I'm currently working on a rpg project, based on content (i.e. setting/plot) and I intend to produce soon (well, this means weeks, at least) a teaser, that will be available, here, at the forge. My thougths are to put it into publishing, but I guess I would need to present how I work on this project. As this is closely linked to my design, I thougth I could present it here, for further references (hey, that's one thing I like to do, use the forge as a library).
The specifics of my project are two things : mutli plots and calendar based adventures. I don't intend to reproduce here my whole design, this is not the point of this thread. For more information, see my theory and design links in my signature.
So, what's the point of this thread ? To show how I'm working, and how my work is related to my design. I'll also present the similitudes with how it affects play.

But, first things first, a little introduction. What does my game do ? how is it played ?
As I said before, my game is related to content, I don't have, yet, specific mechanics for it. What I'm trying to acheive is to find a new way to present setting/stories. I'm trying to elude the old chapters based scenario and the endless setting with too much information. As I'm describing a setting in motion, I use a calendar to describe the different plots happening at the same time. One important thing about my design is that everything (related to content) fits into a 'case'. I'd say I write in a modular way. Also, I wish to only propose a backbone as a story. I don't go into details, there are left on purpose for the DM to create them. For all the following, keep in mind that I'm in the context of a prewritten scenario.
The game is played in a traditional way, with players and a DM. One big difference is that, since there is no predefined holes for the players, they have to make choices all the time. What are they going to do ? Also, since it is multi plot, the players do have the lead on which interests them more. So the DM is not responsible for pushing them in any direction. He manages the calendar, playing with his players, helping them build their own story.

I guess those premises, put my work into the narrative aspect of the game. Not only the do the players will be confronted to dilemmas inside plots, but also, between plots, as they can't do everyting in a given, limited time. Most of the time, I guess, players will jump from one story to another. Also, as it needs to be played day by day, it is the DM's responsability to create all minor locations (inns, for example) and secondary characters.
Some examples of actual play :
[Avalanche] - encouraging SIM/NAR, my problems
[Avalanche] - with prepared players
[Avalanche] part I - with unprepared players

My work. How do I procede and does my design helps me ?
I present a one year calendar, divided into four seasons and each season has five stories. I prefer to work along a given story, till it meets another one in the plot, than work along the calendar itself (i.e. writing weeks after weeks for all the stories). I also wish each story to be written in a different style. Some will be about heroic adventures, others, investigations or horror. That said, I am now working with two other authors. They each have a story of their own to write. I'd like to say I do have the chance to work with people to whom I make comments and will gladly rewrite some parts.
I provide each of the writer with something like 'non official events title', a glimse of what's going to happen. I need to do that as the different stories overlapped each other. So, for one thing, my design is quite helpful for having other writers. I just distribute some parts of the modules. But, there is another interesting thing. We only write a backbone of a story. So, what I distribute to them is a 'backbone of a backbone'. Quite strangely, they manage to come up with something different than I had in mind. An example ?
A writer is working on the story of orcs establishing a stronghold. I had thougth of undead attacking them. Well, I had in mind something like one assault. It came out the battle lasted for three weeks with the introduction of new characters. In fact, it was quite better than what I had in mind.
I also like to present two sides of the same story. In one of the subplot, orcs are confronting brigands. I wrote down all the events concerning the lattest, leaving the orcs' point of view to another writer. It came out better than what I thougth, offering an all new perspective.
Now, the illustrations. My design is made as to be illustrated. And it's quite simple. One event, one illustration, one element of essence (i.e. setting) one illustration. I'm currently working with two illustrators, each one having a story of his own. That said, when describing an element of the setting, I don't provide physical descriptions. It is up to the illustrator to add his own vision. Well, each time, it came out different than what I had in mind. And each time better in fact.

I do realise that working with other people not only 'discharges' me of some work, but also adds something to it. It betters my product. It is possible because what I'm doing is not directive, so, the authors and illustrators can add their own visions to mine. And the fact that my design is modular, it facilitates work with others.

Play. How my design affects play in a similar way ?
Then again, as my product is not directive, as there are holes to be filled (day to day, characters), I suppose the DMs will also be able to add their own visions. In the same way, almost, other writers and illustrators do.

In those two aspects (work and play), I think I use a kind of superposition and appropriation.
Superposition : I bring some ideas, nothing more, and other people puts their own on top of it.
Appropriation : adding their own vision, other people (illustrators, writers, DMs) appropriate the story and make them their own.

Publishing
I'll mention it, thus it is not the purpose of this thread. I intend to sell my project thru html. My desing serves my needs, because there is a lot of things you can do on a web page that you can't in a regular book/pdf. So, my design is as it is because it is meant to be accessible thru a database.

So, as you can see, my design serves three different purposes : work, play and publishing.
----------------------------------------
Well, while I'm at it, I'll present some of my objectives and ask some questions.

What my game does (or at least try to do...) :
- present a setting always in the context of stories
- present a scenario in a way that is fun, exciting to read, but still informative for the purpose of rpg. I know this balance is not easy to find.
- multi plots : many stories occuring at the same time
- avoid meta plotting by avoiding predefined hole for the players (for me metaplot is there is a way out, don't bother, the solution will come)
- present a fully illustrated setting and stories
- provide a way, by modular writing, to access easily the information
- provide a way, by modular writing, to manage the impact of the players on the game
- allows space in the plot for the DMs to put their own stories
- offer mature subject
- provide something that no one will dare to do for a home brew campaign, unless they're crazy. I can't imagine people writing down five stories, in case their players choose one over another.

What my game doesn't do (or at least try to avoid...)
- overflow of informations. I want to provide something not too long to read.
- details about every little things, on how exactly they happen. The DMs will have to improvise and create during their game.
- endless list of names of mayor, inns, towns.
- precise direction into which push the players. Their story is not there. At least, not yet...

That said, I'm well aware of the problems of such a product.

So, my questions
My trade is content, not rules. This is my battleground. My design defines a new way to write setting/plots for the purpose of rpgs. What I'm doing is best suited for narrativist group, or so I think.

There seems to be a need for content, or so I think. Living campaign, althougth free and of poor quality, seems to have some success. From what I understand, thousand are playing them. But I can't find figure about that. Anyone knows more ?

In the first place, I won't provide a dedicted system for my product (I know, what a shame). But still, I'm looking for systems that encourages NAR play in DM/players context, to see what I'd like to do. Any examples ?

My design won't change much, since the database is already built. That said, I'm looking at something more I could offer. I'll give an example. In the first place, I thougth no system was needed. But I learned here I needed one (even a bad one, I guess. I'll use d20 first, as their licence suits my needs and the game is well common and played by many). I realise it would take me a couples of hours (well, more than a couple, in fact) to add it. Better me to do it once than all my costumers to do it themselves. So, what could I add ?

I know content is not the cup of tea of the forge, but still, I'm looking for some examples of design related to content, let's say outside the chapters based/separated setting thing. Any examples ?

Final notes
I don't like to say that, but before asking me about details my design, please refer to my theory. It's all there (see my signature). Beside that, I'd be my pleasure to answer any questions concerning it.
One last thing. Building up a website as I intent to is a hell of a job. It takes time to build a cool interface, a good lasting database, and a lot of functions without bugs. But, it's in progress. That's one of the main reason I don't have something real to show for the moment. What I intend to do is provide a real value added service thru the website.

My trade is content, not rules. This is my battleground. My design defines a new way to write setting/plots for the purpose of rpgs. What I'm doing is best suited for narrativist group, or so I think.

There seems to be a need for content, or so I think. Living campaign, althougth free and of poor quality, seems to have some success. From what I understand, thousand are playing them. But I can't find figure about that. Anyone knows more ?

My design won't change much, since the database is already built. That said, I'm looking at something more I could offer. I'll give an example. In the first place, I thougth no system was needed. But I learned here I needed one (even a bad one, I guess. I'll use d20 first, as their licence suits my needs and the game is well common and played by many). I realise it would take me a couples of hours (well, more than a couple, in fact) to add it. Better me to do it once than all my costumers to do it themselves. So, what could I add ?

I know content is not the cup of tea of the forge, but still, I'm looking for some examples of design related to content, let's say outside the chapters based/separated setting thing. Any examples ?

Thanks for the answer, but now, I have other questions that come to my mind.

General note about the forge
I really don't know if I get this right, but I see this site, somehow, as a library. Personnaly, I use it in that way : present design, go into actual play, then come back to design, and finally publishing (later on). I guess the point in this is not repeating myself over and over, restating all the time the same thing. But there is a big counter point. It means that when writing down a new post, I'd have to ask people to read back the previous ones. And I know this is not easy to ask, as the number of threads increase. Unless some people 'follow' my project, but I wouldn't bet on that. So, I guess the use of the forge, as I see it, is kind of paradoxal.

For the purpose of this post, I'll quote myself from an actual play post I've written. In there, I didn't present my design, since I thougth it wasn't its purpose.

The purpose of my product

I don't think thats a safe assumption.  Depending on how the plot threads are really constructed, it may be that Narr players find this design pretty much unusable, on the basis of the usual problems that arise with stories that are laid out ahead of time.  But on much the same basis, Sim and Gamist players might having such a layout highly useful.

As you can see, the use of the calendar is not much as "time bomb", but rather as a way to impose dilemmas. What I want to avoid, is seeing my characters say "let's prevent the war, then we'll go against the orcs." It is not possible, as the two plots occur at the same time. They can't do both. The calendar is useful when players go 'in' and 'out' of stories. And this is why I say that multi plots, using a calendar, encourages, intuitively, NAR play.

I would think, if you don't have a resolution system in mind, it would be better not to have any than to force-fit your idea to d20.  The point behind advocating a dedicated system is that system controls how things are done in play, obviously, and thus how your game will ACTUALLY be played.  But if that is not the purpose of the product, then adding an external system will likely only distort the idea; even the very presence of the d20 system will convince some players it is is intended to be played like any other d20 game.

Hence this is quite a good way to convey how the culture views itself, regards itself in terms of its own history and mores.

First, I believe the story/plot should be rooted in 'history'. Characters, protagonists are linked by a common history. This is the glue that tie them together. And I think this is also true for all relationship (lovers, friends) : it exists because of a common history. From that point of view, I also believe no one can't understand the present without understanding the past. I believe that this reference to the past enables the plot to be thicker, richer.

History - gray orcs
0 : not so many, they have been living in the exile’s land for many millennium. As time goes by, seeing both victories and defeats, a race of half orc has emerged.
25 : the first exiled gray orcs appear on the exile’s land. They are fleeing from the capital and take refuge in the mountains.
326 : the gray orcs, being lead by the black orcs, take part in the assault against the three dwarf strongholds. More than ten thousand of them will die in the battle at Murdithorn.
330 : the gray orc’s village are now emptied of their fighters. Many generations will be needed to replenish them.
430 : as the white orc’s kingdom grows, the gray orcs retreat in the mountains.
1050 :  brigands take control of Murdithem and chase the gray orcs who live there. Fierce clans will try to oppose them.
1100 : two generations of gray orcs are forced to war against the brigands but they will not be able to prevent them from taking over the stronghold. Sporadic assaults will remain, but the war is obviously lost.
1330 : gray orcs are hunted by humans in the mountains but also in the moon’s forest in what seems a total war for their opponents.
1351 : the gray orcs allied themselves, voluntary or not, to the black orcs as to reconstruct the tower on the lake, but also to confront the brigands. Thousands of gray orcs will be lead by a handful of black orcs.

History - black orcs
0 : they lead their people’s exile out of the Outer World. Gulmther has finished the tower of the many mirror and Guhnvack has completed the construction of the city in the clouds. The black orcs take refuge in the volcanic mountains where they establish their capital.
325 : the black orcs lead an army to strike and take control of Madyernack, the dwarf’s capital.  Many smaller battles will follow in the surroundings of the capital, even up to the exile’s land.
950 : the black orcs lead an army who defeats the man at Hoperya. Many orcs are banished from Ethernya.
1100 : the black orcs who are now established at Hoperya begins to trade with Carcandasse. Prosperity for both capitals.
1351 : Gulmther sends three distinct groups of black orcs to take back the control of the tower on the lake. As to insure the success of his plans, Gulmther asks Dragneckry, who is known in the exile’s land as the human goddess Thikrum, to organize the liberation of Tarm from his icy prison. The black orcs who are sent to rebuild the tower will need the help of the gray orcs as they will be oppose to brigands, the nature’s dark side, humans, white orcs and even undead. Their task is not an easy one.

I'll post here the complete gray and black orcs. I'll comment on a following post. Then again, sorry for the translation.

Gray Orcs
Presentation
Considered as inferior by the black orcs, most of the gray orcs have fled the capital to take refuge in the mountains. There are many dozen of thousand of gray orcs present on the exile’s land, mostly in the mountains, but also in the moon’s forest. Although this race is sickly by the sunlight, they can still bear it. Of peaceful nature, the gray orcs are often constraint to war, by adversaries who hunt them or by black orcs who lead them to battle. The gray orcs is a race who has suffered much by the decision of others.
Arts, culture and woman’s place
The gray orcs have developed a culture of their own where nature has a predominant place. They have developed a particular bond with it, retiring magic abilities from this harmony. Those druids are wrongly named shamans and are not to confound with the real shamans of Raijuvak, half orcs who exploited the nature. Women do have an important place in their society. Often shamans, the future of this race was in the hands of women many times during their history, notably after great battles. As in all orc’s culture, songs have an important place in the oral tradition, but here, it is more often question of nature than victories.  Finally, those orcs owns a savoir faire for many crafts, but they do not produce any excess.
Politics
The gray orcs live in small clans, almost family structures. Most of the time, it is the old ones who lead those gatherings. It is not rare to see a women shaman in this role, as they are known for their wisdom, but also their magic; the potions they prepare, among other things. The gray orcs do not seek wars and only wish to leave in peace. So, there is almost no battles between clans of these races, as they prefer to move than to confront aggressive neighbors. That said, gray orcs might reveals themselves great warriors if constraint to fight. And some clans, few among them, are well known for their ferocity.
Trade and relation with other races
The gray orcs would gladly trade with their neighbors but they are scorned and considered inferiors by them. So the gray orcs are at war with the humans : brigands and young rangers for the most. The first ones hunt them in the mountains as the second try to evince them from the moon’s forest. The gray orcs are also hunted down by the dwarfs near Murdighar for the only reason that they represent the orc race. As for the white orcs, they affront the gray ones in the hope of seeing their territory, the kingdom of silence, grow. Finally, the gray orcs are tolerated by the Luciomes in the moon’s forest as they are seen to live peacefully at nature’s side. The gray orcs have their own forge where they create their weapons and armors. They use primary shorts lances and javelins in battles, wearing light armor and shield.

Black Orcs
Presentation
The mightiest people among all the orcs, the black orcs are mostly encountered underground, buried in his deepest depths. This race fears the light of the sun at the exception of the eater of the flesh. These elite orcs are exposed from their birth to the sunlight. Only one out of ten will survive their deadly training. But this is how the black orcs make their greatest warriors, the eater of flesh, the mightiest among the mightiest. Those warriors are tremendous colossus of more than two meters and a half, which the only sight inspires fear. They are the ones who led the exile of this race from the Outer World.
Arts, culture and woman’s place
Most of the black orc’s culture has disappeared during their exile, but this race still owns a ancestral knowledge. So, for example, the black orcs know how to forge the noyrme, although their competence seem pale compares to those of the dwarfs. The flesh eater are always wearing splendid armors and using weapons made out from this rare metal. This race also inherit the ancient art of tattooing. As magnificent as they might seem, those tattoos are from a magic kind, conferring abilities, varied and powerful, to their wearer. Songs to the old heroes of this race are always present during any celebrations. The eater of flesh take their names from the fact that they literally eat their enemies, sometimes even on the battlefield itself. The female black orcs are reputed to be crueler and more dangerous than their male counterpart. Powerful wizard are also known to be present among this race.
Politics
The politic system among the black orcs is quite simple since it is based on the law of the strongest. With the exile of this race from the Outer World and the massacre that took place with it, their ancients gods were killed. Thought, those who led the exile became the new gods of their race. Among the flesh eater, a small group parts from the lot, representing the leader of those warriors. The Vark’Grak’Khran, “those by whom victory befalls”, constitutes a group of a hundred orcs who makes tremble from fear not only their enemies, but also those they command. It is said that a single warrior from those orcs can defeat more than a hundred adversaries. Note that all black orcs present in this scenario are from this elite formation.
Trade and relation with other races
The black orcs consider themselves the supreme race amongst the orcs. So, all the other orc’s races must submit themselves, voluntary or not, to their so-called leaders. The black orcs are far better at destructing than constructing. They don’t see any real interest from conquests outside domination. Native to the Outer World, the black orcs are used to be at war against all their neighbors. They tolerate the presence of the humans in the exile’s land because they gain a real advantage from the trade they make with them. In the context of this scenario, the black orcs might form an unnatural alliance with the white orcs if they can’t reach the tower on the frozen lake. To where this alliance might take them ? As to attain their objectives, the black orcs will need the help of the gray orcs. The latest will surely appreciate the offer, especially to oppose the brigands.

I'll complete my point about my design.

The purpose of my product
I've been doing some homeworks, returning to one of Ron's article about SIM : Simulationism: The Right to Dream
Althougth I clearly think I'm playing NAR will my players, I found some informations about SIM, in that article, that describe what I'm doing. Some quotes :

Rules-lite Story or Character priorities
This section is likely to get me into trouble, so I'll tread carefully. I suggest that many self-described "rules-lite" or "story-oriented" role-playing games represent a derived version of the High Concept model, slanted heavily toward Situation - especially Situation which is under complete GM control, overt or covert. Players get to contribute tons of Color, even content, but never outcomes or final-resolutions, and playing the character as conceived is the first priority, sometimes taken to extremes of Actor Stance (e.g. Turku play, see the Glossary). Character and Situation are prioritized with Color, with Setting next, and lastly the formal System, which is slanted strongly toward Drama-mechanics. This mode of play may be strongly linked with LARP crossovers.
(...)
From the introduction to Theatrix (1993, Backstage Press, authors are David Berkman, Travis Eneix, and Brett Hackett):

    Making a story come to life can be a difficult task. Previous generations of game systems have been rules bound, trapped within their own structure and rigidity. We wanted to produce a game that would help you in every way, not hinder you. So we developed a system of rules that is written to evolve along with your style of storytelling and roleplaying. These rules can be used to guide every facet of the game's progress, without becoming intrusive. You can use all the rules, or easily peel them away in layers, until you're running free-form games. The rules heavily encourage adopting this style of play, making themselves unnecessary.

In other words, the system helps create story by fading away, much like the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. I think that this whole design effort arises from a desire for "big story" in the face of Purist-for-System design and mainly Fortune-driven High Concept design. In the effort to get out of that sort of Simulationist play, the thought is to get rid of the System that supports it, with any explicit System being perceived as that sort of system. I consider this a problematic design goal but it's widespread enough to merit a category. What makes it difficult to discuss is that its explict story-creation goals are similar to those of Narrativist play, but the operational process is stripped-down High Concept Simulationism. (See the GNS stuff below for further discussion.)

Metagame time is rarely discussed openly, but it's the crucial one. It refers to time-lapse among really-played scenes: can someone get to the castle before someone else kills the king; can someone fly across Detroit before someone else detonates the Mind Bomb. Metagame time isn't "played," but its management is a central issue for scene-framing and the outcome of the session as a whole.
(...)
The following text is also from the first edition of the Dungeon Master's Guide (TSR, 1979); the author is Gary Gygax.
You may ask why time is so important if it causes such difficulties with record-keeping, dictates who can or can not go adventuring during a game session, and disperses player characters to the four winds by its strictures. Well, as initially pointed out, it is a necessary penalty imposed on characters for certain activities [making magic items - RE]. Beyond that, it also gives players yet another interesting set of choices and consequences. The latter tends to bring more true-to-life quality to the game, as some characters will use precious time to the utmost advantage, some will treat it lightly, and some will be constantly wasting it to their complete detriment. Time is yet another facet which helps to separate the superior players from the lesser ones.

The mere presence of story as the product of role-playing is not a GNS-based issue.

pells wrote:
I really don't know if I get this right, but I see this site, somehow, as a library. Personnaly, I use it in that way : present design, go into actual play, then come back to design, and finally publishing (later on). I guess the point in this is not repeating myself over and over, restating all the time the same thing. But there is a big counter point. It means that when writing down a new post, I'd have to ask people to read back the previous ones. And I know this is not easy to ask, as the number of threads increase. Unless some people 'follow' my project, but I wouldn't bet on that. So, I guess the use of the forge, as I see it, is kind of paradoxal.

I'm quite surprised about SIM and GAM. Do SIM players really need a plot based on event related to a specific story ? Do gamist players really need a good story ? Anyway, in both cases, they'll be confronted to the plot, to the obligation to make choices, to take sides.

I think, as long as players are looking for a good story, well, then they'll be glad with that product. I suppose I have to separate the way I play, the way I use my product, from what other people might do with it. As far as I'm concerned, it is clear to me now, that I really play narrative games.

But there is a couple of things useful about this system, althougth, I might be wrong on my assumptions....It is gamist oriented. But I think many people use it in different ways. Why ? Because there are used to it, they're confortable with it. Or, at least I know many people who use it, but not for gamist purposes.

Anyway, for me, d20 is just a question of time spent. For Avalanche, I would need about a hundred characters sheets (main characters, and for organisations, like the military, the soldiers and officers and general). I guess I'll need about forty hours to do so. Honestly, that's not much.

That said, I'll mention something. The database is meant for multi systems, meaning, if I can provide more than one, customers will be able to choose the one they want among them. So, if I read you well, what do you think about this : proposing (depending on their licences, my choices might still be limited there) a gamist, narr and sim systems ? Does it even seems like possible ?

The design in itself

Hence this is quite a good way to convey how the culture views itself, regards itself in terms of its own history and mores.

History is an important aspect of my work. I'll quote myself

First, I believe the story/plot should be rooted in 'history'. Characters, protagonists are linked by a common history. This is the glue that tie them together. And I think this is also true for all relationship (lovers, friends) : it exists because of a common history. From that point of view, I also believe no one can't understand the present without understanding the past. I believe that this reference to the past enables the plot to be thicker, richer.

History - gray orcs
0 : not so many, they have been living in the exile’s land for many millennium. As time goes by, seeing both victories and defeats, a race of half orc has emerged.
25 : the first exiled gray orcs appear on the exile’s land. They are fleeing from the capital and take refuge in the mountains.
326 : the gray orcs, being lead by the black orcs, take part in the assault against the three dwarf strongholds. More than ten thousand of them will die in the battle at Murdithorn.
330 : the gray orc’s village are now emptied of their fighters. Many generations will be needed to replenish them.
430 : as the white orc’s kingdom grows, the gray orcs retreat in the mountains.
1050 :  brigands take control of Murdithem and chase the gray orcs who live there. Fierce clans will try to oppose them.
1100 : two generations of gray orcs are forced to war against the brigands but they will not be able to prevent them from taking over the stronghold. Sporadic assaults will remain, but the war is obviously lost.
1330 : gray orcs are hunted by humans in the mountains but also in the moon’s forest in what seems a total war for their opponents.
1351 : the gray orcs allied themselves, voluntary or not, to the black orcs as to reconstruct the tower on the lake, but also to confront the brigands. Thousands of gray orcs will be lead by a handful of black orcs.

History - black orcs
0 : they lead their people’s exile out of the Outer World. Gulmther has finished the tower of the many mirror and Guhnvack has completed the construction of the city in the clouds. The black orcs take refuge in the volcanic mountains where they establish their capital.
325 : the black orcs lead an army to strike and take control of Madyernack, the dwarf’s capital.  Many smaller battles will follow in the surroundings of the capital, even up to the exile’s land.
950 : the black orcs lead an army who defeats the man at Hoperya. Many orcs are banished from Ethernya.
1100 : the black orcs who are now established at Hoperya begins to trade with Carcandasse. Prosperity for both capitals.
1351 : Gulmther sends three distinct groups of black orcs to take back the control of the tower on the lake. As to insure the success of his plans, Gulmther asks Dragneckry, who is known in the exile’s land as the human goddess Thikrum, to organize the liberation of Tarm from his icy prison. The black orcs who are sent to rebuild the tower will need the help of the gray orcs as they will be oppose to brigands, the nature’s dark side, humans, white orcs and even undead. Their task is not an easy one.

The purpose of my game or how it will be played ?
I honestly don't know. What I do know, it's story oriented.

Perhaps, I would not know of course, but inasmuch as you are determining events, this MAY be contradictory to the Nar desire to tell the story themselves, rather than listen to a story being told by the GM.  Basically, Nar might chafe at following your story, while Sim and Gam might enjoy it precisely because it is not the MOST important issue for thrm.
But that would depend on exactly how much direction you are giving.

And precisely because they are comfortable and familiar with it, they will use it in the same old way they always do when they play your game, and your page of play advice is going to have no impact on these embedded habits.

How many readers are actually going to steadily work through a hundred character sheets and internalise the data?  Not many I will bet.

Phew.  I think thats possible, but such a major idea that I have never heard it proposed before.  In effect, that would be like writing three games, simply with the same setting.  It would also likely mean that local play is widely divergent.  Possible, yes, but I don't think you should you should try to take that on.

Haha come on man, I only work 37.5 hours a week, and they pay me real money.  You're looking at a full working week here just for a bunch of NPC's that are intended purely for illustrative purposes?

In the first place, I won't provide a dedicted system for my product (I know, what a shame). But still, I'm looking for systems that encourages NAR play in DM/players context, to see what I'd like to do. Any examples ?

… an example. In the first place, I thougth no system was needed. But I learned here I needed one … Better me to do it once than all my costumers to do it themselves. So, what could I add ?

I think it is suited to any form of play that the group likes (as is clear, by the way, in the Big Model: Creative Agenda supercedes Setting).

If I may comment on just this question, I say don't do it
(...)
If I were you, with this very interesting methodology, I would instead pick "paragons" of GAM/NAR/SIM mechanics and make sure that your setting content makes it crystal clear where the "interfaces" to your setting are for particular system types.

Maybe even go so far as to organize the content presentation to mirror the Big Model. Clearly delineate the challenges, thematic import, and details of situation--even use those as major sub-headings for a given story module--and let the customer easily find the hook that they need for their favorite mode of play and system.

make your setting content so thoroughly detailed that a GAM will think it's rife with challenge and rewards, a NAR will find many threads of theme to explore, and a SIM will not ever lack for specific details of timing, culture, and conflict.

As a final note: please look into some "nonlinear narrativism" and other modern (post-modern, really) literary theory: I recall some folks at UC Berkeley doing "experimental English" which your setting design method reminded me of. You are, it seems to me, bringing some bleeding edge literary criticism theory into the RPG market; you might take inspiration from what they have done.

Do you mean I should put no system ? What do you mean exactly by paragons ? Presenting three mechanics, each one from a clearly different type of play ?

I agree with you say. But I still think I need a system if I'm going to hope to sell more than three copies.

One more follow-up:

I think you might mean "system" as in "the system by which one creates these setting and story modules" rather than the "system by which players resolve conflicts once exploring such modules."

If you mean the former (what I have called "methodology") then you really have to decide something else:
Do you want to (a) sell modules or (b) teach folks to make modules "your way"?
If (a), then the last thing that you want to do is show your method and methodology. Develop it, sure; that'll help you tune it. Provide it to your writers, of course (after they sign their NDAs); they have to know it. But sell off the methodology itself? Nah! Let folks reverse-engineer that, if they have the energy, before they can go into direct competition with you using your own method.

If you mean (b), then be prepared to compete with professional writers, perhaps with significant credits, who will appropriate your method as a "mode" to employ, not "your style" that they are plagiarizing. And they'll be write, so long as they do not adopt your method's terminology--which will be easy, as systems can be retooled quite quickly while keeping their functional core. But content (settings and situations) are just as easy to protect as systems are to steal: who could re-write Journe or the Dune universe or the Wild Cards settings without cries of "hack!" and "copycat!" ringing across the land?

Of course, if you mean "system as player tool for conflict resolution": see my earlier posts; think hard about doing so before you just jump in to tack on your flavor of d20/Hero/Palladium/GURPS.

David

Very interesting David. I'd like to answer in details, but I have to take a train for the weekend... but some quick questions :

Does that means that I can present my product with more than one system ? Is that still coherent ? Would the major error be to tag a system on my product ?

If so, the problem of systems, does it become a publishing issue ?

Does the design problem of the system should be thougth out as a whole ?

Would it be interesting to dissect the narrative stream (or so to called it) and find out what DMs would need, when, depending on their of play ? Here, I'm thinking about add-on on the events, some kind of properties, a link toward a system ?

Does that means that I can present my product with more than one system ? Is that still coherent ? Would the major error be to tag a system on my product ?

If so, the problem of systems, does it become a publishing issue ?

Does the design problem of the system should be thougth out as a whole ?

Would it be interesting to dissect the narrative stream (or so to called it) and find out what DMs would need, when, depending on their of play ? Here, I'm thinking about add-on on the events, some kind of properties, a link toward a system ?

Most interesting David. I had to give it a lot of thoughts this weekend. I guess this will be a long post, but I think I can understand where I stand now.

My theory - content vs container
I sell content written for the rpg. To acheive what I had in mind (multiplot, calendar based adventures), I had to come up with a theory on how is design a story, or how can you cut down the narration stream ? It happened I design a system for managing space and time. Well, after all, I guess this is what a story is about. This container can, in fact, support any thing that relates a story. Newpapers, books, movie, teleseries, comics, manga, even blogs. A company could use it for managing its employees. The field of applications are countless.
There are two main concepts :
essence : the setting. Could be of any types.
existence : something (an event) happening, at some time, that is reffered to one or more elements of essence.
You can see Heiddeger here.
There are some rules on how to manage events and their interaction and how time is segmented. For more information, see my theory

What I'm doing
There is not constraint in my theory about content, or how to fill in the container, as it could contain anything. I chose to develop a pretty common fantasy world. I chose to write down very openly. I chose it to be multiplot, based on a calendar. And I also chose the smallest time unit as being the week. The final product looks like a story board. But it could have looked all different.

If you mean (b), then be prepared to compete with professional writers, perhaps with significant credits, who will appropriate your method as a "mode" to employ, not "your style" that they are plagiarizing. And they'll be write, so long as they do not adopt your method's terminology--which will be easy, as systems can be retooled quite quickly while keeping their functional core. But content (settings and situations) are just as easy to protect as systems are to steal: who could re-write Journe or the Dune universe or the Wild Cards settings without cries of "hack!" and "copycat!" ringing across the land?

We are stumbling on diction, I think. I am proposing that you include no System at all: a setting/situation-only product that can be used with any of the three Creative Agendas (and any of a number of Systems that serve each Agenda). I also recommend that you do not include your method for creating your modules (it's your Trade Secret); this is what you seem to mean when you say "system," but The Forge has a fairly rigorous meaning for System, and it does not pertain to the content-creation process.

I believe so: if you make a System, you will invariably make that System serve a particular Agenda (or will make an abashed System); that's what drives the whole notion of System as subsumed under Agenda in The Big Model. But I believe the strength of your product is the afrementioned method of content-creation. You are selling a "versatile" product, not a "targetted" one, yes? If you provide a System, you will probably cut out 2/3 of the possible Agendas.
Further, I would not be eager to enter the competative space of System products: there are a LOT of solid Systems already out there, with big marketing and big followings. You want to leverage that by providing a product that is non-System-specific, and basically be able to use all that marketing and following to your advantage. That means a product that is System-independant and, yet, which has content available to support any Agenda (and, thus, any System).

I couldn't hurt to have a sample module, perhaps--even the outline for one--to begin to give concrete examples of where each Agenda is served by your method of content creation. Bring it on....

Thank your for your clarifications, and with all of the above in mind, I say, "Go for it."

Your Method of Content Creation ("method") is, I think, worthy of Trade Secret stauts; but you feel that your personal implementation will be competative with those who might copy the method. Then go for it.

You think you need a System that players can use to generate their own content, using your source material and your method; if there are elements in the method that rely on some mechanics to resolve, say, who has Director Stance or, say, how specific content that a player adds can be, then go for it.

Personally, I would leave all of that "at the factory" and only provide Settings, Situations, Color, and (as necessary) Character details. But I tend to protect intellectual property (IP) when it is a method or process or System far more than I would content that can be trivially copyrighted. As I mentioned in a past post in this thread, a System can be stole whole-cloth with minimal renaming and tweaking of interrelationships. Thus, I would be fearful that the System (i.e. your method) would be re-appropriated by someone doing, say, a specificly targeted NAR game; it would suck to see someone out there selling your hard-developed system by itself while you tried to sell a "copy" of it with some Setting material. But I am a jealous creator, and if you are not (or don't think thatt is a real risk), then go for it.

As for Systems that work to serve your method: I do not own or reference any NAR systems, because I am fairly SIM-oriented and because I usually find them to be "micro" systems that I can memorize and, thus, borrow in my normal play IF I need to address Theme or manipulate Stances for players or distribute GM duties. In my experience, most NAR Systems tend to involve some sort of resource bidding or some sort of randomizer to manage Director Stance/control, and the rest use something even simpler: social interraction and voting. How codified can such a System be—unless it is seriously intrenched in the Setting, in which case it is usually bloated with Color disguised as System?

With all that, I guess my helpfulness is at an end. We have left my baliwick (SIM) and you are more willing to share IP than I am. But there are many folks here who are experimenting with NAR systems and who should be able to inspire you with their System styles or methods.

Good luck!
David