Hi everyone. I would like some feedback on a new game I have been designing. I’ve been sitting on this idea for a while but last night I finally got around to typing up my notes. This is a first draft so please keep that in mind.

Briefly, the game is set in sort of modern day, post-apocalyptic world where animals suddenly gained human intelligence (what they call the Knowing) and then rose up in revolt. Not only did the Knowing impart human intelligence but it also imparted the caopacity to experience the best and worst of human traits---love, compassion, hatred, cruelty, etc.

The mechanics are really what I need feedback on. They are totally different than what I am used to designing/playing so please let me know how they stand up. I was shooting for the dark and gritty feel of Grimm’s Fairy Tales, Watership Down and Rikki Tikki Taavi (sp?). The game was also partially inspired by the first incarnation of Nathan Hill’s elegantly simple The Wild RPG.

After reading Matt's thread in the Site Discussion forum and after seeing the plethora of new games on this forum I understand I won't be getting a huge number of responses here but anything would help.

Anyway, here goes.

---



Life After the Revolt

The game takes place just a few years after animals have become aware, in a world where the natural order of things has been stood on end.

Many animals have retreated into the wild, attempting to detach themselves from human influence. Some hate humans and have formed vicious packs intent on killing all humans and even those with too many human like traits.

Others have settled down into small communities in or near small abandoned human towns. Some of these have actually prospered. These communities work together to survive and protect themselves from raiders (human or animal).

The cities have become war zones with bands of surviving humans and packs of animals constantly sniping at each other.

Still the cities contain food and other supplies that could be useful to animal settlements. In fact, procuring food is a extremely important among animals, particularly among the settlements. This is especially difficult for carnivores. It’s considered bad form to eat your neighbors and those who do are seldom welcome in one area for long. Luckily, insects and most small fish (bass, salmon, etc.) never experienced the Knowing and thus are still considered fair game. This has led to a brisk seafood trade and barter among the more "civilized" animals.



What You Need to Play

A GM, at least one player, some paper and pencils, at least 5 six-sided dice and an earthenware bowl full of black and white stones (at least 10 of each).



Character Generation

Players play an animal of whatever type they want.

The PC has 3 stats, Might, Wits and Bearing. These stats can never be increased.

-Might is overall physical prowess and is a static number between 1-5 based on the animal’s size.

1 - rats, mice, sparrows, gerbils
2 - cats, small dogs, armadillos
3 - big dogs, wolves, cougars, deer, gorillas,
4 - lions, crocodiles, great white sharks
5 - elephants, rhinos, killer whales

-Wits is a measure of intelligence and common sense.

-Bearing is a measure of appearance and overall demeanor.

You must have at least 1 in Wits and 1 in Bearing but otherwise have 3 points to divide between the two stats.

Tommy the terrier has Might 2 because of his size and
decides to divide his points into Wits 3 and Bearing 2.



Descriptors

Descriptors add bonuses to a particular stat for purposes of task resolution (see below). Descriptors should ideally be written out as a sentence. They range from 1-3.

Characters begin the game with 3 points of Descriptors.

Descriptors can be things like:
-is strong (M)
-likes to tell jokes (B)
-can evaluate human tools (W)
-sings good (B)
-good jumper (M)
-tells good stories (B)
-keeps fur clean (B)
-very alert (W)
-good at riddling (W)
-good swimmer (M)

Tommy is a scrappy little dog who enjoyed watching movies with his ex-master, particularly action movies. This translates to:

Tommy is a scrappy fighter (M +2). Tommy can understand human language (W+1).



Instinct and Reason

An animal with the Knowing is constantly fighting an internal battle between his animal nature and his human one. This struggle is reflected by his Instinct and Reason scores. Each animal begins the game with Instinct 4 and Reason 1. Instinct and Reason are used during task resolution (see below).



Quirks

For game purposes, Quirks are considered to be human-like quirks. Quirks can be physical as in a nervous tick, or a stutter or psychological as in the animal hates humans (or cats, or trees). As most pet owners can tell you, domesticated animals often develop human like quirks.

The more Quirks an animal has, the less comfortable other animals feel in his presence. Those with too many Quirks may find themselves a pariah among other animals.

Each character begins the game with one Quirk.

Quirks can be things like, wears human clothes and jewelry, enjoys casual sex, licks lips, dyes fur, over eats, etc.

As mentioned, Tommy enjoyed watching action movies. From this he developed his Quirk of spouting godawful one-liners, especially after a fight.


Quirks and Reason (Sins)

The PC gains 1 point of Reason (and loses 1 point of Instinct) for every 5 Quirks he develops. In addition, for every point of Reason he also gains a human "sin"---gluttony, greed, etc. This sin should reflect at least one of the Quirks in some way---an animal who likes to wear jewelry might take vanity, an over eater might take gluttony, etc.

As with Quirks, the more Sins an animal has, the less comfortable other animals feel in his presence. Sins should be roleplayed out and good narration of a sin could earn the character a Story Point (see below). Sins can be "lost" but Quirks are permanent (see below).



Favors

In the world today, animals must often call upon the assistance of others who not of their own kind. This has resulted in a complex web of favors. Favors are rated as small, big and huge.

Ex.
-Small: helped an animal find food, helped an animal do some small job, etc.
-Big: helped an animal in a fight, helped an animal find a den or permanent shelter, etc.
-Huge: saved an animal’s life, kept an animal’s family from starving, etc.


Each animal starts the game with one 1 point Favor owed and owing one 1 point Favor.

Tommy helped Ralph the rabbit drive a flock of birds away
from Ralph’s small crop garden. Ralph owes him a small favor for the service.

Tommy was injured in a fight with a rat and Franny Frog helped him clean and dress the wound so he owes her a small favor. .



Task Resolution

Tasks are resolved by an animal’s Stat + Descriptor vs. a target number between 2-10 (usually defaulted to 5). There are no degrees of success---an animal either completes the task or he doesn’t. Tasks successfully accomplished should be narrated by the player attempting the task. Good narration should be rewarded with one Story Point (see below).

Instinct or Reason can be used to help beat a high target number.

Using Instinct, the player draws one stone from the bowl for each point of Instinct the animal has. White stones count as one point.

Tommy wants to swim across a fast moving river. The target number is 5. He has Might 2 and no appropriate descriptors, therefore he uses his Instinct as a guide, drawing 4 stones from the bowl. If 3 of them come up white, he succeeds, if not he gets swept away downstream.


Using Reason, the player rolls 1d6 and adds the number to his Stat and Descriptor.

Tommy doesn’t like his chances of swimming across the river so he tried to come up with a better solution. He thinks on it and rolls his Reason of 1, getting a 5. Might 2 + 5 = 7, so the Player decides that the Tommy remembers watching a movie about boats. He straddles a small log and paddles it to the opposite shore.


Any time an animal uses Reason to resolve a task he develops another Quirk. When the character develops five Quirks, he gains another point of Reason (and a sin) and loses a point of Instinct.



Social Situations

Social Situations are resolved like other tasks, using the character’s Bearing + Descriptor vs. a target number. However, whenever an animal interacts with another in a social situation, the one with the most Quirks and Sins must subtract the difference from all social tasks/rolls.

Tommy 1 Quirk and Carlton the cheetah, 2 Quirks + 1 Sin meet in the forest. Carlton wants to be friendly but he must subtract 2 from all Bearing rolls with Tommy.



Combat

Combat is resolved the same way as tasks with Might + Descriptor + Instinct/Reason. This is essentially a resisted test so both combatants tally up their scores and compare. For each difference in success, the character suffers one wound level.

Groups of animals can attack one animal. In this case, the scores of the entire group if tallied up and compared with target’s.

There are four degrees of wounds---Bruised, Hurt, Badly Injured and Incapacitated.

-Bruised: A bruised animal is just that, bruised.
-Hurt: A hurt animal suffers a -1 to all tasks.
-Badly Injured: A Badly Injured animal suffers a -3 to all tasks.
-Incapacitated: An incapacitated abnormal is incapable of any action. In most cases the animal either dies or is eaten.


Now obviously this system was not designed with realism in mind. Tommy, Might 2, Scrappy Fighter 2, has an even chance against a lion Might 4. For this reason, the combat should be narrated by the winner of the contest, keeping in mind that using Instinct or Reason should be narrated differently. Good narration should always receive a Story Point (see below).


Tommy gets into a fight with Leo the lion. Both use Instinct and Tommy wins the contest by 1. The player describes the battle as a chaotic frenzy of Tommy’s barking and nipping at the lion’s ankles, staying just out of range of the lion’s claws. If Tommy had won the contest by 2, the lion might have brought its paw down on a sharp branch while trying to swat the terrier. If Tommy had won the contest by 3, the lion could have broken its paw on a rock. If Tommy had won the contest by 4, the lion might have crashed into a tree while leaping at the dog and knocked itself cold.

In the same instance, Tommy knows he doesn’t stand much chance against a lion and decides to use Reason. In this case, Tommy could actively use the terrain to his advantage, he might try to lead the lion into a trap, he might try to blind the lion, etc. Basically, the narration should contain some bit quick-thinking that allowed the winner to outsmart or outmaneuver the loser.


Note: Unless cornered or in defense of their young, few animals will fight past Badly Injured. In addition, animals who are normally prey (a rabbit, a deer, a wildebeest) will not fight natural predators (a coyote, a wolf pack, a lion, res.). In these cases, say if a PC mouse decides to fight a cat, or if a PC is Badly Injured, he must roll Reason to augment his numbers as Instinct dictates he flee the scene.

In addition, unless hunting, few animals attack with the intention of killing. Murder is a human trait. In the wild, most fights are territorial disputes with the loser leaving after being Bruised or Hurt. Any animal who kills for reasons other than self defense, defense of their young or for food automatically gains another Quirk.



Tasks and GM Fiat

A GM can rule at any time that a task cannot be done. A kangaroo cannot climb a sheer cliff, a mouse cannot lift more than an elephant, a lizard cannot beat a cheetah in a straight footrace. In these cases, the GM may allow a character to spend a Story Point to alter the scene (see below).




Story Points

Story Points (SP) are the game’s currency. In general, an animal gets a Story Point for good narration. Story Points can be used to create a story, for character advancement or to alter a scene.


Creating a Story

A story breaks down into five basic story elements. In order, they are: NPC, Situation, Complication, Hook and Reward.

In this game, the players participate in the creation of the upcoming story by spending one SP per story element. Storytelling is a human art so the players must roll their Reason. The one with the highest number may choose which story element he wants to create.

-NPC: This can be a new NPC or one the characters already know
-Situation: Describes the "plot" of the story and is centered around the NPC.
-Complication: What happens to keep the NPC from achieving his goal.
-Hook: Why do the character care? What makes them get involved.
-Reward: What do the characters hope to get out of this story.

Of all of these elements, Reward is perhaps the most important. Therefore, the player who uses the SP should choose the Reward wisely. It can be used to get something the PCs want or need, it can be used to showcase certain Descriptors that the PC wants to gain or used as a segue to another story.


An example of a story would be:

-NPC: Oliver the owl is an absent-minded but kindly old owl. -Situation: He has been driven out of his tree by a gang of belligerent squirrels.
-Complication: He wants his home back but obviously the squirrels are not just going to give it up.
-Hook: The PCs like Oliver and feel bad for him.
-Reward: A big favor from Oliver in the future.


It is up to the players to lay out the basics and it is up to the GM to work out the details. This is why story elements should ideally be created at the end of the gaming session. GMs should feel free to also develop a story within a story. Is the owl as innocent as he seems? Are the squirrels really mean or were they driven from their own homes by something meaner?


SP and Character Advancement

Characters advance by gaining new descriptors or by increasing ones they already have. This is done by spending story points on story elements. For every 5 SP the character spends on story elements, he may raise a Descriptor by 1 at the end of the next story.

Advancement is not automatic however. The PC must also have attempted the desired Descriptor at some point during the story. This is why the Reward element is so important because the player can make sure a situation arises in the story where the desired Descriptor is needed.

Tommy wants to get better at swimming. When it comes time for his turn to allocate a SP for Reward, he says he wants something involving swimming so he can gain a swimming Descriptor. The GM must include that into the story.


Note that the Descriptor must have been attempted in a way relevant to the story. In the owl story example above, a PC cannot just decide he wants the swimming Descriptor and then take a swim during the story. However if the squirrels agree to leave the tree in exchange for the characters retrieving a bag of walnuts that lie across a river, then the character could conceivably gain the Descriptor, at the end of the story, provided he has spent 5 SP on story elements.


SP and Resolving Tasks

A character may also spend a SP to alter a scene but _only_ when the GM rules a task impossible to accomplish. This should be narrated by the player but should take the form as a lucky break rather than an act of planning. A classic example of this would be the story of the Tortoise and the Hare.




SP and Altering Instinct/Reason

SP can be used to try to eliminate a point of Reason (and the accompanying sin) and get the character back in touch with his animal nature. This is difficult to do and requires the character spend his SP on the Reward element during story creation.

During the course of the story, the character cannot use his Reason to modify any rolls. At the end of the story, the character draws a number of stones equal to his Instinct. If any come up white, he regains a point of Instinct and loses a point of Reason (and the sin). Only one point can be gained/lost in this manner and unlike gaining Descriptors, only the character who spent the SP for the Reward element may attempt this.

As a side effect of the Knowing, animals must always have at least 1 point of Reason.


Humans

Humans are intended to be used as NPCs, usually antagonists. Humans are created the same way as animals except that they start with a Reason of 4 and Instinct of 1, 1 sin and 1d6+2 Quirks. In these times, some Humans have less Reason and more Instinct, having devolved to a more primitive state.

Of the few humans that remain, some have banded together in the cities in fortified shopping malls and apartment complexes, some roam the countryside scavenging food or items that used to have worth, while others have banded together into paramilitary organizations intent on exterminating animals. The most aggressive of these is comprised of ex-PETA members (or as close as I can legally come to using that name) who felt the most betrayed.



What Caused the Knowing?

Nobody knows. Theories include a laboratory experiment gone haywire, the first wave of a sinister alien invasion or even that the spirit of mother earth decided to hand the reins back over to the animals before humans could destroy the world for good.

---------





Well, that’s what I have so far. Like I said, I’d really appreciate any comments, suggestions or thoughts. Is the game playable? Interesting? Do the mechanics seem sound? Please let me know if something was unclear.

I’m really enamored with the setting and plan on at least publishing this as a PDF at some point once the bugs are worked out of the mechanics. Is there anyone out there who would be willing to do some online playtesting with me, and then maybe some off line playtesting with their own group?

Thanks,

Pete

I really like this alot. I have a question though, I think I already know the answer but I want to make sure, do the animals retain their normal form or are they mutated in any way?

I would suggest you move up gorillas and other great apes up one might level as they are truly much stronger than most of the creatures they are listed with. the other question would be how do the cities work? Do they vary in government by who is in charge and how do they get the things they need? I know if I go with the Watership Down feeling I get an idea of how they could work. Another question would be have you considered The Secret of Nymh as another descriptive of setting and possibly what those with the Knowing are capable of doing?

Sylus

Hi Sylus,

The animals are still physically the same, only smarter. I figure there are enough anthromorphic RPGs out there. There are probably more than a few animal RPGs out there as well but I just like the thought of playing quirky animals better than animal mutants.

You're right about the gorillas. Don't know what I was thinking there. :)

As to city structure are you talking about animals or humans? I'm envisioning humans have some places staked out for farming, maybe fenced off and electrified. Others might have crops growing on tops of buildings or maybe in courtyards. I can see a football stadium converted for this. Governments would range from politicians and other leaders in the more civilized compounds, to warlords in others.

As far as animal settlements, the hierachy would also vary from one to another. Some would be communal while others would be more strict (like Effrafa). Something I forgot to add was now that the human threat is not so immediate, not all of the animals are working together. Some have become worse than humans with regards to cruelty and such, even towards other animals, raiding, pilfering and killing among the settlements.

Secret of Nimh is a _perfect_ fit for this and I don't know why I didn't think about that. Thanks for reminding me.

And thanks a lot for the comments.

Pete

Hey Pete,

No problem. I enjoy helping out and seeing new settings develop. Nice to see you going with them retaining their natural form. Glad the reference to Nymh helped out. I'm really looking forward to seing more on it.

Sylus

A few comments.

First have you seen Rise Again. A sorta more violent version of what you have, and a bit more Narrativist, FWIW.

I assume you mean you start with one in each of your two stats and can raise them by a total of three points? The text is abiguous.

Is there any rationale for why the PlayerAnimals stick together? The structure you provide is classic mission oriented. Why do these particular animals do these particular missions? That seems a bit vague at this point.

Mike

I love Watership Down (the book, never saw the movie) so playing something like this is very appealing to me. If you set it up on Indie Netgaming to play over the 'net I'm in.

A small concern about the rules:

If Might is 1-5 and you can have a bonus "extra strong +3" does that mean that my rabbit is strong as say the average gorilla or crocodile? That seems pretty... err... strong.

Hi Mike, thanks for taking a look and thanks for the link to Rise Again. I meant to ask for any similar games but forgot so if anyone has any more please post the links.

I assume you mean you start with one in each of your two stats and can raise them by a total of three points? The text is abiguous.

Is there any rationale for why the Player Animals stick together? The structure you provide is classic mission oriented. Why do these particular animals do these particular missions? That seems a bit vague at this point.

If you haven't read George Orwell's Animal Farm rush out and do so today. Right now.

It's "technically" about Socialism and COmmunism, but I reckon that your game is "technically" about human issues, not just "wouldn't it be cool to play talking animals" (although that would be cool, I guess).

It'll really walk you through the issues of how your newly impowered animals might treat each other, and to what ends.

Jake

Jake Norwood wrote: If you haven't read George Orwell's Animal Farm rush out and do so today. Right now.

It's "technically" about Socialism and Communism, but I reckon that your game is "technically" about human issues, not just "wouldn't it be cool to play talking animals" (although that would be cool, I guess).

Gaa! Animal Farm! Another source I didn't think of. Thanks guys. Lord, it's been like 15 years since I read that book so it'll be like reading something new all over again.

Mike,

I checked out Rise Again and see they had some neat ideas but they went the anthropomorphic route I was trying to avoid. I was just wondering why you classified it as a more Narrativist* game because at a glance it looks like the rules seem to support a more Sim style of play.

Everyone,

After Mike pointed out the obvious (why are the PCs together?) I came up with this.

In chargen, the players must decide three relatively important events that involve their character.
-One has to be something that has already happened (past). -One has to be something that is currently going on (present).
-One has to be something they want to do/get involved in at a later date (future).
-At least one of those events has to favorably link to another character in the group.

Here is an example---these are just basic outlines of course and it is hoped that the players will develop more in depth events for their animal.


The group is made up of a rabbit, a wolf, a hawk and an alligator.

Rabbit (past): A short time ago, the rabbit warned the wolf that human hunters were in the area so the wolf is grateful.

Wolf (present): The wolf and the hawk have recently teamed up to raid a nearby animal settlement for food, with the hawk flying recon and the wolf doing the groundwork.

Alligator (future): The alligator's lair is near the rabbit's warren and he wants to make an arrangement where the rabbit can warn him of danger in the future so he wants to be on good terms with the rabbit.


This would tie all of the characters into a group to start with. The tie might be tenuous at first (like the hawk and the rabbit) but will hopefully strengthen through future Stories.

I hope I'm explaining this right.

Does this mechanic sound interesting or does it blatantly rip off some other game? I'm thinking mainly of Sorcerer's relationship map here---I don't know exactly how that mechanic works or if the two are that similar so please let me know before I step on anyone's toes.

Anyway, as always, comments appreciated.

Pete


*Narrativism, discussed here among other places.

Hi Pete,

Just wanted to clarify that the Sorcerer relationship-map method is mainly an NPC-backstory technique and has little to nothing to do with relationships, alliances, friendships, or group-associations among the player-characters.

The Alyria storymap method, which is derived from the relationship-map rules, is a bit different and a little bit more like what you're describing, but I don't think parallelism in this aspect (or any aspect, really) of game design is a bad thing at all.

Best,
Ron

For some reason the premise reminds me more of THE BIRDS than anything else. Maybe with a bit of WATERSHIP DOWN sprinkled in, which makes it really interesting.

There could stand to be a bit of a bigger range on the stats though. However, I say this because I'd want to play an aware tarantula (think KINGDOM OF THE SPIDERS), and "1 Might" just doesn't seem low enough.

OK, Ron, thanks for the clarification on Sorcerer and thanks for pointing out Alyria. It's always good to have something to reference, especially when you're trying something new. Also, in this game, at least one of the events has to involve one of the other PCs but the other two events can involve NPCs.

Evan, The Birds is another great movie (and now that I think of it, Cujo, The Pack, Monkeyshines, Grizzly! and others). I actually had pictured birds attacking in overwhelming numbers like that, descending on humans caught in the open.

Also, playing an aware tarantula is just beautiful. I had initially planned for all insects to be unaffected by the Knowing but I think I will change that and make insects with a little size and with some. . .personality, for lack of a better word, playable. I can see tarantula, scorpion, praying mantis, dragonfly, etc. PCs but I might have to veto a PC cricket, gnat, fly, ant*, termite or earthworm (not insect, I know, but. . .). :)

Rather than change the stats (it took me a while to get the right symmetry I was shooting for) what I can do is make Might range from 0-5, with large bugs at 0. This would of course put insects at a huge disadvantage in most physical situations (combat especially would be resolved with just Descriptors and Reason/Instinct) but I assume their talents would lie elsewhere anyway. Thanks for the suggestion!

Incidentally, for anyone still following this thread, I'm having a _huge_ problem thinking of a name for this game which is extremely annoying when I'm writing stuff for it. I tentatively named the file "Animal Uprising" but I absolutely cringe every time I read that or think about explaining the game to others using that name. I'm looking for something non-obtrusive or cheesy so any suggestions are welcome! :)

Pete

*although come to think of it, a PC queen ant (or bee), using telepathy to direct her soldiers as they "go on adventures" might be interesting, and certainly as an NPC.

Check out these movies as well, for smart animal vs. human theme:
Day of the Animals (actually, these animals are just mean, from a sun flare or something goofy)
Man's Best Friend
Monkey Shines

I'll try to think of a few more...

And isn't there an old disney movie called The Doberman Gang, about a trio of bank robbing dogs?

Sean

After reviewing, I take back what I said about Rise being more Narrativist. I think they are similar in ability to produce Narrativist play. Yes, Rise has some additional Sim mechanics, but the only question is whether or not they will become distracting in play. Which only playtesting would tell.

Mike