Apotheosis is a mythic game that floats somewhere between the narrative and simulation models. Apotheosis is a poetic journey through a meta-mythic realm of infinite epic possibilities. This is my first post to the forge and my first attempt at game design. Thoughts so far would be appreciated.

Entities and Templates
Entities are the building blocks of reality. Anything that has the potential to (or actually does) possess elements, legends, and/or makes is an entity. Anything may be seen as an entity in the appropriate context. Templates are intrinsic to reality as well. A template is anything that can be associated with an entity but is not an element, legend, or mask.

Traits
Elements, Legends, and Masks define an entity.

Elements are broken into categories: fabrics, threads, patterns, and weaves.

Fabrics describe the underlying structure of an entity. Fundamental features given form are typically fabrics.

Threads describe the unique facets of an entity. Fundamental forms given a function are typically fabrics.

Patterns describe the salient models of an entity. Fundamental functions given modality are typically patterns.

Weaves describe threaded patterns of an entity. Temporary threads created with patterns are typically weaves.

Elements possess two important attributes: motes and pillars.

Motes are used to determine how intricate and costly an element is with respect to the overall narrative.

Pillars are used to determine how potent and powerful an element is with respect to the overall narrative.

Legends are original themes an entity embodies in a narrative.

Masks are the archetypal roles an entity plays in a narrative.

Complication
During specific stages of a conflict elements can be burned, evoked, or invoked.

Burning an element disallows the entity from using that element for a fixed period of time, but the element is considered to be more intricate and/or potent than usual for that time period.

Evoking an element draws on another entity’s element to influence dice pools.

Invoking an element is the standard action. It allows an entity to draw on its own traits to influence dice pools and what not.


Conflicts
Conflicts are the result of multiple entities vying for narrative priority.

A conflict occurs when multiple entities with divergent goals vie for narrative priority.

Conflict resolution determines that outcome of specific situations, not specific tasks.

Initiation
Initially, an entity must declare that a conflict is occurring. If it is agreed upon that a conflict shall occur, all participants become engaged in the conflict.

Intention
After this initial declaration, all participants in the initial conflict state their goals. Multiple entities can support a single goal. An entity can support no more than one goal during a single conflict.

Interaction
Entities may burn, evoke, or invoke traits. Entities may also disengage from the conflict, but can do nothing else for the duration of the conflict. This withdrawal may remove certain goals from the conflict (and therefore may resolve the conflict by default). Entities outside the conflict may engage in the conflict, but must support a previously stated goal. Finally, an entity may yield and do nothing for the duration of the conflict. This may be necessary if an entity is incapable of activity, even though the entity might be engaged in the conflict.

Resolution
The entity that initiated the conflict rolls one die for the initiation and any additional dice gathered during the interaction. Each other entity rolls any dice gathered during the interaction. This favors the initiator by a single die. The dice are rolled and for each even number that comes up the entity garner a single success. Whichever entity has the most success gains narrative priority.

Narration
Whoever has narrative priority must fulfill at least one of the intended goals. Multiple goal fulfillments are allowed, but you may not go beyond the scope of the previously stated goals. You may fulfill one goal for each success.

Sub-Conflict
A sub-conflict (crisis or crucible) can occur during any stage of conflict. A sub-conflict (crisis or crucible) can also be the main conflict.

Crises
Crises are catastrophic changes an entity must potentially undergo. A crisis occurs when a player attempts to manipulate any element of an entity. Crises can also create or destroy entities. If an entity wins a crisis, they can manipulate a number

Crucibles
Crucibles are catastrophic challenges an entity must potentially overcome. A crucible occurs when a player attempts to manipulate any template, legend, or mask of an entity. Crucibles can also create or destroy templates.

Notes
Essentially, each element has a cost in Motes. This determines how much an element costs to “purchase” as well as how important the element is in the narrative. Elements with higher mote scores are more difficult to manipulate. Each element also has a number of Pillars. Pillars generally determine how many dice are added to an entity’s dice pool for conflicts.

All elements are assumed to start off with a single mote and pillar.

Also, elements may be amended with specific aspects. Aspects are further divisions and descriptors that help define elements. For example, the “Core” aspect makes an element essential to a character and thus increases adds two motes and one pillar to the element. This means a standard element would now have three motes and two pillars. Accordingly, if an entity could only possess four motes in elements this would leave the entity with the ability to purchase a single mote trait. Also, this element would add two dice to an entity’s dice pool when this trait is used.

Any thoughts so far? Thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to read through this convoluted piece of work.

Hello Silent,

Welcome to the Forge.

I find Apotheosis a fascinating idea, but don't know how to initiate discussion of the design. What I, as a reader of Apotheosis-as-presented-here, would like is a notion of what the game is about: what the aims of characters are, or indeed what the characters themselves are. (It strikes me this could bring role-playing in the world of DC's occult comics alive.)

Do you have an example or transcript of actual or hypothetical play to share with us?

Regards,

Hello, Silent Entropy. Welcome to the Forge!

Conflicts are the result of multiple entities vying for narrative priority.

Entities may burn, evoke, or invoke traits.

A sub-conflict (crisis or crucible) can occur during any stage of conflict. A sub-conflict (crisis or crucible) can also be the main conflict.

Any thoughts so far? Thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to read through this convoluted piece of work

Thank you, Dave.

I'll post an example of conflict resolution and some of my initial play notes, hopefully that will help elucidate my vision of Apotheosis.

Also, thank you, Matt.

I like this succinct definition. Nice.

A complete redux. I will expand upon Fortunes, Legends, Masks, and Sub-Conflicts ASAP. Does this help clear anything up, Dave or Matt?

Apotheosis is a mythic game that floats somewhere between the narrative and simulation models. Apotheosis is a poetic journey through a meta-mythic realm of infinite epic possibilities. The backdrop of Apotheosis is the Tapestry. The Tapestry is the aggregation of the narrative environments and mythologies in a given game. The Tapestry exemplifies the “meta-myth.”

I will use classic Arthurian legends to illustrate my points...

Entities and Templates
Entities are the building blocks of reality. Anything that has the potential to (or actually does) possess elements, legends, and/or makes is an entity. Anything may be seen as an entity in the appropriate context. Templates are intrinsic to reality as well. A template is anything that can be associated with an entity but is not an element, legend, or mask.

“King Arthur,” “Merlin the Wise,” “The Kingdom of Camelot,” “The Sword in the Stone,” and even “The Arthurian Legends” could all be entities.

“Knight of the Round Table,” “Quest for the Holy Grail,” “Slayer of the Questing Beast,” and “The Once and Future King” could all be templates.

It’s important to understand that these entities and templates could easily be interchanged with little or no modification.

Just imagine playing the entire body of Round Table Knights. To accomplish this you could control multiple entities associated with the Round Table, you could control the appropriate template, you could belong to the appropriate template, or you could control a single entity, “Knights of the Round Table.”

Additionally, many entities and templates can be Tethers under the right circumstances.

Tethers
Tethers tie an entity or template to the Tapestry. Tethers come in several varieties: elements, fortunes, legends, and masks.
Elements are broken into categories: fabrics, threads, patterns, and weaves.

Fabrics describe underlying structures. Fabrics are initially passive and cost nothing to activate in a conflict.

King Arthur’s fabrics might include, “The Once and Future King,” or “I am the High King of Camelot.”

Threads describe unique features. Threads are initially inactive and have a cost to activate in a conflict.

King Arthur’s threads might include, “Excalibur’s Sheath Protects Me,” or “I am Guided by the Grace of Merlin.”

Patterns describe the salient models. Patterns do nothing in and of themselves expect represent potential. Patterns have a cost to activate during a conflict. Patterns are used primarily to manifest weaves. Weaves are practical effects created by using a salient model (pattern). Weaves are not unlike temporary threads.

Merlin’s patterns might include, “The Woods Obey My Words,” “I am the Bastard Child of a Demon,” or “Royal Divination.”

Weaves created using these patterns might include, “Nature’s Grasp,” “Obfuscation of Damnation,” or “The Sword in the Stone.”

Elements possess two important attributes: motes and pillars.

Motes are used to determine how much an element costs and how important an element is compared to other elements.

Pillars are used to determine how powerful an element is compared to other elements. Usually, an entity can add one dice per pillar to its dice pool for a conflict.

All elements start out with one mote and one pillar.

Elements may gain or lose motes or pillars initially through Aspects. Aspects are further divisions or distinctions elements possess. Some aspects might include…

Core – Core elements are essential to an entity. A core element has an additional mote and pillar.

Craft – Craft elements can easily produce new elements. A new element is created through a conflict. Craft elements have an additional mote.

Cursed – Cursed elements add dice to an opponent’s dice pool as well. Cursed elements have one less mote.

For example, if King Arthur possessed the fabric, “The Once and Future King,” it would have a single mote and a single pillar.

If it were a Core element, it would have two motes and two pillars. If it was a core AND craft element, it would have three motes and two pillars.

Fortunes are karmic blessings bestowed upon an entity.

Legends are themes an entity embodies.

Masks are the archetypal roles an entity plays.

Complication
During specific stages of a conflict elements can be burned, evoked, or invoked.

Invoking an element is the standard method of interaction. Invocation simply uses the element the entity possesses in an appropriate way. Usually this means adding one dice per pillar to an entity’s dice pool for conflict resolution.

Evoking an element is like invoking an element, except you’re forcing another entity to use an element instead of using one of your own elements. This usually garners the entity fortune.

Burning an element revokes the ability for an entity to use that element for a set duration. When the element is burned, though, its motes and pillars are effectively doubled for all purposes.

Conflicts
Conflicts are the result of multiple entities vying for narrative priority.

A conflict occurs when multiple entities with divergent goals vie for narrative priority.

Initiation
Initially, a player must declare that a conflict is occurring. If it is agreed upon that a conflict shall occur, all participants become engaged in the conflict.

Intention
After this initial declaration, all participants in the conflict state their goals. Multiple entities can support a single goal. A single entity cannot support multiple goals.

Interaction
Entities may burn, evoke, or invoke elements. Entities may also disengage from the conflict, but can do nothing else for the duration of the conflict. This withdrawal may remove certain goals from the conflict (and therefore may resolve the conflict by default). Entities outside the conflict may engage in the conflict, but must support a previously stated goal. Finally, an entity may yield and do nothing for the duration of the conflict. This may be necessary if an entity is incapable of activity, even though the entity might be engaged in the conflict.

Resolution
The entity that initiated the conflict rolls one die for the initiation and any additional dice gathered during the interaction. Each other entity rolls any dice gathered during the interaction. This favors the initiator by a single die. The dice are rolled and for each even number that comes up the entity procures a single success. Whichever entity has the most success gains narrative priority.

Narration
Whoever has narrative priority must fulfill at least one of the intended goals. Multiple goal fulfillments are allowed, but you may not go beyond the scope of the previously stated goals. You may fulfill one goal for each success.

Sub-Conflict
A sub-conflict (crisis or crucible) can occur during any stage of conflict.

Crises
Crises are catastrophic changes an entity must potentially undergo. A crisis occurs when a player attempts to manipulate any element of an entity. Crises can also create or destroy entities. If an entity wins a crisis, they can manipulate a number

Crucibles
Crucibles are catastrophic challenges an entity must potentially overcome. A crucible occurs when a player attempts to manipulate any template, legend, or mask of an entity. Crucibles can also create or destroy templates.

Examples of Conflict

Conflict (No Sub-Conflicts)

King Arthur’s player declares a conflict is occurring with Merlin over one thing or another. Merlin’s player accepts and agrees to the conflict as stated. No one else will be participating.

King Arthur’s player states that his goal is to subdue Merlin without harming him. Merlin’s player states that his goal is to escape out the tower.

During the course of action, Arthur’s player invokes three elements to aid him and Merlin’s player invokes two. All of these elements are 1 Mote, 1 Pillar elements.

In the end, Arthur’s player has three dice from pillars plus one for initiating the conflict. Merlin’s player only has two dice. They roll. Arthur’s player rolls a single even number; Merlin’s player rolls two even numbers.

Merlin has narrative priority and two successes he can narrate either goal or a compromise between the two. Merlin narrates that he simply escapes, as planned.

Hey there,

Welcome to the Forge!

Mechanically, this sounds fairly similar to my game Ever-After (http://www.1001.indie-rpgs.com/ever-after.html). The threads involved in the design process are linked from that page. Especially check out the last one, on "Currency & Advancement." Also, if you're not familiar with Shreyas Sampat's game, Torchbearer, I'd give that a look as well. So far, Apotheosis looks like an intriguing bastard child of the two, plus Universalis, with some other interesting spices thrown in. I'm very interested to see how it develops.

However, it's not yet clear to me what the purpose of play is. What are the player's characters? Individual personae or these meta-game entities? What is their purpose in involving themselves in these mythic narratives? What drives them? Simply the desire to tell good stories? is there any meta-game awareness on the part of these entities that extends beyond individual personae? Do they talk to each other in a kind of in-game OOC speech? This double-removal thing is what reminds me most of Ever-After, actually, while the dice mechanics are more evocative of Universalis.

Matt, I've just started looking over your work on Nine World. I'll admit, it's a lot to digest but so far it looks fascinating.

John, thanks for your input so far. I've read a bit about Universalis on the forums, but I haven't actually purchased it.

I plan to look over Ever-After and Torchbearer as soon as I get a chance.

What are the player's characters?

Individual personae or these meta-game entities?

What is their purpose in involving themselves in these mythic narratives? What drives them? Simply the desire to tell good stories?

is there any meta-game awareness on the part of these entities that extends beyond individual personae? Do they talk to each other in a kind of in-game OOC speech?

Silent Entropy wrote: Player's control templates and/or entities. Any valid template or entity can be played if everyone agrees on it.

Each "meta-game entity" involves itself in the narrative for a number of reasons depending on the specific conventions being used.

Here are my notes regarding the "meta-game."

Game play is broken down into three stages (in order): pre-narrative, narrative, and post-narrative.

The pre-narrative stage consists of developing Narrative Layers and Narrative Structures.

Narrative Layer
Narrative Layers are finite levels of play. Each narrative layer establishes a limit of control that a player has over the narrative. Narrative layers may be stacked in a variety of ways for different effects. Some example layers are...

Setting Layers
Environmental Layer
The players can manipulate the narrative environment.

Mythological Layer
The players can manipulate the narrative mythos.

Historical Layer
The players can manipulate the narrative history.

Contact Layers
Discrete Layer
Individual players can manipulate individual narrative structures.

Collective Layer
Multiple players can manipulate individual narrative structures.

Character Layers
Archetypal Layer
Players control archetypal essences.

Thematic Layer
Players control thematic essences.

Persona Layer
Players control persona essences.

Universal Layer
Players control universal essences.

Omni Layer
Players control mythical essences.

Support Layers
Contextual Layer
The players can manipulate the component and convention contexts.

Finite Layer
Players control limited resources.

Infinite Layer
Players control unlimited resources.

Control Layers
Variable Layer
The level of control a player has varies depending on the circumstances.

Constant Layer
The level of control a player has is constant regardless of the circumstances.

Functional Layer
The level of control a player has is a function of the circumstances.

Narrative Structure
Narrative Structures are pieces of the narrative. Narrative structures can be broken down into Components and Conventions. Components are structures that define the narrative setting (that is to say, the environ, history, and mythos). They include stories, worlds, templates, entities, elements, masks, legends, and fortunes. Conventions are structures that dictate the narrative flow. They include axioms, boundaries, and principles.

Components
Stories are other narratives that are tangential to the narrative being player.

Worlds are individual settings. Worlds are the media upon which narratives are staged.

Fortunes individual events or objects that guide the narrative.


Conventions
Axioms are pre-narrative rulings that become immutable during the narrative stage. They become completely transparent once the narrative begins.

Boundaries are pre-narrative rulings that may be mutable during the narrative stage. They become partially transparent once the narrative begins.

Principles are pre-narrative rulings that are mutable during the narrative stage. They do not become transparent once the narrative begins.

Notations
Essences are "meta-entities." The level of "meta-awareness" depends on how layers are hashed together (especially control layers).

Archetypal essences embody archetypes.

Thematic essences embody themes.

Persona essences embody personas.

Universal essences are the players themselves.

Mythical essences are integrated into the narrative mythos.


Is that clear enough? Any thoughts? Regardless, I will post expansions and examples of the layers soon. I will also post how the layers can mesh together (stack, parallel, secant, etc.)

Obviously this is one of those games like The Million Worlds, which is simply too big to digest in one piece. I'd like to know more about this, and specifically, what issues you're having with it that you'd like to be addressed. But please, in small doses, with more explanation. I mean, seriously, "Players can manipulate the narrative mythos" means about as much to me as "Hon mabathon, rochon ellint im" means to a person who's not a language dork like me.

So, rather than throwing new stuff at us, show us something in detail, and ask some questions about it. As I see it, there isn't much to discuss here right now, just a long list of words, but I'd like there to be.

Thank you, Shreyas. I'll try to start with edible, delicious portions and work my way up.

Please ignore my previous posts when viewing this one.

This will focus on conflict.


Composition
Entities are composed of traits known as elements. Elements are discrete, fundamental facets of an entity. Entities may possess a variety of elements. Elements may be invoked to add or subtract dice from the entity's Resolution Pool, as well as activated to draw upon an element's speical properties.

Arcanum is a metagame currency used to manipulate the narrative.


Orientations
An entity’s orientation during a conflict determines how an entity may interact in the conflict.

Initial Engagement
Initial engagement occurs when an entity requests a conflict that is scheduled to occur. The initiator of the conflict is initially engaged before any other entities. The initiator is otherwise considered to be actively engaged.

Active Engagement
Active engagement occurs when an entity becomes engaged during the Initiation Stage and is not the initiator. The entity is an active participant. Active participants can create goals and acquire narrative priority.

Passive Engagement
Passive engagement occurs when an entity becomes engaged during the Interaction Stage. The entity is a passive participant. Passive participants can neither create goals, nor acquire narrative priority.

Passive Disengagement
Passive disengagement occurs when an entity is not engaged during the Initiation Stage. This entity, for all intents and purposes, is not a part of the conflict proper. The entity may become engaged during the Interaction Stage. The entity will become passively engaged.

Active Disengagement
Active disengagement occurs when an entity leaves a conflict during the Interaction Stage. The entity, for all intents and purposes, is removed from the conflict completely and may not reengage. The entity’s goal is still a viable goal. If no active entities remain the conflict is concluded with no end resolution or end narration. If a single active entity remains it gains narrative priority.

Final Disengagement
Final disengagement occurs at the end of a conflict. All entities participating in the conflict become disengaged and may not reengage in the same conflict. The conflict has concluded.

Postures
Postures determine what actions are available to an entity.

Extracted
Extracted entities are not part of the conflict. They are ready and able to perform actions that do not influence the conflict. Disengaged entities are extracted by default.

Occupied
Occupied entities are performing an action currently and can take no further action.

Prepared
Prepared entities are ready and able to perform an action that influences the outcome of a conflict. Engaged entities are prepared by default.

Incapacitated
Incapacitated entities are not performing an action currently and cannot perform actions.

Actions (Influential)
Activation
Activated elements are tapped to influence a narrative without actually adding or subtracting to the pool of Resolution Pool.

Invocation
Invoked elements are tapped for dice to modify the Resolution Pool. The entity uses the element to add or subtract a specific number dice to the entity's Resolution Pool. A number of dice equal to the Reoslution Pool are rolled during the Resolution Stage to determine which entity has narrative priority, as well as the narrative opportunities that entity possess.

Actions (Incidental)
None yet! These are actions entities outside of conflict can perform.

Conflict
Conflicts are the result of multiple entities vying for narrative priority.

Conflicts are composed of five stages.

Initiation
A player must declare that a conflict is occurring. It must be agreed upon by everyone who will be included in the conflict that a conflict is occuring. If a player does not wish to be a part of a conflict they will not be included in the conflict. If a conflict occurs, initiator is immediately oriented toward Initial Engagement and all other participants are oriented toward Active Engagement. All non-participants are oriented towards Passive Disengagement.

Declaration
Active participants state their goals, if any. There musy be at least two mutually divergent goals. Multiple entities can support a single goal. A single entity cannot support multiple goals.

Interaction
Prepared and extracted entities may change their orientation once. An entity that is actively engaged may become actively disengaged. An entity that is passively disengaged may become actively engaged. A prepared entity may perform actions the influence the conflict. Extracted entities may perform actions actions that do not influence the conflict. Finally, an entity can pass and do nothing for the duration of the conflict. Some postures may require this final action.

Resolution
The Resolution Pool for each entity is accumulated by figuring how many dice from invoked elements add or subtract to the pool. The initiator gains an additional die to use. An entity that subtracts dice from its pool uses the element as a hinderance, rather than a benefit. The entity increases its Arcanum once for each die subtracted. The dice are rolled and the evens are counted as Narrative Opportunities.

Narration
The player with the most opportunities is said to have Narrative Priority.
The player with narrative priority determines which goals manifest. The player may pick one or more goals (or a compromise between multiple goals). They player can not incorporate more goals in its narrative than opportunities rolled. All entities become disengaged from conflict at the end of this stage.

First and foremost, is my conflict structure understandable? If not, please elaborate. Anyone see any glaring flaws?

I'm debating whether or not to give "Interaction Points" that allow an entity to draw on a certain number of elements or element functions during a conflict. Maybe something like...you get six Interaction Points so you can invoke up to six elements.

Or it might be interesting to have invoked (and activated) elements grant you the interaction points to spend on a variety of options.

Something like...I invoke three elements and now I have three Interaction Points to spend. I can either....

Add 1 Resolution Die to my Resolution Pool (Costs 1 Point)
Add 1 Resolution Die to another entity's pool (Costs 2 Points)
Subtract 1 Resolution Die from another Entity's pool (costs 3 points)

So I could, with my three invoked elements, add 3 dice to my pool, add one dice to mine and one to another entity's pool, or subtract 1 dice from another entity's pool.

Also, Arcanum is like "luck," "karma," and "action points" in other games. It allows you to manipulate the conflict on a metagame level. The only reason I have it currently is because I can't figure out what "bonus" to give someone who invokes or activates an element in a hindering fashion. I want there to be some reason to do it. Kind of like how Nobilis (which I've only heard about, mind you) gives you MPs for flaws when they are used. I do not want to define anything as inherently a "flaw." Obviously, "Poor Eyesight" or "Paraplegic Fish" will not be useful in many situations, so if you pick them, I want there to be a reason to use them.

Ideas?

I'd like to post an example of how I envision some conflicts unfolding after I get some feedback.

Entropy


Being one who has a complicated game system concept (It's called The Million Worlds: Chronicles of The Eternal Cycle), with a multi-layered approach, I can say that you need to do a lot of heavy lifting to get people up to speed in order to conceive of how to play.

As it stands, your terminology and explanations are sparse, austere, and obfuscatory. The number of "non-standard & esoteric" terms are high, and thus you have to devote a huge amount of effort just to parsing them. Perhaps if you could whip out a bit of an example of play. Or better yet, a step by step instruction of how to use the game, or just the conflict system it will go a long way towards making your game comprehensible. Have you ever heard of the game Aria: Canticle Of THe Monomyth. Well, from apperances, your game knocks it dictionary in the dirt in terms of complicated terminology and opacity of intent.

So my reccomendation is to write out a nice detailed step by step technical chapter, say of the conflict system, with copious examples, in order for people to be able to grasp what you are doing here. I can see some of the ideas of what you have, but the bare terms and minimal explanation makes it nearly impossible to grok on any useful level.

I don't mean to offend you, just offering some of the hard facts that I have encountered in getting people to grok my own complex game.

HTH

I like the new section on Conflicts as the original one failed to mention the players specifically (made it sound like the game played itself). Looks pretty tight now, and I think an overall write up at this point would prove that.

I don't totally agree with Rob as to the opacity of the text, but I do think that the terminology is a tad out there. That said, I think both he and I are speaking from a point of view of tradition which says that you have to use terms like Traits instead of Elements. So I'm not really sure that you need to change it, truth be told.

What I'd do is to write it up in a complete document, and then edit with some independent input. That might be more effective. Right now I think the only thing that you can look at right now is the potential play, and that looks pretty good as far as it goes. Perhaps a couple more posts here to clarify some things like you have been doing, and then on to writing.

Just a thought.

Mike

As a quick aside, I agree that an example of play would be great. Imagine an ideal session of this game. How would it go? I think this would tell us a lot about what the game is about.

Okay, first off, OW MY HEAD. And I feel like I don't belong here with all these other big talkers but hey, I take chances now and then.

Next, WOW, what a ... I dunno, I've never seen a *rich* rpg 'explanation' of rules before, but this was... almost ethereally graceful, yet at the same time, I comprehended almost none of it - but didn't mind. Heh.

"A single entity cannot support multiple goals"

Er - why? I don't grasp, off the cuff, what a 'goal' is and why you (or your meta character, whatever THAT is) can't 'support' more than one.

Presumably, to be vulgar, a 'goal' in combat would be to kill or injure an NPC (I know these terms are probably anathema to your game but its easiest for me) - but if you had 'apprehend, failing that-knock out, failing that-wound, failing that-kill', is this still one goal or multiple goals? Putting it differently, how concrete or abstract are goals? All players may have the 'goal' of rescue the Duchess or Wield Excalibur or Find the Secret of the Universe, or even have a 'selfless' goal of 'Have Ted Wield Excalibur' yet ALSO have their OWN goals...

Utterly fascinating reading, just attempting to decipher it and translate it into something that my own experience and mind can interpret, but as noted, definitely NOT for unwary consumption by persons who haven't written a doctoral thesis over Joseph Cambell's works. I am intrigued by this whole meta character thing and controlling entities, being even multiple people, or one person, or I suppose, an entire town, or even the life of a forest, etc. Its truly overwhelming for someone like me who has never quite considered gaming from this vantage.

Overall, I have to agree, besides some form of respite from words with more literary pedigree than most Westminster events, a good, solid ideal example of play or a 'walkthrough' would probably be the best step toward a 'quick start' section for people who are stumped on 'Contact Layers'. Also I think an outline or something, like I. II. III, of 'do this, do that, do this now, follow with this' would be helpful - I have no clue as to how or when any of these things you described would come into play, be used, be created, be referenced, etc, or in what order.

The problem I see here is, its possible (and this is just a potential I feel could exist in a game of this... depth) that you do not know 'exactly' what you feel would be an ideal session, since it hasn't been played to its full potential and you might not really even recognize it if you saw it. You obviously have a 'goal' or expected resolution formula, complete with narrative variables and sequences along the path, and know what the players are supposed to do during play - but being able to encapsulate something as multi-dimensional as this seems like it would take a truly massive amount of detail, memory and probably trimming to be able to say 'here it is, it should work like this: A, B, C'.

I will try to follow this thread but doubt I'll be giving much input on this, but I certainly hope it gets some interest and support and can be brought to fruition. I wish you all the best.

Silent


Hey, thought I should follow up my negative sounding post with some concrete and focused ways that I think you could improve the presentation of the ideas.

Silent Entropy wrote: Apotheosis is a mythic game that floats somewhere between the narrative and simulation models. Apotheosis is a poetic journey through a meta-mythic realm of infinite epic possibilities. The backdrop of Apotheosis is the Tapestry. The Tapestry is the aggregation of the narrative environments and mythologies in a given game. The Tapestry exemplifies the “meta-myth.”

I’ve revised the entire game based on the feedback I’ve gotten from this thread. I’ve talked to several people privately and I believe my refined and revised version is much more accessible to anyone who isn’t me! :)

It would be appreciated if anyone could point me toward similar systems. I already plan to check out The Million Worlds, Nine Worlds, and Universalis. I've checked out Ever-After and Torchbearer, although not in detail. I'm sure they've both influenced my revisions somehow.

There are some very broad strokes here, but I’ve tried to specify enough to clear up most problematic details. After I finish presenting the most recent copy of my material I will go back through the current string of posts and explain specifically what I’ve done to address individual concerns.

I’m going to give a synopsis of the game, but this post will focus primarily on entities and conflicts in narrative play.

Apotheosis is a game about myths. It’s also a game about mythologies. Apotheosis is divided into three phases of play: pre-narrative, narrative, and post-narrative.

During the first phase of play, the pre-narrative phase, players define the rules and guidelines that will further dictate how and why they play the game. The pre-narrative phase is broken down into a context step and a contract step. Each step requires players to structure a piece of the game world. During the context step players decide how they will actually play the game. During the contact step players begin solidifying the narrative structure. The narrative structure is the multimedia theatre in which the narrative unfolds. The narrative structure defines the narrative reality, the narrative setting, and the narrative mythos. The narrative reality dictates what can and cannot occur in the course of the narrative, as well as how and/or why it can or cannot occur. The narrative setting is the environment where the narrative occurs. The narrative mythos is the collected body of myths and legends that (true or otherwise) define the mythologies of the narrative. Context agreement and contract arrangement can be reversed in order. This allows recursive styles of play to develop. It’s important to note that the pre-narrative phase is definitely a part of the game. It is not “before the game begins.”

During the second phase of play, the narrative phase, players act out their established roles. This phase is generally divided into alternating periods of standard narration and conflict narration. Standard narration is the act of simply telling a story. Anyone can narrate the story (within the limits of the pre-narrative Context and Contract). When a dispute over narrative rights or inheritance occurs there is a conflict. A conflict that plays out entirely undergoes narration as well. This is conflict narration. The narrative phase itself is predicated upon conflict. Everything can conceivably be an entity and every entity can undergo internal and external conflict. Each entity can also be static or dynamic in nature. Allowing this "binary opposition" gives me a lot of room to work with traditional myths and legends. The premise of the narrative phase is typically, "We always have a choice whether or not we participate in any given conflict. What are conflicts? Why do we engage in them? What do our choices, intentions, and actions in a conflict say about us?"

During the third phase of play, the post-narrative phase, the pre-narrative and narrative phases are wrapped up. More information will be given about this phase in the future.

Players will usually control one or more game entities during the narrative phase. The number of entities (if any) and the parameters of an individual’s control are determined during the pre-narrative phase of play. Most games will allow players to control game entities, though. Also, most games will allow the players to act as an “anti-game” entity, a “meta-game entity,” or a “supra-game” entity. Anti-game entities do not exist in the game itself. The player is considered to simply be playing whatever entities are under his or her control. The player is directed by a discrete role that encourages them to simulate an entities behavior. This is not unlike many other role-playing games that lack an exclusively “meta-game presence.” The players may also act as “meta-game” entities. This gives them a distinct meta-game presence. Most narrativist games fall into this category. Playing “supra-game” entities allows a player to actually play an entity that “plays” other entities. This can be thought of as a “meta-game” mechanic that is actually a part of the game itself.

This piece of work on entities and conflicts focuses on game entities and game conflicts. Anti-game, meta-game, and supra-game entities (and conflicts) are not addressed. Any reference to a conflict or entity refers exclusively to a game entity or conflict.

Entities
An entity is anything important and interesting enough to possess a defined presence in the narrative. Entities are composed of paradigms and elements.

Paradigms are numerically scaled attributes that model an entity's place in the narrative. Each paradigm is therefore related the narrative structure. There are two paradigms. Each paradigm is also associated with three unique elements. Paradigms lay the foundation for conflict.

Elements are individual traits possessed by an entity. Elements are associated with paradigms. Elements define how much control an entity has over any associated paradigms. This also means elements are responsible for how an entity can influence the outcome of a conflict.

Legacy is the paradigm that focuses on an entity's purpose and inertia in the narrative. An entity's legacy determines how an entity can exploit opportunities in a conflict. An entity's legacy also determines how much power an entity has to manipulate the narrative outside of conflict. Legacy is associated with Masks, Sigils, and Wonders.

Masks are elements that define archetypal roles an entity fulfills or portrays. They are unique facets of an entity that act as a foundation for identity. Typically, an entity's name (true or otherwise) is a mask that an entity will wear.

Sigils are elements that modify or mold how an entity interacts with the narrative. Sigils are templates that dictate what an entity is and what an entity can do. Sigils can bend, make, and break the rules of a narrative.

Wonders are elements that fuel myth. Wonders are used to perform unique actions that can completely change the course of a narrative. Wonders are also used to enact specific rituals that bring an entity closer to myth. Wonders are finite resources that may be spent during the course of a narrative.

Tapestry is the paradigm that focuses on an entity's potential in the narrative. Tapestry helps determine the limit of an entity's ability to influence a conflict. Tapestry determines how truly ingrained an entity is into the mythic structure of a narrative. Tapestry is associated with Patterns, Threads, and Weaves.

Patterns are elements that form the foundation of an entity and its relationship to the narrative. Patterns are fundamental building blocks that an entity can use to manipulate the narrative. Patterns can be used to influence the outcome of a conflict. Patterns are finite resources that may be spent during the course of a narrative.

Threads are elements of an entity that are active (or reactive) and require no cost to use. Threads enhance and enrich a conflict by there very presence, when appropriate.

Weaves are elements of an entity that are passive (or inactive) and require a substantial cost to use. Weaves affect a conflict in a similar way to threads.

Conflicts
Conflicts are the result of multiple entities vying for narrative priority.

Conflict Orientations
An entity's orientation during a conflict determines how an entity may interact in the conflict. Conflict Orientation occurs during the Initiation Stage and may be modified during the Interaction Stage. Engaged entities may take influential actions and incidental actions. Disengaged entities may take only incidental actions.

Initial Engagement
Initial Engagement occurs when an entity initiates a conflict. The initiator of the conflict is initially engaged before any other entities. The initiator gains a slight benefit for initiating the conflict. For all intents and purposes otherwise the initiator is considered to be oriented toward Active Engagement.

Active Engagement
Active Engagement occurs when an entity becomes engaged during the Initiation Stage and is not the initiator. The entity is an active participant in the conflict. Active participants can declare goals and acquire narrative priority.

Passive Engagement
Passive Engagement occurs when an entity that was oriented toward Passive Disengagement, becomes engaged during the Interaction Stage instead of the Initiation Stage. The entity is a passive participant in the conflict. Passive participants cannot declare goals (since they missed the Declaration Stage). Passive Participants cannot gain narrative priority (since they missed the Initiation Stage).

Passive Disengagement
Passive Disengagement occurs when an entity is not engaged during the Initiation Stage. This entity is not a part of the conflict proper. The entity may become engaged during the Interaction Stage. If this occurs entity becomes passively engaged (oriented toward Passive Engagement).

Active Disengagement
Active Disengagement occurs when an entity leaves a conflict during the Interaction Stage. The entity is removed from the conflict completely. The entity's goal remains if at least a single active participant remains.

Final Disengagement
Final Disengagement occurs at the end of a conflict. All participants in the conflict become disengaged and may not reengage in the same conflict. Entities thus disengaged gain a single Wonder. An entity’s paradigms are returned to normal. The conflict has concluded.

Incidental Actions
An incidental action is any action that cannot have a dire or direct impact on the resolution of a conflict. Anyone can take incidental actions.

Influential Actions
During the Interaction Stage engaged players may take influential actions. These actions can have a dire and direct impact on the resolution of a conflict.

Pattern
An entity may spend patterns to influence the outcome of a conflict. An appropriate number of patterns equal to or less than the Tapestry may be spent. Each pattern spent contributes to the number of options available to an entity during a conflict. Patterns spent are not cumulative. For example, if I spend two Patterns I can either grant an entity two dice to roll or take away one die from an entity.

Fortune
For every pattern spent an entity may give a single die to any other entity during the Resolution Stage. This die is rolled in an attempt to gain a narrative opportunity. If the die is even the entity gains a narrative opportunity. If the die is odd the entity gains nothing.

For every two patterns spent an entity may remove a single die from any other entity during the Resolution Stage.

Karma
For every three patterns spent an entity give a single narrative opportunity to any entity during the Resolution Stage.

For every four patterns spent an entity may remove a single narrative opportunity from any entity during the Resolution Stage.

Drama
For every five patterns spent an entity may declare an additional goal.

For every six patterns spent an entity may reorient itself toward Passive Engagement or Passive Disengagement.

For every seven patterns spent an entity may reorient itself toward Active Engagement or Active Disengagement.

For every eight patterns spent an entity may give a Wonder to any entity.

For every nine patterns spent an entity may remove a Wonder from any entity.

For every ten patterns spent an entity may nullify a declared goal.

Thread
An entity may activate a thread to increase any entity’s Tapestry be one. The thread costs nothing to activate.

Weaving
An entity may activate a weave to increase any entity’s Tapestry by one per Wonder spent to activate the weave.

Notes
If no active participants remain in a conflict the conflict is concluded without narration.

If a single active participant remains in a conflict that participant gains narrative priority.

If a single goal is ever left that goal is narrated and the conflict is concluded. The only exception to this is during the Interaction Stage (since goals can be added or removed from the conflict).

A transmutative goal has a specific cost based on the nature of the transmutation. It costs a specific amount of Wonders to transmute an entity. It also requires the transmuter to sacrifice a certain number of elements.

Raising or Lowering a Paradigm by X costs (10^X) Wonders + X Associated Elements.
Adding or Subtracting a Legacy Element costs 5 Wonders + 1 Tapestry Element
Adding or Subtracting a Tapestry Element costs 5 Wonders + 1 Legacy Element

Conflict Stages
Conflicts follow a linear path through five stages.

Initiation
Any player may initiate a conflict. Any players that wish to participate in the conflict may do so. No one is ever forced into participating in a conflict. The initiator is immediately oriented toward Initial Engagement and all other participants are oriented toward Active Engagement. All non-participants are oriented toward Passive Disengagement.

Declaration
Each active participant may declare a single goal. There must be at least two mutually divergent goals in any conflict. Goals can be purely interpretative and affect the course of the narrative. Alternatively, a transmutative goal can be declared. Transmutative goals change an entity.

Interaction
Active Participants may become non-participants (Active Engagement reoriented toward Active Disengagement). Non-participants may become Passive Participants (Passive Disengagement reoriented toward Passive Engagement). All participants may take appropriate actions.

Resolution
Participants may resolve the conflict using any appropriate means determined in the Interaction Stage. Participants may add or subtract their narrative opportunities to or from other participant's opportunities. Participants may reserve their narrative opportunities. The participant with the most narrative opportunities at the end of the Resolution Stage gains narrative priority and is considered the narrator. The initiator of the conflict gains an extra narrative opportunity.

Narration
The narrator determines which goals manifest. The narrator may pick one or more goals (or a compromise between multiple goals). Each goal costs a single narrative opportunity. A participant may only spend a number of goals equal to or less than its Legacy. Interpretive goals only cost narrative opportunities. Transmutative goals must be paid for with an additional cost depending upon the particular transmutation. Afterward everyone is oriented toward Final Disengagement and the conflict ends permanently.

Does this clear up any questions? Do the mechanics have a particular feel? Is the conflict structure understandable yet? Is the vernacular easier to deal with or does it still put people off? I'm going to write up some conflict examples from a mechanics standpoint. They'll be up as soon as I get some more time. After that I'd like to go back through the past posts and address my changes and everyone's questions.