Hello.

I'm doing some backtracking and much trashing of drafts with my little project (the last post concerning which is here: The Iron City: Secrets and Subversives). I've gone in and retooled my initial focus somewhat. This is what has turned up:

-----------------------------

THOUGHTCRIME: IRON CITY

The Game In Brief: You are the worst kind of criminal, and in this world, the only kind of criminal that truly deserves to hang. You are a subversive and seditionist, a traitor to the state. You are the madman waiting on the horizon to strike at the bustling hive of order and civilization called The City. Driven to this life of villainy by a desire for vengeance, you must now pit your wits against society's greatest weapon, the Secret Police. So, what'll it be? Che Guevarra or Osama Bin Laden? It's your choice.

Literary (and not-so-literary influences on the game): 1984 by George Orwell, The Man Who Was Thrusday by GK Chesterton, the Metropolis films (both the Fritz Lang original and the Osamu Tezuka anime), Captain Nemo and other characters from HG Wells' novels, Repent Harlequin said the Tick-Tock Man by Harlan Ellison, and Mojo Jojo from the Powerpuff Girls cartoon series.

Setting Sketch: An ultra-stylised cartoon-ish steampunk city. Bowler hats and gasmasks. Massive urban sprawl full of hidden levels, gigantic skyscrapers, factories spewing gouts of smoke and steam, a comprehensive people-mover system of steam-powered locomotives, elevators, and trams. Gargantuan airships and sputtering gyroflyers dot the sky. Retro-style gearjacks (robots with human brains) collared for manual labour and all sorts of clerical tasks -- in a sense, these are The City's slave population. The rest of the population includes both humans and savants. Savants are, well uhm, "furries", anthropomorphic animals (of the Wind In The Willows type). The savants represent The City's migrant population (which also means that the human population is all caucasian -- so, yes, I'm going for stereotypes here.)

The Player-Characters: The PCs are anarchists fighting against the system. Essentially they are criminals, with motive, means, and opportunities which they themselves will explore throughout the game. Their "deviancies" from the accepted norm include not only a motive for striking back and their means for doing so; but also form the basis by which the system's Secret Police will be hunting them and their allies down.

Role of the Setting: The City is essentially a modular "snap-on" setting. It provides some basic structure and flavor, but it gains more and more stability in terms of where hidden bases, secret tunnels, and such are located as play progresses. The player-characters themselves are given directorial power over this to some degree. They are the anarchists of the game after all, and represent that random flash of chaotic lightning that "the system" must deal with.

Role of the Gamemaster: The Gamemaster takes on the roles of the City's "system" and it's agents, The Secret Police. The GM (and to some extent the players) have directorial power over how The City reacts to the actions of the anarchists, which people significant to the PCs the system might target next, etc.

Some Rules Concepts: Each anarchist character always begins with a Motive -- a significant point where he begins to question the system and starts to build resources (whether intra-personal such as an exceptional talent at making bombs, or extra-personal such as his own secret lab under the sewers). The Motive's strength goes up during the course of play, depending on what the character will be risking (allies, self, other PCs), and how the system counter- attacks (example: the Secret Police end up killing a friend, Motive thus goes up in strength).

Aside from stengthening Motive, advancement will also reflect greater power over certain elements of the setting such as secret bases, hidden laboratories, networks of contacts, the sheer power of infamy, and so on -- ie: advancement equals more anarchic power, but also equals riskier opportunities.

There's also the idea of "deviancy" -- that the criminal anarchist is a deviant (a genesis of which is in his Motive), and so I'm looking at how to turn this deviancy into traits or measures in the game.

The players are rated on one or perhaps several scales of "fame" and "infamy". Since the actions of the PCs will place their allies and other significant people in the line of fire, the effects of their actions will eventually result in a tug between the "Che Guevarra" side or the "Osama" side of things.

The Secret Police are everywhere. Which means for each significant strike against the system that the players enact, a set of Leads are gained. These Leads can pop up as "extra dice" (extra effectivity) possessed by various agents of the system within a scene. Furthermore, the players get to choose just how much of the Leads they've thus far incurred get played into a particular scene. However, the specific person in which this extra effectivity is placed on is up to the GM -- you never know who the Secret Police really are until the last moment.

As the individuals in the Cell (the PC group) follow their villainous adventures, they begin to take either side of the Che-Osama dichotomy. The more varied the members of a Cell are in this regard, the more likely a Secret Police agent will arise from among their own ranks. I'm also thinking of some way for the players to actually declare where the Leads will show up, as long as it is within their own ranks.

-----------------------------

Granted, the above is just another sketch on the drawing board. However, this one's getting more and more closer to the feel/style and theme areas I'm keen to explore, those areas I'd like to humbly ask the gallery for a bit of help with.

Some questions:

I know that questioning your own motives, might just be gazing at one's own navel, but is the emphasis as outlined above leaning toward a more narrativist game, or a more gamist game?

From a narrativist design point-of-view, which elements of those outlined above stike you as worthwhile enough to develop? Also, just from a more general gamer standpoint, which elements strike you as interesting? Is there even any with some potential at all?

Finally, concerning the whole PCs as "villains" and "hunted criminals" set-up, would you know of some good games out there that tackle this?

Thank you very much for taking a look. And best wishes for your own games.

- W.

Looks good on initial gloss, I'll have a think. I guess the biggest danger is that the political issues be dealt with too simplistically (a la The Matrix) and you end up with a cartoon. It would be good if the system provided a way of staging ethical dilemmas, faustian deals and modelled the politics - not sure how that would work...

Love the Furries. Are you with me Comrade Mole?

I'd recommend the anime film Jin Roh: THe Wolf Brigade.

Also, The Secret Agent by Joseph Conrad. On a lighter note, the 'Comrade Bingo' story in the Jeeves & Wooster tv series - not sure what short story it came from..

Scobie

scobie wrote: ...I guess the biggest danger is that the political issues be dealt with too simplistically (a la The Matrix) and you end up with a cartoon. It would be good if the system provided a way of staging ethical dilemmas, faustian deals and modelled the politics - not sure how that would work...

Love the Furries. Are you with me Comrade Mole?

For other influence, pick up the first couple of "Scion" graphic novels from Crossgen Comics (or get a subscription to the online version of their comic library). They're great for old/high-tech, enslaved-furries-serving-humans stuff. And the writing and art are incredible. Leans a little more towards the tropes of the sword-and-sorcery genre than what you're doing, but similar on several levels. Of course, you may be familiar with it already...

You mention Mojo Jojo, but have you looked at Samurai Jack?

I really 'get' this game idea. It resonates with me pretty strongly. Excellent work thus far!

I was thinking about the deviancy aspect you mentioned and thought of something interesting. How about the City being ordered in a rather strict caste system and every player character having his background in one of these castes which would define the beginning 'skills'/'traits' that the character had. The city's system not only promotes but enforces its citizens to be good workers with just the right skills and to not develop themselves out of the mold. So, every additional trait a character would have would make it easier for the Secret Police to get a Lead on the character. The caste skills could be basic things like Engineering, Menial Labour and so on, while the deviant skills could include pretty much everything from Charismatic Speaker to Demolitions.

I feel this idea ties in the deviancy and character effectiveness nicely.

The caste system could also neatly introduce a shady ruling caste if that feels appropiate for the setting.

That's just a first idea concerning the setting, let's see if I can propose a few others later.

- Joachim Buchert -

Jonathan Walton wrote: ...pick up the first couple of "Scion" graphic novels from Crossgen Comics (or get a subscription to the online version of their comic library). They're great for old/high-tech, enslaved-furries-serving- humans stuff...

Chris Goodwin wrote: ...You mention Mojo Jojo, but have you looked at Samurai Jack?

Daredevil wrote: I was thinking about the deviancy aspect you mentioned and thought of something interesting. How about the City being ordered in a rather strict caste system and every player character having his background in one of these castes which would define the beginning 'skills'/'traits' that the character had. The city's system not only promotes but enforces its citizens to be good workers with just the right skills and to not develop themselves out of the mold. So, every additional trait a character would have would make it easier for the Secret Police to get a Lead on the character. The caste skills could be basic things like Engineering, Menial Labour and so on, while the deviant skills could include pretty much everything from Charismatic Speaker to Demolitions.

I feel this idea ties in the deviancy and character effectiveness nicely.

The caste system could also neatly introduce a shady ruling caste if that feels appropiate for the setting.

I'll be glad to offer input, if only to give you a firm push towards working on finishing this concept that very much sounds like something I'd like to run. Now, let me put on a little Rage Against the Machine and ...

I like the way your ideas try to make the game become an exploration (or even Exploration, in the Sim sense of the word) of rebellion, in the way that you first define what type of insurgent you actually are and also how your character fits in with the rest of the Cell and how much he embodies their great Cause. I find this a very interesting area to explore via play. You could become an ardent fanatic supporting your comrades or a withdrawn rebel who finds little contentment in the base acts of his Cell? Will the lonely thinker betray his comrades to the Secret Police or will he leave them be and ultimately go down his own lonely path of rebellion?

As for the visual look, ever since first reading about this and especially after hearing some of the references, I keep seeing these pages out of a European-style comic, ala Enki Bilal and Moebius.

WDFlores wrote:

The anarchist PCs will be profiled as criminals, possessing the classic (a) Motive, (b) Means, and (c) Opportunity elements. Among these three, Motive bears the most weight and becomes a core currency of the game.

WDFlores wrote:

Further, it is Motive that the Secret Police are really after. It represents that random thing that doesn't fit into their plans for society. So, one way of looking at the Secret Police, is that they're out to discover your Motive. If, through the Leads you leave behind, they finally figure it all out, it's game over. (I'm still thinking about how to work this into the design.)

Daredevil wrote: As for the visual look, ever since first reading about this and especially after hearing some of the references, I keep seeing these pages out of a European-style comic, ala Enki Bilal and Moebius.

It would be very interesting to develop Opportunity into a sort of Kicker type system to provide a starting point and framework for a session. I think it would be most effective if it sort of sprung forth from either the character's Motive or possible his available Means.

On the social aspect of the Cell, there could be disagreement between members on which opportunity to invest into. The less your idea of using the Cell assets in some way appeals to the rest of the Cell, the less effectiveness you have available as fewer comrades will be helping you whole-heartedly.

Hmm. Why (do you think) the discovery of the character's motive would extinguish the character's rebellion? Some form of cover-up by the Secret Police or how?

With a Soviet or East German socialist-constructivist jive going. If the project ever pushes into actual publishing, I'm thinking the chapter headings ought to be done in Soviet-style fonts.

I would absolutely love a chance at doing the layout and design of the game if you decide to go with the constructivist look. That's one of my favorite design styles of all time.

This sounds great, WD. Question: what happens to revolutionaries who get caught? Are they killed? Imprisoned? Branded? Re-programmed and used to catch other cell members?

The central narrativist question of the game seems to center on the divergent developmental path you've got going: the che/osama dichotomy. The intra-cell conflict based on these decisions serves to highlight that basic question.

The players are rated on one or perhaps several scales of "fame" and "infamy". Since the actions of the PCs will place their allies and other significant people in the line of fire, the effects of their actions will eventually result in a tug between the "Che Guevarra" side or the "Osama" side of things.

Re-programmed and used to catch other cell members?

The central narrativist question of the game seems to center on the divergent developmental path you've got going: the che/osama dichotomy. The intra-cell conflict based on these decisions serves to highlight that basic question.

Hiya,

I've tried to order all the recent replies along specific categories. Just so I can organise the discussion and my own responses. Apart from my replies, I've also added some new "issues", placing these at the end half of this post. In general, this post moves from the issues I'm not so focused on right now (tackled in the earlier portions), and builds up to the concerns I'm still trying to wrap my brain around at this stage (tackled in the latter portions).


MISC:

Emily Care wrote: I'm personally very happy you wrote this because I have an idea for a slave revolution game that is much more historical in nature, and historically revolutions are very, very difficult. Now I can refer folks to your game if they want a that kind of experience, and I can be free to have mine be a more sim-oriented educational game that helps folks have the experience of what it's like to be enslaved. Thanks!

gobi wrote: I would absolutely love a chance at doing the layout and design of the game if you decide to go with the constructivist look. That's one of my favorite design styles of all time.

Emily Care wrote: This sounds great, WD. Question: what happens to revolutionaries who get caught? Are they killed? Imprisoned? Branded? Re-programmed and used to catch other cell members?

Mike Holmes wrote: That's brilliant, Em. Perhaps it could be engineered so that the players wouldn't always be sure if a character had gotten caught or not. Some PCs could be working for the other side, and the characters and even players wouldn't be aware. How's that for generating Paranoia? Essentially the players would feel the pressure of constantly worrying that those they were working with could turn them in at any time.

Emily Care wrote: The central narrativist question of the game seems to center on the divergent developmental path you've got going: the che/osama dichotomy. The intra-cell conflict based on these decisions serves to highlight that basic question.

Having multiple ratings makes it more complex than simply having a single rating cover "loss of decency" etc. The increase of fame/infamy could influence who gets drawn to be in society with you as well--thugs gravitate towards stronger thugs, and law-abiding citizens will be more likely to help a Robin Hood figure. Are the leads involved in the fame/infamy? Seems like you'd need some way for your identity to be known in order for your personality to have that kind of impact for the "cause". Sounds like you might want to look at how other games such as Sorcerer foreground the premise via the mechanics.

Mike Holmes wrote: I'm seeing a potentially very Gamist game where players could actually win by causing an overthrow, but it would be something that would require extreme care to engineer over a lot of play. Losses, wherin all were captured would be common to make it a real challenge.

BTW, look at the game Zero for an example of characters who are hunted.

In my last post I wrote: The situation seems to me to have lots of Nar potential, and rife with opportunities for players to explore the particular styles of criminal deviancy that interests them... I was groping for a clear marker for "game over" with that one... from a Sim point-of-view, I admit this won't be realistic. Still, it does seem to give me some sort of nice little Nar package. I'm still on the fence where this is concerned (ie: Nar-Sim, Sim-Nar, Pure Sim, or just Nar... dang, I'm getting dizzy ;o)

Hi all.

Hey, I really like the idea for your game. I'm new here, so bear with me if I use the jargon a bit wrong.

Anyway, someone mentioned the gamist goal of overthrowing the evil regime, and thus ending the game. I just like to point out ( is this going narrativist/sim'ist?) that what happens after a revolution can be just as interesting as the paranoid underpinnings of the fight against the Big Bad.
Consider the following:

The struggle for power in the new Regime:
-The purges of the early Soviet Union through the Stalinist era, and then the post-Stalinist reaction. Heck, those periods alone are worth mining for ideas, either directly or in a translated form.
-Although the Stalinist era is usually held up as the big example of revolution gone bad, consider the following: The political underpinnings of the Marshall Plan, The Irish Civil War that followed Partition and the Tan War, The Cultural Revolution in China, the after effects of the Cuban Revolution, Post WW2 France and dealing with both the collaborationists and the leftists, etecetecetc.

Anyway, my point is this: I know that you haven't yet got the original game off the ground yet, but the overthrow of the Old Order almost never ends all the issues that the Revolution was originally about. More often than not, it leads to more chaos as new and old power groups struggle to reach some sort of functional equilibrium while still settling old scores.

Your general setting seems very well set up to have many, many adventure opportunities in any of the Three Play Styles _even_ in the event of the Regime being ousted.

Good Luck. I can't wait to see how things turn out.

PS- How horrific do you plan to make the setting? I used to play Paranoia and loved the setting. My group used to play it primarily for laughs. OTOH, I have seen people play it really dark and brooding...

Bob, that's true. But then what's your "win" condition? There has been in the past an aversion to having win conditions in RPGs. But for no reason that I can discern other than tradition, and an unreasoning fear that Gamism will run rampant. The game Rune is a great example of a Gamist RPG with a win condition that has no problems.

What I see here is a game that could advance the idea of a Gamist game with seriously philosophical undertones. Which I think would be very cool.

Further, I stand by the principle that games ought to have a well defined scope. Sure he could do the aftermath portion as well, but I'm not sure that's part of his vision for the project. He could also include aliens in the conspiracy, and elves, but would the game really benefit? Don obviously has a strong idea of what the game will be about. So I think he ought to run with that.

Not to say that a game that includes aftermath of revolution wouldn't be cool as well. Just that if that's what you want, then someone else, maybe yourself, should design that particular game.

Mike

Heya,

OK Mike, I see what you mean about limiting the scope, especially initially. I can easily see how overwhelming trying to do everything involved in building the system in the first place ( much less building essentially a second game at the same time ) could be.

Actually, I doubt that I personally have the wherewithall to put together anything even a tenth the size of ThoughtKrime these days. Honestly though, I am really jazzed about the whole setting. I really just wondered if a game where the pcs have little or no chance to eventually succeed in their endeavors was just a bit too depressing. Of course, that was the original premise of Paranoia, and I did enjoy that...

One thing that I would throw out there ( okay, maybe two things)

Game Art: This game seems to be one of those ones where the art that goes along with the writing is likely to set the entire tone of the game for folks first encountering it. Just curious what your vision for accompanying art would be?

Setting: Strictly for my own greedy reasons, I like all setting related stuff seperate from mechanical thingies. Basically, even though I understand the "System Matters" argument, I like to have a setting guide that is not intermixed with rules, so that I can port it around easily. I know, horrible and evil of me. Honestly though, I think the setting of ThoughtCrime is really clever- Clever enough that I'd want to play games in that setting without necessarily slowing down for mechanics ( Personal sidenote- I'm starting to game with folks that haven't been gaming before, so I'm tending towards ruleslite or even, Heaven Protect us Gamey Simmers, more narrativist oriented rules).

Wow, that was chatty.

I've been reading about both power groups as background and relationship maps ( it seems like you'd want to go beyond Blood and sex ties for this setting). Are you thinking of utlising either or both?

Strictly for my own greedy reasons, I like all setting related stuff seperate from mechanical thingies. Basically, even though I understand the "System Matters" argument, I like to have a setting guide that is not intermixed with rules, so that I can port it around easily. I know, horrible and evil of me.

It strikes me that within your Motive/Means/Opportunity areas, Means would be the place to put skills/stats. This portion of the character description indicates how useful the character is to the Cell, specifically in applying his skills, contacts, resources, knowledge, and other basic ability to the Cell's goals.

As far as Leads go, something you could explore is the fact that the more useful a character's Means, the easier he is to identify. Basically, the more he advances toward the Cell's goals (subversion), the more evidence he leaves for the authorities to track him down. You discussed this briefly earlier, but on the Cell level the more effective a Cell is the more likely it is to be discovered. The players would then be skirting the edge of capture in order to be truly effective. Great gains can only be obtained by taking risks, but risks that are too great end in the exposure of a Cell.

Hi again, all. Apologies for the late return-fire, but here are the issues brought up for Thoughtcrime. Again, I've arranged them into sections starting from the ones I'm least focused on to those I'm more focused on (at least at this early point in the design stage).
__________________

MISC:

komradebob2 wrote: Wow, that was chatty.

komradebob2 wrote: How horrific do you plan to make the setting? I used to play Paranoia and loved the setting. My group used to play it primarily for laughs. OTOH, I have seen people play it really dark and brooding...

Game Art: This game seems to be one of those ones where the art that goes along with the writing is likely to set the entire tone of the game for folks first encountering it. Just curious what your vision for accompanying art would be?

komradebob2 wrote: Setting: Strictly for my own greedy reasons, I like all setting related stuff seperate from mechanical thingies. Basically, even though I understand the "System Matters" argument, I like to have a setting guide that is not intermixed with rules, so that I can port it around easily. I know, horrible and evil of me...

Mike Holmes wrote: It does raise some issues of presentation, but that's been dealt with in other threads. Basically, it seems to be a matter of preference in how the system is linked to the setting in the text...

inthisstyle wrote: It strikes me that within your Motive / Means / Opportunity areas, Means would be the place to put skills / stats. This portion of the character description indicates how useful the character is to the Cell, specifically in applying his skills, contacts, resources, knowledge, and other basic ability to the Cell's goals.

inthisstyle wrote: As far as Leads go, something you could explore is the fact that the more useful a character's Means, the easier he is to identify. Basically, the more he advances toward the Cell's goals (subversion), the more evidence he leaves for the authorities to track him down. You discussed this briefly earlier, but on the Cell level the more effective a Cell is the more likely it is to be discovered. The players would then be skirting the edge of capture in order to be truly effective. Great gains can only be obtained by taking risks, but risks that are too great end in the exposure of a Cell.

komradebob2 wrote: ...someone mentioned the gamist goal of overthrowing the evil regime, and thus ending the game. I just like to point out ( is this going narrativist/sim'ist?) that what happens after a revolution can be just as interesting as the paranoid underpinnings of the fight against the Big Bad....

Anyway, my point is this: I know that you haven't yet got the original game off the ground yet, but the overthrow of the Old Order almost never ends all the issues that the Revolution was originally about...

I really just wondered if a game where the pcs have little or no chance to eventually succeed in their endeavors was just a bit too depressing. Of course, that was the original premise of Paranoia, and I did enjoy that...

Mike Holems wrote: Bob, that's true. But then what's your "win" condition? There has been in the past an aversion to having win conditions in RPGs. But for no reason that I can discern other than tradition, and an unreasoning fear that Gamism will run rampant...

Further, I stand by the principle that games ought to have a well defined scope. Sure he could do the aftermath portion as well, but I'm not sure that's part of his vision for the project...

Mike Holmes wrote: What I see here is a game that could advance the idea of a Gamist game with seriously philosophical undertones. Which I think would be very cool.

I've been lurking and following this idea for a couple of weeks now, and I've read the background threads to catch up. Simply put, there's a lot to love here.

I've been thinking about running a variation of it for my local group. The idea was to blend it a bit with the anime Big O, so that the characters are out to wreck the government, but (A) they're doing it with some really kewl steampunk gear, and (B) there are other, far less morally responsible criminals out there that they might end up fighting, which could create the escape path of becoming Robin Hoods instead of bin Ladens.

Today I read your comment about five-story robots with explosive canisters, and I made a face not unlike that of Dee-Dee from "Dexter's Laboratory" when she finds a red button to push. Maybe you're a fan of the Big O as well?

Anyway, the point. I came up with a preliminary idea of how this could be played using the standard tenets of WEG's D6 system. Here's how a character sheet would look.

NAME: the PC's name
NOM DE CRIME: the cool alias

STRENGTH: measuring both lifting power and physical endurance
Any Strength skills would appear beneath.
REFLEXES: measuring dexterity and reaction times
Any Reflexes skills would appear beneath.
KNOWLEDGE: measuring analytical thinking and memories
Any Knowledge skills would appear beneath.
TECHNIQUE: measuring ability to use and repair machines
Any Technique skills would appear beneath.

COVER: This is a trait for mundane life background details.
"Cover Skills" would actually be friends, business contacts, job, other legitimate sources of money, government contacts, etc.
CONSPIRACY: This is a trait covering criminal background details.
"Conspiracy Skills" would actually be crime contacts, allies, hidden sources of funding, weird gadgets, hideouts, etc.

CHARACTER POINTS: 5 (starting XP, basically, which can be spent on bonuses)
MOTIVATION POINTS: 1 (spent to double all stats for a round or to add a major plot point; if it's spent on a relevant matter it is regained at the end of the game, and if it's spent on a really game-critical matter, another MP is gained)
OPRESSION POINTS: 0 (these accumulate as the Secret Police manage successful investigations of the character -- discovering his/her Cover traits, finding the hideout, blocking access to technology, etc. Gain more OP than you have MP and you're pretty much out of business, because the character is more afraid of the SPs than he/she is motivated to fight them)

In case you aren't familiar with the system, D6 uses die pools for everything. Each attribute has a base die pool, and skills add to that (so each skill under an attribute would have more dice than the base attribute). The point of designing Cover and Conspiracy as attributes and their details as skills is to allow the player to choose how "in" the character is (just starting out with lots of legit contacts, or deep inside the underworld with little surface time?) by how the points are spent.

I have no idea if this is at all helpful in designing your own system. I hope it is useful as an alternative example. In any case, know that your work is inspiring others, and I for one will be happy to buy it if it ends up as a marketed product.

Praetus (five-story robots . . . glee!)

Hiya,

Welcome to the Forge, Praetus! Thanks for the interest and the input, and thanks also for taking the time to go over the background threads.

Praetus wrote: Today I read your comment about five-story robots with explosive canisters, and I made a face not unlike that of Dee-Dee from "Dexter's Laboratory" when she finds a red button to push. Maybe you're a fan of the Big O as well?

Anyway, the point. I came up with a preliminary idea of how this could be played using the standard tenets of WEG's D6 system. Here's how a character sheet would look...

... I have no idea if this is at all helpful in designing your own system. I hope it is useful as an alternative example. In any case, know that your work is inspiring others, and I for one will be happy to buy it if it ends up as a marketed product.

"Together, Victory or Death! Big Fire!" Oh, yes, I am inspired now. I think I'll be reviewing my tapes soon.

Your comment on compressed air blew my mind, because I was actually thinking of something similar. Ever see "Logan's Run?" The Sandmen had pistols which blew out jets of white gas with a whoosh (an old Starlog magazine write-up said they were firing acid or explosive pellets, I think, but another source said they were lasers). I was thinking of playing the Secret Police as having compressed-gas pistols which fired some nasty kind of ammunition. Probably just a coincidence, but a nice one. I probably thought of it because it would allow them to have fairly quiet weapons, which would be nice for Secret guys.

The real trick with Deviancy is the question of how much it should impact the character's life as represented in roleplaying. It's a similar situation to the Humanity track in Vampire: the Masquerade. If the character starts off with a Humanity of 6 (stealing is at level 7, higher than the character's starting point) then is that character perfectly all right with stealing? That's determined as much by roleplaying behavior as by the chart. The situation might be one where Deviancy would be determined by in-game behaviors more than by dice. Or is Deviancy intended to be a roleplaying guide for the players? 'Cause that would work, too.

A really interesting point is that the character would gain effectiveness within the Cell as Deviancy increases. I have been wondering if there would be older members higher up the Cell's order, and just how Deviant would they be? Would they be the freaky mad scientists and diabolical plotters, or would people that Deviant have already been tracked down and removed from play by the Secret Police?

There is one thing that I'm still trying to wrap my head around. By the current description of system, if you use 3 Deviancy bonus dice (for example) you put a Lead point in the Sunday's hands. However, what if the player specifically designs the character's activities so that they confuse his goals and disrupt the evidence left behind? It seems like there should be some way that a high roll might actually neutralize the Lead point, preventing it from tallying into the final SP investigation roll. Alternately, a really horrible roll might add another Lead point, indicating that the conspirator's instincts were bad and his mistakes left even more clues than normal. Then again, this would complicate the system, and you may be going for a cleaner dicing element than that. So feel free to say "That's too complicated for my goals" and wave this paragraph away.

I desperately want to know one thing, though. Why is the GM called the Sunday? I'm afraid the reference goes right over my head, and I never found an explanation anywhere.

Thanks for all of this, and be sure to post your website address when it's up!

Praetus

Small question. What exactly do you mean by anarchist? Do you mean the anti-political philosophy and movement that advocates autonomy? Or do you mean some one who happens to be against the current government? Or do you mean some variation of the dictionary and media definition, basically an advocate of disorder? Or do you mean a free market libertarian or any host of other political philsophies that are sometimes refered to as anarchist?

Which role is the character to play?

Hi, all. Real life's been keeping me busy and I haven't had the time to really respond to the concerns above until now. Apologies for the delay.

Praetus wrote: The real trick with Deviancy is the question of how much it should impact the character's life as represented in roleplaying. It's a similar situation to the Humanity track in Vampire: the Masquerade. If the character starts off with a Humanity of 6 (stealing is at level 7, higher than the character's starting point) then is that character perfectly all right with stealing? That's determined as much by roleplaying behavior as by the chart. The situation might be one where Deviancy would be determined by in-game behaviors more than by dice. Or is Deviancy intended to be a roleplaying guide for the players?

I have been wondering if there would be older members higher up the Cell's order, and just how Deviant would they be? Would they be the freaky mad scientists and diabolical plotters, or would people that Deviant have already been tracked down and removed from play by the Secret Police?

... what if the player specifically designs the character's activities so that they confuse his goals and disrupt the evidence left behind? It seems like there should be some way that a high roll might actually neutralize the Lead point, preventing it from tallying into the final SP investigation roll. Alternately, a really horrible roll might add another Lead point, indicating that the conspirator's instincts were bad and his mistakes left even more clues than normal.

I desperately want to know one thing, though. Why is the GM called the Sunday? I'm afraid the reference goes right over my head, and I never found an explanation anywhere.

Cemendur wrote: Small question. What exactly do you mean by anarchist? Do you mean the anti-political philosophy and movement that advocates autonomy? Or do you mean some one who happens to be against the current government? Or do you mean some variation of the dictionary and media definition, basically an advocate of disorder? Or do you mean a free market libertarian or any host of other political philsophies that are sometimes refered to as anarchist?

Which role is the character to play?

Good luck!

I know it's kind of late to be bringing in any input, but I just found some of my notes from when I was making a Matrix RPG (bear with me) that reminded me of your project's use of deviancy and leads.

Simply put, I had a single meter called "Freedom" that represented the mental freedom from the illusion of the machine. Any acts against any representation of the oppressive system, whether it's petty hacking or defying gravity, has Freedom added as a bonus to the attempt. Every successful act of rebellion added a notch. Get enough notches, your Freedom rating rises.

For a short while thereafter, the rebel would have an air of freedom detectable if he or she were in public. This would require a period of downtime while the rebel stays low until the heat dies down. However, this downtime also removes freedom notches so there's kind of a gamist tension. "My freedom's ready to level but if I so much as jaywalk, I'll be up to my eyeballs in agents. What the hell, I'll risk it."

Back to the topic at hand, in the long term, a rebel's "permanent" freedom would be used as a bonus in any investigation or tracking of her activities. In effect, higher freedom makes a bigger, brighter blip on the System's radar. Hrm... on second thought, maybe this should have been its own post. :P

Hey,

This game is a pretty cool concept, and gets really strong feelings from me. I was looking at the discussion on eventually bringing down the system and I strongly object. I don't know about anyone else, but I think that a 1984 style rebellion would be really interesting to play as, something that you cannot possibly achieve in your lifetime, but as one step closer to the system's downfall. I think that the fact that this is depressing brings the players further into the world you have created. I don't know, but that is just my thoughts on the situation.

Also, DON'T CHANGE THE NAME! PLEASE! Thoughtkrime is a really great name and should not be changed, you may be a rogue, but it is the thoughtcrime which leads to you becoming a rogue. Sorry, now that I have that out of my system I'll let the thread sink as you asked.

Good luck!

Kirk