Greetings all,

I was just reading something about dice mechanics (which this post has nothing to do with) and ye olde torchlight of idea started sputtering.

Say you have a game, any game will do, and add a mechanic which allows for the changing of who is actually GMing during the game session, or allows for interchanging of active player characters between players...


Example: Sort of like when you are playing a board game and some card is drawn (or whatever) that allow a player to force some action which alters play. That is the sort of dynamic I am trying to describe here.


Only in this case the GM would perhaps be forced to switch NPC/PCs with someone, or the GM allowed to pick two players at random who must switch their characters...

For that matter what if the same mechanic allowed for interchange of characters between players often? In fact what if this mechanic was an integrated part of the game system?


IE: Bobi Socks, playing her Wailing Ben Sidhe, suddenly has to change PCs with Green Man, currently playing a wily Bogart...

Now Bobi Socks must switch to playing a wily Bogart, which maybe she doesn't like so much, and could possibly even contest the change for...

Well I think you get the gist of what I am trying to say. I hope.

Comments?

What are you trying to achieve? At the moment, it would seem to merely frustrate most players:

IE: Bobi Socks, playing her Wailing Ben Sidhe, suddenly has to change PCs with Green Man, currently playing a wily Bogart...

Now Bobi Socks must switch to playing a wily Bogart, which maybe she doesn't like so much, and could possibly even contest the change for...

Say you have a game, any game will do, and add a mechanic which allows for the changing of who is actually GMing during the game session,..

I agree with Andrew, if you present this as regular role-playing game with a character switch mechanic then I would find it frustrating to play, mainly because the mechanic is frustrating my attempts to fufill the purpose of the game: to play a role and play it well.

On the other hand in a story-telling game a switch mechanic could be a boon, something that actually helped you to tell a story and tell it well. In a story-telling game having only one role is often a source of frustration.

Can I make a plug for the superb Universalis? It has a simple mechanic for taking over control of characters, that ties in with its core resource-expenditure mechanic. It works well because its a story-telling game and being able to control different characters at different times (or several characters at the same time) helps, rather than frustrates, the players in their attempts to tell a good story.

Alternatively you could find a context for a regular rpg where sudden changes in character behaviour/roles is anticipated, even vital to, the genre.

For example Light Opera where the maid dresses up in her mistresses' best gown and at the ball flirts with her master who has disguised himself as a French aristocrat, who shares jokes with the prison govener (who he has to report to tomorrow morning to begin a prison sentence) who is also disguised as a French aristocrat...

Of course that would be characters switching roles rather than players switching characters... but switches of both kinds could still be great fun in this kind of context where bemusing and farcial identity complications are sought for.

Another alternative is the famous star trek "This week an invisible alien is taking over members of the crew" plot device. Hmmm, standard fare. I think I'll try that opera game though... ;-)

PS Opera rocks.

tony188 wrote: For example Light Opera where the maid dresses up in her mistresses' best gown and at the ball flirts with her master who has disguised himself as a French aristocrat, who shares jokes with the prison govener (who he has to report to tomorrow morning to begin a prison sentence) who is also disguised as a French aristocrat...

Andrew Martin wrote:

What are you trying to achieve? At the moment, it would seem to merely frustrate most players:

IE: Bobi Socks, playing her Wailing Ben Sidhe, suddenly has to change PCs with Green Man, currently playing a wily Bogart...

Now Bobi Socks must switch to playing a wily Bogart, which maybe she doesn't like so much, and could possibly even contest the change for...

Quick Answer: A game which is fast paced where players have as much fun vying for control of choice characters, and thus their actions in shaping the narrative of the game.

I am sure there is a card game analogy that would fit what I am trying to describe but I can’t think of it at the moment, save for how play goes in Pope Joan. Maybe. Anyhow here is a bit more of an explanation now that I have had time to give the idea some thought ::


Imagine you are playing a game like Hero Quest (or maybe Magic Realm or even King‘s Bounty) where there is an established board, playing pieces, and maybe character cards with all the stats and background on them. There is a GM, whose burden is thankfully lightened by the simple fact all they have to do is open a box, set up a board, and pass out character cards/sheets…

Ok, you have the basic visual, now enter the *situational* mechanic which allows for players to freely (ex)change which character they are playing and/or perhaps even penalize them into forced character exchange. This would be sort of like how board games can force you to return to start or some card games allow the exchange of hands with another player.

Thus part of game strategy could perhaps be for players to attempt to get their character of choice back or rid themselves of unwanted characters-- all while having to deal with the scenario‘s set goals-- which perhaps may even introduce *new* characters into play!


As I see it this could work one of two ways: 1) all players begin play with the standard single character; 2) all players begin with their *core* character and perhaps one or two additional *sidekick* types who are a bit fickle…


Hope that clarified my most recent brainfar.. er.. brainstorm.

Andrew Martin wrote:

I think this:

Say you have a game, any game will do, and add a mechanic which allows for the changing of who is actually GMing during the game session,..

.
is a benefit in some games.

tony188 wrote: I agree with Andrew, if you present this as regular role-playing game with a character switch mechanic then I would find it frustrating to play, mainly because the mechanic is frustrating my attempts to fufill the purpose of the game: to play a role and play it well.

Heh, that's "Die Fledermaus", right?

Mike

Of course the rules would have to be simple and everyone ( I mean *everyone* ) would have to have some basic knowledge of the rules. Or maybe not…

How this would work in a standard game: What if players could trump a GM? Or call them on a rule?

Since this often happens anyway why not just have a mechanic which then allows the person actively being GM to switch? ( I am sure most Game Masters would love the opportunity to actually play once in a while too. )

Also it would be a way to get everyone involved in learning the rules and actively trying to move the game forward toward personalized mini-goals.

“Dynamo Legend Weaving Role Play”

A Narrative (?) Aide


{{}}

Ok that’s my working title. Not bad, eh? Bit wordy though.

Currently this is merely an outline for the actual yet to be implemented mechanic. Any suggestions for rules expansions/clarifications are welcome. ( see below )

As outlined this system is *loosely* keyed to a possible table top game system. Either that or something akin to the free form style of a standard board/card game.

Those following my “Pixies” thread should note that this may or may not be woven into the fabric of that game as represented here. Feel free to comment if you have an opinion one way or the other on this matter.

Thank you.

Kester Pelagius



{{begins}}


The Rules (as they stand now)


Trumping the GM

During game play any Player may opt to “Trump the GM” in an effort to either A) acquire a character from the “NPC Pool”; or B) become the GM until they are Trumped themselves.(*)

• These are the only two clear reasons for Trumping I have at this point. More?


Discarding Characters

During their turn a Player may choose to “Discard” any one of their *secondary* characters. Characters thus discarded enter the “NPC Pool”.. <still working> ..


NPC Pool

Pool of characters whose status (currently) is either inactive or who are no longer under the control of a Player. All active characters not under the control of a Player become the domain of the Game Master until such time as they are “Trumped Out” or otherwise “Purchased” (?) into play.

{{ends}}


Still working the basics out. But I think those are pretty much set.

And, yes, I am borrowing terminology from trick taking card games. Darned astute of you all to notice!

Then again some of the basic mechanics just *feel* right for what I am working on. Not all, but enough that I was able to put this primer together to post.

Of course only play testing will tell. Which leads me to the following…

For those wanting to try this with a small impromptu game note that “Trumping” the GM successfully would mean either that 1) the GM would switch out active characters with the player who trumped them, or; 2) that the GM would have to draw characters from the standing NPC Pool. (Yes, Ms. Bobbi Socks, if you move to Trump the GM they get to play your Wailing Ben Sidhe. So only Trump if you really mean it!)

Also set scenarios/goals are likely to be required. Though they need not be adhered to in railroad fashion. Of course players wont earn Victory/XP points if they don’t actually complete the stated mission/assignment.

Greetings all,

I Was wondering where this thread had wandered to.

<Bad thread! Bad thread. No you can't have my cookie! Now sit.>

If I can be serious for a moment: I have been working on the basic principles of my idea. Reworking them into a very very minimalistic system to be exact.

My question is this: Once finished I would like to be able to provide it for play testing and feed back.

Suggestions on how to implement this?

Oh, yeah. I plan to make the test game as entertaining as possible. Since it is October it will be some one shot Hallween thing, if you folks don't mind such. So long as I find out what you think of the interactive mechanics.

Thank you.


Kind Regards,

Kester Pelagius

I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, but people usually just make the rules and perhaps a scenario available for download, as well as instructions on how to provide feedback (questionaire, phone, email, whatever). Then you beg people to play. :-)

Mike

Mike Holmes wrote: I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, but people usually just make the rules and perhaps a scenario available for download, as well as instructions on how to provide feedback (questionaire, phone, email, whatever). Then you beg people to play. :-)

Mike

Kester Pelagius wrote: Since this often happens anyway why not just have a mechanic which then allows the person actively being GM to switch? ( I am sure most Game Masters would love the opportunity to actually play once in a while too. )

Andrew Martin wrote:
I've been working (in my copious free time) on rules which distribute GM powers to every player (I'm a lazy GM). I've used the rules with two different game systems in two different settings. I've found that some players use all the powers, some don't use any of the new power, and some use some of the powers.

Based on this experience, I think that switching total GM power from one player to another player would be too "coarse". Some players wouldn't want the total power and will never "go for it" as it were.

Andrew Martin wrote: Some players wouldn't want the total power and will never "go for it" as it were.

Emily Care wrote: Kester seems to be describing a competitive system. Victory conditions, points or "tricks", to continue the card game analogy, might be useful to goad recalcitrant or uninspired players into assuming GM authority. Carrot and stick and all that. Something like the points you get in Inspectres perhaps. Are they franchise dice?

--Emily Care