"Sometimes you gotta stop and smell the roses."
- Anonymous

Hey all, I am still plugging away on the Game Concepts shared play
chapter, and in enumerating the various elements of the Setting that a
Company should consider when proposing Setting Tenets, I hit upon a
couple of ideas/principles in how I want to approach the design of the
Design Architecture, and was curious what people thought of them.

Anyway, I am plugging through the Game Concepts: Shared Play chapter,
in the midst of the Genesis Session material describing the Design Tenets,
when I get to Setting Tenets. I start laying out the important setting
considerations, the players should consider, and how they are
represented in the gamesystem. Also, I am considering my cool things
bullet points considerations in making the worlds, where I want to push
a kind of vast anime style grandeur to world design, you know engaging,
enthralling kewl stuff.

So you have your Panoramic elements, which includes the overall
geography and scope of the Narrative Environment. Here I am cribbing
off of Aria in putting together my bullet points, adding in my gosh-wow
elements of special environmental effects as a consideration, you know
magic storms, toxic jungles etc. Stuff that will be present as hazards
or obstacles to characters. Then you have Mythic elements, which
concerns how the world fits into the games larger cosmology, as well as
the existence of gods and other entities. Then you have Speculative
elements which considers what kind of Metabilities are availabe within the
Narrative Environment (you know, Magic, Psi, Super-powers). Then Social
elements, such as races, cultures, organizations, societys, etc. Biological
elements, such as Species available and creatures extant. etc.

Not all of these need to be detailed to start play, they simply define the
creative space that make up the production, and areas from which the
Company can contribute further designs.

One of the key elements that occurs to me considering these elements is
the idea of Intuitive Verisimilitude. my idea of IV stems from the
understanding that there is no way I can create truly comprehensive or
detailed system handling the myriad of details involved in modeling a
setting, let alone an infinite universe of fantasy settings. However, I
can create a sense of detail and depth by relating the details in terms
of their effects on Personae, and then having the players flesh out the
extra details to make it seem real, that is to create Intuitive Verismilitude.


IV is a melding of Aria's Playable Realism precept combined with the
Design by Effect approach of Heroes system powers. In Hero the Powers
effects are described in game system terms, but the actual special
effects are interpreted and described by the players, requiring them to
suggest and implement logical ramifications and limitations, and
operational details in handling them in game. Thus, drawing on the
players knowledge and imagination to add detail and plausibility to the
game Entities of the Setting. So, my systems then will focus on defining
the Personae/Resolution system effects, and handle the rest through
Intuitive Verismilitude.

An outgrowth of this IV is what I call Simulative Archetypes. Here, I
intend for the different Design Frameworks to "model" particular
concerns and elements of the entites created by it through sets of
overarching Simulative Archetypes. Which prescribes various mechanical
limitations and Mechanical advantages to the Game Entity, much like
power advantages in Hero, creating a model for simluating the
differences in elements and operation of a particular Entity. For
intance, powers created under the Metability system could be made under
a "Psionic" SA, or a "Magic" SA, or "Super-Power" SA, or "Cybernetic
Augmentation" SA, or "Post-apocalytpic Mutation" SA, etc. By the same
token, Vehicles could be made under a "Steam Power" SA, or a "Alien
Energy Crystal" SA, etc. Weapons under an "Bronze Age" SA, or "World
War 2" SA or "Cyberpunk Future" SA, etc. Players can create the SA's for
their particular narrative Environment, or use a stock SA, and then
create and use weapons and such for it.

Basically, the SA's provide a way to add some plausible gear-head design
realities and modeling to what will be point-based design for effect
Game Entity design Frameworks. The intent here is to add a bit more
depth and foundation for detailed exploration of setting via tinkering
and design, while still providing a universaly applicable system that
doesn't require spreadsheets and engineering to use. This is important
as otherwise it wouldn't be able to support the infinite universe of
worlds that I envision.

Another idea is that these SA's will have Aspect values, that limit
the major boundaries/realities of each sphere, thus integrating the
player's game worlds into the larger game universe, and setting the
stage for adventures and Narratives among different Spheres. Creating
a comprehensive interoperable Design Architecture for the game that
lets the players engage in serious Setting eXploration, you know
the joy of SeX I talked about earlier.

Anyway, these are concepts that developed as I was writing the Setting
Tenets text, I think they provide a doable system concept. Hopefully,
the system will set the stage for the creation of an elaborate and
engaging communal fantasy that the players will want to explore.
Comments or questions by anyone who wants to help me flesh out this
idea are welcome. As is a discussion of the larger issue of good SeX by
design:)

Thanks for your interest,

Hi Rob,

I'm a little confused; reading the latest on Scattershot and then turning to your stuff is not recommended for the faint of heart. Is Design Architecture inside the Simulative Archetype, or is it the other way around?

Also, here's one BIG vote of enthusiasm for both Intuitive Verisimilitude and Design by Effect. With these in your pocket, Simulationism/Setting suddenly becomes do-able as play and transferable by text. That is ... well, let's just say that's historically rare.

Ron Edwards wrote: Hi Rob,

I'm a little confused; reading the latest on Scattershot and then turning to your stuff is not recommended for the faint of heart. Is Design Architecture inside the Simulative Archetype, or is it the other way around?

Ron Edwards wrote:
Also, here's one BIG vote of enthusiasm for both Intuitive Verisimilitude and Design by Effect. With these in your pocket, Simulationism/Setting suddenly becomes do-able as play and transferable by text. That is ... well, let's just say that's historically rare.