First, I'd like to say how educating it has been to stroll around glancing at the posts in this forum. It is a fine thing to see with my own eyes that a community such as this one is alive and kicking :) Don't know how many ideas and concepts i've already adopted from these forums, so thanks for those ;)

But... To the point, starting with a short introduction:
I've been toying with an idea for a specific RPG for a long time now - I've actually created a few somewhat working games so far (none released anywhere, yet), most of which are in fully playable condition, but there has been one concept I've never managed to flesh out to become what I've envisioned.

In my visions, Cybergod is a dark sci-fi rpg about Cybernetic Sentient Organisms, with emphasis on the word Sentient in a world of immerse technology combined to strange and twisted religous aspects, mysticism and mysteries eventually reaching epic scale events (babylon 5, star wars, Hyperion and Endymion by Dan Simmons). I want the game to be both dramatic and realistic, i.e. fast and deadly combat (which becomes closer to cinematic when considering the fact that players are super-boosted cyborgs...), as well as insightful roleplaying.
I.e. the players take the roles of entities that are partly human and partly machines. Different forms of human modification exists, varying from nanotechnological enhancement to the standard cybernetic prosthesis, implants and so on. But upgrading the character constantly to become the ultimate killing machine is not what I've intended the game to be about. I want it to be a deeper experience, in a way that the players would feel like playing a different kind of entity - yet similar to ourselves in many ways.

An important factor in the game are different factions that have nearly sole control over the worlds(several colonies) and their inhabitants(mostly common humans), as well as the powerful technology exceeding anything today (date set several thousand years in the future). Most of the factions themselves are 100% cyborg. Humans are the inferior race. (An option for playing with a human might be included for real challenge).

Another point of importance are twisted "theotechnological" (a word I probably invented?) agendas and religious zeal around a mystical entity known only as the Prophet, and a Cybernetic God visioned by him.

The basic concept could easily be about the factions fighting each other (there are around 8 thought of so far), without forgetting the religious aspect in the game, and one of the most important traits i've come up with so far: Humanity.

Humanity in the game is both a trait each character has, as well as a philosophical concept in the world. In terms of game mechanics, if humanity drops down to zero, the game's over. This contradicts the fact that many characters would probably seek a path that would eventually decrease their humanity right down to zero, by getting more and more enhancements and pushing their bodies and minds far beyond human limits.

Problems
There are a few areas where I am in need of a new perspective, and after reading through the posts, I thought you people might be able to help me out here.

World detail issues
I haven't completely decided yet on how detailed approach should I take into creating the world. I know there could be lots to tell, but what would be the easiest and most sufficient way? E.g. Do I need specific timelines, names for colonies, faction key-individuals?

An idea crossed by mind about keeping even the world as abstract as possible, leaving more imagination to the GM and players. How much details can you actually leave the players and the GM, with still getting to the bottom of it? I know this kind of setting can easily have tons of background material, but I myself would rather keep it to the minimum, as I know most people are very lazy about reading through those anyway (including me).

Humanity
I've decided to put a great emphasis on the humanity part during the play, making roleplaying very important. But I've also come to the conclusion that I need something to make the roleplaying challenging. For this, I've decided to use some sort of Alignment system, which roughly determines the character's motives and reasons for being what he is.
I've come up with three basic Alignment categories:

Humanist, Neutral and Machinist.

Basically Humanist supports human efforts and is aware that for every nanobot and cool cybernetic prosthesis he puts in his body, he loses his humanity, and they don't want to cross the point of no return (i.e. humanity zero).
Machinists on the other hand are the opposite of that, and couldn't care less about human casualties etc. and want more and more powerful enhancements, and desire to evolve into a supreme cybernetical being closing the gods of myths and legends. I.e. machinists eventually destroy themselves (or at least the playability of the character).
Neutrals are in the between, attempting to maintain a good balance out of fear of consequences, because they believe it's "right", or whatever may their reasons be.

IMO three simple categories aren't enough - at least I feel I'd need something in between, but what? I know alignment should be an abstract form, and actually I rarely use such in other games, but in this case I feel it's appropriate. I've thought of a d&d syle lawful, neutral, chaotic - which could work, but that doesn't satisfy me (too boring). How else could the current concept of alignment be expanded? I know I'm somewhat perfectionist by nature, and details such as this often stay and haunt my mind :)

Well, that's about it for now. Any questions, comments and ideas are appreciated.

Hey, welcome to the Forge!
Do you have a real name we can call you by?

Looks like an interesting start.
Are you familiar with the Warhammer 40,000 background?
They have a lot of machine worship, dark sci-fi...
A lot of their fluff would be interesting for inspiration I think.

i.e. fast and deadly combat (which becomes closer to cinematic when considering the fact that players are super-boosted cyborgs...), as well as insightful roleplaying.

I want it to be a deeper experience

Most of the factions themselves are 100% cyborg. Humans are the inferior race. (An option for playing with a human might be included for real challenge).

But I've also come to the conclusion that I need something to make the roleplaying challenging. For this, I've decided to use some sort of Alignment system,

Hey, welcome to the Forge!
Do you have a real name we can call you by?

Looks like an interesting start.
Are you familiar with the Warhammer 40,000 background?
They have a lot of machine worship, dark sci-fi...
A lot of their fluff would be interesting for inspiration I think.

Want to elaborate on what YOU see as being "insightful" and "deeper", maybe with an example of an issue that players would go "deep" into?

Just to clarify - humans are still the same race, aren't they?
I'm not trying to nit-pick terminology, I just wanted to clarify that.

Would it be a "real challenge", or a different set of challenges? It seems like this human/cyborg/robot thing is on a really sliding scale, so it seems like the challenges would SHIFT rather than INTENSIFY as you got closer to full humanity.

Am I correct in this assumption/projection?

Personally, I'm often skeptical of alignment systems - especially d&d type ones.
How does this make roleplaying more "challenging"?

And, are you really going for challenging, meaning you want to make it hard for the player to roleplay?
Or are you trying to return to the "deep" and "insightful" goal?

catmorbid wrote:
Humanity
I've decided to put a great emphasis on the humanity part during the play, making roleplaying very important. But I've also come to the conclusion that I need something to make the roleplaying challenging. For this, I've decided to use some sort of Alignment system, which roughly determines the character's motives and reasons for being what he is.
I've come up with three basic Alignment categories:

Humanist, Neutral and Machinist.

Basically Humanist supports human efforts and is aware that for every nanobot and cool cybernetic prosthesis he puts in his body, he loses his humanity, and they don't want to cross the point of no return (i.e. humanity zero).
Machinists on the other hand are the opposite of that, and couldn't care less about human casualties etc. and want more and more powerful enhancements, and desire to evolve into a supreme cybernetical being closing the gods of myths and legends. I.e. machinists eventually destroy themselves (or at least the playability of the character).
Neutrals are in the between, attempting to maintain a good balance out of fear of consequences, because they believe it's "right", or whatever may their reasons be.

IMO three simple categories aren't enough - at least I feel I'd need something in between, but what? I know alignment should be an abstract form, and actually I rarely use such in other games, but in this case I feel it's appropriate. I've thought of a d&d syle lawful, neutral, chaotic - which could work, but that doesn't satisfy me (too boring). How else could the current concept of alignment be expanded? I know I'm somewhat perfectionist by nature, and details such as this often stay and haunt my mind :)

Well, that's about it for now. Any questions, comments and ideas are appreciated.

Well, let me raise one question: Why would players want to not be Neutrals, daring the edge of low Humanity without going over the edge into NPC psychosis? In particular, why should players be Machinists, since that's a clearly self-destructive path?

V:tM (sourcebook alert!) created a system to allow for vampires to choose something other than humanity, the Path system for accepting one's inhumanity and in fact embracing it without going psycho. Will something like this be an option for Machinists?

Moving along from this, my gut instinct is that there shouldn't be a significant divide in game terms between human and cyborg -as such-, because it's a continuum rather than a sharp cliff. Take Shadowrun (another bit of source material for you). Mages aside, quite a few people in the world have a couple of basic implants...and then there's the solid chrome ones skating on Essence 0.1. So the difference between human and cyborg isn't "either-or," it's "how much," and that's better represented by "take human, add hardware, lose humanity, apply effects of lost humanity."

Lots of general points that I hope will help you, in no particular order:

Date - As an amateur futurist, I can fairly safely say that anything you imagine for "several thousand years in the future" is likely to fall FAR short of actual abilities, unless you have periods of 'devolution' or 'downgrading tech' in the game's future history. For instance, if we keep on our current tech potential curve, even one thousand years should find us well away from "human" and into "transhuman."

A short laundry list of possible abilities that the Average Joe could have:
* Semi-autonoumous copies of personal sentience, in cybernetic modes or physical modes - Basically, someone could 'shard off' a copy of their mind, assign it to an appropriate vessel (cloned body, nanotech robot, computer), and give it a set of tasks to complete. After said tasks are complete, the seperate sentience would be re-integrated into the 'primary mind' (or maybe even terminated, but that raises some serious ethical issues).
* Casual physical morphology - Using nanotech--or its future offshoot?--people can trivially reconfigure their base DNA and RNA to adapt to any number of environments, threats, or mere whims of cosmetics.
* Hive minds - It (should/will) become common for people to form into hive minds (cybernetically, most likely) to accomplish any number of cooperative goals: material planning, democracy, research, social interrraction, you name it.
* Proactive immunology - You've got to have heard of this--it was even in a classic Star Trek episode! Basically, folks will walk in a fractal cloud of nanotech agents, tools, sensors, and countermeasures. This cloud will augment immune systems as well as provide a host of knock-on abilities (exs: telecomm, physical self defense, journaling). Also, given the likelihood of powerful telecommunications tools providing a network for those agents to the user, it will be rather hard to define the "edge" of someone's existence: it will extend far past their skin and five senses.

Anyway, take some time to really think about your future history, tech curves, and how that will shape the thematic issues of your game play. Frankly, most of the tech and commensurate conflicts that you detail seem better suited to, say, 50 or 100 years in the future, not several thousand. And this speaks to...

Humanity - You seem to have adopted the (popular) dialectic of naturalism = human and artificial = non-human. THis has been espoused since the beginning of the Industrial Age, as folks watched factories turn craftmen into cogs--easily replaced, less than human. But, I believe, it is just flat wrong.

I have much better teeth, hair, skin, bone structure, etc than I should have, thanks to artificial (technological) enhancements and supplements. We all do. Now consider someone who's had lasic (sp?) eye surgery... or an artifical heart... or rebuilt knees. These folks, in your notion and game system, have "lost humanity." Taking an inductive leap, you go on to presume that integrating computing systems into mind, or reinforcing bones and skin, or improving sensory fidelity will necessarily lead to even less "humanity".

A futurist would just have to call that an incoherent induction (if polite) or laugh out loud (if an ass). The writer with an online thesaurus linked to his brain is "less human" even though his command of language is such that his works become sublime. The artist who can see into the microscopic can interpret visions for people that have never been naturally seen, providing a nuance to art and life heretofore unimagined. The soldier with chromed body armor and fantastic weaponry can project more power, thus requiring fewer soldiers, thus leaving more people free to pursue "higher" goals in life than material control assault or defense. I could go on ad naseum (and maybe have?): technology in itself does not debase or exhault mankind's "humanity". It's use might, but that means we need to speak more about what this ineffable "humanity" means, really. Surely, it's not the disease, grime, feces, prejudices, violence, tribalism, fear, or lack of purpose for sentience... is it? SO it's, instead, that which we drive towards, after the kids are fed and the fires are lit and the night beasts are held at bay. And what has most-aided such "higher" pursuits? Technology. Environmental manipulation. Usurping control of human evolution. Self-control of base, animal instincts.

[Quick aside: I would disregard Shadowrun, for one reason: its tension is between magic and technology (NOT human and tech), so the REAL purpose of Essence is to prevent "cybermages" that have every tech mod AND know a school of magics. In other words, Shadowrun's notions of "humanity" really came from gamist play balance considerations, not any realistic grounding in metaphysics or philosophy. Want the tech toys? Then no magic for you! What's that got to do with (a) your playstyle goals ("deep") or (b) actual history of human progress or (c) the metaphysics of ANY real-world magic belief system? Heck, that's sort of a non sequeteur, in Shadowrun: magic--this "supernatural" and "spiritual" and "arcane" power--depends upon a human biology, consistent and whole? So much for "demon sorcerors," huh? :) ]

Alignments - This word is often confusing, because it can be considered in two ways:
* Motivations, as in what influences an actor to behave in a certain way.
* Ethics, as in what justifies those motivations and actions, in a greater context (metaphysical, spiritual, pragmatic).

For the tone of your rather bleak game, I think you want the latter: some way to underpin the intentions of your player's characters. You seem drawn to factionalism, coupled with your notions of natural v. artifiicial, and so that makes your "alignment system" really more of a matrix of allied beliefs. As you already have your 8 (and growing) political factions, look to that as a map of character motivation and role playing constraints (which is all ANY "alignment system" is, at root). Forget about forging some metaphysical spectrum which is, in my opinion, reflective of an Industrial Age prejudice, as I have said above. Instead, consider the motives and goals of your various in-game factions, and provide ways that players can ally themselves with those factional goals.

However, if you really feel there is a significant tension--at a metaphyscal level--between the artificial and the natural in humans, then you might want to go with the other folks' ideas about a continuum from unaugmented humans to utterly cybernetic human-origin sentiences. THEN, make each stance along that continuum equally valid, in and of itself. In other words, don't preach with your alignment system; don't make some point on the continuum "just right" and all others "pale reflections" or "stupid and wrong" or "evil".

What's more, I believe this about your setting: if each faction's propeganda is appealing, taken at face value; and if each stance along the continuum of artificial v natural has pros and cons; and if the players are given mechanical means to weigh and balance each faction and stance; then this game will resonate with FAR more Creative Agendas, it will allow for more nuanced exploration of the themes of humanity and progress and naturalism, and it will push closer to that "deep" playstyle you espouse.

Inspirations - In no particular order:
The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson: nanotech influence and impact done right... and only a handful of decades away (not thousands).
Anything by Steve Baxter: the Manifold series, in fact, go FAR beyond your time frame, to look at what forms sentience might take to survive universal heat death, sterilization events, and other "explanations" for the Fermi Paradox. Leave your "humanity" at the door: these far-future humans live in databases built from black holes held in static matrices. :)
World Transhumanist Association: folks who have BIG brains and have thought a lot about this stuff.

Hope this all helps!
David

Disagreement with a couple of points here. Not to get into an argument, but I think you're disagreeing with a lot of his basic game premises here, and not in a tone that's challenging him to answer "why," but in a tone that says "this won't work because it doesn't fit in with current projections of the future." So, let me rewrite it in a "why?" tone.

Date: I'd like to ask the author...-is- this intended to be hard science fiction? If not, then I think that several centuries of technological development could equal several "realistic" decades. Dune, for instance, explains how it's technologically backwards despite being 9,000 years uptime from now, but "don't worry about it" is an equally valid position for a sci-fi setting, as are dark ages and apocalypses, for the same reason that people can travel faster than light-speed. (Frankly, -on Earth-, I don't believe technological advancement could continue for more than 50-100 years without apocalypse, but that's me.)

Humanity: Well, the whole theme of the system at present is destroyed, IMO, if the natural-artificial tension is destroyed, so don't remove that aspect lightly. Looking strictly at the gamist agenda, if players don't have the incentive to not accessorize themselves to the point of God, they will accessorize themselves to the point of God, looking at the Narrativist end, players lose the intended question of "what does it mean to be human?" since the word has become useless.

Alignments: Here, I agree. When it comes to how to dealing with the continuum of human-machine, he's pretty much said all I can say on the subject. I don't think, however, that you should make all the factions appealing. Far from that...if you want to generate pathos, you want all the factions to be equally -un- appealing. But maybe that's just me. ^_^

Ramidel wrote:
... I think you're disagreeing with a lot of his basic game premises here, and not in a tone that's challenging him to answer "why," but in a tone that says "this won't work because it doesn't fit in with current projections of the future." ...

Ramidel wrote:
Date: I'd like to ask the author...-is- this intended to be hard science fiction? If not, then I think that several centuries of technological development could equal several "realistic" decades. Dune, for instance, explains how it's technologically backwards despite being 9,000 years uptime from now, but "don't worry about it" is an equally valid position for a sci-fi setting, as are dark ages and apocalypses, for the same reason that people can travel faster than light-speed. (Frankly, -on Earth-, I don't believe technological advancement could continue for more than 50-100 years without apocalypse, but that's me.)

Ramidel wrote:
Humanity: Well, the whole theme of the system at present is destroyed, IMO, if the natural-artificial tension is destroyed, so don't remove that aspect lightly. ...

Ramidel wrote:
Alignments: Here, I agree. ... I don't think, however, that you should make all the factions appealing. Far from that...if you want to generate pathos, you want all the factions to be equally -un- appealing. ...

I haven't completely decided yet on how detailed approach should I take into creating the world. I know there could be lots to tell, but what would be the easiest and most sufficient way? E.g. Do I need specific timelines, names for colonies, faction key-individuals?

Hello Nick,
I have an interest in your game, the philosophical ramifications and sheer controversy surrounding it. I see multiple opinions and enjoy that it generates more threads!

I feel that the embrace of machines, prosthetics, nanobots, software and virtual spirituality is important in your game and shouldn't be calculated into one number.

Most people are born in a world that is inherently dangerous and they learn to survive, thrive and enjoy it. The sum of the experiences and training is immense and, at the same time, hard to define. A person is more than just attributes, skills and cool powers. If you're looking to really immerse the players in your game vision then really focus on what humanity is, beyond what humans are.

What we consider to be humanity is a comfortable view of how people behave and what causes less waves in the political waters. We can bomb a city out of our greed for power and suddenly send in blankets, food and medicine. Those who steal in the name of religion could have a sense of humanity. So, humanity is definitely based on agreement in a world varying opinions.

There are tremendous facets of humanity and many aspects of the human condition are considered barriers to a path of true humanity. So, I don't assume that the cyborg world is automatically a dehumanizing approach. It is quite possible that rendering the flesh inert may indeed pave way to becoming a better "human".

In the real world, people who survive great traumas to their bodies and minds find themselves perceiving the world in a different fashion. Lack of movement, dexterity, sight, hearing, voice and the knowledge of having a life-support machine trailing behind you seems to make the current view of humanity absurd to them. Of course, people deal with tragedies in different ways. Some are thankful that they are alive and life themselves beyond their physical challenges. Others adopt despair and thrive on misery and its company.

The idea of multiple factions is exciting. Groups who have the same goal of reaching some ultimate destination, yet compete in the way to get there. If cybernetics is the main way of getting there, then think about how cybernetics can be applied.

Alignment is too narrow in this area. That annoying tic-tac-toe board of law and chaos makes me roll my eyes. Regardless of the descriptions you will assign to alignment, each player will have a different opinion about it.

A possible way to handle humanity, cybernetics effects and alignment could be:

Humanity is replaced by a group of numbers where each measures a particular aspect of being human. This is different from showing the epitome of humanity. There are advantages and disadvantages built in that would affect the game mechanics, not just how the player should play the character.

Compassion: On the high end you want to provide relief and eliminate the cause of pain. On the low end you may observe what is happening and see truth in it.

Affection: On the high end you have tender feelings for another. On the low end you are detached from the emotions and perceive the other indifferently.

Pride: On the high end you are firm in what you want and actively announce your achievements. On the low end you are inhibited, taking no credit and satisfied with what you need.

Personality: On the high end you acknowledge the individuality and uniqueness of all people. On the low end you see the similarity of all humans.

Worldly: On the high end you know the pleasures and pains of the body, indulgence in the senses. On the low end you are closer to spirituality.

Creativity: On the high end your mind is capable of fantastic thoughts and meanderings. On the low end you have a practical mind able to apply knowledge to appropriate situations.

If you wanted to get really religious, then just use the seven deadly sins as a way to measure human-ness.

Cybernetics could have a multitude of applications and the reasons behind using them. The reasons for their use may be more interesting than just creating cool devices that modify attributes and give you kick-ass abilities.

Sensory Filter: spinal implant capable of limiting or enhancing tactile sensations. Pleasure can be nullified to generate focus on mind and spirituality. Sensory deprivation mode can be enabled with appropriate life support for weeks.

Communal Pace Maker: replaces asymmetric pulse with controlled pulse tuned to a specific group. All hearts beat with the same rhythm and engage the communal experience.

Occupational Fittings: hands are replaced with specific tools to perform assigned tasks. Efficiency, production and quality is insured freeing the mind of success and failure.

Censor Module: the mind will only receive information relevant to the person's goal and programming. Ignorance is bliss.

Neuter Procedure: the person is modified to have no sex. Appropriate organs are removed and the hormonal system is replaced with artificial genderlack. This renders the person free of personal bias.

Lobotox: a frontal cortex monitoring device designed to pacify aggressive emotions and reveal a sense of elation and well-being.

Alignment can be a combination of motives and ideals that come into affect when humanity is threatened.
Protector of the weak: High compassion will make you come to their aid. Low compassion will let you stand back and watch.
Bad Temper: With high pride you are set off by derogatory remarks. Low pride lets you calmly analyze the mental condition of the one who is speaking.

The factions may be rooted in the different aspects of humanity or by methods of achieving a spiritual apex.

Humanists believe that being human, indulging in the body and keeping technology at arm's length is the way to achieve enlightenment. They will surrender their bodies to death before using prosthetics. They fight often with Mechanists and threaten to use EMP devices.

Mechanists compute that the spirits of humans are trapped in the flesh. Complete cybernetic replacement and unit assignment is the logical way to merge with the creator.

Surfs are voluntarily participants plugged directly into the Net. Their goal is to seek and interact with any conversations regarding spirituality through interthought processes.

Mediators strive to placate various sides of conflicts. Through their diplomatic tactics, mediators look for the common ground and emphasize sameness and sympathetic spirituality.

Multivatican City is a biomechanical warehouse of failed bodies placed in vats whose minds hold the key to the soul. A central AI monitors the frail bodies and suspends the minds in a virtual cathedral of dogma and ceremony. Cardinals and Ordinals receive their duties to minister the heathens directly from the Multivatican through digital transmissions.

Inquisitors rely on their broad knowledge and efficient questions to seek the secrets of the spiritual universe. Encountering an inquisitor is a surreal experience as they only ask Yes/No/Maybe questions. With 20 questions or less they can garner amazing facts about your life.

That was fun!
Troy

I believe the situations where I've actually felt this kind of overflow of inspiration are very rare indeed. I would've never thought to get this much and this kind of response, through a simple post. My most sincere gratitude for all this :)

Many questions have arisen, and in order to continue this splending exchange of thoughts, I'll do my best to answer them all and comment all of your posts in no chronological order.

Date
No, the game isn't supposed to be "hard" sci-fi. I'm no scientist, just a guy who finds sci-fi very interesting and appealing setting, and enjoys envisioning technological marvels, and wants to incorporate that in a homebrewn rpg. I think I'm a storyteller by heart, and sci-fi proves unlimited options for telling interesting and thrilling stories. I consider sci-fi a similar tool to your ordinary magical fantasy. Anything is and should be possible. It's only up to your imagination to come up with the possibilities. The good thing about sci-fi is, that it's less random than your average fantasy rpg.

One of the reasons I had when setting the date so far in the future was to give me unlimited options to form the world into what I want. Everything has changed. All that remains same as today is a small blue planet called Earth (not even sure about that though, but could be important as a religious figure - e.g. a source of pilgrimage? Finding your roots blaablaa, the mythic first home of mankind :)), and humans. Languages have changed, names have changed, human physiology has changed. But when looking at the surface, everything seems very familiar and hence something you can easily relate to. This is RPG after all, and It's always been easier to relate to those fantasy races closer to humans than the most different ones.

Technology
David and Troy both gave me wondrous ideas for technology. I felt silly a while back after reading your posts: I hadn't even thought of the extent that the technology could reach. But then again, I shouldn't, because I believe it easily makes the game too massive and difficult to comprehend. I want to keep it relatively simple, but want to definetely add more depth through technology as well.

The way I have things figured so far is that the most powerful technology is limited. The Factions are the ones who control, develop and use new technologies. Individual corporations might do this as well, but even they are mostly Faction controlled. I like the idea of Factions instead of open corporations or powerful governments. Through giving access to high technology to factions only, I think makes them even more important and makes the common man even more powerless, which I think suits the bleak atmosphere for the game.

Most technologies I've thought of at this point mostly involve different kinds of cybernetic enhancements, which I call simply enhancements :) This will probably be an important issue in the game, pretty much the only "resource" the characters will want to seek out (in addition to a more traditional character advancement, but as opposed to wealth). This also IMO gives great contradiction to the fact that these enhancements eventually destroy the character. Which is still something I want, but more on that later.

In fact, many ideas presented for technology are somwhat already thought of, but you just gave them names :) But I will certainly look for more ideas about technology.

What comes to general level of technology here's a few thing I've thought. Any ideas of better names or alternatives are welcome.

"Jump ports": Call them stargates, jumpgates whatever. Something that makes travelling between colonies easy. They're time and resource consuming however to build and maintain, and definite strategic advantages in space-age warfare. Something I definetely want to include.

Slow space travel: Without jump gates travelling through space is slow. Even though I want to keep mundane ways of travelling somewhat reasonably time consuming, I don't want startrek warp engines and similar. I think slow is better, hence light speed or maybe a little faster, but not much. So it could take years to travel to a colony without a jumpgate. I loved the element of insecurity with the Tseng Ho (?) mercantile fleet in a Vernor Vinge novel I read about a year ago or so. They could never anticipate if a certain civilisation was even standing when they arrived. Though thousands of years of travelling is perhaps a bit too much.

Effective personal security: I thought of a thing called DNA-codes, which would be a personalised code based on DNA which to use instead of a social security number, compulsory for every human being. These could be read from a distance, making controlling crime and people very easy. Also used for currency transactions and such. However I also want a loophole for using a substitute for "cash", to make black market transactions and such possible. Loopholes in system are great :) Any good ideas, or better replacements? A bleak world must have a powerful technological way of controlling people, however in such way that it gives at least the illusion of freedom.

Common virtual realities: Cyberpunk like way to keep the common people happy through virtual entertainment. Also, vast holographic projections are possible such as the Star Trek's famed holodeck. Haven't really thought of how vast their use would be, i.e. would the average joe have his own holographic living room, to participate in random generated entertainment.

General teleportation: Why not? Maybe through short distances though, I don't want any "beam me up scotty" stuff.

of Humanity again
The main reason WHY I think cybernetics will ruin humanity is the feeling that the entity becomes closer to a god when achieving greater power. Simplicity and weakness is the purest form of humanity I believe. E.g. I believe great intelligence eventually surpasses empathy and sympathy and such. Raw logic tells you that emotions are futile. What can you do, when you KNOW It's bad for you to feel? And feeling, IMO is what humanity is about. There have been good points though, that there could be various ways of using the factor of humanity. E.g. Troy's idea of using the seven deadly sins was in fact a fabulous one. I'll certainly think about that.

I'll probably still use the Humanist/Machinist idea somehow. Mostly because I think it would help to play the role. BTW. Not even the original Humanist/Neutral/Machinist division was supposed to give any type of right or wrong division. I've always thought it to be more like a matter of perspective, but it may be more effective to use those terms to describe the general stand of the factions, adding more as Troy suggested.

Factions
Are these too boring so far? Anything you'd like to see?
I'll use the H/N/M division to give some idea.

Humanists
1. Religious faction that follows the teaching of the Prophet and seeks the Ultimate being - a combination of technology and humanity. Diplomats by nature.
2. An order from past times dedicated to enforcing the law through any means necessary. Soldiers by nature.
3. A "terrorist" organization dedicated to preserving humanity and fighting the machine opressors. They believe the ends justify the means, i.e. using cybernetics to fight cybernetics isn't a bad thing if you know where to set the line.

Machinists
4. A faction dedicated to subjugating humans and ruling with raw logic and machine supremity. Organized soldiers by nature, that pretty much see the humans as useless organisms perhaps worth studying as lab rats.
5. A combination of today's organized crime and powerful corporate strategies. They think with pros/cons style of way, giving a value to everything. They respect hi tech - not high humanity.

Neutrals
6. A faction of mercenary hackers/engineers/scientists that seek knowledge, advancement and personal glory.
7. Independent merchants that take care of most civilian/cargo transports for long distances, employing a vast and organized defensive force, similar to an army of mercenaries to protect this cargo against any aggressors.
8. A mysterious religious order that seems to brainwash and use people for unknown purposes. Most faction members are unaware of what goes inside it, and indeed "join" against their will. Or at least heavily regret later. Very secretive and zealous.

Hello Nick,

I'm glad you're focusing on setting and background. I find that too many people just want to create clever ways to redo attributes, abilities and skills.

Your game description is beginning to look very much like a mixture of Cyberpunk 2020, Cyberpunk Generation, Mutant Chronicles and a bit of Alternity. The religious overtones, mega-corporations and warped humanity are very much a part of Mutant Chronicles.

I like your original ideas about this game. Frankly, you're adding a lot elements that take away from it. Keep it simple and pure. Stick with your initial premise and you'll be surprised at how much detail you'll need.

Work the story without thinking about the game mechanics and I think you'll have a very rich setting. Create the mechanics now and its possible your story-telling mode will suffer.

Good luck!
Troy

Here's -one- problem then.

I'll probably still use the Humanist/Machinist idea somehow. Mostly because I think it would help to play the role. BTW. Not even the original Humanist/Neutral/Machinist division was supposed to give any type of right or wrong division. I've always thought it to be more like a matter of perspective, but it may be more effective to use those terms to describe the general stand of the factions, adding more as Troy suggested.

This statement is at odds with the following...

In terms of game mechanics, if humanity drops down to zero, the game's over.

Thus, mechanism is not a viable choice. If becoming a cyber-psychotic is grounds for removal from play, then players who want to keep their character will not play characters that are on the road to losing their humanity completely, any more than V:tM players who want to keep their characters will play evil, psychotic monsters (unless Paths are allowed, of course).

So, I'd like to ask your solution to that?

Ramidel wrote:
Here's -one- problem then.

I'll probably still use the Humanist/Machinist idea somehow. Mostly because I think it would help to play the role. BTW. Not even the original Humanist/Neutral/Machinist division was supposed to give any type of right or wrong division. I've always thought it to be more like a matter of perspective, but it may be more effective to use those terms to describe the general stand of the factions, adding more as Troy suggested.

This statement is at odds with the following...

In terms of game mechanics, if humanity drops down to zero, the game's over.

Thus, mechanism is not a viable choice. If becoming a cyber-psychotic is grounds for removal from play, then players who want to keep their character will not play characters that are on the road to losing their humanity completely, any more than V:tM players who want to keep their characters will play evil, psychotic monsters (unless Paths are allowed, of course).

So, I'd like to ask your solution to that?

And it should also be always planned of and played in a logical way. The character shouldn't just wake up one day and be considered an NPC. I thought of creating a system which gradually makes the player lose some control over the character if his humanity has become low enough. This should at first show in very rare occasions, something that don't really seem to bother the player at first.

David wrote:

With this as your goal, I suggest that you think about Troy's notions of multiple sliders of "humanity" which each have a game-mechanical hook into your System (i.e. not just role playing guidelines). That way, you would automatically get the gradual loss of control that you seek: as each slider got to the "inhuman" extreme, its increasing Systemic impact would reduce player options (in Actor Stance). Put another (Big Model) way, the more inhuman ratings on sliders that the character has, the less credability its player will be granted and the more the System will dictate that character's responses. Right up until the last slider "falls off" and the System runs the whole character. Heck, the character wouldn't have to even go anywhere (die or disappear or whatever): it could still be in the "group" but it would be nothing but a GM-controlled automaton reacting as the System dictates in any given situation.

David wrote:
Also, as you seem to have a Humanist bias, each slider would probably have to provide a benefit, when high, to offset the penalty when low or nil. That will work to offset the other Systemic benefits the characters gain from the humanity-stripping cool techie upgrades. Of course, that takes you (dangerously) close to classes. If the same net effectiveness can be attained with high humanity slider "buffs" as can generally be attained with high tech (but humanity-stripping) upgrades, you basically have two classes: Humanity-driven and Cyber-driven. A player might as well choose one at random, if careful management of each yields the same net effectiveness in standard situations.

Up to the point, of course, where character "creation" (of a Cyber) leads to near-immediate character unplayability.

All that is just to say that ANY Systemic means of influencing a player to hover near one point on these pseudo-ethical sliders must be carefully balanced against the opportunities the player will gain at another point on said slider. Otherwise, any Gamist tendencies in the players will quickly "bubble out" the "sweet spot" on your panoply of sliders and most characters will gravitate towards that spot (excepting players who will play atypically weak characters just to explore that situation).

This could be viewed as almost exactly like Bruce Sterling Shaper/Mechanist work, with more thrown
in. This isn't neccecarily a bad thing as said work is sublime. Read it for more inspiration, and I would
say going ahead in this mode is a good idea as he a pretty much abandoned the subgenre and moved
on to more modern type settings, and there seems to be a fairly large call for more in this mode.

It seems to me that if you assume all your players will have a keen interest in roleplaying thoughtful portrayals of individuals grappling with the loss of their humanness, then the system of sliding attributes should serve largely as orientation, with no mechanisms really required.  "Here are some guidelines for what kind of behaviors make sense for a character whose Compassion score has dropped to 2", etc.

However, if all your cool tech and background power struggles add up to a setting where players make themselves badass and blow stuff up for fun and profit, then your "loss of humanness" theme risks being marginalized unless it has some sort of actual effect on the players' ability to kick butt, as enforced by the system mechanics.

Perhaps you should describe what you expect players/characters to spend their game time doing before discussing system mechanics further.  (I'm not trying to denigrate any system ideas already discussed here, but to me they just don't feel very grounded in actual play concerns at the moment.)

As for the question of how much detail work to put into your setting, my advice would be: as much as you can possibly stomach.  Even if no one ever reads it, the process of thinking it and writing it will give you a much richer sense of your world, and that richness tends to shine through in the end product.  (I say this as someone who tends to browse through books and arbitrarily stop at flavor sidebars or passages with cool illustrations next to them.)  Warhammer 40,000 is an excellent example of selectively highlighting bits of a giant backstory in order to create an effectively rich setting.  I think.  It's been a while...

David wrote:
if all your cool tech and background power struggles add up to a setting where players make themselves badass and blow stuff up for fun and profit

If your major theme is what we might call "technical ascension", then I don't think your humanity stat can be abstracted, it has to be exploded into some detail.  If that is to be important to play, decisions involving it cannot be too simple.  One approach might be the ability to switch off human drives.  If you could prevent yourself from experiencing hunger unless you chose to, does that mean you lose touch with other humans?  But then again, does it matter?

One important question to raise is how big a society you need for this to work.  Is a society spanning stars with gates and whatnot, and all the implications these entail, really necessary for what you described as a specific RPG?.  Could it be set it in a single big flying city, for example?  That might allow you to go somewhat down the road of Dogs and Sorcerer in having user configurable settings if you wished.

Another consequence of reaching far into the future or deep into space is that the further you go the more pressing becomes the Fermi Paradox.  Its also hard not to tread on this terrain when you are dealing with philosophical concepts relating to technology and the future.  For similar reasons, I would be inclined to stay away from wormholes and so forth, as they have complicated relativistic consequences.

Addressing David "Czar Fnord" Artman:

You ask some interesting questions. Although its impossible to really know the future. Who would have thought 50 years ago that the genetic and chemical sciences would advance to the state they have before we even managed to have a single base on the moon? And the very concept of nanotech would then seem preposterous. Chances are in 100 years they will be doing things we would never have even thought of (And not doing half the things we thought they would). Its impossible to accurately predict the advance of technology. But hell, its FUN, isnt it?

I think a case can be argued though that as we become more machine, we become less human. Your example of the artist who can see the microscopic is the perfect case of losing humanity to machines. Much of what defines us as a culture, be it art, taste, religion or belief is governed by irrationality and misinterpretation of reality.

For a people who can see into the microscopic, an artistic interpretation must become more abstract and less based on reality, as duplicating what one sees becomes childs play (As evidenced by Modern Art in the face of technological developments). It is our interpretation of what we see that inspires art. As we percieve things more exactly, interpretation becomes less of a feature.

Again, in the "Usurping control of human evolution. Self-control of base, animal instincts" we are removing what makes us human. Much of our aesthetic taste- our relaxation at the sound of running water, our pleasure at the burbling of a child, our enjoyment of a camp fire on a starry night all stem from evolved animal instincts. Such things could easily be simulated by chemical stimulants to change our brain chemistry. Sit around all day just enjoying the feeling, like a drug addict. We could exist in a state of perpetual bliss. Though indeed, why have these instincts at all? They serve no rational purpose. Best to remove them entirely.

I dont propose that this is something that would happen in the future. It is already happening. As we become more affluent we move more towards gratifying our desire for entertainment than advancing ourselves as a species or as individuals. We occupy ourselves with games, music, television, drugs and we usurp the evolutionary process for our amusement using contraception.

As we become more perfect, increase our knowledge, remove our irrationality and understand the universe more completely, we lose much of what makes humanity unique. We lose our unique human madness, if you will. Perhaps, then we are becoming less animal. But what are humans if not unique animals?

You even propose that we would form collectives. Perhaps, eventually, one single collective human mind? That is going beyond losing our humanity, and into losing our individuality. That goes into your identity vs technology dichotomy, which is a very interesting one.

Is all of this good or bad? We could end war, poverty, grief, hardship, struggle. But what is it to be human?

I dont know man! I just live here. But its a very interesting thing to explore in an RPG.

We're thread-jacking, but it's somewhat germane. As I am mostly proffering opinions, there isn't much more "Jack" left in me--it's on catmorbid to establish the game situations.

Oscar wrote: ...Although its impossible to really know the future. ...Its impossible to accurately predict the advance of technology. But hell, its FUN, isn't it?

Oscar wrote: I think a case can be argued though that as we become more machine, we become less human. ...It is our interpretation of what we see that inspires art. As we perceive things more exactly, interpretation becomes less of a feature.

Oscar wrote: Again, in the "Usurping control of human evolution. Self-control of base, animal instincts" we are removing what makes us human. ...As we become more affluent we move more towards gratifying our desire for entertainment than advancing ourselves as a species or as individuals.

Oscar wrote: We lose our unique human madness, if you will. Perhaps, then we are becoming less animal. But what are humans if not unique animals?

Oscar wrote: You even propose that we would form collectives. Perhaps, eventually, one single collective human mind? That is going beyond losing our humanity, and into losing our individuality. That goes into your identity vs technology dichotomy, which is a very interesting one. Is all of this good or bad? We could end war, poverty, grief, hardship, struggle. But what is it to be human?

We're thread-jacking, but it's somewhat germane. As I am mostly proffering opinions, there isn't much more "Jack" left in me--it's on catmorbid to establish the game situations.

Hey kissasurkea, be proud of your Finnish name. Even if it´s only to prevent people calling you "Nick"...

Somewhat more on the topic, have you read Edwards´ Sorcerer or Kirk´s RPG Design Patterns? The latter is a free download, even.

David wrote:
I'd rather predict inaccurately than completely disregard plausible advancements and just throw a pastiche of tech and time together.

David wrote:
In refining our worldview (AKA more exact perceptions leading to less fanciful interpretations) we have found more profundity and wonder than any earlier cosmologies.

David wrote:
Veneration of the animal in Man is questionable, at best. 

David wrote:
Me? I think the fact that we reject and surpass our animal heritage IS humanity. Otherwise we're particularly violent (but clever) monkeys.

David wrote:
And all I argue for is that there be some serious consideration of issues of identity, sentience, sense of self, and sense of time/place. 

David wrote:
Not just the sliders of altruism, emotionalism, and knowledge--all that happy stuff that we put on our "human resume" to prove we aren't mere animals.

David wrote:
I worry about becoming less than human when I am able to have, say, forty different sensorium foci comprising twenty different "views" onto a given instant, spread across a planet... or a galaxy . . . how can we continue to CARE when there is nothing to fear? 

David wrote:
How can this game make me (the player) actually feel this angst, this loss; how can it actually make me explore what is human and what isn't

As I mentioned earlier, I am running out of Jack. Do not feel that I am dismissing your thoughtful replies. Just that it really, really, really is, now, on catmorbid to draw some lines in the sand. Then we can see if we can help him tune those lines.

David wrote: An identity crisis will probably work better if it relates to these rather than to some highly abstracted notion of sentience or "humanness".

ca wrote: The main reason WHY I think cybernetics will ruin humanity is the feeling that the entity becomes closer to a god when achieving greater power. Simplicity and weakness is the purest form of humanity I believe. E.g. I believe great intelligence eventually surpasses empathy and sympathy and such. Raw logic tells you that emotions are futile. And feeling, IMO is what humanity is about.

Catmorbid (we generally have a real name policy here 'cause it makes things easier, but if you aren't comfortable with it then that's cool too), I love the concept!

Now, I know you've specified that you want fantastic combat, and crazy stunts and technology and shit, but for me, what makes the game the most interesting are what I see as the two central issues: Faith and Humanity. Concepts like "what impact does science have on faith?", "If god did not exist, then man would have to invent him" and "how does expanding technology influence our humanity" are fantastic building blocks for stories. You should check out the Nikopol Trilogy (also called Immortal, I think). I don't remember the author, but a Google search should show up some results pretty quickly. Also, Blade Runner, Brave New World, all the classics.

So if you were, instead of focussing on how good your character is at combat, what crazy stunts they can do, make the game centered about those two issues: Faith, Humanity and how they interact with science and technology. Everything the players do should be oriented around those issues, 'cause that's what's interesting.

I'd highly reccomment that you check out a lot of the games around the Forge. We generally take a different view to design than most mainstream groups, so a lot of what we suggest might seem a bit odd at first if you aren't familiar with our methodology. Sorcerer and Sex & Sorcery are must reads for anybody designing RPGs. Seriously, I can't recommend them enough. Sorcerer also deals with Humanity, but from a different perspective, asking the question: how far will you go for power? If you want, you can also check out some of Ron's essays in the Articles section. If you have a bit of trouble with those, haul ass down to Anyway. and Vincent's essays and posts should make things a bit clearer. While you're at it, you may wanna check out some of his freebies like Otherkind, as well as Dogs in the Vinyard, which is one of the current favourites at the moment.

But anyways... We've got a decent handle on your themes and setting. What kind of system are you working with? Rules and stuff are really important, and we can only do so much without any information on yours.

Keep it up! I'm really intrigued by what you've said so far!

Luck,
- Kirk

Slight social moderator post.

"Nick" is not catmorbid's name. It was used to mean "nickname" and someone seemed to think it was the real name or something like it.

To the person posting as catmorbid - the Forge is an international community and everyone posting is accustomed to names from quite a few countries, Finland included. Speaking for myself and many others, we would greatly appreciate it if you would disclose your actual, human name. Why? Because this practice means people are more likely to interact as actual, human persons. This principle has been validated many, many times at this site.

If you really don't want to tell your name, you don't have to. But it would be appreciated.

Best, Ron