I'm aware we all learn to play any game by watcing people playing and reading the rules. Then most of the mystery and fun of an RPG resides in getting to know the setting. But what if getting to know the rules becames also part of the exploration?

I'm dealing with the idea of an rpg where players (besides the theme and basic concept of the setting) are only explained the conflict resolution mechanic and get to learn the variations of this mechanic an other rules later in the game, bit by bit. It's the same for the narrator, he's explained the basics of narration mechanics and doesn't have to develop a story to start playing. I've got a few ideas of how to accomplish thes, but I would like to know if it's been done before explicitly.

By the way, it's a game where characters get to use a limited freeform magic mechanic but start knowing nothing about magic, hence the mystery on both the setting and most of the rules.

Have you ever checked out Luke Crane's The Burning Wheel? The main rulebook has a section for the basics, called "The Hub of the Wheel", and then a section called "The Rim", which contains advanced applications of the basic mechanical concepts.
On the subject of how to use the advanced rules, the book has this to say:

"I strongly recommend not reading the [advanced] section straight through.... What's best, I think, is to start playing the game slowly.... [A]s you approach each [game] session, set up the conflict so as to introduce one or two of the following mechanics." p. 82

Good to know, thanks! I'm still looking for Burning Wheels books, and yes, in my game mechanics are introduced at a slow pace: each session the PCs meet a character, find a magic book or make a deal with an ancient creature and get access to a new spell, trick or magic item. Only then a new mechanic regarding that event is explained to the players, and even then, the dangers or issues of using such powers aren't always fully explained >:-D

Of course, all mechanics must derivate somehow from the basic conflict resolution mechanic, otherwise it wouldn't be so functional. Yet I'm a bit worried about players mixing magic mechanics. According to this system you would be able to rise an undead with necromancy, charge it with fire magic and perhaps even change it into gasoline in the middle of a battle with alchemy (of course, this would be a while ahead in the story) ... as a player doesn't sound bad, but as a narrator I'm afraid things could get easily out of my hands...

I'm not aware a published game that works like this, but I've played in a campaign that did something similar. The characters (evidently) did have stats, and there were some mechanics that used those stats at work, but none of the players knew what they were (nor did we ever learn, though I think they were slightly GURPS-like). It was quite a long campaign, and ranks as the second best campaign I've ever been involved in.

I'm just putting the finishing touches on a game called "Rajah Spiny Rat" where I had this sort of idea in mind.

This was for a "Random RPG Cover" contest that was launched on story games a few weeks back.

The essence of the game was written in the form of sanskrit epic poetry, but I found that it was a bit too much to explore all concepts of the game through a structure of 8-syllable-4-line stanzas, and since many of the great sanskrit epics go for thousands of interconnected stanzas that build up concepts little by little expanding until the whole picture is revealed...I didn't think it was entirely appropriate to create a game manual using this method.

The general concept has remained intact though.

Top of the page is is a pidgin of English and pseudo-Sanskrit poetry, while the bottom half of each page is an explanation of the concepts above in more modern English rules.

The basics are introduced, and gradually new iterations of those basics are introduced through the rules as they are introduced in the poetic narrative. Environment, Story, Interaction, Conflict, Recovery, Character Development, Escalation Toward a Climax.

Characters are built up the same way through the course of play, gradually revealing their strengths and weaknesses as necessary.

It seems to work but I haven't had an outsiders perspective yet...give me a couple of days and I'll post a link.

V

Start

Hi Monk (or whatever your name is),

Are you trying to introduce mechanics gradually for the same reasons Burning Wheel does, namely to provide an easier learning curve?  Or are you trying to make a game wherein part of the fun is earning knowledge of the mechanics through play?

If the latter, have you ever played the card game Mao?  The Mao Master is the authority on the rules (often making them up during play), and no one is allowed to say aloud what the rules are.  It creates a social dynamic very different from anything I've seen at an RPG table, so I think that'd be cool...  I can elaborate if you want.

Ps,
-David

Thanks a lot everybody! Having readed your posts and after checking wiki for Mao it sounds better to have even less rules be known by the players on the beggining of the game. Now players will just write their hp on their character sheet (since I prefer narrator to keep track of other things) and will fill the page later with the spells, items and skills they get later on the game. I'm hoping to enforce this by a "Mages don't tell their tricks" rule. So even whatever has been learned by one player can't be taught to the others. A possible excuse for this would be that once your character tells the secret, that particular spell won't work anymore.

I'll be offering this game to an audience without any experience in RPG games, so that's another good reason for making the game start like this. Many thanks, David. And my name is Paulo, btw. :)

I played a mutants and master minds game where I was blind to my character sheet. it was fairly exciting and was actually something I requested from the GM (i did not want to learn the rules :P ). I let him know what I wanted from my character and then he let me know what limitations i had. As I would narrate my turns he translated that into the games mechanics and would narrate my success or failure. if my narration broke the rules he would let me know and i would adjust accordingly.

Recently when we started a new serenity campaign the GM had us start with the general character information filled out but had us do skill assignment on the fly, spending points as we needed them, progressively building the little details of our character. it was quite smooth and enjoyable and lead to a very nicely balanced group of characters.

I played a game like that once and I have mixed feelings about it.

• It doesn't work particularly well for gamist or simulationist rpging. This can be good, though, if you want a more rp focused game.
• It causes trouble when he's trying to do something that he's not very familiar with. Take combat for example. Should I use autofire or not? That depends on the rules. If the system is realistically accurate, that might help, but only if I know what to realistically expect. My character might be a skilled soldier and he might know what to do, but I don't.
• From a design perspective, systems like this tend to be difficult to test.

A great idea.

Once we had a diceless system of magic in which players were limited to some gestures; they were supposed to actually show everything that they were doing while casting a spell. The essential thing was that the effects were completely random (for players), that is, it was the GM who determined what would happen if they experimented with this or that gesture. There were of course some basic motions and signs of a fixed meaning and effect, but if one wanted to get more, it was a must to try sth new (and dangerous).

It's not actually like not knowing the rules at all, but learning one at a time, the first time you use it. In this game, it's not like you character starts as a soldier, it starts as a rookie in training. As soon as he's taught how to operate a firearm in the game, the GM tells you the mechanics for using firearms and all variatons realed to the particucular sidearm you were trained with. Of course, later you can apply what you learned and experiment with other firearm.

Then what knows the character at first? The initial premise of the game is that you roleplay yourself at age 15, as you've just been transferred to a new strange school... etc.

I assume this aims to be an easy pick-em-up-and-play game, advocating the right to dream.

Pacing the learning experience is important. It's no fun when you're interrupting play every five minutes for another learning session. Nor it it fun to have to wade through what is basically a tutorial level if it takes too long.

I think it helps a lot if you limit choices when introducing new rules bits. Go for a strictly need-to-know approach. So don't give them ten types of guns and six ways to shoot when guns come into play. Give them one gun and one way to shoot. Leave customization for later.

Paulo,

Sounds cool!  I really like the combo of "you don't know the rules yet" and "you're playing a character in a completely new environment".

I often like games that start from ignorance.  I like learning about the fiction during play, from my character's perspective.  The less you start with, the more curiosity you can harness, with the epitome being an amnesiac experience: "You wake up.  You have no idea who or where you are.  You have no memory."  The trade-off is (or can be) investment.  It's a lot easier to motivate a character in ways the player enjoys if the character has a favorite bar and a wife and a rival and a cause and a peer group and an addiction etc. and spends play interacting with these.  Good luck finding the balance that's right for your game.

I hope you let us know how it goes!

Ps,
-David