So a while back I was considering whether alignment had a place in the game I am designing (A Time of Steel & Staves) I posted here for advice and in the end decided to exclude it. During that process however I hit on an interesting system (though I don't think its alignment so much as personality)
So today after reading an Alignment post It reminded me of it and a new Idea was born.
Well .. new to me anyhow.

What about a Roleplaying game that instad of skills and abilities there were just personality scores.
I didn't have a lot of time to really explore the idea and only came up with a couple examples

now back in my alignment post I talked about a weird little homebrew thing my DM came up with for priest alignment
He calls it a "slider" because it shifts back and forth (in this case between good and evil which is either good or bad depending on the god your character worships) he is a graphic designer and has this little graphic for it but I don't have it to share. so heres sort of a poor mans version of one. (via quicking google search)

So the one I came up with today that I really like was this.

Willpower---Vs---Instinct        or
Determination---Vs---Inclination
When using Willpower/determination what are you trying to overcome? instinct/inclination
Ex: When facing a superior - your  instinct or inclination might be to submit but willpower/determination can overcome that.

I just went back and looked at the "sliders" I came up with and while they maybe could be tinkered with to make work but none really have the relevance that will---vs---instinct has for me...
anyway they are (just copied and pasted)
[tt]
Sentiment|------------------------|Detachment
    Observant|------------------------|Inattentive
  Benevolent|------------------------|Selfish
Compassionate|------------------------|Cruel
    Interest|------------------------|Apathy
    Restraint|------------------------|Indulgence
        Tidy|------------------------|Unkempt
    Confident|------------------------|Unsure
    Trusting|------------------------|Suspicious
      Mellow|------------------------|Volatile  [/tt]

So. My thought is for a game that has these "oppositions?" as there main focus.
I don't have a game idea worked out. I thought that if you guys took off with it though
surely a good idea would arise.

a game centered around person motivations and their opposing forces. Seems interesting.

Okay..... GO.

ps: also if anyone wants to point out a game that already uses this idea, please speak up. I am busy with [A Time of Steel & Staves] right now but one day - it might make a good reference material.

Also I will point out that, if anyone really likes the idea. Take it - I claim no ownership. I would hate for my already full plate to smother what could be a fun game.

Thanks
-Brent

Damnit but I just Hate to sound so foolish.
what's next, "There table is in they're. Their very upset about it?"
**smirk**

A offshoot? Good grief. In the title no less.
An offshoot idea. Just pretend it says that.

We wouldn't be on this site if we didn't have imaginations. ;)

There are things based on this concept.

Check out the play report.  It will give you a strong idea on how dynamic such a simple setup can get.

Hi Brent,

The Forge is generally focused on developing your own game.  I know over at www.story-games.com they sometimes set up abandoned ideas for others to pick up, so you might want to post over there, as well.

The first game that comes to mind in having this kind of mechanic is Pendragon, which came out in the 80's, I believe.  It had over a dozen personality stats which measured your knight's virtues and it even recognized that different cultures value different virtues- for example, pagan knights valued "Lusty" while Christian knights valued "Chaste" - and got bonuses accordingly.

Several games, like Breaking the Ice, Grey Ranks, Bliss Stage, or the Smallville RPG use emotional stats either only, or as primary stats for their games.

It's not a new idea, though probably underused and under-recognized for a lot of rpg culture.

Chris

I have a job that requires a lot of planning and setup then near mindless follow up. As a result, I have a decent amount of the day to ponder (during the mindless portion). It is not at all uncommon for me to disappear for a minute while I write a new idea. That is was this was. One I hadn't known was already in use. I figured it might be. I'll have to check out some of those games.
More than likely it will just a backburner Idea, Like my Group of people Player a single character Idea I may try to combine the two Ideas but in my mind they work best separately, but who knows.
Maybe one group could play one side of the divide and the other oppose them.
For example:
let the players pick an personality attribute -- lets say willpower. -- another player could pick "instinct" and they would hash it out through some resolution mechanic. a decision would be made by the single player character based on that outcome and  the story line would progress accordingly.

or maybe the players could all be one side of the divide. and the GM the other .for instance

the left side of the column
Sentiment / Observant / Benevolent / Compassionate / Interest / Restraint / Tidy / Confident / Trusting / Mellow
and the GM play the opposing forces. [sub]but please note that I no longer like the idea of a "slider" and Much prefer the idea of opposing forces. unfortunately I only have the one that I really like -- instinct --- vs --- Will [/sub]

So we'll just say that Instead of gifting out my idea I'll just put it on simmer.
anyway thanks for the references -- I'll see if I can get my hands on some of them.

Keep the input coming. I'd especially like more "oppositions"
or maybe "counterpoints" may be a better word [sub]**shrug**[/sub] lets see what the mindless portion of my job gifts me with.. My lunch break is now over.

Thanks
-Brent

My only question is .. why? To what end? Like, what about this idea would make it fun?

I don't mean it negatively, and clearly something about the idea appeals to your tastes. It just sounds like a lot of work tracking changes in a personality, but I don't see the payback.

I have given this game idea some thought and some things I think would need to change...
But to answer your question as to why? It would just be a different way to resolve conflict.
Which part of someones personality would triumph? The result would move the story being told in a new direction based on that decision
I don't have a setting in mind but unlike my other game (which is intended to work in any fantasy setting) I think this game would benefit from one.
Clearly this idea wouldn't be at the center of a combat heavy game (Like D&D for example)
having paused just now to brainstorm a few Ideas I think maybe...
Paranormal Investigation or maybe alien related content might work well.
The reason being is they are the unknown. Lots of people believe that stuff. A lot of people do not at all, and a yet there are some how don't rule it out.
therefore there is a lot of room for self doubt, internal conflict and the like.

So having circled this idea and trying to pick it apart.
I have made a few decisions.

• I will Keep my  [tt]will-Vs.-Instinct[/tt] idea for another game or idea - I think its really accurate but just doesn't belong here unfortunately.
• Sliders (or anything else they cold be called) probably would be tedious to mess around with. Keep up with the benefits/drawbacks of "sliding" one way or the other
instead I think Its better to have opposing rolls of the dice (not sure how or which yet) the attribute with the winning roll or rolls wins the conflict and that player that is playing that attribute makes the descision -- ex: "I don't believe in ghosts, therefore it is foolish to be frightened of this house. I will enter the back bedroom"  - in that example players would have rolled to see if the character believed in ghosts. they may have to later roll again (perhaps upon further "evidence" is found)
• This game will need a storyteller or narrator rather than a GM-less/full setup
• I think this game would benefit from the freedom of a "rules-lite" ruleset. the mind/personality of a person is hard to confine, I think.
• I'd like for the game to have some sort of knowledge/evidence collection mechanic that would alter the rolls as time passes. By that I mean: a way to keep track of things the group has figured out already (or think they have figured out) and that would in turn give +/- to their respective rolls
• I'd really like the game setting to be one that makes it easy for the Story creator(GM) to create circumstances that naturally promotes internal conflict - which I feel would be the central theme of this game. i don't yet know what that may be. Ghost/alien investigating as I mentioned earlier? Maybe some kind of reversal there? Maybe they play an Alien or ghost that is investigating the existence of humans? Need it be an investigation? 

Just some ideas. Nothing concrete.

This would be my 2nd attempt at writing an RPG and I most definitely do not have the hang of it yet.
add to that, that I have never even played (or heard of until recently) a game with 1 player character controlled by a group - or a game centralized around emotions or personally - and You begin to hear the Cry for help that this post really is. ;)

I am aware that aside from the occasional good/great Idea - I am a novice here. If this whole idea is dumb, that's fine. Tell me. (I will of course only consider your words and decide whether I agree.) I feel like it could be a fun game that I would like to play. Of course I feel like it has a long way to go, and honestly I am not really sure how to proceed. is there protocol?
anyone got any good ideas for setting? situations? I mean nothing super detailed - just more general idea. Maybe reading over this - you had a good idea (that happens to be sometimes while reading other threads)
How about a good way to put the opposing attributes to good use?
Is there a way to add in a point-buy system that takes care of the knowledge collection - mechanic I mentioned earlier? is there a better way than point buy?
anyway. I am a little out of my league with this type of game. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks as always,
-Brent

This is a good idea. I will try to help you in my spare time.

Lassidus wrote:
This is a good idea. I will try to help you in my spare time.

If you would like inspiration, you might want to check out "A Sojourn in Alexandria" which had similar personality sliders built into the core mechanics.  It might help you in some way. 

 
http://www.genesisoflegend.com/PDF/A%20Sojourn%20in%20Alexandria.pdf

Sorry for the shameless plug, I just think it might be useful on this particular topic.

Hi, I too had a similar idea.  I dont like the general idea of having personality traits anymore, but it might be helpful to you.

The basic premise was that one end of the scale was absolute freedom of character action and the other end of the scale was absolute shackles.  Character creation was a point purchasing system, and the idea was that the default was the perfect freedom' end of the scale for every personality trait, but that the player could take on 'shackles' and thus gain points to buy other stuff elsewhere during character creation.

i.e. 

loyal<------------------------>disloyal
craven<---------------------->brave
moral<----------------------->immoral
compassionate<--------->dispassionate
emotional<----------------->impassive

I think I had about 7 or 8 traits.

So your perfectly free character is completely disloyal, brave, immoral, dispassionate, impassive etc...  can react to any situation in any way that suits.  Whereas when you slide the sliders to the left for any given trait(s) the character becomes more restricted by their personality - a  totally craven character, for instance, is not free to react to a dangerous situation in the same ways that a totally brave character might. 

This thread is related to this one

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forge/index.php?topic=30638.0

Thanks for the link stefoid. I'll look at when I get off work. (only a few minutes left on my lunch break)

I can see your point about personality traits feeling bolted on. However I would say the Idea behind this game idea is more about internal conflicts if there is any "combat" It would be between two opposing beliefs.

Another thing I like about the idea of this game is that all the players in this game are playing a single character, this allows two players to face off as parts of one person.
for instance.
We all have greed
We all have ethics.
Perhaps the are not evenly matched but outside factors may also contribute influence to one side of the other. and make the struggle something

So say there is a situation like this:

You just found out that funding has been has been cut to this project that you have found great joy in. The project has 2 weeks left to finish up research.
(game scenario - off the top of my head)  and the project will inevitably be cut short, unless you find a way to cut costs or bring in a source of funds.

later on in the game. 
You come across a body. handcuffed to the dead man is a briefcase - the latches are broken and you see what looks like money.
You look around and see no sign of anyone. You are 100% sure that no one would see you take the money
but you know ethically that you should report the obvious murder.
now of course this situation would never happen. Who would murder someone and be too goodhearted to take their money.

Just making the point of -- there is an internal conflict to have the players -- discuss/fight about to see who's "personality trait" would prevail
the player with Greed would fight for greed to win and the player with ethics would fight for ethics to win. while other personality traits can aid one side or the other as fits their motivations.
What do you think?

is there a way to do this without have a completely verbal game (which I don't want)
is there a way to do this would having personality traits.
I think players would quickly break down without hard figures to "back" them
Gotta go. Late coming back form lunch

thanks
-Brent

Understood.  IMO, Ron Edwards main insight is that the game has to back up a style of play with mechanics all the way through.  Games that 'say one thing but do another' are confusing and badly designed.  That is, the game text says players should do thing A but the mechanics encourage them to do thing B.

So if your game is about internal conflict, then what mechanics could back up that statement?

And how do you make it interesting to play?  i.e. how do you manage to let the player have the final say in how a character reacts to situations without something like personality replacing their decision?

You did mention that personality traits replaced skills/abilities.  Taking that literally, you could leave the decision of how to act in the hands of the player, but use the personality trait as the 'skill' to see how that decision resolves?  i.e. if you intend to do something where the primary attribute is moral<->immoral, then you roll that trait to see if it works. 

your example:  deciding whether to take the money or report the murder is obviously a significant thing.  Lets say this is a morality check.  A character who is habitually immoral is likely to be good at doing such a thing unnoticed and hiding his tracks etc.., whereas a character who is habitually moral is not likely to be.  So the player having made the decision, then rolls to see how the consequences of that decision turn out?  Are they caught immediately?  Did they leave a clue that might lead the police to them later?  Do they get away scott free but with a crushing guilt? etc...

This is sounding like 'Cohen bros film' the game.

stefoid wrote: the game text says players should do thing A but the mechanics encourage them to do thing B.

So if your game is about internal conflict, then what mechanics could back up that statement?

Im not sure I agree with the necessity of choosing a setting.  Certainly you need a strong idea of what you are trying to achieve with your game, and that may include setting.  Sometimes what you are trying to achieve in a game design is inseparable from the setting (or maybe a genre) and sometimes the setting or even genre is merely color.

But if you dont know what you are trying to achieve, how can you know what to include and what to leave out?  You cant aim without a target.

If you need a setting to get engaged with a project, then yeah, you should. 

I just said Cohen Bros, because their films always seem to feature characters who continually dig themselves deeper and deeper into trouble due to repeatedly making poor/out of character decisions.  And the game mechanics I proposed above seem to support a game based around exploring the consequences of making those types of decisions.  Its a setting agnostic thing to aim at.