Topic: Nine Worlds playtest
Started by: Matt Snyder
Started on: 8/5/2003
Board: Chimera Creative
On 8/5/2003 at 8:55pm, Matt Snyder wrote:
Nine Worlds playtest
I've been working on this one for a while folks, and I'm proud to say that the playtest version of Nine Worlds is now available as a free download.
These first three chapters of the game are the full full version of the game's rules (minus one ancillary tidbit that I'm working on tentatively called talismans). The rest of the game -- setting material and advice on running the game -- is still in progress.
But that's where you come into play. Anyone and everyone can download this playtest version. I'm looking for critiques on the game and especially playtest reports. (Yeah, I'll take editing errors and the like, but I'm more looking for substantive comments on the game itself. Also, the layout is not final -- still some tweaking to do.)
If you have any playtest comments, please post those in the Chimera Creative forums. Alternatively, you can send me an email: matt@chimera.info
Download the Nine Worlds playtest (800k+ PDF file)
On 8/6/2003 at 3:42pm, Spooky Fanboy wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
WHEEEEEEE!!!!
More detailed review in a moment.
On 8/6/2003 at 5:07pm, Spooky Fanboy wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
Okay, first thoughts:
A character sheet and a Conflict "cheat-sheet" (a condensed flow-of-play chart) would be a lot of help, IMO. Also, a condensed bit of background would help as well to orient the GM, again IMO.
Can you turn captured Tricks into Stasis locks on your actions? Or must one of the other players default into being the "lock-er" so that all of these actions do not undo themselves at the start of the next scene? I'd tend to vote the first, since it flows a lot smoother and seems more intuitive. Of course, the Stasis locking would be better if the character used Stasis as the basis for his conflict in the beginning, and thus get those default Stasis values to add to his/her total, but I think that only makes sense.
I like the story-graduated xp system. Accomplish your goal, one way or another, and you improve. Slowly, but that's appropriate given how frickin' powerful players are. Absolutely a good thing. I approve!
Also, now that it's out, I'm curious to hear your rationale for making the used attribute (Arete/Hubris) sacrosanct and the opposing attribute (Hubris/Arete) put in jeopardy. It seems counterintuitive to me. If I use Hubris to change the world, I think that Hubris should be what suffers or benefits according to the outcome of the Conflict. Is there something I'm overlooking? I think the fear of having one default always being used would gradually balance itself out in play, but I can't be sure. I can rationalize it: By using Arete, your Hubris (ego) suffers by what happens according to the outcome, and by using Hubris, your body has to cover the checks your mouth's writing out. But it seems like a stretch.
On 8/6/2003 at 6:31pm, Matt Snyder wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
See, there's always, always stuff you miss because you just think you know it, so everyone else must, too. Jason Blair has already noted a typo in that my tie-breaker example has way too many spades, and is therefore confusing. I'll be correcting that one! Some of those spades are supposed to be hearts, I believe. Doh!
Spooky Fanboy wrote:
A character sheet and a Conflict "cheat-sheet" (a condensed flow-of-play chart) would be a lot of help, IMO. Also, a condensed bit of background would help as well to orient the GM, again IMO.
Agreed, 'specially the character sheet. I'll work something up soon. As for a cheat sheet, an order of resolution flowchart, I hadn't considered it. But, it's a good idea. I'll likely add one, and make that available.
Can you turn captured Tricks into Stasis locks on your actions?
If I understand your question correctly, no, you can't do this. Well, kinda. You CAN do this ONLY IF you're using Stasis in that phase. In other words, let's say you are using Hubris + Stasis. You play several diamonds cards, including 2 Tricks. You opponent plays several Spades cards, but fails to win a victory. His cards included 3 Tricks. You're vicctorious, and you now have 5 Stasis Tricks to do make one or more locks with.
But, if you were using, say, Cosmos to increase your own abilities, and your opponent used Stasis, you could not use his captured tricks for anything but Cosmos, which you've already declared.
So, what does this mean? It means you can't increase your abilities and lock them into place in ONE PHASE. You could easily do it in two or more phases. Or, you could have help from pals do it in the same round.
(Teaser: There will be another way. I'm writing a mechanic called Talismans. Talismans is the term for anything Archons create with a Power rating. Could be companions, familiars, artifacts, enchantments, curses, or even aetherships. Basically, you sacrifice a whole Muse, and you can make an entity with a Power rating and Urges. Effectively, another character. You could use the Talisman to increase you abilities, then use your Archon's Stasis Urge to lock 'em in place. Or vice versa. )
If I've answered the "wrong" question, let me know.
I like the story-graduated xp system. Accomplish your goal, one way or another, and you improve. Slowly, but that's appropriate given how frickin' powerful players are. Absolutely a good thing. I approve!
Cool. It actually is the "newest" rule in the text. Glad you like it.
Also, now that it's out, I'm curious to hear your rationale for making the used attribute (Arete/Hubris) sacrosanct and the opposing attribute (Hubris/Arete) put in jeopardy.
Hmm, hadn't considered it that way. But not that you raise the point, I'm struggling to recall my once-upon-a-time rock solid reason for sacrosanct and jeopardized virtues. Interestingly, when writing the rules examples throughout the chapter, I kept getting frustred when I realized I was breaking the sacrosanct rule. I'm going to give it some more thought. The reason for sacrosanct abilities is so that you're rewarded for using one over the other. Controlling risk when one is low, for example. Anyway, I'll definitely think on it. You might be right that currently it's counter intuitive, and that the rule stays but works in the opposite way. That your chosen virtue is jeopardized, and your unused one is sacrosanct.
On 8/6/2003 at 6:50pm, Spooky Fanboy wrote:
My first 9W character
Daniel Scrivener
Arete: 5
Hubris: 4
Chaos: 2
Cosmos: 2
Metamorphosis: 2
Stasis: 3
Muses:
Goal (3): To Awaken all of humanity and make them active in the Titanomachy.
Goal (3): To resurrect Poseidon and reestablish his empire on Saturn.
Passion (3): To know everything about everything.
Dan's parents tell the apocryphal story of his first word being, "Why?" Anyone who meets him believes it; Dan is a driven man. He values truth and learning above everything else. When Prometheus clued him in to what was happening, he squeezed as much information out of the Titan as he could. Then he set an immodest agenda for himself to set right everything he saw as wrong with the world. Satisfying curiosity is nice, but knowledge without action is meaningless. Dan doesn't like meaninglessness.
Ignorance and apathy are anathema to him. The Eternals may have been willfully neglecting their duties as gods, and humans just as negligent of the world around them, but Scrivener is going to put a stop to that, as there are more important things in the universe that just coasting through life.
For example, when Kronos slew Poseidon, it wasn't just a petty act of spite. When Eternals die, their domains are wounded as well. Poseidon's death is responsible for climate changes and the increase in global warming and the pollution of the oceans. By resurrecting Poseidon and reestablishing Poseidon's hold upon the oceans, Dan hopes that the damage to the world's climate can reverse itself.
His vocal promotion of the truth that is out there has alienated many in his family and former associates. He's not happy about that, but he tells himself that when the truth is fully revealed, he'll be able to change their minds and prove himself right.
On 8/6/2003 at 7:28pm, Spooky Fanboy wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
Matt Snyder wrote:Spooky Fanboy wrote:
A character sheet and a Conflict "cheat-sheet" (a condensed flow-of-play chart) would be a lot of help, IMO. Also, a condensed bit of background would help as well to orient the GM, again IMO.
Agreed, 'specially the character sheet. I'll work something up soon. As for a cheat sheet, an order of resolution flowchart, I hadn't considered it. But, it's a good idea. I'll likely add one, and make that available.
Both would make this game a lot easier for the players and GM to visualize. It's a pretty abstract game.
Also, one thing you might want to include in your examples is alternate ways the characters could have done something with alternate Urges. Frex: When Alex was put to sleep by the gas in Aegis HQ, he could also have used Metamorphosis to disperse the gas throughout HQ, rather than using Cosmos to restore his conciousness or Chaos to disperse the effect of the gas on his system. Things like that will go a long way to getting players and GM into brainstorming about how to use the Urges in play.
Matt Snyder wrote: (Teaser: There will be another way. I'm writing a mechanic called Talismans. Talismans is the term for anything Archons create with a Power rating. Could be companions, familiars, artifacts, enchantments, curses, or even aetherships. Basically, you sacrifice a whole Muse, and you can make an entity with a Power rating and Urges. Effectively, another character. You could use the Talisman to increase you abilities, then use your Archon's Stasis Urge to lock 'em in place. Or vice versa. )
Anything that adds to the coolness, I'm all for. ;-)
Matt Snyder wrote:Spooky Fanboy wrote: Also, now that it's out, I'm curious to hear your rationale for making the used attribute (Arete/Hubris) sacrosanct and the opposing attribute (Hubris/Arete) put in jeopardy.
Hmm, hadn't considered it that way. But not that you raise the point, I'm struggling to recall my once-upon-a-time rock solid reason for sacrosanct and jeopardized virtues. Interestingly, when writing the rules examples throughout the chapter, I kept getting frustred when I realized I was breaking the sacrosanct rule. I'm going to give it some more thought. The reason for sacrosanct abilities is so that you're rewarded for using one over the other. Controlling risk when one is low, for example. Anyway, I'll definitely think on it. You might be right that currently it's counter intuitive, and that the rule stays but works in the opposite way. That your chosen virtue is jeopardized, and your unused one is sacrosanct.
Here's what I think: Any attributes that are improved by locking them into place during or after a conflict must be ones that are used during that conflict. Otherwise, it doesn't stick. other than that, all bets are off. That emphasizes the importance of choice, without making things counterintuitive and wonky.
Dude, don't sweat it. This is why people playtest in the first place! ;-)
Other than that, I love it. BTW, the initiative system is pretty cool, too.
On 8/7/2003 at 5:41pm, ethan_greer wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
I like the fact that everyone uses their own deck - handling time traditional with card-based resolution is greatly alleviated this way. Question: do you reshuffle after each conflict phase?
Question: I'm assuming that each entity can pick a different Urge for each phase - not everyone has to use Chaos at the same time, for example. But this isn't stated specifically, or at least I missed it if it is...
Question: The examples show people allocating their Tricks in the course of the narration, but the To The Victor section on page 16 states,
Once victorious players have allocated their Tricks,
they compare Fate values. The player with the lowest
Fate value narrates first, followed by the next lowest,
and so on...
So which is it - are Tricks allocated during narration, or before?
Also, I'm assuming that when you capture a Trick, you just take the Tricks, not the cards, and everyone plays with a full deck at all times.
Question: In the example with the soporific gas, two locks get placed on Alexander's Hubris and Cosmos, meaning that they can't change. To which I respond, "So what?" If they can't be changed, they can't be lost, right? Or is it that Stasis Locks prevent a Virture/Urge from being used at all (which isn't stated that I could find)? In which case, how do the two locks represent incapacitation in that case? Why do they need to be removed to revive Alexander? More clarification on how Statis locks work is definitely needed.
Supplementally, why does Alex apply points to Lydia's Arete in the example where he makes her look like Athena? If he's already fooled the guard's mind, why does Lydia need extra Arete?
Question: Why do the characters seem to know before hand the guards' Stasis lock strengths, but Alexander apparently doesn't know the Stasis lock strength on Heather? Is this just a question of GM fiat, or are there guidelines for how much characters can know about certain locks in certain situations? Or is Alexander just tapping himself out because it's thematically appropriate?
In general, I'd have to say that the rules section needs another pass to clarify a bit. As it stands right now, it's definitely playable, but it's also a little arcane. I've listed all my questions, though, I'm not skipping anything; everything else seems pretty clear to me. So just in those areas, I'd revise a bit to cover the issues above.
Praise: Damn, this is a thick game. By thick, I mean that the possibilities are astounding for what you can do with it. It's surreal fantasy at heart, but the examples show elements of investigative drama, pulpy action, romance... I'm impressed. Somewhere in the text I would include some guidelines for the different types of play experiences that are possible, and I would also include a section talking about expectations in play, and group discussion prior to play, to prevent problems during play of one player narrating full-on pulp action and another narrating idyllic romance and another narrating mystery/horror and another... well, you get the idea. Just a thought.
Praise: The card resolution system is pretty clever - I like the fact that if you think you're going to lose, you can choose to not play all your cards to prevent someone from stealing tricks, but it's all a gamble. I can see it playing out as a very tense (and intense) resolution system.
Praise: Character creation makes for a very rich character right out of the gate, by default, using the Muses, and these rich backgrounds are mechanically relevant as well. Well done there, it's a great synergy of mechanics and character background.
I gotta say I'm pretty impressed with this - the coolness factor of it is extremely high. But what's with the cheesey-looking stars in the margins? :)
On 8/7/2003 at 6:47pm, Matt Snyder wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
First off, thanks, Ethan, for asking some great questions and taking time to read throug it all. I'll address several points ....
ethan_greer wrote: I like the fact that everyone uses their own deck - handling time traditional with card-based resolution is greatly alleviated this way. Question: do you reshuffle after each conflict phase?
I have waffled on reshuffling mechanics. I want people to have to refresh their decks at some point, and I need to make that clear. The idea I'm leaning toward currently is spending either Tricks or Muse ratings for to reshuffle. One interesting point you could, in theory, take action without cards. You'll likely lose, but you can do it. So, in that sense, having cards (or Fate) on your side is a privilege, hence need for a mechanic.
Question: I'm assuming that each entity can pick a different Urge for each phase - not everyone has to use Chaos at the same time, for example. But this isn't stated specifically, or at least I missed it if it is...
Yes, absolutely. Each participant may choose any Urge he/she wishes. The only requirement for using the same Urge is cooperating on destroying a lock.
Question: The examples show people allocating their Tricks in the course of the narration, but the To The Victor section on page 16 states,
Once victorious players have allocated their Tricks,
they compare Fate values. The player with the lowest
Fate value narrates first, followed by the next lowest,
and so on...
So which is it - are Tricks allocated during narration, or before?
Good point. Actually, tricks should probably be allocated during narration, so that the narrators with the highest Fate can allocate in reaction to other Trick maneuvers. I'll rewrite accordingly.
Also, I'm assuming that when you capture a Trick, you just take the Tricks, not the cards, and everyone plays with a full deck at all times.
Yes, basically. But it's a non-issue since folks likely won't using those cards in the next phase anyway. Players certainly don't HOLD another player's card as some kind of trophy. However, as I said above, I haven't included a reshuffling mechanic here, so this isn't obvious.
Question: In the example with the soporific gas, two locks get placed on Alexander's Hubris and Cosmos, meaning that they can't change. To which I respond, "So what?" If they can't be changed, they can't be lost, right? Or is it that Stasis Locks prevent a Virture/Urge from being used at all (which isn't stated that I could find)? In which case, how do the two locks represent incapacitation in that case? Why do they need to be removed to revive Alexander? More clarification on how Statis locks work is definitely needed.
I'm with you that locks are the trickiest part of the game, and hence need clarification. To answer your points:
Yes, locks placed on attributes means they can't be lost. It also means they can't be gained or increased either. This matters a lot to player characters, very little to an entity only in one scene. The gas has done its job, and we as players don't care about it again, ever.
Stasis locks do not prevent the use of any characteristic.
The text does make an explicit point of saying that despite the fact that Alexander is unconscious, he may still act "as normal." Remember, the fact that the gas "knocks him out" is merely color.
This game does not simulate physical realities like getting knocked out. It just doesn't happen that way in Nine Worlds. The game creates a metaphysical framework. Saying Alexander is knocked out is totally up to the narrators. It is color, not mechanics. The locks are the mechanic. Being knocked out is merely the narrator coloring in the details of those locks. This is how the game operates at every turn.
Supplementally, why does Alex apply points to Lydia's Arete in the example where he makes her look like Athena? If he's already fooled the guard's mind, why does Lydia need extra Arete?
He hasn't fooled the guard's mind, really. All he has done is fulfill his goal: Leave Jupiter aboard the Wayfarer. HOW that happens is up to the narrator, who in this case colored the scene with an actual illusion.
Futher, if someone's going to look like Athena, the more impressive she is metaphysically, the better. So, Alexander's player decides that while he's successful in winning, he's going to use the Tricks to Lydia's Arete as a way to make her more powerful. Also, in game terms, she stands to benefit in the next phase, should it occur. Think of it as insurance for next round, if needed. (For example, the orbital patrols of Jupiter might step in to board their ship, or something) Next round may not happen, and the tricks are gone. This also happens frequently.
Question: Why do the characters seem to know before hand the guards' Stasis lock strengths, but Alexander apparently doesn't know the Stasis lock strength on Heather? Is this just a question of GM fiat, or are there guidelines for how much characters can know about certain locks in certain situations? Or is Alexander just tapping himself out because it's thematically appropriate?
I KNEW someone would catch this. I don't have an answer for you. Usually, my philosophy is that everyone knows what's going on in terms of ratings and such. No "behind the screen" nonsense. But, in the case of the climactic ending, the GM "hid" the lock rating. Plainly, it works better for the example. There are no guidelines, and I need to give it some more thought on how this is properly handled.
Also, thanks for the praise. You make a good point that I should probably instruct people that activities can range from pulpy action to subtle espionage to soap opera.
Phew! Back to work, and I'm printing out Thieves and Thugs right now.
I gotta say I'm pretty impressed with this - the coolness factor of it is extremely high. But what's with the cheesey-looking stars in the margins? :)
A bit of a quip, I realize. However, it's all intentional. See the links below for examples of Art Nouveau elements used in the design. This game is very much inspired by the Spelljammer supplement in Polyhedron last year. Something about that Art Nouveau look and feel clicked with the cosmic elements and Greek imagery for me.
http://a1259.g.akamai.net/f/1259/5586/1d/images.art.com/images/PRODUCTS/large/10076000/10076365.jpg
Also,
http://www.bpib.com/illustrat/mucha6.gif
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/46/019_1482.jpg
http://www.respree.com/scstore/graphics/larqmu10303.jpg
On 8/7/2003 at 7:23pm, ethan_greer wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
Hmm. Maybe you could have an automatic reshuffle after the conflict in which you run out of cards. But in the middle of a conflict, you have to spend a Trick to reshuffle (and therefore replenish). This would increase the gamble aspect when the deck starts getting thin, but would also allow a player to get out from under a situation where all their favored suit gets eaten up halfway through the deck.
Actually, tricks should probably be allocated during narration, so that the narrators with the highest Fate can allocate in reaction to other Trick maneuvers. I'll rewrite accordingly.
I agree with this decision.
This game does not simulate physical realities like getting knocked out. It just doesn't happen that way in Nine Worlds. The game creates a metaphysical framework. Saying Alexander is knocked out is totally up to the narrators. It is color, not mechanics. The locks are the mechanic. Being knocked out is merely the narrator coloring in the details of those locks. This is how the game operates at every turn.
Cool. Reword the above paragraph into a more general format and put it in the document somewhere; it's a very important point that needs to be emphasized and re-emphasized. Same goes for the next two paragraphs I've quoted below. This would go a long way in helping people grok the game - it certainly helped me just now! :)
He hasn't fooled the guard's mind, really. All he has done is fulfill his goal: Leave Jupiter aboard the Wayfarer. HOW that happens is up to the narrator, who in this case colored the scene with an actual illusion.
Futher, if someone's going to look like Athena, the more impressive she is metaphysically, the better. So, Alexander's player decides that while he's successful in winning, he's going to use the Tricks to Lydia's Arete as a way to make her more powerful. Also, in game terms, she stands to benefit in the next phase, should it occur. Think of it as insurance for next round, if needed. (For example, the orbital patrols of Jupiter might step in to board their ship, or something) Next round may not happen, and the tricks are gone. This also happens frequently.
Okay, so then in the next round, he could use Stasis and if victorious could make the the additional Arete permanent. Then, if you want to increase Arete again, you'd have to (in a single conflict) remove the lock, increase, and place another lock. Is that true? (If so, that's pretty cool).
Question: Do Statis locks persist between sessions (or adventures, or however chunks of play get separated in the game)? And if you resolve a muse, can you increase a Virtue or Urge that has a Stasis lock on it?
I KNEW someone would catch this. I don't have an answer for you. Usually, my philosophy is that everyone knows what's going on in terms of ratings and such. No "behind the screen" nonsense. But, in the case of the climactic ending, the GM "hid" the lock rating. Plainly, it works better for the example. There are no guidelines, and I need to give it some more thought on how this is properly handled.
Brainstorm: Give certain Stasis locks a special property, call it obscured or something. It costs an extra Trick to make a Statis lock obscured, and if it is obscured then an Archon cannot determine how strong the lock is without spending a Trick to get the info. Archons cannot create obscured locks; that would be solely in the province of Titans and Eternals. Just some thoughts; disregard or use at will...
Phew! Back to work, and I'm printing out Thieves and Thugs right now.
Sweet! Thanks!
Regarding the stars, yes, it was a bit of a quip. But I actually didn't like them until I saw other examples you posted. Chalk it up to ignorance of art deco - now I think they look cool. Fickle, thy name is Ethan...
On 8/7/2003 at 9:26pm, Matt Snyder wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
Okay, so then in the next round, he could use Stasis and if victorious could make the the additional Arete permanent. Then, if you want to increase Arete again, you'd have to (in a single conflict) remove the lock, increase, and place another lock. Is that true? (If so, that's pretty cool).
Yes, exactly. With another phase and use of Stasis, Lydia's Arete would remain increased "permanently." Yes, to increase it again, you'd have to 1) remove the current lock 2) increase the stat and 3) put another lock on it (in the same conflict scene, or else the rating will revert to the orginal, permanent rating).
Question: Do Statis locks persist between sessions (or adventures, or however chunks of play get separated in the game)? And if you resolve a muse, can you increase a Virtue or Urge that has a Stasis lock on it?
Yes, stasis locks persist indefinitely, until destroyed, overloaded, or moved.
Excellent point on the resolving a Muse and Locks. What would happen is that the "permanent" rating would change, but the actual attribute rating would be altered until the lock is released. So, let's say you have a permanent rating of Arete 4. Then, you get it locked at 2. You resolve a Muse and decide to increase your Arete. Doing so increases your permanent rating by 1, so your Arete is now 5. However, it remains at 2 until the lock is released. At that point, it "snaps back" to 5.
Brainstorm: Give certain Stasis locks a special property, call it obscured or something. It costs an extra Trick to make a Statis lock obscured, and if it is obscured then an Archon cannot determine how strong the lock is without spending a Trick to get the info. Archons cannot create obscured locks; that would be solely in the province of Titans and Eternals. Just some thoughts; disregard or use at will...
Interesting idea! I like it. I'll think on that some more, too. Cool.
On 8/8/2003 at 5:44am, Spooky Fanboy wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
ethan_greer wrote: Hmm. Maybe you could have an automatic reshuffle after the conflict in which you run out of cards. But in the middle of a conflict, you have to spend a Trick to reshuffle (and therefore replenish).
See, I'd say either let them reshuffle after every Conflict (to represent a new situation) or not let them reshuffle until the cards run out (to represent the Fate of the Archon running it's course.) Seems more elegant those ways. Maybe the latter plus the reshuffle option would be cool, though...
ethan_greer wrote: Brainstorm: Give certain Stasis locks a special property, call it obscured or something. It costs an extra Trick to make a Statis lock obscured, and if it is obscured then an Archon cannot determine how strong the lock is without spending a Trick to get the info. Archons cannot create obscured locks; that would be solely in the province of Titans and Eternals.
I dislike giving the NPCs toys that the PCs can't play with. Other than that, I support the idea.
On 8/8/2003 at 6:29pm, MathiasJack wrote:
RE: Nine Worlds playtest
Um... could the Urges be used on the deck itself?
Say:
Stasis: spend to makes a deck unshufflable
Metamorphosis: spend to reshuffle right then and there
Chaos: spend to pull a certain number of your opponent's card into their discard pile
Cosmos: spend to pull a cartain number of your own cards from your discard pile
Normally decks reshuffle only when they run out?
This would possibly mean there's some mechanic for an Archon to be able to do things without cards as suggested earlier in the thread...
Don't know if this helps, but it's the random brainstorm I had when reading earlier posts.
the Jack :D