INGENERO is just Latin for 'generator' to make is sound fancy, for lack of anything to call this idea.  Didnt get any feedback at all on the other thread, so Im breaking it up.  This thread is specifically about the Challenge generator / backstory part.

The short summary is that the game is a played in two modes, one being a kind of combined story-telling system that provides a backstory for the 'Challenge' mode which punctuates it every now and then.  The Challenge mode is more of a gamey system with the GM being adverserial, but we wont go into that any further in this thread.

After establishing the initial situation, the GM pulls a card from a Challenge deck that presents a potentially challenging situation that must be addressed by the player characters.  I am imagining something like the Oracle cards from In A Wicked Age, but different in nature -- more narrow in terms of what the situation is, but not specific at all in terms of who is involved in the situation.  examples might be:

A direct confrontation
An attempted burglary
A stinging betrayal
Sweet revenge
Rebellion!
Make a friend
etc...

Somehow, by way of player and GM collaboration, the playing group narrate the series of events that leads from the current situation directly to incorporating the new challenge, up to the point in which the exact nature of the challenging situation is determined and it is about to occur.  Once the new challenging situation is established in this way, it is played out to its resolution in a more 'traditional' roleplaying fashion, with the players saying what their characters are going to do to resolve the challenge and the GM taking on an opposing/adversarial role.

The general idea is that you only have randomly decided contests (as described in previous posts) as part of official Challenges.  Everything that occurs between official challenges 'just happens'.  The question is who has authority over what exactly 'just happens', which is something I havent worked out, except to say that I really like the idea that the players have a lot of input into that process, and that they obviously have authority over decisions that their character makes during that period.  I think a lot of authority can reside with the GM, but that players should be able to in some way buy/negotiate narrative authority in some way, even if it only applies to their particular character.

This sort of implies that characters can get up to mischief which involves conflict, but that the conflict is just narrative, meaning that it is resolved without resort to dice and the usual task/conflcit resolution mechanics.  Anything can happen that is plausible, with the aim that everything flows to the next official challenge in a satisfying fashion.  It may even be from a dramatic/narrative point of view that the simply narrated conflict is more important than the actually played-out Challenge that the players have to overcome.  I dont necessarily see that as a problem, however.

Why do this?   
a)  reduce need for GM prep (for the time-challenged) and the rail-roading it results in
b)  give the players a creative input into what happens
c)  Inject some complicated / unusual / left-field situations into the story.

Specific questions: 
1) what do you think of this idea in general?
2) Any ideas on how to make this work, particularly the bits in red?

Hi,

Somehow, by way of player and GM collaboration, the playing group narrate the series of events that leads from the current situation directly to incorporating the new challenge, up to the point in which the exact nature of the challenging situation is determined and it is about to occur

Callan wrote:
Hi

Somehow, by way of player and GM collaboration, the playing group narrate the series of events that leads from the current situation directly to incorporating the new challenge, up to the point in which the exact nature of the challenging situation is determined and it is about to occur

Why not just have the written procedure tell the group to frame the scene at the challenge, then they can if they wish, work as a group to give some quick overview as to how they got to this point.

You don't have to have a set of plausible fictional steps to arrive at something - you can just arrive at something, then add in some steps afterward (indeed, if any at all...you could just nakedly cut to the action and not even explain how you got there - what's more important, the action or the getting there?).

Well, you could playtest it to see if it indeed doesn't work?

Thinking on my own play, sadly it's been games like the fallout series, the mercenaries computer game, the project IGI computer game, GTA and some others that have given a free roaming in between set pieces.

What cam to my mind is that the set pieces could have starting resources based on the free roaming part. For example, a bandit camp could have two options written into it, of encountering it straight up, or encountering it from the top of a cliff, camp below. The GM determines which, based on that prior play.

So there you go, you can frame straight to it and prior play would have a meaningful effect. Add more options for each challenge if you decide to have more ways in which the challenge can be affected by the prior freeroaming.

Callan wrote:
What cam to my mind is that the set pieces could have starting resources based on the free roaming part. For example, a bandit camp could have two options written into it, of encountering it straight up, or encountering it from the top of a cliff, camp below. The GM determines which, based on that prior play.

stefoid wrote: The fun being how do we go from where we are now to a situation that includes 'Rebellion!' as a challenging situation for the PCs to be involved in.

Callan wrote:

stefoid wrote: The fun being how do we go from where we are now to a situation that includes 'Rebellion!' as a challenging situation for the PCs to be involved in.

Gah! How your words read atleast to me, is that you've just said the getting there is the fun part! The very thing I asked about before and you said the action was the important part!

I'm saying that not because you have to respond to that, but it's somthing to consider - perhaps I'm just reading you wrong, or perhaps you've got conflicting goals on this matter? Please, please don't write a 'Oh, but your reading me wrong and...' post, they're just infuriating every time I've read them from someone else - there's no way to actually prove to me there isn't an internal conflict, barring really scary levels of MRI technology, and I'm just dreadfully not interested in just taking peoples word for things.

Something to chew over, anyway. And I'm not going to act as if I'm just right on the matter - I know that's infuriating as well :) It's something only you can mull over and decide, so that's why it's a chewer...

This is just rambling thoughts, maybe someone can point me in the direction of a thread or game(s) which address some of these issues:

To reiterate, the idea of the story mode is to give the Challenges meaning by giving them context.  And I specifically want the players to be able to have a big input into saying what the context of each Challenge is.

The Challenges are gamist - using your character design, you find strategies to execute and overcome the Challenge.  So maybe I have it arse backwards...  rather than gaining currency in the Challenge mode to spend in the Story mode, it should be the other way around?  You gain currency by contributing to the Story mode, that you get to spend in the Challenge mode.

There could be a problem in that the game could be 'gamed' by a player who was intent on ensuring that all the Challenges were suited to his character.  So I think the Story mode contributions have to be consensual.  The context of the next Challenge has to be satisfying for everyone at the table, and ideally everyone at the table should have the chance to shine equally at different Challenges at different times.

So there just seems to be something missing, something to help steer the game from Challenge to Challenge, without it simply being about - my character is good at hitting things, so I want to make every Challenge as much about hitting things as I can.  (When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail)

And the other thing is that the process of getting from A to B is a challenge for the players, but its an important part of the game.  And if the players cant get from point A to point B satisfactorily, then they arent going to want to play the game:  "this game is broken", "its too hard / intimidating", "the stuff that happens between challenges is boring!"  etc...    The challenge card itself is some help - its an endpoint to steer towards, but I think there needs to be more inputs into the process - to help GM and players generate more possibilities.

So I think I need something like 'issues' from PTA, or 'best interests' from IAWA....  just some kind of internal drivers for the characters to give the players something to aim at during Story mode, other than arranging for the next Challenge to be compatible with their own character.  So give the character a Goal, and by rewarding the player for bringing that Goal into play during Story mode, it also becomes a Goal for the player.  something like that.

If one goal is good, more is probably better, but because we are making up the backstory as we go along, starting goals will by necessity by quite vague.  Better if Goals are allowed to be established during play, so the player can react to the emerging Story.  But too many goals could be gamed, so we cap them at, say , four -- you can only have 4 uncompleted goals at any given time.

Currency is awarded for:

1) coming up with a good goal for your character (which can only be done during Story mode, where you describe the process by which your character comes to realize they have a new goal)
2) If your character manages to work into the story some actions which lead along the path to achieving the goal (only in story mode)
3) if your character accomplishes a goal, which can only be done during Challenge mode.

Trying this on for size:

Goals and stuff.

1) At the start of the game, the GM describes a situation that is rich with promise for shit to go down.  this is the very first thing that happens, before chargen
2) then the players create their characters, and assign them one Long Term Goal.

Goals come in short and long term varieties:

• Short term goals are worth 1 currency for inspiration, 1 currency for participation (working them into a story mode) and 1 currency for resolution.  Im yet to decide whether resolution means  being involved in a Challenge that will resolve the goal one way or the other, or if it means successfully achieving the goal.
• Long term goals are worth 1 for inspiration, 1 for participation, and 5 for resolution.

3) during story mode, players can announce new short and long term goals, within the limit of 4 active goals per character.  Short term goals are potentially resolvable at the very next Challenge phase (should I be saying phase instead of mode?  I think so)  but they dont need to be. 

Short term goals can change in light of new information, and can be dropped and replaced without question, and even reintroduced later - its all about priorities.

Long term goals - not so easy.  They can be dropped and replaced only if they become impossible, or if the player narrates a really good reason as to why that goal is no longer a long term goal, and if they do so to everyones satisfaction, they get 3 currency.

So doing well in challenges is not only about stepping up with your character and overcoming the specifics of the Challenge itself, its also about achieving Goals, and there is nothing to say that one characters goals couldnt be achieved, partially or completely, by another character.  so that could be interesting.

You know what,

short term goals are worth 0 for inspiration, 1 for participation, and 1 for resolution
long term goals are worth 3 for inspiration, 1 for participation, and 5 for resolution.

The reasoning being that, for short term goals, inspiration and participation is likely to be the same instance.
And that having long term goals restricts a players tactical choice of short term goals (because you can only have 4 goals max), but that their existance is likely to create more of a satisfying backstory overall, so they deserve more reward.

Lastly, I think there may be a qualitative difference in short and long term goals, in that a short term goal cannot introduce new information into the story.  Its like, oh, this is occuring?  OK, my short term goal is now _this_... its purely reactive.  Whereas the proposer of along term goal CAN introduce new information as part fo the definition of the goal.  "My characters long term goal is to take revenge on the sky pirates of valeron!"  "oh yes, and who are they exactly?"  "well -- six years ago....blah blah blah"  "OK, that is way cool, here is 3 currency!"

inspiration - the story phase in which a goal is conceived, outlined and accepted by the rest of the group
participation -  in which an existing goal is mixed in to a subsequent story phase - only paid once per goal per Phase.
resolution - where the goal is ultimately achieved in a Challenge phase
discarding - dropping a short term goal either permanently or temporarily for whatever reason, OR when a long term goal becomes impossible
abandonment - where a long term goal is still achievable, but for compelling reasons, the character abandons it

currency reward for:
short term goal - inspiration 0, participation 1, resolution 2, discard 0
long term goal - inspiration 5, participation 1, resolution 5, abandonment 3, discard 0

so you can chop and change short term goals all the time, at no net change to your currency rewards.  Only by sticking with a short term goal and building on in subsequent story phases and/or resolving it, do you get any currency reward.

Long term goals, however, are encouraged with a big upfront payment, and more draconian rules on how they can be removed - only through resolution or official abandonment.

On inspiration and participation - for either short or long term goals, when doing these, the player must add or elaborate on some element that is related to the story surrounding that goal. 

i.e.  participation means that the player narrates how the character is attempting to advance towards resolving a goal.  The player must bring in a new story element that relates to that goal and/or their pursuit of it in some way.  It doesnt have to be related to the immediate upcoming challenge, but it could be, and in fact only when the path of a goal and a challenge cross, does the character have a chance to resolve that goal, because goals can only be resolved during Challenge phase.

What I imagine is that short term goals will be more closely aligned with near-term Challenges, so as to keep the short term goals ticking over, earning resolution currency as often as possible.  Long term goals can keep their distance from the near-term Challenges, generating participation currency each and every story phase without necessarily having anything to do with an upcoming Challenge, until its time to receive the big payoff when the long term goal and a Challenge have some synergy.  So in that sense they are supposed to be more like an ongoing sub-plot.

Remember that Inspiration and Participation story elements have to be mutually agreed by the group

I suppose this is not only setting-agnostic, but it could be used with any kind of character creation and conflict/task res mechanics.  You just have to tie the story phase currency into the resolution mechanics of your choice, say like hero points for hero wars or XP for D&D, etc...

This question might not be applicable and from left field, but anyway...

Some people might have some issue with the real world they find meaningful, and write a song, or write speculative sci fi, or make a short film about it, or such like.

Is this for people who first have a real life meaningful issue they want to get at somehow? And then roleplay is a means to that end?

Or is the meaningfulness there just to support a fun game - ie, meaningfulness is just a means to the end that is roleplay?

Callan wrote:
This question might not be applicable and from left field, but anyway...

Some people might have some issue with the real world they find meaningful, and write a song, or write speculative sci fi, or make a short film about it, or such like.

Is this for people who first have a real life meaningful issue they want to get at somehow? And then roleplay is a means to that end?

Or is the meaningfulness there just to support a fun game - ie, meaningfulness is just a means to the end that is roleplay?