I've been working on this game for a good bit of time. It started out as FaeEarths. There are a few threads on this forum about that. This version should probably be largely unrecognizable based on those threads, though.

I'm looking for feedback. As much as possible.

One concern I have is that the game might be too gimmicky with respect to mechanics. I use a lot of nonstandard (to any place but the Forge) stuff in this game, but I'm trying to keep it coherent. The mechanics part, below, is incomplete - but the basic stuff is there, and it should provide a fairly clear view of where I am going.

Stuart

---

The Worlds

For countless Eons, the Worlds stood apart from each other, linked only by the treacherous paths through the Chaos and the Void. Worlds developed in relative isolation. In most places, there were rumors of other lands, but these were stories told to frighten children. Strange visitors would come from the deepest, most wild woods or the dark caverns of the mountains. Strange sailors would appear claiming to be from an uncharted land far away at sea. Strange things would appear after a storm. All men knew, though, that there were twisted creatures in the wild and lonely places, and these visitors were distrusted.

One thousand years ago, the isolation of the Worlds was shattered. One thousand years ago, one woman sacrificed the magic of an entire world to create the Crossroads. The world she sacrificed was our own Earth.

Now, one thousand years later, the Empress still reigns over the Crossroads – a vast metropolis that serves as the center for trade between the Worlds.

Our Earth, alone among all the worlds, stands bereft of its birthright of magic. Yet our Earth is also closer to the Crossroads than any of them. Sometimes, the magic comes home, briefly. When it does, it has been known to take a visitor back with it…

Destined is a fantasy adventure roleplaying game set in the Worlds. While the game is set in the modern day, the Worlds exist at a variety of technological levels. Players can take the role of heroes from any of the Worlds, including our own. Whatever character a player chooses to portray, however, will be destined to be a hero. This is not the game you want to play if you want your character to be at risk of dying an ignoble or meaningless death. This game is meant to reflect a tradition of heroic fiction in which the sheer determination of the protagonists conspires with fate to keep the characters central to the story. Hopefully, the mechanics will reflect this…

A note on the setting: My current plan is to develop an outline of a setting that can be filled in by those playing the game. If a character doesn’t come from our Earth, that character’s player can largely define the world she comes from (though this might be subject to limitations if the world is shared between players). The characters might end up serving as the champions of a just and virtuous Empress who performs her actions carefully and with the greatest of intentions. Alternately, they might end up leading to the downfall of a cruel and merciless (or treacherous and conniving) Empress. Perhaps they will have little to do with the Empress at all. They might aim at returning magic to Earth. They might face off against a grave threat against the Worlds. Whatever they do, though, should be something potentially world-changing.


Game Mechanics Overview

Statistics:

There are two basic statistics in Destined. These are Determination and Destiny. The two of these scores, when added together, must equal 10.

Determination - the degree to which you live your life on terms you choose for yourself. For each point of Determination, the character should define a commitment. A commitment can be a relationship, a duty, a promise, a strong desire, or anything else that ties the character to something. It must be something that the character has undertaken or accepted herself, though: it should not be something that was wholly imposed upon her.

Destiny - the degree to which your life is ruled by Fate. Each character will have a Heroic Archetype. I'll write more on the Heroic Archetypes later (some of my thoughts on this are in my early Forge posts on FaeEarths, which was an earlier incarnation of this game-idea).

The player can control his level of Determination by severing commitments or making new ones. A character who severs a commitment, however, does not automatically gain a compensating point of Destiny. Fate is fickle. Playing along with your Archetype is a good way of encouraging it, though.

Qualities: The substitute for Attributes/Abilities/Advantages in other games. They are largely freeform and can be anything from Strong to Heir to the Throne to Used Car Salesman. Characters can have an unlimited number of Qualities with no value. These are largely used to describe a character and that characters basic capabilities, and a literary portrait of some sort might be substitutable. Qualities with value are remarkable qualities that the character possesses that set her above the norm of those with the particular Quality. Valued Qualities range from +1 to +3. For example, someone might have the unvalued Quality of Strong. With this Quality she can attempt feats of strength that someone without the quality would have no chance of performing through sheer strength. Someone with a valued Quality, however, would be seen as remarkably strong and would have a significantly easier time attempting similar feats.

Plot Points – Plot points are, in some ways, the currency of the story. When a player introduces a plot twist, helps move a story along, or acts in accordance with his archetype, he may be awarded plot points. Plot points can be used to introduce plot elements, both in a manner similar to Adventure!’s dramatic editing and in somewhat more relaxed circumstances. Plot points will also power magic. (I have yet to fully integrate plot points into the mechanics. I’m working on it.)


Basic mechanics as I currently see them (with due credit to Sorcerer and others I’ve learned from…):

The mechanics revolve around the resolution of problematic situations. A player considers the situation that his character is in and determines the outcome that he’d like to see. This is done on a larger scale than in many rpgs. For example, making your way past a horde of armed guards might be resolved with a single roll (though this would obviously be dependent upon what qualities you have).


1. The Player decides whether he will resolve the conflict via Determination (i.e., his own ability) or Destiny (Fate).

2. a. If the player chooses the path of Determination to resolve the conflict, he rolls a number of d6 equal to his Determination score. If he has a valued Quality appropriate to any task involved in the conflict, he adds that value to the highest die.

2. b. The GM rolls an appropriate (see below) number of d6s. If the conflict has an appropriate valued Quality, add the corresponding value to the highest die.

2. c. Determining the GM's die pool and Qualities of conflicts:
* If the conflict involves a major NPC, utilize that NPC's Determination and Qualities.
* If the conflict is easily within the character's capabilities, the die pool should be smaller than the character's die pool.
* If the conflict is within the character's capabilities but would be challenging for the character, the die pool should be about the same as the character's die pool.
* If the conflict is theoretically within the character's capabilities but would be a difficult challenge for the character, the die pool should be larger than the character's die pool.
* If the conflict is beyond the character's normal capabilities, then the GM is entitled to state that the character has little chance of success if he bases his action on sheer determination.
* If the conflict is one which would normally only be successfully undertaken by someone with a certain Quality, the GM should provide the conflict with a Quality of the same level.
*If the character’s proposed resolution is particularly appropriate to the story, subtract one from the highest die rolled.
*If the character’s proposed resolution is particularly inappropriate to the story, add one to the highest die rolled.

2. d. Compare the highest die of the player with the highest die of the GM. The margin of success or failure is the difference between the two totals. The GM may rule that particularly time-intensive or resistant conflicts will require that the player surpass a certain threshold of successes before the conflict is fully resolved (With major NPCs who have their own Determination scores, this will typically be equal to their Determination). In these cases, multiple rolls can be made, but it costs the player one degree of success off of their last roll to make a new roll (against the same resistance).

2. e. Once the player attains (or fails to attain) the proper number of successes, the player may then narrate the resolution of the conflict, with the understanding that the conflict should be narrated in accordance with the die roll. As a general rule, the player should consider stating one fact about the resolution of the conflict for each degree of success or failure.

2. f. With the expenditure of plot points, the player may add degrees of success to the roll by taking complications (all on a 1-for1 basis: 1 plot point +1 complication adds 1 degree of success). Alternately, a player can “pay” for using plot points to add successes by particularly evocative descriptions of stunts or unusual actions.

Example: Jonas is a gentle giant, but a giant nonetheless. With his
Qualities: Big +1 and Tremendous Strength +2, the heavy oak door in his
way poses only a minor inconvenience. The GM determines that the door
could be knocked down by someone with an appropriate strength-based
quality of +1 without a huge amount of trouble, so he assigns the door a
Quality of +1. The player of Jonas rolls his Determination of 4 and gets
(2, 3, 3, 5) for a total of 7. The GM, seeing that this is not a simple
task for Jonas, but not a particularly challenging one, either, rolls
three dice and gets (1, 4, 4) for a total of 5. With two degrees of
success, the player notes that Jonas barrels into the door, and it swings
open, splintering slightly at his impact. If Jonas had failed in the
conflict (say, by one degree of success), his player might have narrated
Jonas swinging his arm into the door, causing a crack to form on its
surface to no real effect. Alternately, if Jonas's player felt that
getting through the door was imperative, he could have spent two plot
points to add two degrees of success (for a total of one degree of
success) at a cost of two complications (these might be, say, a shard of
wood opening up a cut in Jonas's hand and the noise of him knocking down
the door drawing unwanted attention).

3. If the player chooses the path of Destiny rather than Determination, then the player rolls a number of d6 equal to his Destiny score. If he has an appropriate valued Quality, he adds that value to the highest die. If his Archetype is particularly appropriate to the conflict, he may add one more to that total. The GM then rolls a number of d6 equal to the character's Determination score. Compare the player's total with the highest die of
the GM and determine the margin of success or failure (the difference between the two totals). Plot points may be spent here.

If the player fails, he must attempt to resolve the task via Determination, and the margin of failure is subtracted from his Determination for the purpose of the conflict.

If the player succeeds the GM narrates the outcome. The GM should resolve the conflict in a manner that coincides with the character's Archetype and Fate. The GM may wish to use the degree of success as a guideline for resolving the conflict, but it is not necessary. See the forthcoming section on Narrating Destiny. Once the scene is over, the player receives a number of plot points equal to the margin of success.


Narrating Destiny

This section should have some GMing tips and guidelines that build on the themes of Destiny vs. Determination. It is as-yet mostly unwritten, but I include some notes to clarify the paragraph above:
Destiny is often opposed to a character's chosen commitments. If the conflict is such that it could lead away from one of a character's commitments, the GM may ask the player to roll her Determination while the GM rolls the character's Destiny. If Determination wins, the character is not pulled from the commitment by Fate. If Destiny wins, each degree of
success should add a complication to the character's commitment (more severe complications might be worth multiple degrees of success). In no case, however, should the GM narrate the character severing a commitment. That is a sacrosanct player choice. If, however, a character's commitment is to, say, a love-interest it would not necessarily be a problem for the complications to involve that individual repudiating the character's love - or even dying. The character can still maintain the commitment, perhaps altering it to involve proving himself worthy of her love or keeping her memory alive.


Some inspirations (setting)
Neverwhere, Stardust (Neil Gaiman)
Riddle of the Wren (Charles de Lint)
Glory Road (Robert A. Heinlein)
Stalking the Unicorn (Mike Resnick)
Chronicles of Narnia (C.S. Lewis)

Some inspirations (mechanics)
Sorcerer
Adventure!
InSpectres
and, I’m sure, various other tidbits here and there…

Example: Jonas is a gentle giant, but a giant nonetheless.

taalyn wrote:

Example: Jonas is a gentle giant, but a giant nonetheless.

Have you been reading my Aisling threads, hmmm? ;)

I think having our very own Jonas Q. Redshirt to use in every example in the forums awesome.

Oh, and as to the mechanic, I don't think it's too gimmicky. But then, I'm into gimmicky mechanics (when they support in-game suspension of disbelief), so I may not be the best to judge. It seems pretty simple.

Actually, in addition to general feedback, I have a fairly specific concern.

The game, as written, potentially allows for characters to never fail to meet their goals. If they have the Plot Points, they can use them to change a failure to a success. If they don't, they can fall back on Destiny (and thereby get more Plot Points).

Now, there are complications that come with either of these options. The success that they acheive won't always be on the terms that they wanted them to be on.

Personally, I consider this a feature of the game (i.e., it is there by design). In novels that the game is loosely in the same vein of, for example, it is rarely the case that we doubt the protagonist will complete the quest he's on and overcome the necessary obstacles on the way.

Will this work in a game, though? Does the system seem like it will allow for enough challenge?


Stuart

I see what you mean. It seems to me that using Determination would, by definition, exclude the use of plot points to create success. Instead, plot points could only be used with Determination to create favorable failures. Even then, perhaps they should be more expensive to use. Destiny, going with your Fate, seems like a situation to use plot points. Or vice versa - it depends on how you see Fate.

If fate is random, then use plot points only for Determination. If fate is more structured, and always leads towards herohood (which is what I understand your goal to be), then plot points are used only with Destiny rolls.

I also think that requiring resorting to Determination if Destiny fails doesn't quite make sense. What is your reasoning here?

Perhaps the GM can determine the Destiny result ahead of time, irrespective of skill and such, and the roll is only an issue of degree of success (or failure, as the GM decided). That seems to mirror the idea of Destiny better to me.

Of course, the danger here is that a player might simply leave everything to Destiny, and thus be a passive participant in the story. But I doubt anyone'd want to play with such a person, so it's sort of a side issue. It really only relates in how the dichotomy between Destiny and Determination is introduced.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more the issue of associating a value with Determination and Destiny bugs me. Either I'll be passive and let the GM decide everything, or I wont. If I don't, I don't really see a distinction between the two, especially if I'll have to roll Determination if I fail destiny anyway. I might as well just have one score - the distinction between Fate and Determination isn't supported by the system as stands.

At least, these are my thoughts at the moment. Hope that helps some.

Aidan

PS. I know you read the Aisling thread - I was being facetious! ;)

As far as what pushes the game forward, the friction between the forces of Determination and Destiny, I've had similiar ideas split three ways. I've split it between Fate, Free Will and Fortune. Or the Chosen, the Choice, and the Choices. My world setting defers to, fitting in somewhere between Unknown Armies and Nobolis. When I have more time, I'll read your thread more closely to see what brainstorming I might contribute or borrow.

It has been pointed out to me that I didn't really explain the roles of Destiny and Determination incredibly well. Most of this I will probably work out in my LiveJournal for awhile, unless other people comment here.

Anyway...

Aidan,

You are probably right about the resorting to Determination when Destiny fails not really working. Part of the problem is that i was going back and forth on what rolling Destiny represents. Here's the way I am currently looking at it:

* When you rely on Destiny, you state your desired outcome and turn Narration rights over to the GM.
* You roll your Destiny+applicable Qualities.
* The GM rolls a number of dice determined by how well your desired outcome would match with your Destiny (i.e., fewer dice the better they match up).
* A degree of success or failure is determined.
* The GM narrates the success or failure in a way that matches your Destiny.

I'm as-yet undecided on how plot points would work with Destiny. I do, however, like the idea that plot points used with Determination can create favorable failures in some way, rather than only success with complications. I'm going to need to think about that, though.

Mathias Jack,

Fortune isn't really central to this game. Yes, there is a fortune-based mechanic, but the idea is that it can be heavily affected via resource-management. Determination (Free-Will) and Destiny (Fate) are obviously major forces at work, here.


Stuart

Currently, I'm putting thought into how Qualities work. One thing I'm dedicated to is allowing players to flag Qualities (skills, professions, advantages, attributes, whatever) that would otherwise appear incidental as important. This would serve not only as license for that Quality to come into play in the player's narration of conflict resolution, but also - potentially - as a cue to the GM to make this Quality relevant to the plot in a more central way.

Does anyone know of a game that does explicitly does this sort of thing? I have some thoughts on it, obviously, but I'd like to compare notes...


Stuart

Actually, I have something that needs clarifying (perhaps it was in your post and I missed it). Do the players get to choose their starting Destiny and Determination scores? If so, then a player that chooses to have Destiny 9 and Determination 1 will succeed 69.9% of the time, and tie 14% of the time (assuming there are no qualities that alter the roll).

Is the GM narration of destiny successes a sort of penalty system to discourage players from relying on fate all the time? If so, maybe you could make the chance of succeeding with destiny less, and allow the players to narrate their successes. Then, the difference will be less mechanical, and more a matter of player style (while I, as a player, would get bored passively sitting by and allowing the DM to do all the talking, I wouldn't mind playing a character that passively sits by and allows fate to carry him into all sorts of crazy situations.)

SrGrvsaLot wrote: Actually, I have something that needs clarifying (perhaps it was in your post and I missed it). Do the players get to choose their starting Destiny and Determination scores? If so, then a player that chooses to have Destiny 9 and Determination 1 will succeed 69.9% of the time, and tie 14% of the time (assuming there are no qualities that alter the roll).

Is the GM narration of destiny successes a sort of penalty system to discourage players from relying on fate all the time?

If so, maybe you could make the chance of succeeding with destiny less, and allow the players to narrate their successes. Then, the difference will be less mechanical, and more a matter of player style (while I, as a player, would get bored passively sitting by and allowing the DM to do all the talking, I wouldn't mind playing a character that passively sits by and allows fate to carry him into all sorts of crazy situations.)

3. If the player chooses the path of Destiny rather than Determination, then the player rolls a number of d6 equal to his Destiny score. If he has an appropriate valued Quality, he adds that value to the highest die. If his Archetype is particularly appropriate to the conflict, he may add one more to that total. The GM then rolls a number of d6 equal to the character's Determination score. Compare the player's total with the highest die of
the GM and determine the margin of success or failure (the difference between the two totals). Plot points may be spent here

SrGrvsaLot wrote:

Let me see if I understand this. A Character with a destiny of 9 must have a determination of 1 (because the two values add up to 10). So, he rolls 9d6. The probability of getting at least one six on this roll is about 84%. The GM opposses this by rolling the character's determination, which is one. 5 out of 6 times, this will be less than six so .84 x .83 (5/6) = .7 (I rounded for this example, the decimals make this fraction smaller in actuallity. So, the player's roll beats the GM's at least 70% of the time (actually more, because there's a possibility that the player won't roll a six, but still beat the GM).

* You roll your Destiny+applicable Qualities.
* The GM rolls a number of dice determined by how well your desired outcome would match with your Destiny (i.e., fewer dice the better they match up).

szilard wrote:
That has changed (and the change was noted a few posts up in this thread) to parallel a Determination roll. Namely:

The problem I have here is that it seems as though if a character has a very high Destiny rating, then it should be more difficult to deviate from that path. I'm not sure how to represent that without resorting to some horribly ad hoc mechanic.

SrGrvsaLot wrote:

Hm, that is tough. Maybe you could solve this by implementing a standard format for describing a character's destiny. Maybe they could have one "descriptor" for every point of Destiny. Then, in situations where they roll Destiny, the opposed dice pool is 10 (or whatever) minus #of applicable descriptors. So, if a person with destiny 4: (Dragon-slaying) (healer) (diplomat) (songwriter) were to rely on destiny to resolve a situation where someone was injured, they'd roll four dice against the GM's 9. If the injured person was a minstrel that could one day write the world's greatest song, the GM rolls 8 dice.

I have another question about the system. Does the GM have a minimum dice pool to oppose Destiny rolls, or if the stars are all lined up correctly does the player get an auto-success? If you subtact 2 dice per applicable descriptor, there's a chance, though not great, of the dice pool being reduced to zero.

SrGrvsaLot wrote: I have another question about the system. Does the GM have a minimum dice pool to oppose Destiny rolls, or if the stars are all lined up correctly does the player get an auto-success? If you subtact 2 dice per applicable descriptor, there's a chance, though not great, of the dice pool being reduced to zero.

There's a slight problem with option three, but you might not consider it a problem at all: the chance of the player failing is exactly the same with 1 opposition die as "negative" one opposition die. After that, the probability of a player failing quickly drops off so that if there are many "negative" dice, it's practically an auto-success anyway.

Aside from that little quirk, all three of your proposed solutions sound pretty good.

Oh, I had an idea about ties for Destiny rolls. Why not have a tied Destiny roll count as a failure unless the player spends a plot point, in which case the tie counts as a success? Rolling Destiny represents leaving your success and failure to fate, right? Well, Fortune favors the bold and if the player is unwilling to go that extra mile to seize the opportunity his destiny provides (by spending a plot point), then destiny is not going to do it for him.

Okay... at this point, both Determination and Destiny have descriptors. For Determination. these are "commitments," but I don't have a term for Destiny. I am toying with "fates," but I'm not sure how I feel about that.

Any suggestions?

Also, this move (thanks again, John) allows me to neatly integrate the acquisition of Plot Points. Whenever a character makes a Destiny or Determination roll that strongly involves one of the descriptors for the statistic rolled, the character will gain a number of plot points equal to the number showing on the lowest die rolled. (If the character's roll involves two applicable descriptors, the number of plot points will be equal to the second lowest die, and so on). This will, generally, mean that characters who depend on lower scores will tend to end up with more plot points (assuming that they pursue their descriptors equally) than those with higher scores. This is a good thing for various reasons...


Stuart