This is just a quick message to let anyone interested know that DragonGrace is a new RPG by my design. The Website is www.anycities.com/user/dragongrace

Premise: A monotheistic fantasy world in which the mighty have fallen and the current generations must work on surviving and discovering the mysteries of the world. The end goal is a return to the mighty status of the ancients such as Dragons, Angels, Kraken, and more.

This is proposed as a relatively diceless system. The randomness comes in the initial character generation for which I have provided an online tool, and will be developing a good Visual Basic tool to do more.

To me this is version 2, since it has changed a great deal since I started the project. I do consider this still an Alpha version however. I hope that my version 3 will be an actual Beta product that I can consider distributing in more formats than just web-based.

I welcome constructive criticism, but of course reserve the right to take it or leave it dependent upon how it fits with my overall game concept.

JOE--

Wow, I've got several comments to start off with.

It just so happens that I'm starting something not too dissmilar. I'm glad that you've arrived here, and hope you stay, because I think that the format that you're using is quite interesting. And we have few experts here (not forgetting you, Blake), and could use more.

That all said, what I think we can help you with most is in the area of mechanical design. The first thing I'd ask is why, given your very specific drive to create stories, did you go with a system so like D&D? Is it just what you're familiar with, or is there something about it that you see as particularly conducive to what you're doing?

Because it there's one thing I'd do with your game, looking at it as briefly as I have, is to totally revamp the system. This isn't a dig, I really like the direction that your idea goes off in. But I just think that the entire mechanics look wrong to me for what it is that I think you're doing.

So, any clarification there would be helpful.

Mike

>>mechanical design. The first thing I'd ask is why, given your very specific drive to create stories, did you go with a system so like D&D? Is it just what you're familiar with, or is there something about it that you see as particularly conducive to what you're doing? >>

hmm... well it was a very purposeful decision to keep the system when I was developing because of the stories. In design I began thinking of all the people who start writing RPG fantasy freeform games and how quickly their characters become godlike beings. Some do this out of sheer muchkinism, and some because they don't know any better. The limitations provided by a somewhat D&D inspired mechanic to me was a simple framework that could be expanded upon.

Breaking the rules to go outside of the limitations of a characters 'stats' would be a sign of a more knowledgable player. However I'd be interested in hearing alternatives, especially for the more story oriented approaches.

For myself having a slow solid build in story turns out to be like a soap opera that goes on over time, only the characters in a game grow because of their actions instead of going in the endless loops of daytime TV. Accumulating experience which in turn crests levels which gives build points was my vehicle for visible tangible growth, especially to the freeformers who think in a computer role playing game fashion.

I hope this explains my decision somewhat, but like I said, I'd be interested in hearing alternatives.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all about a good solid, even hefty, system (we're all about the system here). Most here would agree with your inclusion of such a system in general terms. But there are systems that support certain styles of play better than others.

Go to the articles page right now. Read "System Matters", "GNS and other Matters...", and "Fantasy Heartbreakers".

That'll get you up to speed on most of the current theory as it applies to what you're doing. Be warned that's a pretty hefty reading assignment I've just given you. But once you're finished we'll have a lot to talk about (assuming you're still interested).

Mike

>>That'll get you up to speed on most of the current theory as it applies to what you're doing. Be warned that's a pretty hefty reading assignment I've just given you. But once you're finished we'll have a lot to talk about (assuming you're still interested). >>

Still very interested, but since I'm under the weather and reading fast becasue I'm at work, I'll say I only got about 80% of it all. Still I made sure to get the points. The most hard hitting point however was at the end of "More Fantasy Heartbreakers" (outside of your recommendations) where Ron take sup your challenge to make a Heartbreaker on the fly. Ironically enough, that is exactly what I did in this case, and on purpose without realizing it.

I however took the extra step to continue developing my idea, which I still feel has potential to be a fun little game. You would probably also thinking that I want to and should veer towards a more Narrative supportive system rather than the half-way I seemingly have. Which if you suggested this, I would probably agree.

A bit more background. The principle idea started as a AD&D knockoff in an AD&D world approaching with an N point of view. If you read the articles I had written while developing the game, It migrated into a system of quick development (Heartbreaking). Now growing towards a version 3, I do want to emphasize story development and character development (whether or not the terminology makes Ron want to cringe :), sorry no offense, Ron).

JOE--

So I guess the next question is, in the new version, are you interested in changing the system at all, and if so, by how much would you be willing to change it?

For an idea of just how far you could change your game, look at The Pool. I'm not suggesting this sort of thing, nor even that you'd want to go that far. I'm just putting it out there to give you an idea of what a system that's radically different than D&D can look like.

Then check out JAGS, for an entirely different kind of system from The Pool that supports an entirely different kind of play. This should give you an idea of the possible sorts of systems available. It's really diverse.

I agree that your goals are most likely Narrativist? I think that's a good assumption from all you've written. That is, I think that you want players to really address the character's issues in an empowered way (as opposed to having story created by participating in a plot of a GMs design, for instance). If that's the case, then maybe you'd want something more like Hero Wars. A game more structured than - say - The Pool, but better for promoting Narrativism than JAGS might be.

But what I'd really suggest is that you take from lots of innovative systems like these, and come up with something totally unique and tailored to the sort of play you want to see. For example none of these is diceless (fortuneless to be technical), which I assume is a prerequisite for your game. Have you seen Amber, BTW? I kinda was assuming that you had as most people who play online and use the term "diceless" have. It's not too difficult to drop fortune from a system, and you could easily add that feature to systems like the one's you find here.

One system that really ought to interest you is Nobilis. The site I've linked to is an online play of that game as well.

The idea is to get a feel for the range of possibilities so that you can start to think outside the D&D box, and create a system that does what you want it to do.

Mike

I like the existing system as it serves a purpose of limiting a character intentionally by forcing them through a gradual progression. The progression is measured and tracked. A GM can serve easily as a watchdog in a community of players in the existing system and other players can as well by quick character comparisons.

However I am familiar with Amber. I have come across Sorcerer before visiting the forge in my searches for existing games. I know the Window system (I like the concept behind Children of Fire as well). The Pool seemed to be a stripped out portion of White Wolf Wraith. As if we just took the Passions and Fetters and played the character with only that knowledge. JAGS seems somehow limited but I only glanced at it briefly. It almost seems like another game I'm working on but in a more developed level. Hero Wars seems interesting but again I only glanced at it.

Nobilis on the other hand appears to me like another game I can't quite put my finger on, maybe a stripped out version of Nephilim, but it has a concept that looks very attractive.

I hope it doesn't look this way, but I'm not new to the rpg world, I've scoured the interent looking at how people do things, experimented on my own and such. I may not have 20+ years under my belt but over 15 ought to do me well. I've seen some of what's out there.

Willing to change the system... My original intentions was to make the attributes more meaningful with the magic/psionic system and skills system as my first move. Picking up on my mistakes as I went along and working through them.

however, I'd be willing to move the setting into a whole new kind of redesign to hone my skills and try something new. What did you have in mind? Or perhaps I should ask >> It just so happens that I'm starting something not too dissmilar >> what ARE you working on?

JOE--

dragongrace wrote: ...it serves a purpose of limiting a character intentionally by forcing them through a gradual progression.

Character progression... A character that does not grow may have more of a tendency to be static. It is more likely, in my opinion, that a character that has a definate growth will be dynamic.

Those stories in which someone suddenly progresses by a burst of inspiration or all in one moment are out there. However let's look at literature. Of Human Bondage by Somerset. Our principle character spends the entire book growing up. He learns as he goes along, he must experience life little by little and each experience lends something to his character that he can draw upon, much like life.

Perhaps I am flawed in my opinion but a character that does not grow in some way will eventually be stagnant. Suppose for example you are writing a story of a soldier, a short story first. It's about his first battle, will he learn something from it, if so then what. This one battle may or may not (metagame) increase his stats, or teach him new skills. Nevertheless it was entertaining and we could write he next few battles the same way. So long as the enemy never grows or learns from their mistakes our soldier neither has to as well. However the moment one enemy realized what our soldier does, our soldier dies. Our soldier must progress as an individual at least in knowledge of fighting tactics in order to continually best the opponent.

In a more fantasy oriented game even one that is narrative, our soldier who does not progress will never be able to get beyond fighting other low level infantry while those that grow meet the kings, fight the dragons, slay the evil wizard, to name a few cliches. Perhaps our soldier doesn't want to do these things but how many times does the average person want to read about the same guy engaged in the same battle thinking the same things over and over again.

Characters over longer stories such as Of Human Bondage, Pride and Prejudice, and even West Wing show progression as individuals.

JOE--

A character that doesn't grow is static, by definition.

The question is, is character progression (changing what's on the sheet) the same thing as character growth?

If you want to tell stories about Beowulf fighting Grendal and grudge monsters and dragons, why not let people create characters capable of shaking heaven and earth power-wise, and create a seperate style of mechanic for modeling personality growth.

Unless the Entire Point of Dragongrace (I'll admit to vast ignorance- thread skimming and not following the link, damn being at work) is to model the classic Hero's Journey type story. But don’t think it’s necessary or required- make a system that facilitates telling the type of stories you want to tell now, not the stories you want to tell some day.

As to Nobilis- here's the Basic Mechanic:

I have an Attribute. It governs a certain range of abilities- at each level of the Attribute, a new broadening of that range opens up. For example, Aspect governs anything that a human could do (although sometimes far, far better than a human can actually do). Stuff like running, fighting, speaking and thinking.

I have some rank in that Attribute. I can perform any action at that rank or lower for free, any time I want. So, with Aspect 2, I can do anything that Aspect 0, 1 or 2 cover for free.

I also have a pool of temporary boosting points, which I can spend to increase my effective rank in the Attribute for a single action. So, I spend five of these boosting points on Aspect and perform an Aspect 7 action- far above what I normally could, but also draining me of those five points.

That's the basic system. MURPG (Marvel Universe RPG) (soon to be published) uses a variant where your rank defines your aboslute limit, and you spend your energy to activate some degree of that limit. So, say I've got a Strength of 3- I can spend 1 point to perform a Strength 1 action, 2 for a Strength 2 or 3 for a Strength 3- but I can never spend more than three points on an act based purely off Strength.

Hope that helps :)

Damn you’re a quick study. Before I get started, the only link I found to the character generator was on the site map, and that didn't work (Yahoo returns 404). Same problem with the "Ideas on Combat". I really haven't been able to get how resolution works. Is it just a comparison of appropriate stats? Any metagame points or anything like that involved at all? Is there a link to resolution rules that I missed?

dragongrace wrote: I like the existing system as it serves a purpose of limiting a character intentionally by forcing them through a gradual progression. The progression is measured and tracked. A GM can serve easily as a watchdog in a community of players in the existing system and other players can as well by quick character comparisons.

However I am familiar with Amber.

I have come across Sorcerer before visiting the forge in my searches for existing games.

I know the Window system.

(I like the concept behind Children of Fire as well).

The Pool seemed to be a stripped out portion of White Wolf Wraith. As if we just took the Passions and Fetters and played the character with only that knowledge.

JAGS seems somehow limited but I only glanced at it briefly. It almost seems like another game I'm working on but in a more developed level.

Hero Wars seems interesting but again I only glanced at it.

Nobilis on the other hand appears to me like another game I can't quite put my finger on, maybe a stripped out version of Nephilim, but it has a concept that looks very attractive.

I hope it doesn't look this way, but I'm not new to the rpg world, I've scoured the interent looking at how people do things, experimented on my own and such. I may not have 20+ years under my belt but over 15 ought to do me well. I've seen some of what's out there.

Willing to change the system... My original intentions was to make the attributes more meaningful with the magic/psionic system and skills system as my first move. Picking up on my mistakes as I went along and working through them.

Or perhaps I should ask >> It just so happens that I'm starting something not too dissmilar >> what ARE you working on?

To write the stories you want to write now...
It's easy enough in any system to tackle the big beasties but starting with large characters, Unless we have joe teenager who never knew he had superpowers wake up one day and save the world in an expert fashion (bourne identity?).

I'll admit my ignorance of nobilis, but can you increase your aspect or any other trait or are you stuck with them for life. Dispite being able to pump bonus points into an attribute for skills, on paper they are static. The dynamic hoped for in such a game comes from character growth through personality of the character and development of the character history through repeated stories.

Perhaps to look again at the GNS way of thinking I'm aiming for a mixture of N & S. Simulation of the growth of a character in many aspects. It's realistic to say that a man who works out everyday to better himself with the knowledge to do so will be probably be able to look back one day and say I only used to be able to lift a ten pound weight, now I can lift a 50 pound weight. He does so on a regular basis, thus in nobilis terms, his aspect should have increased rather than pumping extra points into the attribute every time he lifts something over 10 pounds.

In Draogngrace it is a reward to be able to become a dryad, an elemental, or a dragon. A long term goal. There are those who want to make the journey and those who want to start out at the top with no where to go afterwards.

When I started thinking about growing the game into more than just a attempt to throw something down on paper, I wondered what I wanted to be able to do, what I would want to play, and how I would want to go about it. I decided that I wanted to commit the time it took to have a long episodic journey that in the end I would have a character who had to work to get there, not necessarily an arch-mage to begin with and an arch-mage I'll always be.

Conan does not change. Not once. Sure, he becomes king. Only to abandon his throne an go off adventuring again. Because he doesn't like being king. He likes being Conan.

And nuthin's as cool as Conan.

There's something about the eternal hero that makes it so that you can write story after story about him and it never gets old.

That said, nothing wrong with allowing development. But Drew has a good point that development does not have to equal ability in all cases.

Have you considered rewarding the player directly instead of through the character? Or having it be an option? Sometimes it's cooler to give the player points he can spend to make the character look cooler than his stats would indicate. So Sam can kill Shelob.

Perhaps to look again at the GNS way of thinking I'm aiming for a mixture of N & S.

http://www.geocities.com/dragongrace2003/rcgFrames.html

This page only returns stats as I am only a mediocre programmer.

>>Haven't you encountered the phenomenon at all where lots of players decide that their characters' stories have to with accumulation of power?>>

It's a sad phenomenon, but yes. Gamism however seems to come as a result of having the capability to take advantage of the system or use it to become the biggest baddest character to walk the world. I can perceive that practically any game with measurable statistics would have this problem. There's always going to be the guy who says I've got one more point than you. Quashing munchkins is much easier to do with the delete account button.

>>And they do get more powerful, don't they. A starting character is nothing compared to even a moderate level character from what I can see>>

Character will gain power under the current system. However a moderate character under this system will be one who has attained a level greater than 6 in my opinion. But given their starting condition, potentially a 1st level character can come in and wipe the floor with them if we go by just statistics. I would like to think in an actual story event however that any conflict whether physical or intellectual will not be resolved by, "gimme your stat and we'll compare". I know I was toying roughly with the idea in my "ideas on combat" "ideas on magic..." links, but I put them up there as notes for myself. I debated on whether or not to put them up there, but I decided to as I see the system as a fledgling anyway. Those ideas were to either modify or scrap. I haven't actually used those ideas in any of the stories.

Lady fair... by pursuing lady fair I left that attachment up to the character to foster and work upon. Being a fighter in the system will gain them physical power however they decide their stories should grow (with or without fighting), but they do get bonus points to distribute as they deem necessary, or rather appropriate. There is not love attribute, or relationship attribute obviously as I did not put them in there. In fact I didn't even think about them. I took the point of relationships of any and all kinds to be a part of character history and the responsibility of the player.

What focus I have placed on combat came as a result of thinking about how players interact in that sense. In my daily job I don't often leap over the cube wall and bring my keyboard down upon my co-workers computer mesmerized head. I, along with many others, have little experience with handling combat. So thus when it does come up in a story line, I tried to give some kind of inspiration for handling the event in various ways other than I hit them and they fall down, I hit them repeatedly and they die. Describing it using terms found through skills they can create their Monologue of Victory (to pull from another source), and thus score bonus experience from impressing co-writers and the GM. Other skills like Social Interaction I left out because that's what many of us do everyday. I don't need an idea from the game to tell me to work it out or get fired. (Medicine probably would be a knowledge, but I was scrambling, I'm so ashamed. Actually for most of my skills I was scrambling, trying to think of ideas to help players form their characters.)

Amber: played it, loved, kept a diary for a insane amberite who only wanted to work in a clothing store in a reality that every single person had one blue eye and one green and only drank pepsi as their beverage of choice. Much to the chagrine of my other power hungry compatriots.

Sorcerer: skimmed it, but it was probably about a year back, I only remember coming across it before.

Window: Good in my opinion, while only thinking about it. No actual game play, however. I'd have to refresh my memory. Children of fire - the setting appealed to me as well as the idea behind the characters goals. I would have liked to have played a game. The role of the rules is for abusers of the system. This kind of idea crossed my mind frequently when thinking about system.

Passions and Fetters: to me I would have to think about them as part of the character. However a player might want to supercede a GM's gameplan and seek to fulfill passions and resolve fetters for the character's resolutions of death. Abilities in dragongrace i would say are the characters.

JAGS I will take a much closer look at, as I didn't dig very deep, no offense intended to the game's creator, but no single game will cover everything to be fair. Hero Wars also I will look closer at. And you have obviousy noted that I have not included equipment or even economy in dragongrace. In racial descriptions I've placed ideas on how raced trade amonst themselves and others but left out money in character creation.

Equipment and treasure are ambiguous for two reasons. One is that I would like the creation of magical items to be a special thing that a character could work for or find, in either case discussing the purpose and ramifications with the GM is a necessary task for an OK. Two: without ratings and listings of such things, I was interested in seeing what people would bring to the table. If they think some sword is the most powerful weapon in another game they have no way of comparing in this one and thus hopefully (and I'm just spitting in the wind) they will chose items and wealth that make for a more interesting story for themselves.

I have good experience in about 6 or 7 systems. Passing experience in maybe 3 more. An active interest in game design that extends beyond RPGs into computer, dice, card, word, board, etc.

dragongrace wrote: http://www.geocities.com/dragongrace2003/rcgFrames.html

This page only returns stats as I am only a mediocre programmer.

It's a sad phenomenon, but yes. Gamism however seems to come as a result of having the capability to take advantage of the system or use it to become the biggest baddest character to walk the world. I can perceive that practically any game with measurable statistics would have this problem. There's always going to be the guy who says I've got one more point than you. Quashing munchkins is much easier to do with the delete account button.

Character will gain power under the current system. However a moderate character under this system will be one who has attained a level greater than 6 in my opinion. But given their starting condition, potentially a 1st level character can come in and wipe the floor with them if we go by just statistics. I would like to think in an actual story event however that any conflict whether physical or intellectual will not be resolved by, "gimme your stat and we'll compare". I know I was toying roughly with the idea in my "ideas on combat" "ideas on magic..." links, but I put them up there as notes for myself. I debated on whether or not to put them up there, but I decided to as I see the system as a fledgling anyway. Those ideas were to either modify or scrap. I haven't actually used those ideas in any of the stories.

I took the point of relationships of any and all kinds to be a part of character history and the responsibility of the player.

What focus I have placed on combat came as a result of thinking about how players interact in that sense. In my daily job I don't often leap over the cube wall and bring my keyboard down upon my co-workers computer mesmerized head. I, along with many others, have little experience with handling combat. So thus when it does come up in a story line, I tried to give some kind of inspiration for handling the event in various ways other than I hit them and they fall down, I hit them repeatedly and they die. Describing it using terms found through skills they can create their Monologue of Victory (to pull from another source), and thus score bonus experience from impressing co-writers and the GM. Other skills like Social Interaction I left out because that's what many of us do everyday. I don't need an idea from the game to tell me to work it out or get fired.

(Medicine probably would be a knowledge, but I was scrambling, I'm so ashamed. Actually for most of my skills I was scrambling, trying to think of ideas to help players form their characters.)

Amber: played it, loved, kept a diary for a insane amberite who only wanted to work in a clothing store in a reality that every single person had one blue eye and one green and only drank pepsi as their beverage of choice. Much to the chagrine of my other power hungry compatriots.

Sorcerer: skimmed it, but it was probably about a year back, I only remember coming across it before.

Window: Good in my opinion, while only thinking about it. No actual game play, however. I'd have to refresh my memory.

Children of fire - the setting appealed to me as well as the idea behind the characters goals. I would have liked to have played a game. The role of the rules is for abusers of the system. This kind of idea crossed my mind frequently when thinking about system.

Passions and Fetters: to me I would have to think about them as part of the character. However a player might want to supercede a GM's gameplan and seek to fulfill passions and resolve fetters for the character's resolutions of death. Abilities in dragongrace i would say are the characters.

JAGS I will take a much closer look at, as I didn't dig very deep, no offense intended to the game's creator, but no single game will cover everything to be fair.

Hero Wars also I will look closer at. And you have obviousy noted that I have not included equipment or even economy in dragongrace. In racial descriptions I've placed ideas on how raced trade amonst themselves and others but left out money in character creation.

Equipment and treasure are ambiguous for two reasons. One is that I would like the creation of magical items to be a special thing that a character could work for or find, in either case discussing the purpose and ramifications with the GM is a necessary task for an OK. Two: without ratings and listings of such things, I was interested in seeing what people would bring to the table. If they think some sword is the most powerful weapon in another game they have no way of comparing in this one and thus hopefully (and I'm just spitting in the wind) they will chose items and wealth that make for a more interesting story for themselves.

I have good experience in about 6 or 7 systems. Passing experience in maybe 3 more. An active interest in game design that extends beyond RPGs into computer, dice, card, word, board, etc.

Mike's rant #3. hmmm... i see your point. At least for a narrativist game. Resolution as a general term being applied across a wide field of activities and possibilities. That if the inclusion of combat related skill sets/attributes/etc is felt to be necessary then a wider variety of other possibilites needs to be present, say with relationships or politics for example, which lends itself to a different style of game anyway, quite possibly.

amber: I liked the alternative rewards oddly enough, that I would get rewarded for keeping a diary outside of the game seemed odd at first mention but I took it readily. What annoyed me mot about my compatriots was that they were not happy that I was able to do something else other than persue power and fight.

>>You're reward system rewards Narrativist play. Why not also hav it give out Narrativist rewards to remind them of what they should be doing?
>>

I'll keep this in mind as I sit and stew over it.

I have for some reason avoided GURPS like the plague. I think from what I'm skimmed and heard form other that it is very far away from my style of play (which equals little enjoyment for me). FUDGE is a system I would very much like to try. I've read the documents on it but that's about it.

>>Do you see where I'm going with any of this?>> I do. And it gives me ideas of a direction that would more satisfy a narrative style game.

>>What other RPG systems? What's your favorite? What was the worst? What was the "weirdest"? >>

AD&D(ed1, ed2), WhiteWolf, RIFTs, Amber, Star Wars, Marvel, NERO(WAR), ShadowRun, GammaWorld(ed1, ed2), there's probably a couple I'm forgetting. The worst for me comes down to a tie between GammaWorld(1ed) and Shadowrun, but I think the feeling was due to poor GMing, Favorite is a tie between RIFTs and StarWars due to good GMing/Players. No system ever really stood out much to me, probably due to some similarities. Weirdest goes to Amber and NERO(WAR) due to the way that I chose to play my characters.

dragongrace wrote: Mike's rant #3. hmmm... i see your point. At least for a narrativist game. Resolution as a general term being applied across a wide field of activities and possibilities. That if the inclusion of combat related skill sets/attributes/etc is felt to be necessary then a wider variety of other possibilites needs to be present, say with relationships or politics for example, which lends itself to a different style of game anyway, quite possibly.

amber: I liked the alternative rewards oddly enough, that I would get rewarded for keeping a diary outside of the game seemed odd at first mention but I took it readily. What annoyed me mot about my compatriots was that they were not happy that I was able to do something else other than persue power and fight.

I have for some reason avoided GURPS like the plague. I think from what I'm skimmed and heard form other that it is very far away from my style of play (which equals little enjoyment for me).

FUDGE is a system I would very much like to try. I've read the documents on it but that's about it.

I do. And it gives me ideas of a direction that would more satisfy a narrative style game.

AD&D(ed1, ed2), WhiteWolf, RIFTs, Amber, Star Wars, Marvel, NERO(WAR), ShadowRun, GammaWorld(ed1, ed2), there's probably a couple I'm forgetting. The worst for me comes down to a tie between GammaWorld(1ed) and Shadowrun, but I think the feeling was due to poor GMing, Favorite is a tie between RIFTs and StarWars due to good GMing/Players. No system ever really stood out much to me, probably due to some similarities. Weirdest goes to Amber and NERO(WAR) due to the way that I chose to play my characters.

>>Yep. Hmmm. Did you like the mechanics for The Force in Star Wars (did you play a Jedi)? If so, why, if not, why? >>

Actually played an alien race that shunned the force but viewed life in terms of traditional samurai. Helped that I was a 7+ ft tall lizard. After lengthy play and avoiding the force I had to go Ronin and began to learn force powers as a means to an end. Favorite pastime however was working on a cultral art using colored stones in a small wooden box. Amusing. This has been about 5 yrs ago so I don't remember the force mechanics all that much, and the old rules are being replaced by the d20 phenomenon.

>>Have you heard of De Profundis? If so, I'm interested in your thoughts on it, as a more freeform game. >>

Hadn't heard about it, Went to the link, read the review, sounds interesting.

>>Cool. Where do you want to go from here? Want to hack it out yourself, or work with it here? What more info do you think you need, if any? >>

I'll hash something together in a few days as a prospectus, I need to do some online research for some of it, however, your brain seems to be a ready search engine for games, so perhaps you could tell me what games are pure Narrtive style that promotes/rewards story development through the use of literary devices.

(don't normally get online on weekends & evenings, so I'm slow to respond. )

JOE--

dragongrace wrote: I'll hash something together in a few days as a prospectus, I need to do some online research for some of it, however, your brain seems to be a ready search engine for games, so perhaps you could tell me what games are pure Narrtive style that promotes/rewards story development through the use of literary devices.

Hi Mike,

Orkworld, InSpectres, Legends of Alyria, Dust Devils, The Dying Earth, The Questing Beast, The Whispering Vault.

Best,
Ron

Joe,

if you like FUDGE, you should also check out this FUDGE-offshoot called FATE: http://www.evilhat.com/projects/fudge/fate/

There is also an interesting thread about FATE and narrativism right here: http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=4944&highlight=rpg+fate

Best regards,
Grex a.k.a. Chris

Well I've been reading, reading, and reading some more. Hashed once in my head to come down to creating Universalis's degenerate twin sister 'Whatthehellisthis'. Hashed a second time through different ideas and found the lost red headed step-child of Window, FUDGE, and Pool called 'the TAFFY'.

Still however was missing something but riding down the merry road of Narrative driven game creation, I keep coming back to elements covered in several different games already. Finally this afternoon I came up with a single short page of notes that I will happily share. :)

DragonGrace as a game is directed more towards a 1 to 1 and a 1 to more, player:character relationship. That is One player for One character or One player to Many Characters. However to avoid Gamism and Simulationism to some degree I am borrowing (promise to give them back) ideas from these systems(games).

Pool, Window, FUDGE, Universalis, Exquisite Corpse, and Infinity (my own shaky attempt). From each:

Infinity -> Setting, Psionics/Magics ideas, limitless growth
Pool -> MOV, dice pools, Character Description initialization (ties directly into infinity character generation and output)
Window -> Skills Definitions and cascading aptitude, {x is...}
FUDGE -> bleeding/nonconventional/mixed attributes
Universalis -> Group Effort Game Building using...
...Exquisite Corpse -> as the driving engine of that building process.

To either borrow or think of someqhat unique concepts for earning 'assignments' (does not equate quests per se) and giving 'assignments via an exquisite corpse model.

Points earned based off of successful Storytelling techniques that move in either a character or a worldly direction. Character directed points improve and or change a character for a player. World directed points change the world surrounding one's own character or another's. This can go towards (loosely) environment/setting/scene. (a form of plot control).

The function of a GM in the above case seems to run the equivilent of a mediator. Or perhaps follow Universalis model of shared mediation.

I hope I haven't reinvented someone else's wheel in this case.

JOE--

dragongrace wrote: I hope I haven't reinvented someone else's wheel in this case.

>>Questions. Does "That is One player for One character or One player to Many Characters." mean that players at the start have to choose one of these options? Or that they can change at will? That's a bit confusing. >>

In my mind it means that players start out with one character to interact within the world. As the stories develop and other players stories develop, they add characters to their stash. I think DarkSun of all settings had something along these lines in which you made several characters and adventured them separately. Kind of a tree progression in that case.

>>As far as "FUDGE -> bleeding/nonconventional/mixed attributes " does that mean that you're going to come up with a slick new set of abilities yourself, or that you're going to allow some sort of customization on the player level ala Story Engine or Hero Wars. >>

Player Level customization is what I was thinking. While slicing through pages of text and so many different ways to get attribtues across, I began to wonder exactly why I had each element in place and the purpose it served. Most likely my excuse was systematic comparison, but in a sotrytelling sense I began to wonder truly what purpose there was to having a combat attribute and not having it. The player who obviously enjoys that sort of thing will ultimately place a great deal of points in that attribute and the other player who doesn't will not. In a field of combat the one character will almost always win given straight comparison.

That being said, if the second player continues to outsmart his opponent who is all "Grok charge! Grok pummel!" then there's no need to compare combat stats and the second places combat stat is irrelevent as it will not likely be used. So I suppose like Hero Wars, (which I still have to get around to looking more in depth at), or storypunk. Somewhat like any system that uses aspects, or traits, defined at creation about a particular character.

>>Your reference to Exquisite Corpse...is there a set of rules that I'm missing? Because the traditional rules are the classic "pass the page to a friend with only the last paragraph available to see, and then he writes the next." >>Can you describe what you mean here? >>

When reading one background page for the EC, it referred to frenchmen assigning phrases to one another in small poetic blurb, ex. The Flaming Elephant bit down on the succulent pygmy grinning happily. At any rate this reminded me another another exercise I did with a college English professor called Broken Pits. In which you pull a Adjective and a Noun out of a pair of hats and put them together then write a story.

In my case. I would like a simple mechanic in which a player foils another by 'assigning' them a Broken Pit (or Exquisite Corpse, which seems to be the predecessor) to work into their character's story. The EC however need not be pivital. Flaming Elephant (one of my favorite examples) might simply be the name of an exotic NPC, a small wooden statue caught aflame in a bizaar, or a huge actual flaming elephant. Other examples can be inserted here. Regardless it is a challenge that can then be awarded with some points. And its fun storytelling, Pickled Eyeball, Ficitious Grape, Young Terror, etc.

It seems as though it could be a fun Universalis Add-on, but I'm speculating.

JOE--

dragongrace wrote: In my mind it means that players start out with one character to interact within the world. As the stories develop and other players stories develop, they add characters to their stash. I think DarkSun of all settings had something along these lines in which you made several characters and adventured them separately. Kind of a tree progression in that case.

Player Level customization is what I was thinking. While slicing through pages of text and so many different ways to get attribtues across, I began to wonder exactly why I had each element in place and the purpose it served. Most likely my excuse was systematic comparison, but in a sotrytelling sense I began to wonder truly what purpose there was to having a combat attribute and not having it. The player who obviously enjoys that sort of thing will ultimately place a great deal of points in that attribute and the other player who doesn't will not. In a field of combat the one character will almost always win given straight comparison.

That being said, if the second player continues to outsmart his opponent who is all "Grok charge! Grok pummel!" then there's no need to compare combat stats and the second places combat stat is irrelevent as it will not likely be used. So I suppose like Hero Wars, (which I still have to get around to looking more in depth at), or storypunk. Somewhat like any system that uses aspects, or traits, defined at creation about a particular character.

When reading one background page for the EC, it referred to frenchmen assigning phrases to one another in small poetic blurb, ex. The Flaming Elephant bit down on the succulent pygmy grinning happily. At any rate this reminded me another another exercise I did with a college English professor called Broken Pits. In which you pull a Adjective and a Noun out of a pair of hats and put them together then write a story.

In my case. I would like a simple mechanic in which a player foils another by 'assigning' them a Broken Pit (or Exquisite Corpse, which seems to be the predecessor) to work into their character's story.

It seems as though it could be a fun Universalis Add-on, but I'm speculating.

True enough. I'm just wondering what you feel is the limited part? Because that says a lot about what you think is important in the game. Marco is well aware that his game isn't for absolutely everyone. He's made a system that does some very specific things very well. They may just not be your things. Knowing what you don't like in games is as important as knowing what you do like when designing.

At the risk of going off thread.

>>As far as being limited? >>
a hasty generalizatino on my part. Which you already realize the possible limitations on the upper end of the scale. The power cap doesn't seem to allow for overloading, but I could have missed that.

>>it's possible to play an intelligent mouse >>
very fun stuff. A party of mice with psionic powers overthrowing criminal organizations. I truly digress.

>>I'd be interested to know what, within the limits of Sim-gaming was found to be really limiting ... and we'll fix it :) >>
There is a great deal of ground covered through all the supplements and it would probably take a good decade to get everything down, but there are a couple of things that are missing, and since so much is included I don't think it is intentional to leave something out, but rather that someone hasn't yet brought it up. Under Psionics however, one of my favorite disciplines is biomanipulation. Even in a real world context this is a very real mental ability that is often writetn off as a super power of the mind. However I remember seeing one case on TV in which someone had lost the ability to move their limbs but through biofeedback of electrodes attached to their head, they were able to move a mouse on a screen. Also bodily biofeedback in which one thinks they are on fire and consequently develop welts and so forth. That might make an good addition to the Psionics section.

Also, under what classification of rules might you reproduce Akira? There is some psionics of immense levels there, as well as Akira itself. I'll admit I haven't read a whole lot of the docu available. Mike is right however, Limited is not a word I would use, but missing a few things that will more than likely be filled in over time is a more apt description from me.

Keeping in thread however, as a modest update, I'll be working on writing down some notes this weekend concerning dragongrace. Things I plan on keeping in mind are the idea of Currency as it pertains to point spending and the value of a point in [meta]game. Character creation along side world affecting player mods.

JOE--