modification of a game that they have played a lot. This is a fine thing, and is probably where anyone starts when it comes to designing anything. However, I have concluded that such game design is a lot like one's first novel. At the time, it seems brilliant and soul-ripping and expressive of one's innermost self, but in actuality, its main virtues are (1) to clear a lot of adolescent trauma out of the way, (2) to familiarize the author with the day-to-day effort involved, and (3) to define the author's goals as distinct from the goals of his main influences. In other words, its best audience is the author; it's a necessary part of his development and people who care about his work need to read and criticize it, but it's probably never going to leave his desk, commercially speaking."
Admittedly, Mage Blade very probably started out as exactly this. I don't know if this origin will doom it to failure, but I'm going to keep plugging away at it. I'm building the game for a few of fairly simple reasons.. 1. Because I love to create. 2. Because I'd like people to play it. I'm not looking for profits, though if I can turn a small profit, I won't object. Mage Blade isn't the first game I've "created". I created a game based strongly on D&D 1st Ed. because I couldn't afford to buy it, and my mother wouldn't have let me anyhow, and still wanted to play it. I also created a Battle Tech game based entirely on a Technical Manual, without any concept for the game already in existence.
I love to create, and I love to game, and I love to have people make use of something I created. That sums it all up for me.
Well, unless someone else says something I feel the need to respond to, my next post on the subject of Mage Blade will either be the suggested documents, or a link to a website which has the suggested documents.
Thanks for the feedback and advice. I really do appreciate it.
On 4/3/2002 at 2:19pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
Re: A new face with a new game
Wolfen wrote:
For one, while D&D does make a swipe at rewarding characters for things other than killcount, it does it pretty poorly. D&D, as someone specifically stated in some essay or another on this website, is about killing monsters, and the system reflects this. Mage Blade will have it's share of monsters, but the emphasis of the game will not be on killing them, unless that is what the GM and Players set as their mission objectives.
Excellent. You may be on to something here now that you mention it. How do these "mission objectives" get set? Do the players and GM work together to decide what they are? Can they change during play? Can there be more than one at a time? Do individual characters have goals, or the all the characters as a group? How do they know how much a reward is given for a particular task? If the goal is to ensure that princess Mila gets to Aranstovia, how much do they get for succeeding? (I have ideas, but I'm interested in what you have, first)
And what can these rewards be used for? The use of the reward is almost as important as why it's given. Do the rewards cause character ability improvement? Character development or change? Player empowerment? Cash from the GM? Some combination?
Mike
On 4/3/2002 at 4:23pm, Brian Hose wrote:
RE: new face with a...and objectives/rewards
Hi,
I'm Brian. LikeWolfen, i've just discovered this site so, please, be forgiving if I'm going about this teh wrong way or if I waffle a bit.
Like Wolfen, I've developed my own game, so I find this discussion to be very relevant to my situation.
My point/question is this:
Surely any game based on the playing of roles (nice call about D&D Wolfen) by its very nature allows for flexability in its objectives and requirements for rewards. Doesn't one flow from the other. I can think of at least one published shadowrun adventure where the player-characters are supposed to question their situation and arrive at the idea that their working for the wrong side. And with this change of objective comes a change in the requirements for earning karma.
Another question is there a realistic system for reward requirements and how those rewards affect the characters. In my game I've tried to opperate ontwo principles. One: that skills are often improved by practice i.e. using them and two: that characters also develop in a general holistic sense (lets call it maturity for now).
Anywho, just thought I'd get my feet wet. Happy Gaming to y'all!
Brian.
On 4/3/2002 at 4:44pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
Re: RE: new face with a...and objectives/rewards
Hi Brian, and welcome,
Brian Hose wrote:
My point/question is this:
Surely any game based on the playing of roles (nice call about D&D Wolfen) by its very nature allows for flexability in its objectives and requirements for rewards. Doesn't one flow from the other. I can think of at least one published shadowrun adventure where the player-characters are supposed to question their situation and arrive at the idea that their working for the wrong side. And with this change of objective comes a change in the requirements for earning karma.
"Surely" doesn't go over too well, here. I think I agree with you that it is sensible that objectives can change. But what we're looking at here is a mechanical declaration of objectives. So that requires a mechanic for changing goals. I kinda like this idea, as it means, for example, that at the moment of dawning in the example you give, there would be a mechanical shift that occured to recognize it. Perhaps as simple as erasing the old goal from the sheet, and writing a new one. Perhaps something more comlicated and interesting.
Another question is there a realistic system for reward requirements and how those rewards affect the characters. In my game I've tried to opperate ontwo principles. One: that skills are often improved by practice i.e. using them and two: that characters also develop in a general holistic sense (lets call it maturity for now).
First you're making the assumption that character improvement is the only form of reward. This is certainly not true. Remember, rewards are for players. So character improvements reward the player by giving him a "better" character. Metagame rewards reward the player directly and bypass the character. For example, points that allow a character to cheat death wen the player spends them (call em Fate pooints, whatever) would be an example of a metagame reward.
Your example of Karma, these points work as either, IIRC. And there are other ways to reward players. My cash was meant in jest, but indicates that there are certainly other rewards one can give. Even in game, one could give Director Points that allowed the player to create part of the world (which might have nothing to do at all with his character).
Warning GNS jargon ahead.
Looking closer at the Character Improvement reward, specifically, it seems to me that "realistic" rewards are most appropriate for Simulationist games. In GURPS, for example, a character can gain a skill (and thus the points to buy it, retroactively) by attending classes or practicing for a certain number of hours. This is classic Sim Character Improvement reward.
But in a Gamist game, this is terrible. Such activity provides little or no challenge to the player. This is why Gamist systems usually require you to overcome challenges before being rewarded. Narrativist's tend to like being rewarded in such a way as to make their character more interesting, or the character's story, or getting more player (not chracter)power. Something like that.
This is why we always ask what sort of play you intend to support. What are the goals of the design. Once you know that, designing a reward system is much easier, and effective, as you can reward players for doing what the system intends.
Mike
On 4/3/2002 at 4:47pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Hi Brian, and welcome.
I'm interested very much in the point that you've raised. I agree with you that if we are talking about "playing roles" in a literal sense, that player decisions create the story, in a thematic sense.
However, I also think that a great deal of both game design and published scenario design militate against this activity. Even the ones that twist a mission-scenario with "we're working for the wrong side," like the Shadowrun example and many others, represent pretty much an extension of the original, linear, task-oriented model. Meaning that it's more than "Do This," but no more than adding "Now Do That."
Not all published scenarios are like this. Some of the Over the Edge and even some of the L5R ones simply posed a moral dilemma and said "Work it out yourself." I think the trend has been and still is toward the task-orientation, though.
So we're talking about scenario design, but of course, the reward system, as you say, comes into the picture too. If we have a juicy, open-ended, lots-of-scope-for-judgment scenario, but the reward system of the game is "practice makes perfect" for skills (and little or nothing else), then we have created a cognitive disconnection regarding what players decide about. So integrating these elements of play is something that deserves a lot of attention.
I have said, for a long time now that reward systems operate in the real world among the participants in the group, and should be analyzed and understood at that level. In other words, discussion about the "realistic" quality of a skill-practice-improvement system are only valid if player-priorities, in that game, are encouraged to be concerned with "my guy gets better in a realistic way." In a game for which such a concern is less relevant - in other words, the "guy" doesn't necessarily get better at his skills, or if he does, it's not so important that the improvement stems directly from use - such a discussion would be irrelevant.
Talking about it gets confusing, because people tend to refer to the currency of a reward system when discussing their values per se.
In my big essay, "GNS and related matters," there's a list of topics about reward systems that you'll probably find interesting. At least two major threads in RPG Theory and Indie Game Design also get at these.
Best,
Ron
On 4/3/2002 at 10:56pm, Wolfen wrote:
RE: Re: A new face with a new game
Mike Holmes wrote:
Excellent. You may be on to something here now that you mention it. How do these "mission objectives" get set? Do the players and GM work together to decide what they are? Can they change during play? Can there be more than one at a time? Do individual characters have goals, or the all the characters as a group? How do they know how much a reward is given for a particular task? If the goal is to ensure that princess Mila gets to Aranstovia, how much do they get for succeeding? (I have ideas, but I'm interested in what you have, first)
And what can these rewards be used for? The use of the reward is almost as important as why it's given. Do the rewards cause character ability improvement? Character development or change? Player empowerment? Cash from the GM? Some combination?
Mike
::weeps:: I had this all but answered, and accidently hit the X when I tried to scroll up. ::sighs:: Okay, I'll try again, and attempt some brevity.
How objectives are set: First, there are varying types of objectives/goals. There are personal goals and party goals, and mission-style and long-range goals.
Personal long-term goals are usually set during character creation. Youi inform the GM of your character's goals, or he suggests some to you, based on your character's backstory. Examples: Avenge the murder of my father ("My name is Inigo Montoya..."), win the hand of my noble-born lady, and the right/status to wed her, etc.
Personal mission-style goals are usually set during gameplay. Things during play prompt both player and character to want certain things, whether it be a fully decked-out set of magical armor and weapons, to be a swordmaster, or whatever. Then it becomes a matter of deciding what needs to be done, and informing the GM of your goal.
Party long-term objectives *could* be created during character creation, but unless the party knew each other prior to the start of the game, it's not likely. More likely, the party will have some shared experience or desire which will eventually translate into a party goal. The party may never even fully articulate that they have this goal, but the GM ought to notice, and work it into the storyline, and reward them (and possibly end the "campaign") when they accomplish it.
Party mission-style goals are often set by an outside person, via the GM. It might be a rescue, a quest, a job or what have you. The party can also set their own mission goals (explore that dungeon see how deep it goes, and what's in it).
The only mechanic of setting goals is making them known to the GM. Once they are known, the GM can handle shaping the story to give opportunities to advance toward the goals. If the goal changes, then the change is simply noted by the GM, although too much vaccillation in goals may prompt the GM to give lesser rewards for accomplishing them.
Rewarding Success: There are various types of rewards available to a GM. It is entirely their choice as to how to use the rewards, and which ones to give.
~Character Points: This is the most tangible to the player. With these, they advance their character in the ways they wish to, making them better/stronger/faster, or just more skilled or knowledgeable.
~Stuff: Weapons, Armor, Money, whatever the character's material little hearts may desire.
~Status: For heroic deeds, the characters may gain fame (or infamy, if the deeds are less than heroic). They may also be granted actual status as a noble or what have you by the ruling persons that they please.
~Success is it's own reward: Some goals are a reward in and of themselves, such as attaining the skill of a swordmaster. If the GM so desires to give other rewards for accomplishing this goal, that is their prerogative, but it's not required, and it's not even recommended, unless the story somehow shapes up that way.
Whether or not the player/character knows what the reward will be is entirely situational, or up to the GM. If it's a reward of points, chances are they won't know until they achieve it. On the other hand, if the reward is a set part of the mission ("rescue my daughter, and I will pay you a kajillion aelium bars!"... "can I get that in writing?")
However, aside from the rewards of accomplishing goals, the players/characters are rewarded with points on a session-by-session basis, depending on how they played. They get a minimum of one point if the character is still alive at the end of the session (this is whether or not the player is there). They may also be rewarded for particularly good roleplaying, heroics, particularly good ideas which advance the mission, etc. Also, there is one point granted per session called the MVP point. The players must choose an Most Valuable Player for the session, and that player gets the point. If the players cannot decide on a single player, then the point is not given that session.
On the idea of rewarding players by allowing them to help expand the setting.. I disagree. Players shouldn't be rewarded like that for playing a game.. If they wish to help expand the setting, they should be allowed to do so, within the limits that the GM has set on the setting. Personally, any player ideas for plots or setting I am very willing to listen to, and possibly even include in the current game.
On the point of Metagame rewards, such as "Fate Points"... I'm not certain if Mage Blade will have such things. I haven't yet decided, as these things are mostly "save my ass" points, and I'm not sure if I want to have a higher lethality, or more potential for heroics. Any pros or cons on this particular topic?
On 4/3/2002 at 11:08pm, Valamir wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Hmmm. Well I admire you for understanding these things in advance and actually codifying them in your game, but I have to say I'm hearing Mean Mike again..."hows this any different from D&D"
We may not have articulated them in the same vocabulary as you but we certainly handed out plenty of XPs for things other than killing monsters. Mission rewards, roleplaying rewards. I can only recall one occassion as a D&D player where I got XPs for what you're calling a long term player goal (my character regained his right to be heir to the elven throne from his evil brother), but it can and does happen.
Your reward system includes Character Points (no different functionally from XPs) and stuff (no different from any D&D treasure) and fame. Fame wasn't a seperate statistic in D&D but careful study of even the first edition rules for gaining followers at "named levels" reveals discussions about fame and noteriety.
So again...I'm left with the appreciation for your doing this in advance, intentionally, and right in the game rules; but the same conclusion of having seen it all before.
If you do decide to go with a metagame mechanic (particularly one more interesting than, "spend a hero point to reroll a die") I'd give real careful consideration to tieing the two together.
As a matter of personal preference, I'd all players to right their own epilogue upon achieving a goal...essentially a Pool style Monologue of Victory, where they get to take over narrating the results.
On 4/4/2002 at 3:06am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Valamir wrote: Hmmm. Well I admire you for understanding these things in advance and actually codifying them in your game, but I have to say I'm hearing Mean Mike again..."hows this any different from D&D"
Um.. ::sheepish grin:: Actually, I didn't. I'd had vague thoughts about it, but until I was asked the question, I hadn't actually codified it. I have now, and it will go into the rules pretty much as I explained it here.
Valamir wrote: We may not have articulated them in the same vocabulary as you but we certainly handed out plenty of XPs for things other than killing monsters. Mission rewards, roleplaying rewards. I can only recall one occassion as a D&D player where I got XPs for what you're calling a long term player goal (my character regained his right to be heir to the elven throne from his evil brother), but it can and does happen.
While your group may do this, it's somewhat rare, at least in my experience. There are game mechanics for doing so, but they're only a swipe at it, for the most part. Shadowrun was one of the first games I saw to actually make accomplishment of goals a main criteria for gaining "experience" (or karma points, as they called it). I'd vaguely based my ideas off the same concepts.
Valamir wrote: Your reward system includes Character Points (no different functionally from XPs) and stuff (no different from any D&D treasure) and fame. Fame wasn't a seperate statistic in D&D but careful study of even the first edition rules for gaining followers at "named levels" reveals discussions about fame and noteriety.
Actually... There is a difference between Character Points and XP. XP are used in various games (D&D only one of many) as a way to measure progress through a series of levels. Character Points are more like the Experience granted in WoD games, Karma in Shadowrun, and Character Points in Star Wars (D6 version). There are no levels, nor character classes in Mage Blade. You advance different attributes and skills individually, as well as buying memorized spells with your Character Points. There is no functional difference in stuff, nor a great deal of game mechanical focus on fame and status, they're simply options other than just Character Points to reward players.
Valamir wrote: If you do decide to go with a metagame mechanic (particularly one more interesting than, "spend a hero point to reroll a die") I'd give real careful consideration to tieing the two together.
Actually, since my last post, I was considering some sort of metagame mechanic. Only I'd limit it, even more severely than Star Wars (D6) Force Points, which was the most severely limited I've seen so far. I'd have a set number of "Hero Dice" (or whatever) that could be used for the entire life of their character. I don't know exactly how I'd make 'em work though. Once I post up the summarized rules, I'm open to any suggestions on this.
Valamir wrote: As a matter of personal preference, I'd all players to right their own epilogue upon achieving a goal...essentially a Pool style Monologue of Victory, where they get to take over narrating the results.
This sounds interesting, but as I'm not familiar with The Pool, you'd have to be a bit more specific.
BTW, if ya'll hadn't noticed, I enjoy debating on message boards. I'll respond to just about anything, and several times a day, if it's my day off. I hope this tendency doesn't annoy anyone.
On 4/4/2002 at 3:59pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Wolfen wrote:
While your group may do this, it's somewhat rare, at least in my experience. There are game mechanics for doing so, but they're only a swipe at it, for the most part. Shadowrun was one of the first games I saw to actually make accomplishment of goals a main criteria for gaining "experience" (or karma points, as they called it). I'd vaguely based my ideas off the same concepts.
What I see as good about your system is no explicit reward for combat, per se. If the players achieve their goal through combat they get the points. If they achieve it through diplomacy, they get the points. That's what I like about it so far. Assuming that I'm correct in this assumption. Essentially, it's better than D&D by ommiting this one thing.
Actually... There is a difference between Character Points and XP. XP are used in various games (D&D only one of many) as a way to measure progress through a series of levels. Character Points are more like the Experience granted in WoD games, Karma in Shadowrun, and Character Points in Star Wars (D6 version). There are no levels, nor character classes in Mage Blade. You advance different attributes and skills individually,
Yes, there is a difference, but it's not big or new. What EXP and CP have in common are that they are both designed to improve the character's power. he problem in rewarding with power is manifold. You inform the players that power is what they should be interested in, instead of the goals (goals simply become a means to power). And then there's the power curve problem where you have to make the foes tougher and tougher until the characters are offing gods. These things can be addressed, but they can also just be eliminated.
as well as buying memorized spells with your Character Points.
Fer real? Not to get off track, but by memorized, do you mean like D&D?
There is no functional difference in stuff, nor a great deal of game mechanical focus on fame and status, they're simply options other than just Character Points to reward players.
Right, but again, they are power oriented. Lots of woes go with "magic inflation". "Hey, anyone need a +2 Sword? Nope? Everyone's got better? OK, we'll just sell it at the next town." And what if character's don't want to be famous (or the player doesn't want the character to be)?
Actually, since my last post, I was considering some sort of metagame mechanic. Only I'd limit it, even more severely than Star Wars (D6) Force Points, which was the most severely limited I've seen so far. I'd have a set number of "Hero Dice" (or whatever) that could be used for the entire life of their character. I don't know exactly how I'd make 'em work though. Once I post up the summarized rules, I'm open to any suggestions on this.
Metagame was just an idea. You're version sounds like Fame and Fortune Points from Top Secret. By limited do you mean they can never get any more? Then they are not rewards?
This sounds interesting, but as I'm not familiar with The Pool, you'd have to be a bit more specific.
He just means that after achieving a goal, the player would get to make up stuff related to the resolution. For example, if my goal was to kill Evil Fred, after doing so, I would get to narrate the results of cleaning up Fred's kingdom or maybe just his lair. The advantage of such a mechanic is that often the player will indicate through play where they would like to go next with their character's "story".
BTW, if ya'll hadn't noticed, I enjoy debating on message boards. I'll respond to just about anything, and several times a day, if it's my day off. I hope this tendency doesn't annoy anyone.
What, responding a lot? I hope it doesn't annoy anyone, I do it a lot. ;-)
Mike
On 4/4/2002 at 5:57pm, Brian Hose wrote:
new and new...
Hi,
I've never encountered the idea of player rewards as opposed to character rewards. I love it. To me the strong point is that it will inspire the players by not binding their rewards within the scope of the game mechanics like character advancement does.
I've decided to add something like this to my game. Stress like...I want to limit the scope of their influence. I know this contradicts what I like about the idea but I have my reasons. Namely I know that my players have all to human flaws and the mayhem which could ensue with unrestricted control over the storyline (shudder) (I don't care - your rich uncle did not just die and leave you a super-star destroyer!). Bad example, I could have a lot of fun making them work to keep it; neh, heh, heh, heh (evil laugh).
What I'm thinking is to some how tie it back to the character history generation and allow them to pick personal events upon which we can hang new story ideas. Influence without tyrany.
Anywho, just dropped by before bed. Always open to comments or suggestions.
May the schwartz be with you,
Brian.
On 4/4/2002 at 6:47pm, Valamir wrote:
Re: new and new...
Brian Hose wrote: Hi,
I've never encountered the idea of player rewards as opposed to character rewards. I love it. To me the strong point is that it will inspire the players by not binding their rewards within the scope of the game mechanics like character advancement does.
You'll find alot of that here. That's sort of a Forge Hallmark.
Probably the biggest design direction you'll find at the Forge is in regards to rewards. What game activities earn reward and what can those rewards be spent for.
Frex, as you know, D&D gives rewards (primarily) for killing stuff, and they use the rewards to make the characters more powerful so that they can kill more stuff.
All games have rewards like this. These rewards define what your game is about. You can spend all the flavor text in the world saying "my game is like this" but how you set up your rewards will determine how people actually play.
So, you may get alot of suggestions here about adding metagame story driving mechanics, but thats just a common theme found here. What's REALLY being said is this "First thing, before you do anything, decide what your game is ABOUT, and plan on rewarding that activity."
In other words, FIRST: if you wan't your game to be about killing stuff, reward killing stuff, if you wan't your game to be about story telling, reward story telling, if you wan't your game to be about completeing missions and goals, then reward missions and goals.
SECOND: make sure that the use of the reward that you give, motivates more desired behavior. In your game specifically: reward players for completeing missions, but make sure the reward you give ties into reinforcing that mission oriented behavior.
I've decided to add something like this to my game. Stress like...I want to limit the scope of their influence. I know this contradicts what I like about the idea but I have my reasons.
Granting power to players doesn't have to mean granting total power to players. Most forms of "authoral" or "directoral" power are limited in some manner.
Namely I know that my players have all to human flaws and the mayhem which could ensue with unrestricted control over the storyline (shudder) (I don't care - your rich uncle did not just die and leave you a super-star destroyer!).
Don't overblow this fear too greatly. The key here is to make sure all of your players are on the same page about what the game is about and what everyone wants to get out of it. If you throw players into a new game with new powerful mechanics without any preperation, you're likely going to get them using those mechanics to play the way they've always played in your other games (which likely isn't what you want). Be clear up front about expectations (often refered to as a Social Contract) and you'll find you're players are more likely to be cooperative than disruptive with the power you give them.
Bad example, I could have a lot of fun making them work to keep it; neh, heh, heh, heh (evil laugh).
That's the key. This is exactly why you give players this kind of power. Not so you can screw them over later, but so you know what kind of story they want to be involved in. One of the most difficult jobs of a GM is to craft a story that's compelling to the players. Often times the story seems great but the players just "aren't into it".
The best way to make sure the players are "into" your story is to let them choose some of the key elements of it. By and large (unless he's just being a dick) if a player trys to introduce himself in command of a Star Destroyer its because he thinks that the type of story that could be told in that environment is more interesting than the one he's currently in.
Giving some power to the players allows them to signal to you what aspects of the game or story they're most interested in, rather than being at the GM's mercy in this regard. Heck, some games around here (like Donjon) practically GM themselves. With very little prep work, you're up and playing, and the players are coming up with their own plot complications and obstacles to overcome.
In my experience players will through nastier and more difficult complications at themselves then they'd be happy at me creating and throwing at them...because their complications THEY'RE interested in, not just complications that I'M interested in.
Its a very powerful tool.
What I'm thinking is to some how tie it back to the character history generation and allow them to pick personal events upon which we can hang new story ideas. Influence without tyrany.
Here's a thought I had. You had mentioned that the missions and goals are just set very informally and adopted by the GM. What if that wasn't the case. What if the missions actually had to be puchased with...I don't know...call them Goal Points, or something.
Things like "Material Reward", "Noteriety Gained", "Scope of effect", "Difficulty", "Expense", etc. would be determined in general terms. For example if a player had a long term goal of becoming Mayor of Shineing Port...that would convey a certain level of fame and power, the scope would depend on whether Shineing Port was a village or a great metropolis, the Material Rewards could be great, and so on.
This might cost 132 Goal Points to establish as a goal for the character. Certainly the character could have that as a goal without paying points for it, but the GM is under no obligation to set up adventures focused on it and the characters chances are no better than my goal to become President of the World. But by paying the Goal Points, now you have a player defined story hook for the GM to begin building adventures on.
But...132 is a lot of Goal Points, more then what the player has. The player can earn more Goal Points by completeing other missions. Rescueing the Princess might be worth 32, Marrying a local heiress might be worth another 12, serving as the Constable of Shining Port could net another 20, and being elected to Alderman another 27. Eventually the player accumulates enough to pay for his REAL Ambition...becomeing Mayor.
In this case having Mayor as a long term goal would cost nothing, it would merely serve as a signifier to the GM of where the player would like to get to eventually. Buying a goal turns it from a long term goal to a shorter term mission...essentially telling the GM "start including stuff about this in the campaign". Resolving the goal earns more Goal Points which then can lead to greater goals.
Anyway, thats just a half finished idea, but the point is players are rewarded for completeing goals, and their reward is the power to set their own goals for the future (rather than rely on GM set goals). It feeds on itself and so the game becomes being about what the players want to accomplish with their characters lives (which could be anything) and the series of events they manufacture to take them there.
On 4/4/2002 at 7:38pm, Brian Hose wrote:
objective...
Hi,
Valamir, that was great and there is a lot ther that I want to address but at the moment the only things keeping me awake (is that the sun?) are cigarettes and thy're not working any more so I'll get back to this tomorrow.. or today.. whatever...sometime soon.
May the schwartz be with you,
Brian.
On 4/5/2002 at 12:04am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Well, though at first I was slightly annoyed to have two different games under discussion in this thread, with some of the points being addressed and the ideas being expressed, I don't guess I mind anymore.
First to answer Mike's points..
Mike wrote: Yes, there is a difference, but it's not big or new. What EXP and CP have in common are that they are both designed to improve the character's power. The problem in rewarding with power is manifold. You inform the players that power is what they should be interested in, instead of the goals (goals simply become a means to power). And then there's the power curve problem where you have to make the foes tougher and tougher until the characters are offing gods. These things can be addressed, but they can also just be eliminated.
Well, I wasn't trying to say I was being innovative with the concept of Character Points. ::smirks:: But you do raise a good point. While characters should naturally raise in "power" as time goes by, not every reward should be a "power-up". However, I can't really think of a way to reward the player/character with anything other than points, stuff, fame/status, fortune, etc. Any concrete suggestions?
Fer real? Not to get off track, but by memorized, do you mean like D&D?
No no no. Not like D&D at all, really... Well, maybe the tiniest bit. The way it works is that characters have a Grimoire with all the spells they've been taught inscribed within it. They can cast the spells directly from the book, if they have access to it, or are able to look through it (middle of a melee is not particularly conducive to thumbing through a spellbook, for example) The spells they cast from the book are not necessarily memorized. Memorized spells can be cast anytime they are conscious (as there are no somatic or verbal components, though some require physical components) without resorting to the spellbook. For certain spells, this flexibility is vital, for others it is not so. As the character can only start out with a certain number of spells memorized, they will want to memorize more during gameplay, to increase their versatility.
Right, but again, they (stuff) are power oriented. Lots of woes go with "magic inflation". "Hey, anyone need a +2 Sword? Nope? Everyone's got better? OK, we'll just sell it at the next town." And what if character's don't want to be famous (or the player doesn't want the character to be)?
I can see your point here again. However, with magic being fairly common, it's not quite so big a deal, I think. As for fame, I would hope that the GM wouldn't "reward" a character with fame if that wasn't what he/she wanted. (Though I could definitely see plot twists with a character who wants to avoid fame suddenly being the hero of the populace...)
Metagame was just an idea. You're version sounds like Fame and Fortune Points from Top Secret. By limited do you mean they can never get any more? Then they are not rewards?
That is pretty much what I was considering, actually. A limited pool of points (say, 5) that can be spent at times of great need to elevate the character to truly heroic (read: superhuman) levels for a short period of time. I'm also considering the additional mechanic of having them be further limited in that, if they are ever ALL spent, the character MUST die within 1 game session of their reaching zero. This would reflect that all of that character's heroic deeds have been done, and that his lifethread has reached it's end. This would mean that the points would not be spent in vain.
Actually, though I was considering another reward mechanic which would only be invoked in very extreme cases. As an example, if the character risked their life and saved the rest of the party (or an entire town, or whatever) from certain doom, they would warrant regaining a point of Heroism. However, if I were to do this, the pool would still be unable to raise above a set amount (considering 5 at the mo').
He just means that after achieving a goal, the player would get to make up stuff related to the resolution. For example, if my goal was to kill Evil Fred, after doing so, I would get to narrate the results of cleaning up Fred's kingdom or maybe just his lair. The advantage of such a mechanic is that often the player will indicate through play where they would like to go next with their character's "story".
I could go with this, though unless it was the final thing a character did in the ongoing game, I would have to limit it to a few days of activity, to keep the continuity of the story intact.
Valamir wrote: All games have rewards like this. These rewards define what your game is about. You can spend all the flavor text in the world saying "my game is like this" but how you set up your rewards will determine how people actually play.
So, you may get alot of suggestions here about adding metagame story driving mechanics, but thats just a common theme found here. What's REALLY being said is this "First thing, before you do anything, decide what your game is ABOUT, and plan on rewarding that activity."
In other words, FIRST: if you wan't your game to be about killing stuff, reward killing stuff, if you wan't your game to be about story telling, reward story telling, if you wan't your game to be about completeing missions and goals, then reward missions and goals.
SECOND: make sure that the use of the reward that you give, motivates more desired behavior. In your game specifically: reward players for completeing missions, but make sure the reward you give ties into reinforcing that mission oriented behavior.
Damn good point.. Fact is, before I came here, I didn't even think about all of this stuff. I'm realizing I've further to go than I thought. (::bitter snarl:: Thanks a lot. As if I didn't have far enough to go already. ::winks::) I've been told, in a conversation with Jared of Memento-Mori, that my game has a strong Simulationist slant, and I can't disagree.
I'm thinking, after reading Valamir's post, of making the goal-setting mechanic a central concept in the game. Make the choosing of at least 1 primary long-term personal goal a part of character creation, and the completion of that goal means the retirement of the character. The goal could change during game-play, but it would help keep the games story-oriented and the stories at least partially in the power of the Players. Overall, I think it would add a decent narrativist element to the game, as well.
I doubt I'd go so far as to make the accomplishment of goals point-oriented, but it's an intriguing idea. Maybe Brian can make use of it, if it suits what he's looking for.
You guys are awesome. Keep up the topic, and I'll love you forever.
On 4/5/2002 at 11:12am, Wolfen wrote:
Mage Blade details site...
It's not much, but it's here, finally.
http://members.aol.com/JohanusMorgan/Home.html
Use the link at the bottom of the site to e-mail me, or just post any commentary here. Thanks in advance.
Oh, btw.. Some of the images don't come up right the first time. If you right-click and select Show Image, it usually works to bring them up. ::shrugs:: AOL's webspace is kooky, but hey, it's free with the membership, so I might as well use it.
Oh, and ONE more thing..
http://members.aol.com/JohanusMorgan/CharSht.gif
If you go to this, you can get the blank character sheet. It won't do you much good without the rules (and it prints best IMO as a .bmp file) but it's there if anyone wants it.
On 4/20/2002 at 12:19am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Hey Brian,
Rather than piggybacking off a thread which hasn't seen any responses in 2 weeks, it'd be wiser to start your own thread. My original thread here is dead, man.
On 4/20/2002 at 6:18pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Hi Lance,
Um, you're still going to finish and run Mage Blade, aren't you? And tell us how it goes? Inquiring minds are on your side.
I've split Brian's post into a starting thread of its own, with his permission.
Best,
Ron
On 4/21/2002 at 2:43am, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Hey Ron,
Lance and I have been discussing heavily in PM, and from what I hear, he's got something coming along sooner rather than later.
Mike
On 4/21/2002 at 12:34pm, Wolfen wrote:
RE: A new face with a new game
Well, I hope not to disappoint anyone, (though if I did, I'm flattered) but I won't be discussing Mage Blade on the boards again until I begin playtesting. I'm still following various conversations in a few of the folders, and incorporating any suggestions given to others that I happen to like. But overall, other than the points being discussed with Mike in PMs, I'm letting Forge involvement in Mage Blade lie for the moment. Rest assured though, that you will hear from me on Mage Blade again. The play sessions will be notated and kept chronicle fashion, with key points being thrown up for your edification on the boards. Also, once I'm certain I'm currently satisfied with the rules and setting, I'll post that up for you all as well.
Peace, and I'm off to bed.