Okay, in a thread about Core Premnise Trait at http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3613, Mike Holmes made a great point about the use of dilemma in Narrative terms.

So, from there I present my trait at the center of my Narrativist dilemma.

Constancy.

Future Perfect is my latest project in the vein of Timecop, Minority Report and the CIA. Players are agents of a govenrment organization who have the ability to travel assisted through time (into the Future only - my core presupposition is that travel results from Einstein's theories and faster than light travel is not possible, yet). They are charged with protecting national security and keeping law and order, by whatever means necessary. They work with agents with either normal skills or psychic skills - telepathy, telekinesis and precognition.

So my core Premise is "Because we CAN change the future, SHOULD we? And to what extent should we go to protect our country and way of life?"

So on to constancy. When a player does something that could cause serious ripples in the future (shooting an innocent bystander, killing a suspect who may yet produce a child who has a positive impact on the future, fathering children throughout the timeline, just general big-picture ethics problems), then he or she generates a point of constancy. The point of constancy translates to a d6 roll, checked against the character's Will. If the roll is equal to or greater than the Will, then the Constancy becomes Permanent. A foul-up in the general Order of the Universe occurs. If a character gains enough Permanent Constancy to equal his/her Will, then the Universe becomes self-correcting. The character no longer accrues Luck, or his/her Psi powers do not work right, and Psi points no longer accrue. The Universe is looking to take out this problem. The player may continue to use the character, but situations become more lethal until the Universe Wills out.

So there is my mechanic. The class is open for discussion...

Aaron Houx

First, I should mention that in classifying the Narrativist Dilemma I was not advovcating them. Just pointing out their existence as a phenomenon. I would not want to see people abandon other ideas and just start piling on with the dilemmas.

That said, I think this one's got some potential. One question, however, that I think is crucial. Can you lose Constancy? Or is it permenant once you have it? Because if it is permenant, that's very interesting. It means that the player has to avoid it like the plague, or his career gets cut short. Which is a cool dynamic when you think about it. I can see play being all about the GM trying to set the players up in situations so bad that they have to risk it, occasionally.

Could be cool. OTOH, if things aren't balanced, players might never go for it. I mean, mechanically, there is no incentive to "break the rules". The reasons will have to be entirely in-game. I think that's risky.

Mike

I love it! Especially the eventual "Universe Wills out" angle. It reminds me of Michael J. Fox's character fading out of the picture in Back to the Future.

It's just so *neat* the way it solves for any timeline change in a subtle (and therefore) very playable manner. And I assume this is because a character can correct for Constancy the way Michael J. Fox did, by continuing to try to 'fix' things?


Jeff

JSDiamond wrote: It's just so *neat* the way it solves for any timeline change in a subtle (and therefore) very playable manner. And I assume this is because a character can correct for Constancy the way Michael J. Fox did, by continuing to try to 'fix' things?

I'm not trying to force words in your mouth Mike. Just pointing out that you seem to have just given us our classification in that other thread.

As for right now, I'm leaning for Constancy - at least Permanent Constancy - to be something that cannot be erased. Of course, not every instance of constancy from the GM or gameplay will result in Permanent Constancy. And the fun thing is that mistakes cannot be "fixed" by going backward.

In a team mechanic, the entire group may have to take some kind of responsibility for the situation, rather than acting without thinking. But, players may try to "overthink", costing them time or the mission.

I'm also thinking of giving players an opportunity to up the Will Stat to as high as 6 over the course of some (subjectively) really great gameplay. After all, these people are mucking about in time, and the sense of self can get very overblown.

Thanks so far for the comments on the game.

Aaron Houx