Topic: Question about precursors of my idea?
Started by: kaworuiskool
Started on: 8/26/2002
Board: RPG Theory
On 8/26/2002 at 1:37am, kaworuiskool wrote:
Question about precursors of my idea?
First of all, any of this may have been done before, and in a way that isn't so hideously impractical. In fact I would prefer if that's so, and then I can use an existing system. I'm looking for suggestions of what this looks like to you. Somebody will have something I can use. I've drawn from previous ideas such as GMless democracy and the whole narratavist cult of Jared Sorensen. (...you do NOT talk about Dice Club...) Here goes.
All participants have the option of bringing ideas for the session, or not. Everyone votes on which they like best, and the winner becomes GM for that session. However, that position is hardly assured. In fact, it's a king of the hill situation. On a vote of no confidence where the players prefer their idea, one of the originators of said idea has the option of taking over as GM.
PC's are common property, and can be traded at will, but what if you want theirs and they don't want yours? You have to sweeten the deal. If you haven't guessed already, the currency of this game is plot. It's almost like playing Risk. Plot-sharing alliances are encouraged.
So, already you have strategy. There's 'ride the bronco' players who try to see how much they can screw over everyone and remain GM. They think up the coolest premise and then surprise you in the game. At the other end of the spectrum are neutrals, who give away ideas and suggestions to whomever needs them, and refuse the GM position when offered. And in-between are those having all kinds of fun, jockeying for positon while discovering things they like.
Sure, it's a mess. Yeah, it could use work. Do what you wish with it....
On 8/26/2002 at 1:45am, Jared A. Sorensen wrote:
Re: Question about precursors of my idea?
kaworuiskool wrote:
Sure, it's a mess. Yeah, it could use work. Do what you wish with it....
Hahaha! I have a cult too!
kaworuiskool (?),
You gotta check out Universalis. It's more or less a system for doing what you're talking about.
- J
On 8/26/2002 at 2:26am, kaworuiskool wrote:
RE: Question about precursors of my idea?
Thanks for the suggestion, Jared. It looks like it'd be good at what it does. I think I was more leaning toward a wacky exploration of the gamist possibilities in the idea, but it's obviously got a narratavist element too. The funny thing is, I'd never think I would be the one to suggest a narratavist mechanic. Story blatantly overriding realism makes me twitch. Ah well. Maybe I'd be comfy with it if played realistically, allowing leeway for story hooks as a secondary goal. Ugg, all three modes in one game....imposible to pull off....head exploding....
On 8/26/2002 at 5:55am, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Question about precursors of my idea?
Hey kwa ... wor ... (you! with the name!),
It might help to think this way: in-setting plausibility, which is what most people mean by "realism," is not a GNS thing, but an Exploration thing. So some or even great attention to establishing it isn't necessarily Simulationist - it can be part of the bedrock for any of the three modes. Don't sweat the definitions too much.
And yes, Universalis is your baby. It is designed specifically to custom-tune toward any mode of play, via play itself.
Best,
Ron
On 8/26/2002 at 11:29am, Valamir wrote:
RE: Re: Question about precursors of my idea?
Well, since the game's been plugged twice by people-not-me, I guess I oughtta chime in with some additional details on Universalis
kaworuiskool wrote:
All participants have the option of bringing ideas for the session, or not. Everyone votes on which they like best, and the winner becomes GM for that session. However, that position is hardly assured. In fact, it's a king of the hill situation. On a vote of no confidence where the players prefer their idea, one of the originators of said idea has the option of taking over as GM.
Universalis works exactly like this only the "GM" so to speak (the person in charge of frameing the scene and getting the action started) changes in each scene rather than each session. Within the scene, once the scene is framed, it is open season, and any player can take over the narration either by waiting for the current player to pass or by actively siezing control with an Interruption.
PC's are common property, and can be traded at will, but what if you want theirs and they don't want yours? You have to sweeten the deal. If you haven't guessed already, the currency of this game is plot. It's almost like playing Risk. Plot-sharing alliances are encouraged.
PC's in Uni are most definitely common property. Who they belong to is defined by Control and Control is defined by who introduced the character into the scene, not who created the character initially. You have Control of a character until someone else takes that control from you.
So, already you have strategy. There's 'ride the bronco' players who try to see how much they can screw over everyone and remain GM. They think up the coolest premise and then surprise you in the game. At the other end of the spectrum are neutrals, who give away ideas and suggestions to whomever needs them, and refuse the GM position when offered. And in-between are those having all kinds of fun, jockeying for positon while discovering things they like.
I have witnessed all three kinds of players in my games of Universalis. In one of our demos at GenCon, two friends showed up to play with the overtly stated goal of seeing who could out plot twist the other. The game got really bizarre. I was surprised at the end how well the game mechanics worked to produce a pretty interesting story out it. You can read about that game here.
Universalis can be played very coorperatively with all players collaborating with each other, or it can be played very competitively, with all players striving to control the story themselves. I'd say the politics around the table are more Diplomacy-like than Risk, but you get the idea.
I hope you'll check it out. If you have more questions on it, come on down to the Universalis forum below.
edited to fix poor quoting
On 8/26/2002 at 1:08pm, kaworuiskool wrote:
RE: Question about precursors of my idea?
Heh, wow. All it needs is some sort of musical chairs attribute that can be called once a session, just for chaos' sake. Nobody loses a chair, of course. Just to shake things up. It'd be activated by yelling something....my players love yelling words like BLARG! and Smite! Once again, emphasis on the gamist elements.
Oh, and Ron, it's japanese-and I'm american, so don't worry about it. (Whether it's romanized with the w is debatable. Shows what I know.) Those with way too much time on their hands can catch me on AIM for a lecture on my favorite show. Well, enough of that....
On 8/26/2002 at 1:36pm, Valamir wrote:
RE: Question about precursors of my idea?
Heh, one of Ron's favorite parts of the game is the Rules Gimmick. Which is a rule that allows players to invent their own rules. Sounds like your group would get a lot of mileage out of that one.