The Forge Reference Project

 

Topic: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres
Started by: DainXB
Started on: 12/31/2005
Board: Muse of Fire Games


On 12/31/2005 at 7:39am, DainXB wrote:
"Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Greetings!

I love superheroes, but some of my gaming friends aren't so in love with that particular genre, so...

Has anyone put thought into using the Capes mechanics for other genres besides superheroes?  (Espionage, western, crime drama, etc.)

It certainly seems flexible enough narratively and mechanically, but the initial problem would be that characters without 'powers' cannot ever earn Debt -- which shuts down the resource-engine of the game right there. 

My thought is that in a no-supers game, Attributes categorized as 'Skills' could work like 'Powers' and earn Debt.  Also, all characters would need Drives, not just the now-non-existent 'powered' characters.

I think that this might work, but I'm not sure about 'partly-powered' genres, where some characters have powers and some don't, like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, or most traditional fantasy worlds.  (In 'old school' fantasy, wizards and clerics have skills and powers, fighters and thieves just have skills unless they use magic items.)  Will it skew the game to allow some charcters to use their Skills repetitively as if they were Powers?

I've come to the conclusion that this is merely a nomenclature problem; i.e. anything can be a Power, even something usually regarded as a Skill, so it makes no difference to the rules system.  This would allow a character in a 'normal cops' game who has the Detective click-and-lock to use 'Shoot' with impunity, in the same way that a super with the Shootist click-and-lock uses 'Shoot' in a regular Capes game.

I thought that I would run this past the experienced Capes players here on the forum before I tried it for real.  Any thoughts or comments?

Thanks;

Dain

Message 18169#192140

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by DainXB
...in which DainXB participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2005




On 12/31/2005 at 1:48pm, Lxndr wrote:
Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

A "power" in Capes is simply "a trait that can be used to earn Debt" as far as I can tell.  In theory, you could have a person with normal-people stuff as Powers (like "Banking" and the like) and a person with supernormal-people stuff as Skills (like throwing fire).  In the end, imho, it really depends on how "important" the character is to the story, rather than whether or not the "power" fits into some supernatural category.

IMHO, a character that you can give "drives" to has Powers, even if the Powers aren't "super".  This means in, say, fantasy, your Fighter's skills are powers, and so is your magic-user's magic.

Message 18169#192153

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Lxndr
...in which Lxndr participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2005




On 12/31/2005 at 2:23pm, TonyLB wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Well, a power is a trait that must earn debt when it is used.  That's subtly different from one that simply can be used to earn debt.

In Capes it isn't the super-powers that make a character more important to the story.  It's the debt those super-powers force upon them.  The difference between being able to use a level-5 ability once a scene, or twenty times a scene is a noticeable difference, yes.  But the difference between being able to have one die or three on your side of the conflict is crucial, as is the motivating effect of offering story tokens as a bribe for your victory.

So if you take "Baking" and turn it into a super-power, that doesn't make that much difference on its own.  Sure, you can Bake more often and importantly than you could otherwise.  Not a huge difference.

But when you say that every time a character Bakes they become that much more committed to standing for their moral principles ... that is a big, big deal in this system.  That changes what Baking is to them ... it's not just something they do, it's something they are.  Using it drives the story, even if you the player don't want it to drive the story.  You're committed:  when you use Baking, you're saying that at some later point you will stand up for your moral principles.

Because of that, I believe that you'll find that any genre you play with Capes will feel, in some ways, like superheroes.  That was what I was aiming to do.  You can get rid of the capes and spandex and lightning bolts.  That's easy.  But if you're running an Iron Chef game under Capes, I think you'll still find that your protagonists end up shouting things like "No!  Your use of squid is skillful, but I cannot lose!  My dead father's honor depends upon me!  My sauce-pan is filled to overflowing ... with JUSTICE!"

So the question I have for you is this:  which part of superheroes do your other players object to?  Is it the trappings?  Or is it the heart?  'cuz if they object to the heart of it (saucepans of justice, IMHO) then Capes is going to be fighting them all the way.  Make sense?

Message 18169#192156

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by TonyLB
...in which TonyLB participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2005




On 12/31/2005 at 3:22pm, Doug Ruff wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

TonyLB wrote:

But when you say that every time a character Bakes they become that much more committed to standing for their moral principles ... that is a big, big deal in this system.  That changes what Baking is to them ... it's not just something they do, it's something they are.  Using it drives the story, even if you the player don't want it to drive the story.  You're committed:  when you use Baking, you're saying that at some later point you will stand up for your moral principles.



Tony, I know you like a good discussion, so I hope you won't mind if I insert this comment (also, it should be relevant to the original query, so we're all good, right?)

The moral principles thing is - of course - spot on, but I don't think that 'superheroic' play is a necessary consequence of these mechanics. Instead, I think that the Debt <-> moral principles equivalence acts as a driver for dramatic (or melodramatic!) play. To me, it's the rest of the system that specifically supports 'superheroic' tropes.

Specifically: I think the reason Capes tends to move quickly into 'superheroic' mode has far more to do with the interaction of the Comics Code, and the extreme power players have over narrative rights during play (and especially, the fact that these narrative rights trump any 'continuity' issues other players may have.) Add the way the system rewards introducing elements that specifically challenge and 'grab' the other players, and you end up wth a play environment that specifically encourages and rewards a certain 'top that!' style of narration.

Now, I don't think that this setup exclusively demands a superheroic theme, but it sure as hell gives it fertile ground to grow in. And tweaking the superficial 'colour' elements of the game (such as renaming Hope/Justice etc. into something else) doesn't change things that much.

To bring this all into some useful advice for the original poster: start with the Comics Code. As well as setting the colour for the game, the Code does more than anything else to 'enforce' limits on narration that will fit the game into the genre you're looking for. Example at random:  if you want a classic Star Trek vibe for the game, make sure the Code specfies that any supporting character in a red shirt must be killed before the end of a scene. If you want a gritty modern setting, include a rule that says that if guns get drawn in a scene, someone will get killed or seriously wounded. And so on.

Message 18169#192164

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Doug Ruff
...in which Doug Ruff participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 12/31/2005




On 1/1/2006 at 3:10am, Kintara wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Hmm, I think a crime/espionage game would work well.  It has the moral/emotional element of using your talents but paying for it later on.  The game would feel more "super spy" than gritty, though.

Swashbuckling heroes might also work very well.

I could see running it as "Eldritch Ass Kicking" style fantasy.

Message 18169#192197

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Kintara
...in which Kintara participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/1/2006




On 1/1/2006 at 8:49am, DainXB wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Thanks everyone for all the input!  Especially thanks to TonyLB.  (I love the Forge -- I can post a hypothetical question about a game I like, and the designer himself posts back with incisive advice the very next day!)

Tony's point about Debt makes a lot of sense, and it's an aspect of the system I had not considered.  Where a character puts his Debt is where he makes his stand.  Supers do that with their Powers.  In a standard game of Capes, normal characters aren't as important as supers -- so they don't get Debt.  For normal people, in a normal world, taking any dramatic action in puirsuit of a goal or an ideal is taking a moral stand, whether it's using a skill, or just arguing a position in dialogue. 

I still think Capes could work for 'normal-scale' settings -- provided they are as intense as the typical superhero comic.  (Which I think is just restating Tony's point.) 

Kintara's suggestion of Swashbucklers or Espionage setings would be good, because they are suitably intense.  'Iron Chef' would come off like one of those weird manga with sushi-chef protagonists, where everything is over-dramatized and (to Western eyes at least) surreal.  If I try using the Capes system for a serious crime drama, I suspect I will wind up with 'The Shield' rather than ''Starsky & Hutch'.  Not that thiat is necessarily a bad thing...

Here's another idea for a tweak to this -- in a 'normals game', normals get only undifferentiated Debt.  (Anyone with Powers gets regular Drives, if there are both powered and unpowered characters in mixed settings like Buffy.)  The undifferentiated Debt doesn't represent 'taking a moral stand' per se -- it represents the characters striving to take charge of their lives in the face of a largely uncaring universe.  When they take action, they earn Debt which they stake in turn on the Goals that mean something to them.  Maybe not because of the big ideals like Truth, Justice, or Despair, but because of the smaller ideals, the concerns of the ordinary guy -- not JUSTICE, (in caps!), but merely fair treatment or fair dealing; not Truth, just honesty; not Honor, just self-respect.  Normal characters with undifferenitated Debt aren't 'one-dimensional', they just aren't 'four-color' like supers are.  Undifferentiated Debt turns the intensity down just one notch.

Whaddaya think?

Dain

Message 18169#192207

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by DainXB
...in which DainXB participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/1/2006




On 1/3/2006 at 10:46pm, Hans wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

As a complete novice, it seems to me that any sub-genre where what a character does is unrelated to what the character achieves and where the characters usually have strongly held codes of action might be suitable for Capes, .  I use the word sub-genre very carefully here, because genre is too big a word.  Take Westerns for example: the feel of "The Searchers" or "High Noon" or even "Maverick" is inapproriate for Capes, but the tone of the Sergio Leone westerns, or their derivatives, such as Raimi's "The Quick and the Dead" might be perfect.  "The Quick and the Dead" is actually perfect, because this movie is essentially a super-hero movie with very limited power sets. 

Some other options:

- Hong Kong-type action, especially period action such as "Once Upon a Time in China" or "Crouching Tiger...", I think, could be done using Capes.  The more outlandish the better.  More modern, gun-fu type setting (think John Woo) would probably not work very well.

- Samurai movies.  Every action of a samurai is charged with moral and ethical connotations, because of their code and the society they live in.  Their powers would be special techniques ("Water hidden blade") or trademark gimmicks ("Young Son in Baby Cart").  This could also work, I think, for Arthurian knights.  The names of the Drives would probably need to be changed to reflect the bushido or chivalric codes.

- Horror movies, with a subtle change.  In a horror movie Capes game, Superheroes become Monsters and all have one shot powers, while the protagonists have traits which earn debt.  Such traits might include "Clever Planning" or "Quick Device Kluge" or "Throw other person in the way".  This is probably more suited, though, to a 50's style horror movie, where the protagonists have the capability to stop the menace, as opposed to more modern horror, where fundamentally the menace is unstoppable and its simply a question of what creative way each protagonist will buy it before blind luck causes the menance to be stopped.

I think the problem with all of the above is that unless you are completely steeped in the sub-genre in question, coming up with interesting descriptions of the different powers is problematic.  Almost anyone alive in Western society today can at least take a stab at coming up with a set of powers for a superhero, or just use a click and lock.  But how many could come up with five interesting powers and three interesting styles for a Samurai?    Also, someone else mentioned a comics code as an important part of the set up for the game...what would be the "Comics Code" for a Samurai themed Capes game?  I will have to think about that one, as I sit down tomorrow night to watch the copy of a Lone Wolf and Cub movie I checked out from my library...

Message 18169#192486

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Hans
...in which Hans participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/3/2006




On 1/4/2006 at 5:19pm, TheCzech wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Capes really only works with superheroes, but some things are superheroes in disguise.  Heroic fantasy, some westerns (as previously mentioned), even Buffy the Vampire Slayer, can all be modelled as superheroic storytelling...in the latter case, you can't tell Xander's story, but you can tell Buffy's, Willow's, or Spike's.

There must be people who have abilities above and beyond most other people.  There must be some sort of pressure on those people as a result of their specialness.  "Power is fun, but do you deserve it?"  It's not just the theme of the game, it is the game.

Message 18169#192587

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by TheCzech
...in which TheCzech participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/4/2006




On 1/4/2006 at 6:25pm, Gaerik wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

I'm not sure I agree with you, Czech.  I am, of course, open to being persuaded.

When I play Capes (up to this point anyways), the question "Power is fun but do you deserve it?" is fairly transparent.  It gets some attention because the resourse mechanic is directly tied to it but that's about it.  I game the system.  I use Powers because they get me resourses to do more stuff.  It's that simple.  I rarely think about the question.  In fact, my hypothesis is that the only reason the question is important is that the resource mechanic happens to be tied to Super Powers.  If you remove Super Powers and tie the resourse mechanic to something else, then the question will change.

For example, if you make Capes a NASCAR themed game and replace Super Powers with Driving Skills then you've got a game where driving cars is central to the game instead of Powers.  Driving a car is something anyone can do.  I'm not sure what the new question for this game would be but it'd have something to do with why the characters race cars.

I propose that you could do this with almost any genre.  The Powers simply get replaced with whatever skill/thing that is important to the genre/game.  The replacement might be something that lots of people could do but that something is central to characters who have them as "Powers" in the game.

Message 18169#192602

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Gaerik
...in which Gaerik participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/4/2006




On 1/4/2006 at 7:39pm, TheCzech wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Gaerik wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with you, Czech.  I am, of course, open to being persuaded.


Hey, if somone uses the mechanic and has fun while dodging the idea behind debt, then I'm not going to say they aren't, but I think that's pretty boring long-term.  It works for beer and pretzels or for a con game, but for a long-term game, the character is everything, and debt is how the character interacts with the game.

When I am playing Capes, there is no point in the game when the amount of debt I have on my character is irrelevant.  It's his mood, his motivations, and his makeup.  It seeps into my narration, probably in ways I don't even realize.  When a scene ends, it's not the end narration that tells me how the scene affected that character, it's his pile of debt.  How much is there?  What drives are overdrawn?  How is it different from when the scene started?  I know Tony and Sydney do this too.  I've witnessed it.

Sure, you don't have to do this.  Maybe you don't find this interesting, but I can't imagine letting this tool for more rich storytelling go unused.

Gaerik wrote:
When I play Capes (up to this point anyways), the question "Power is fun but do you deserve it?" is fairly transparent.  It gets some attention because the resourse mechanic is directly tied to it but that's about it.  I game the system.  I use Powers because they get me resourses to do more stuff.  It's that simple.  I rarely think about the question.  In fact, my hypothesis is that the only reason the question is important is that the resource mechanic happens to be tied to Super Powers.  If you remove Super Powers and tie the resourse mechanic to something else, then the question will change.


Everybody games the system, but I'll bet you don't game it as much as you think you do.  Do you bother to pay down debt when your character is getting filled up?  If so, why? 

From a strictly mechanical sense, being loaded down with debt is almost meaningless.  The penalty is having to roll down the sides of up to five conflicts your character is allied with.  The reality of play is that most conflicts are won or lost mostly within a single page.  In my experience, many times overdrawn characters don't even have anything to roll down since all the conflicts they participated in got resolved last page. 

So, to truly game the system, one would pile on debt indiscriminantly and just use it when needed for narrative control.  Eventually, you would have every poker chip in your house on one character, but it would be of only minor inconvenient to you in play.

In spite of this realization, I still pay down debt, and not just when I need to split a die.  I do it because I care about my character's debt level. 

Gaerik wrote:
For example, if you make Capes a NASCAR themed game and replace Super Powers with Driving Skills then you've got a game where driving cars is central to the game instead of Powers.  Driving a car is something anyone can do.  I'm not sure what the new question for this game would be but it'd have something to do with why the characters race cars.


Driving is something anybody can do just like running and punching are things everyone can do.  But you can't run like the Flash or punch like Superman.  You probably also can't drive like Dale Earnhardt, Jr.  Being among the best of the best is a Power under another name.  Does debt make sense here?  I don't know.  It depends on your approach.  If it doesn't, why use Capes?

Gaerik wrote:
I propose that you could do this with almost any genre.  The Powers simply get replaced with whatever skill/thing that is important to the genre/game.  The replacement might be something that lots of people could do but that something is central to characters who have them as "Powers" in the game.


You could indeed, but you wouldn't have a game that is nearly as interesting to me.

For me, debt is like the town creation system in Dogs in the Vineyard.   After a little casual play, it seems like a neat little mechanical tool, but after extended play, it is revealed as the gas in the game's tank.  Town creation is a blueprint for progression through the session in Dogs.  Debt is a reason to give a damn about the story you are telling in Capes.

You can use the Dogs system to play outside the universe.  The character attributes and conflict resolution mechanics transfer easily to another genre.  The problem is that once the town creation system has been abandoned, it just isn't as interesting as playing Dogs.  (I've seen this firsthand.  It really, really isn't.)

When you remove "Power is fun, but do you deserve it?" from Capes, you get the same thing.  Sure, you can use most of the rules in another genre and probably have some fun doing it, but it would be like settling for a Twinkie when you could have had an eclair.

Message 18169#192612

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by TheCzech
...in which TheCzech participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/4/2006




On 1/4/2006 at 9:15pm, Gaerik wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Czech (You got a real name?),

I'll bow to your arguments until I've played a longer term game.  I've don't have that experience yet so what you're saying might very well be the case once the serious storytelling and character development gets underway.  In any case, I can certainly see your point of view.

Message 18169#192628

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Gaerik
...in which Gaerik participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/4/2006




On 1/4/2006 at 10:01pm, TheCzech wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Gaerik wrote:
Czech (You got a real name?),


Indeed I do.  It's Eric.

Gaerik wrote:
I'll bow to your arguments until I've played a longer term game.  I've don't have that experience yet so what you're saying might very well be the case once the serious storytelling and character development gets underway.  In any case, I can certainly see your point of view.


I would very much like to hear the reactions of other people once they have played more.  Right now, the sample size is quite small.  For me it's all about the angst, and that's been true for me in gaming well before Tony started developing this game.

Play on and share!

Message 18169#192635

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by TheCzech
...in which TheCzech participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/4/2006




On 1/4/2006 at 10:28pm, Sydney Freedberg wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Capes works for "superpowers" in a totally non-physics sense -- it's pure story-logic. Leaping tall buildings in a single bound, firing laser beams out of my eyes, driving like Dale Earnhardt, whatever, they all qualify as "super" if and only if the character cares about them so intensely it drives what they do and who they are.

I suspect you could do a high school anime game where all sorts of mundane activities like making someone a bento lunchbox were "super," because those characters positively shudder with passion about everything they do. Conversely, you can do superheroes with world-smashing might as characters with no powers and no Debt if their passion doesn't really impact the story.

Message 18169#192639

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Sydney Freedberg
...in which Sydney Freedberg participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 1/4/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 6:52am, Uhlrik wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Eric wrote:
When you remove "Power is fun, but do you deserve it?" from Capes, you get the same thing.  Sure, you can use most of the rules in another genre and probably have some fun doing it, but it would be like settling for a Twinkie when you could have had an eclair.


The more I read the Capes rules, the more I see thegame's iconic catchphrase as having at best a tangential relationship to the superpowers themselves. What power is it referring to, then? In my eyes, it's narrative power. The power to control the game, the characters, the setting and the course of history. To me, the question is aimed squarely at the player on a metagame level. Are you, as a player, willing to step up to the bat, take charge of the story and not only take the necessary steps to exercise power to get what you want, but to face the responsibilities inherent to its exercise and pay the price?

Message 18169#207290

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Uhlrik
...in which Uhlrik participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 9:56am, Tuxboy wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

What power is it referring to, then? In my eyes, it's narrative power. The power to control the game, the characters, the setting and the course of history. To me, the question is aimed squarely at the player on a metagame level. Are you, as a player, willing to step up to the bat, take charge of the story and not only take the necessary steps to exercise power to get what you want, but to face the responsibilities inherent to its exercise and pay the price?


Excellent point, well made.

I agree...the character's powers and the debt they produce are, for me, the mechanic that allows me to go for the real "power", the power to drive the narration.
The genre and the nature of the powers doesn't make a difference, whether it is "Sonic Scream" in a supers game or "Strike Mighty Blow" in a fantasy game they serve the same purpose, to allow you to interact with the other players and influence the narration.

I don't think that the concept of powers should be removed from a non-supers game, with a little effort you can come up with abilities that can act as powers for the characters, powers are central to the mechanic after all, but as Tony says you will always end end with that comicbook feel. Fantasy will be Epic Fantasy, SciFi will be Space Opera SciFi...it is unavoidable, and given the system, it shouldn't be avoided...its what makes it work.

Message 18169#207293

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Tuxboy
...in which Tuxboy participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 12:22pm, Hans wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Tuxboy wrote:
I don't think that the concept of powers should be removed from a non-supers game, with a little effort you can come up with abilities that can act as powers for the characters, powers are central to the mechanic after all, but as Tony says you will always end end with that comicbook feel. Fantasy will be Epic Fantasy, SciFi will be Space Opera SciFi...it is unavoidable, and given the system, it shouldn't be avoided...its what makes it work.


I think this is a very good point.  Capes does a lot of things well, but one thing it doesn't do well is "tight" narration.  That is, narration that feels all of a piece, tightly integrated.  I think it has to do with the fact there is no GM, and no overarching thrust to the story at any time.  Stories in Capes are not designed, they accrete like coral reefs.  Lots of exciting fun stuff happens in Capes games, but coherency is not necessarily on the menu.

Therefore, there will always be a certain amount of stream of consciousness and chaos to Capes play.  Personally, I love this, but it is dead wrong for some kinds of stories.  Claustrophobic horror, for example, or film-noir thriller, where things need to be very well integrated, with little extraneous detail detracting from some central theme.  You could do Star Wars, but you couldn't do Blade Runner.  You could do Conan or Elric, but you would be hard-pressed to do Thomas Covenant. 

Message 18169#207301

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Hans
...in which Hans participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 2:15pm, drnuncheon wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Hans wrote:
I think this is a very good point.  Capes does a lot of things well, but one thing it doesn't do well is "tight" narration.  That is, narration that feels all of a piece, tightly integrated.  I think it has to do with the fact there is no GM, and no overarching thrust to the story at any time.


Wow. Totally different from our Capes game (which I suppose qualifies for this thread anyway, based on its Angel/Hellblazer/Dresden Files setup)- but I think that's because we as the players made a definite choice to do that.  Each time one of us set up a scene, we made a decision to have it follow on logically from the previous scene, and things were thus pretty closely related.

Given that, I wouldn't say that Capes itself is what doesn't do "tight" narration - that is, there's nothing in the system making it more difficult.  The tightness or incoherency of what's going on is completely up to the players, and if they're getting incoherent, then it's because of the choices they are making.

I may change my mind as the campaign goes on, but I suspect that even if one of us throws in a scene that's completely out of left field, the group will then deliberately move to weave it in to the story.

J

Forge Reference Links:
Topic 19762

Message 18169#207325

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by drnuncheon
...in which drnuncheon participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 2:55pm, Tuxboy wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Wow. Totally different from our Capes game (which I suppose qualifies for this thread anyway, based on its Angel/Hellblazer/Dresden Files setup)- but I think that's because we as the players made a definite choice to do that.  Each time one of us set up a scene, we made a decision to have it follow on logically from the previous scene, and things were thus pretty closely related.


I think that is all in the pre-game discussion and setup. I don't think there is anything stopping a core plot "shared" world environment working in Capes as long as it has been discussed prior to play. Structured plot lines can be useful, especially with newer or inexperienced players.

Given that, I wouldn't say that Capes itself is what doesn't do "tight" narration - that is, there's nothing in the system making it more difficult.  The tightness or incoherency of what's going on is completely up to the players, and if they're getting incoherent, then it's because of the choices they are making.


Agreed...the direction the narration takes is player dependant...if your group are like hyperactive 4 year olds then coherency is not likely (I speak from experience here.)

As long as the group have agreed to related scenes then things can be tight, but without that agreement things could get out of hand very quickly...its all social contract stuff at that point...

Message 18169#207337

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Tuxboy
...in which Tuxboy participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 4:00pm, Uhlrik wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Tuxboy wrote:
I don't think that the concept of powers should be removed from a non-supers game, with a little effort you can come up with abilities that can act as powers for the characters, powers are central to the mechanic after all, but as Tony says you will always end end with that comicbook feel. Fantasy will be Epic Fantasy, SciFi will be Space Opera SciFi...it is unavoidable, and given the system, it shouldn't be avoided...its what makes it work.


I don't disagree with the powers part of that statement at all.

I'm not sure about the comic-book feel or the epic fantasy thing (it kinda depends on what one means by epic fantasy) as I've not played the game enough to explore all of its potential ramifications. My take on epic roleplaying means a game that it is filled with big issues, lots of drama and impressive story developement. I think that your definition is similar.

As far as fantasy goes, I tend to be more interested in "low fantasy" stuff than "high fantasy" (to illustrate, I'm more interested im playing in a setting where magic and supernatural phenomena are somewhat subtle and special than someplace where it's as overwhelmingly commonplace as, say, Xanth)... but a "low-fantasy" game certainly can definitely be epic by my definition. I'm interested in thematic scope and implications, much less so in having manticoras wandering down the street chit-chatting with a half-drow about politics and that wacky wizard that leveled a mountain because he was in a bad mood, then pausing in their conversation to let a warrior that's busy extinguishing fifty glowing ninjas on his own pass them by.

Message 18169#207355

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Uhlrik
...in which Uhlrik participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 4:24pm, drnuncheon wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Tuxboy wrote:
I think that is all in the pre-game discussion and setup. I don't think there is anything stopping a core plot "shared" world environment working in Capes as long as it has been discussed prior to play. Structured plot lines can be useful, especially with newer or inexperienced players.


That's the thing - we didn't actually talk about that.  Nobody said "OK, we have a structured plotline to go through today which is John's responsibility" or "here's the plot".  I kicked off with a fight scene, John provided the reason, Mel picked up the ball and took actions which led us into the next scene, where John's new character pulled us into the third, and by the time it got back around to me again I think all three of us know what the next scene was going to be.

And yet, we still don't know who sent the demon, why it was after the amulet, who this "Vriknu" is (and why his symbol is on an amulet I got from a cult that serves an entirely different demon), who Gabriel and Meredith are really working for...so in the sense of "this is what's going on behind the scenes", there's no kind of a structured plotline at all. 

In the sense of "this is the type of story we're going to tell", yeah, we discussed that and are all on the same page - but again, we didn't sit down and say "each scene has to follow from the last logically", it's just what we're doing.

Part of it may be related to the fact that the three of us have been gaming together on an almost weekly basis for the past 5 years, with each of us taking turns in the GM chair.

J

Message 18169#207366

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by drnuncheon
...in which drnuncheon participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 5:06pm, Hans wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

drnuncheon wrote:
Given that, I wouldn't say that Capes itself is what doesn't do "tight" narration - that is, there's nothing in the system making it more difficult.  The tightness or incoherency of what's going on is completely up to the players, and if they're getting incoherent, then it's because of the choices they are making.


There may not be anything that makes it more difficult, but there isn't anything to make it easier either.  As you said yourself, "the tightness or incoherency of what's going on is completely up to the players".  This is not true for all games.  Some games provide a lot of support for this.  Things that make it easier:

1) A GM (as in D20) or psuedo-GM (like the Dealer in Dust Devils or the Producer in PTA).
2) A fixed story structure (ala Shab al-Hiri Roach or Mountain Witch, or the episode structure in PTA).  
3) A mechanic that keeps drawing the story back to certain themes (Spirtual Attributes in TROS).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Capes needs any of the above as part of the rules.  I like Capes just the way it is.  What I am saying is that the Capes rulebook doesn't provide these things, so to support some kinds of story telling you will have to add things in.  It sounds like you and Doug bring in point 2 above through your group dynamic.  Also, it sounds like you have groups of players that are very disciplined and in-sync regarding the direction the story should take.  This has allowed you to be successful.

What I am getting at is this: sometimes, you are better off using another game, then trying to use a current game to tell a particular story you want to tell.  You can do fantasy in Capes, just like you can do fantasy in D20, TROS, Fate, GURPS, Donjon and who knows what else.  But each of these systems will have certain KINDS of fantasy it does well "out of the box", and others that it does poorly.  One set of elements (setting, characters, premise, plot lines, etc.) will be fantastic in one system but be dissapointing and frustrating in another.  

As an example, I think Michael Moorcock's Elric/Corum/Hawkmoon fantasies would work wonderfully in Capes; heck, there are big sections of a lot of the Elric stories that READ like a Capes game in progress.  However, even though the "power" level is much higher, I think Moorcock's Dancers at the End of Time series would be poor fit for Capes; these books are more about interpersonal interactions that would be better done with, say, Fate.

So when you ask me "Can I do fantasy in Capes?" my answer has to be, "Sure, but what is it about the kind of fantasy you want to do that you think Capes will support better than the other excellent fantasy RPG's the world has to offer?"  If you can answer that question, then you know where to go with Capes to get what you want.

Message 18169#207373

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Hans
...in which Hans participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 8:50pm, drnuncheon wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Hans wrote: What I am saying is that the Capes rulebook doesn't provide these things, so to support some kinds of story telling you will have to add things in.  It sounds like you and Doug bring in [a fixed story structure] through your group dynamic.


I'm not sure if we're talking past each other or what.  When you say a "fixed story structure", it sounds to me like you're saying it's the result of deliberate planning (that's certainly what your examples suggest), and my point was that no, we weren't doing that at all.  If it looks like there's a fixed story structure, that's only from the outside.

This is the sort of thing I'm talking about: "From the outside, it looks like we were really smart!"

Also, it sounds like you have groups of players that are very disciplined and in-sync regarding the direction the story should take.  This has allowed you to be successful.


I'm not sure I'd call it that either - I'm sure we all have very different ideas about the direction the story "should" take.  For example, neither of the other players had even considered the idea that Gabriel and Meredith were working for someone other than Joseph, even though it was plainly obvious to me based on their actions.

What we all share is the desire for a story.  Not any particular story - not my story or Mel's story or John's story - but a coherent story just the same.  So when we can make a choice that would either lead towards or away from a story, we're choosing to head towards one.

Now, the thing is, this happens in all roleplaying games, all the time.  If you're the DM, you can run D&D without a coherent story.  "Done with that fight?  OK, you're in the arctic and three yeti attack."  "Weren't we just fighting yuan-ti in the jungle?"  People generally don't do that because they have that same desire that we have for a story - even if it's just "four guys go into a dungeon and come out with mad loot".  In Capes, everyone is the GM, so if the story is incoherent, it is because the GMs have chosen to make it that way - they have all said (consciously or unconsciously) "this is how we want to play."

J

Forge Reference Links:
Topic 13351

Message 18169#207408

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by drnuncheon
...in which drnuncheon participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/11/2006 at 9:22am, Tuxboy wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

That's the thing - we didn't actually talk about that.  Nobody said "OK, we have a structured plotline to go through today which is John's responsibility" or "here's the plot".  I kicked off with a fight scene, John provided the reason, Mel picked up the ball and took actions which led us into the next scene, where John's new character pulled us into the third, and by the time it got back around to me again I think all three of us know what the next scene was going to be.


Ah the hallmark of a good group...you're a lucky man...wish every group was like that!

Message 18169#207462

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Tuxboy
...in which Tuxboy participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/11/2006




On 5/11/2006 at 2:08pm, Hans wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

drnuncheon wrote:
I'm not sure if we're talking past each other or what. 


After reading your comments, I realized that the word "incoherent" was a bad choice for what I was trying to say.  Better choices would have been "seemingly incoherent' or "nonlinear".  I did not mean to put words into your mouth regarding "fixed storylines" or otherwise.  I recognize that none of your group consciously planned anything that happened.  My point was that Capes doesn't HELP you keep to a more straightforward linear structure.  There is no support for it, and in fact the mechanics, if anything, support the opposite.   The fact that your group kept to a fairly linear structure in your first session is great, you all obviously enjoyed it, but doesn't alter my conviction that setting out to TELL a fairly straightforward linear story is not something Capes is good for. 

The subtitle of this thread is "using Capes for other genres".  My point is that just saying "Capes can work for fantasy" or "Capes can work for Sci-Fi" is not very helpful.  Capes would be good for SOME kinds of Fantasy, perhaps better than many other games at it.  But other kinds...not so much.  This is true for every RPG, Capes is not unique.  What I was trying to get at is WHICH kinds of fantasy Capes would be optimal for, and which it wouldn't, and what the features would be that differentiate between the two.  So for example, I think the following:

Capes is optimal for: Heroic Fantasy (ala Elric/Conan), Heavy Metal-style Euro-fantasy (ala Moebius), Episodic Fantasy (ala Xena or Hercules), maybe Mythological or Legendary Fantasy (as in Arthurian or Ancient Greek, I think this is sort of the territory Bret is heading for with his "Gods" hack).
Capes is not optimal for: Epic Fantasy (ala LOTR or Wheel of Time), High Setting Fantasy (that is, where knowledge and consistency of the setting is really important to the play experience, such as most D&D fantasy settings), Character-Based Fantasy (ala Thomas Covenant or Earthsea or Pern), Dungeon crawls.
Capes is neutral (i.e. depends more on the group then the game) for: Humorous/Parodic Fantasy (ala Discworld or Xanth).

And to me, the differences in the two lists can be summarized in two points:
* Capes is optimal for fantasy that is fairly non-linear or episodic in structure, and is not optimal for fantasy that is fairly linear or epic in structure.
* Capes is optimal for fantasy that concentrates on situation and/or colour, and is not optimal for fantasy that concentrates on setting and/or character.

The two points above would apply to ANY genre, really.

Message 18169#207482

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Hans
...in which Hans participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/11/2006




On 5/11/2006 at 2:38pm, drnuncheon wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Hans wrote: My point was that Capes doesn't HELP you keep to a more straightforward linear structure.  There is no support for it, and in fact the mechanics, if anything, support the opposite.


I'm afraid I don't see it.  What's the reward for choosing non-linearity?  When it comes time for me to be the scene starter, what's my impetus to choose to set up a scene that's completely unrelated to what has gone before?

Maybe if I'm just starting out with Capes I want to do it to explore this great new freedom I have.  But if we're all sitting down to play our supernatural game, I'm going to choose scenes that fit in with the current characters and plotline, because I know that the other players and I are already invested in those characters and situations.  That means they'll fight harder and there'll be bigger rewards.

Sure, I could decide to set the next scene on a barren wind-swept plain just north of the Arctic Circle.  Or in Cambodia.  Or on the far side of the moon.  The rules won't stop me.  But I have to ask myself - why?  What do I get out of it?

Jeff

Message 18169#207490

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by drnuncheon
...in which drnuncheon participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/11/2006




On 5/11/2006 at 5:11pm, Hans wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

drnuncheon wrote:
I'm afraid I don't see it.  What's the reward for choosing non-linearity?  When it comes time for me to be the scene starter, what's my impetus to choose to set up a scene that's completely unrelated to what has gone before?


First of all, Jeff, do you think Capes would work equally well for all fantasy?  Do you think there are some kinds it would do better or worse at?  Why?  That is the question I am trying to get at.

To summarize in another way what I think would work well in Capes versus what I think wouldn't:  Capes works well for sub-genres that are created in the same way Capes is played.  Capes is played by people tossing off scenes, each one building on what has gone before, but with no one person really in control of what the thrust of the story is, and sometimes no one even HAVING a general direction in mind.  What kinds of fantasy are created like that?

* comic books (Doctor Strange)
* t.v. shows (Xena, Hercules, maybe Buffy)
* short story series (Elric, Conan)
* mythological or legendary stories (Arthur, Greek Gods)

what isn't?

* Novels, and especially epic novels (i.e. LOTR, Earthsea, or the Wheel of Time)
* Most other RPG fantasy settings (i.e. Forgotten Realms) because knowledge and coherency of setting is so important.

Now, as to you comment above, a particular part of a story can be related to what has gone before, and yet the relationship be non-linear (better I think, to say non-structured, I'm still trying to find the right words).  Think of your average Elric story.  It has Elric in it, and Stormbringer, Arioch, Tanelorn, etc.  So these stories are highly related to each other.   But on a story by story basis, they often have no connection to each other.  Moorcock certainly didn't write them in a structured fashion.  In many ways it makes no difference whatsover what order they are read in.  Elric was never planned by Moorcock, it just happened; it built up over time like a coral reef.

Now compare Elric to the Lord of the Rings.  Even though Tolkein bounces back and forth between several different plot lines in each book, and the book itself went through multple revisions, it is obviously a planned work.  It has a constant thrust throughout the whole thing.  The scenes don't just lead into each other, they drive forward, heading towards a conclusion.  I would argue they head towards an obvious conclusion; did anyone ever seriously think Frodo would FAIL to destroy the ring, the first time they read it?

The Capes mechanics support relating what is happening now to what else has happened, but it doesn't do this with any kind of structure at all (ok, not completely true, the veto and the comics code can be used to help with structure).  All that matters is the interest level I think what I am about to do will generate in the other players. I could be taking the story in a wildly different direction, but as long as it is interesting at the moment, I will be rewarded.  Moreover, if I am MISTAKEN about this being interesting, well, its too late.  Its already in the story.  In a way, the damage is already done. 

Message 18169#207508

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Hans
...in which Hans participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/11/2006




On 5/11/2006 at 6:33pm, drnuncheon wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Hans wrote: First of all, Jeff, do you think Capes would work equally well for all fantasy?  Do you think there are some kinds it would do better or worse at?  Why?  That is the question I am trying to get at.


I think Capes would work best for any kind of character-heavy fantasy.  A Game of Thrones, or Erikson's Malazan, for instance.

I think Capes would work just fine for epic fantasy given one of two situations:
1) The players decided beforehand that's what they wanted to go for, or
2) The "epic plot" that builds up through each player's contribution is interesting enough that all the players stick with it.

(If the campaign doesn't meet either of those criteria, then I submit that the campaign is what is ill-suited and not the game system.)

Take the scene in Bag End: Gandalf wins the goal "Reveal the history behind Bilbo's ring".  Before that, Gollum was just a creepy encounter in a cave that one of the other players thought would be neat.  Afterwards, BAM! Significance.  From the outside, it looks the same as if the DM had lovingly crafted the history of the ring before deliberately placing it there to be found during the previous campaign.

The Capes mechanics support relating what is happening now to what else has happened, but it doesn't do this with any kind of structure at all (ok, not completely true, the veto and the comics code can be used to help with structure).  All that matters is the interest level I think what I am about to do will generate in the other players. I could be taking the story in a wildly different direction, but as long as it is interesting at the moment, I will be rewarded.  Moreover, if I am MISTAKEN about this being interesting, well, its too late.  Its already in the story.  In a way, the damage is already done.


People selectively edit stories all the time.  Just because it's in the game doesn't mean it's in the story, if you catch the difference there.

I get that you're saying that a strong central authority makes those kinds of games easier, because you've got one person responsible for continuity, planning, etc.  I don't think that makes Capes bad for those kinds of games, just different.  The players will have to (unsurprisingly) share the duties of the GM among them.

Assuming everyone wants to have a great Tolkienesque epic, let's say you decide to take the story in a wildly different direction on your next scene.  Isn't that pretty much the same as the players saying "Forget this whole Mordor gig, let's go sail across the sea and sack the Grey Havens?"  There's nothing stopping you from doing that sort of thing in D&D either, but somehow I don't think you'd say that D&D doesn't support the "epic story".

J

Message 18169#207525

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by drnuncheon
...in which drnuncheon participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/11/2006




On 5/14/2006 at 5:11am, Miskatonic wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Hmm. Now, only Tony moderates this forum, so don't look at me like I'm the boss-man, but...
Did you guys notice you've resurrected a thread from January? (Go back, look at the date on Syndey's last post.) I just wanted to point that out.

Message 18169#207792

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Miskatonic
...in which Miskatonic participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/14/2006




On 5/14/2006 at 5:51am, Uhlrik wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Larry wrote:
Hmm. Now, only Tony moderates this forum, so don't look at me like I'm the boss-man, but...
Did you guys notice you've resurrected a thread from January? (Go back, look at the date on Syndey's last post.) I just wanted to point that out.


I did notice. I don't think it's a bad thing, if there's still stuff that's worth discussing.

;)

Message 18169#207794

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Uhlrik
...in which Uhlrik participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/14/2006




On 5/14/2006 at 6:04am, Miskatonic wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Okay, just checking. It's a no-no on the Forge-at-large, if you didn't know.

But this is Tony's house, so whatever. I do think it's a worthwhile topic.

Message 18169#207796

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Miskatonic
...in which Miskatonic participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/14/2006




On 5/14/2006 at 1:32pm, TonyLB wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

New threads are so cheap (the price has really dropped ... in college the system warned me each time I posted a message that delivering it could cost "hundreds or thousands of dollars") that I'd generally rather see people do sequels ("Son of Capeless Capes") and link to the old threads than ressurect threads.  'kay?

Message 18169#207814

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by TonyLB
...in which TonyLB participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/14/2006




On 5/14/2006 at 3:25pm, Uhlrik wrote:
RE: Re: "Capeless Capes", or using Capes for other genres

Larry wrote:
Okay, just checking. It's a no-no on the Forge-at-large, if you didn't know.


Ah, I didn't. This is the only part of the Forge that I tend to bother with. My bad.

Message 18169#207825

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Uhlrik
...in which Uhlrik participated
...in Muse of Fire Games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/14/2006