The following bit is a gloss of how I've used Matrix Games as a support element in RPGs. In this case to aid character growth.

MATRIX GAMES IN CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT

“My character has 50,000 experience points. What do I get for going up a level?”

“How many points do I get to add to my skill levels? I did just kill a dragon after all.”

Experience versus skills, the old dichotomy in character development. Clearly both have advantages but both also miss so much. People are more than a sum of their skills. They do more than fight and steal things. They have lives outside of adventure. Simulating this mundane world may seem unimportant but doing some of it greatly increases player commitment to role play campaigns.

There are games here on the Forge that focus on relationships but they are games where that is the action. What I’m talking about here is a quick after the game game in which players grow their characters and then come back to the regular game. I use an Engle Matrix Game for this.

Before the game begins I ask players to make 1 or 2 arguments about weird things that people in their family tell them. As in all Engle Matrix Games one player acts as referee and decides how much they like each argument. This sets a “to happen” roll. If the argument goes through then a bunch of new information has been added to the game. As game master I try to incorporate this into the game. Players love this because in a way they are writing their own scenario.

After the game I give players 3 more arguments to make. The 1st is about something that happens in the bigger world that has nothing to do with them. The 2nd is about how they make a new friend or develop their relationships with those they already know. The 3rd harks back to skill development by asking how the character improves themselves.

Matrix arguments add a narrative behind each character, if arguments are written down it literally a literary narrative. This narrative grows the unwritten “Matrix” of data that describes that character. Matrix Game referees and RPG game masters can referee to this matrix to get ideas on how to proceed in the game. Is an argument strong if a character is “badly wounded”? How will you have a group of Orcs react to a character who has gained the status “Orc Bane”?

As characters grow accustom to Matrix Game development arguments they start exploring life outside of adventure. Some will get married, have kids, and get jobs. Others will try to raise in social status and acquire property. Still others might try to improve their spiritual life and go off to study at the monastery. All of these stories can fold back into adventures because they show what players really care about. That may be the motivation they need to go off on the next quest.

The cool thing is all these result from only ten minutes gaming with no prep time required. The players just make arguments. They either happen or don't. The bulk of your time remains in adventure with the Matrix Game just a tacked on utility.

When I started doing this in the early 1990’s my players became passionate about the games. When I started using rumor arguments before games, writing scenarios became 10 times easier because I knew what the players were interested in. By sharing a little power I made my job as GM much easier and more fun.

Chris Engle
2-8-07

What is the advantage of assigning a difficulty and then rolling dice, over, say, a "universalis" type of "story point" system? Isn't it frustrating if everyone wants something to happen, but the dice say otherwise? Isn't it kind of 'double handling' the decision - having two factors that decide if it happens? Also, when do people choose nubers other than 1 (if they don't like an idea) and 6 (if they do)? What's the motivation for leaving it up to chance?

Consider this alternative system:

After every game, every player (including the GM) gets three "story tokens."  They can use these before and after games (and store them between games) to make statements about the game world, or their own characters.  They do this by making the statement, and sliding the tokens back into the pot.  Anyone can support the idea by spending their own tokes on it.  Anyone can veto the idea by spending a like about of tokens. Points spent of vetoed ideas are still lost. 

I'm not saying this is better, but what are the differences? Why use dice?