Currently, there are 348 downloads of the Nine Worlds playtest.

Forty-five people downloaded the character sheet*.

That rocks. On toast.

So far, 6 people responded in any way to said playtest.

This sucks. On toast

Spooky Fanboy, Nine World's No. 1 fan, was on the scene with his comments.

My man Jason Blair really dug it, and noted a big ol' typo goof. (the tie-breaker example doesn't have Hearts symbols, but has twice as many spades symbols as it should for Alexander's hand)

Ethan Greer shared some great critiques, as well as excellent editing points.

MathiasJack had a very interesting suggestion about shuffling decks, one that I'm still working through in my brain.

Kirt "Loki" Dankmyer (a.k.a. Xiombarg) said his group will likely playtest the game. Rock!

Antii Karjalainen created a friggin' character sheet* on his own intiative, and he's looking to playtest the game with his group. He also rocks.

The people listed above will get free copies of the final PDF-version of the game. The next 6 people to offer something useful up in way of critique/playtest will get the same.

* The character sheet is now also available in a letter sized version for us damn yankees, courtesy of Antii Karjalainen.

Click here to download the letter-size character sheet

Click here to download the A4 size sheet

Matt Snyder wrote: Kirt "Loki" Dankmyer (a.k.a. Xiombarg) said his group will likely playtest the game. Rock!

And keep in mind that you're getting a free copy. Which is half carrot-and-stick, and half "I mean what I say, and say what I mean." I appreciate feedback, and you gave some. You're getting a free copy. Nuff said.

I'm a slow dude, Matt. Expect comments eventually, though.

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: I'm a slow dude, Matt. Expect comments eventually, though.

Best,
Ron

Short thought on layout: When you were posting art samples in your Livejournal, Matt, I was worried that they would be overwhelming. It's turned out that you've put together a really beautiful playtest document; the borders, the art, and the wonderfully spacious boxes all work together very smoothly.

I worry a little about your titling typeface, particularly the S and H; they're a little harsh on the legibility. The S looks like a dotless questionmark, and the H like a scripty K. The font is so good, though... are there alternate characters for those two, or a way to obtain such a thing?

Shreyas Sampat wrote: I worry a little about your titling typeface, particularly the S and H; they're a little harsh on the legibility. The S looks like a dotless questionmark, and the H like a scripty K. The font is so good, though... are there alternate characters for those two, or a way to obtain such a thing?

The next 6 people to offer something useful up in way of critique/playtest will get the same.

I just found out you had this available for playtest! I better get crackin'

OK, I just pitched Nine Worlds to a couple of my players (who have extensive WoD backrounds):

"It's like Mage, with the emphasis on the PCs and their personal stories... no splats or factions or such. The 'magick' is much more open (and powerful). The backstory revolves around godlike spirits and their squabbles, and how the archons must weave through them. The setting includes mystical worlds represented by the planets of our solar system, as well as modern earth. The characters can zip between these worlds easily with etherships, so both mundane and outlandish elements can be included in a session. Oh, and it uses playing cards."

That seemed to do it! Both got interested, and we went through the character creation. And here I come to agree with Mike Holmes: The Muses part worked well when it was the first. I kinda continued with the Mage RPG analog and told the players that they should first decide on the "human" part of their characters -- their motivations. These were revised after the characters were completed (a once over for likeability, as it were).

Then for the metaphysical part: Arete and Hubris were instantly understood (even though their names mean a bit different things in Mage), and Urges are close enough to Spheres -- though this caused some confusion:

One of the players commented that the character feeled a bit too metaphysical and not easily approachable because the character revolved around the Virtues and the Urges -- he was put away by the names of the characteristics. But after I told him to write the verbs next to the Urges, and explained that the Urges determine how the character chooses to approach situations, and not just the magic (or nifty card mechanics) side of things, he understood: "Oh, so they ARE kinda like skills then." :)

So, I would say that the Urges could use a lot of examples on how they can be employed, emphasizing the scene resolution approach and especially with Arete.

More to come as things progress.

Cheers,

AnttiK

Anticide Illustrations:
http://www.kotiposti.net/xakarjala/

To reiterate what I mentioned in your LJ:

I read through it, and I liked what I saw, but I got really lost around Tricks. I've been waiting to find time to sit down and really figure out Tricks, because it could be that I just didn't grok it when I first looked at it.

I will admit that I didn't think I would like a "play as many cards of X suit as you can" system, but what I've seen I do like.

Question: Are you looking for nitpick comments like spelling and the like, or just system comments?

Eddy Fate wrote: To reiterate what I mentioned in your LJ:

I read through it, and I liked what I saw, but I got really lost around Tricks. I've been waiting to find time to sit down and really figure out Tricks, because it could be that I just didn't grok it when I first looked at it.

I will admit that I didn't think I would like a "play as many cards of X suit as you can" system, but what I've seen I do like.

Question: Are you looking for nitpick comments like spelling and the like, or just system comments?

Well, I don't know if I've made it in time to be part of the "second six," but who cares? If I get a book, I get a book. If not, I'll probably still get a book. :)

First, it was a remarkably personal experience, reading about the adventures of Alexander, being as he and I share names. I'm sure I was not the reason behind your choice, but it still made it a rather neat read as I followed Alexander quite literally to hell and back. It's even somewhat eerie/amusing, 'cause Alexander is in some ways the kind of person I'd want to be in such a setting (more Hubris than Arete, avoiding Stasis in favor of the other attributes). Though he's not totally like me (he's described as "always well-dressed" and "smooth-talking").

I absolutely love the interconnection between greco-roman myth and the whole "aethership" thing. Ever since I first ran across Space: 1889 (and later, to a lesser extent, AD&D's Spelljammer), I've been fascinated by the pulp-magical feel of that sort of space-travel (and honestly, if I'd realized that earlier, I'd have pulled it down and read it much sooner). The setting is wonderful, and I'm hoping you describe it more in the final document.

I liked watching and discovering the mechanical interaction between Hubris/Arete, the four Urges, and the nine muses (and kudos for counting Aces as ones, it seems to me most people forget that it wasn't always a high card). At first I was worried that playing cards would detract from the grecian feel of the game, but they instead seemed to be a good interpretation of "Fate." When you you reshuffle decks, though? Only when you're all the way through? After every hand?

I think that was asked before. If so, I'm sorry.

I also like how conflicts are (or can be) resolved by altering characteristics, both your own and others. Very nice and "generic" (looks like you have no need for any sort of silly subsystem for combat or socialization or anything else, in other words). And yet it's possible not to get a single Trick if the cards are drawn (in)appropriately.

page 16, 2nd column, 2nd bullet under "Tricks": "...as long as the victorious character is not defeated by some other any opponent..." I'm assuming the "any" shouldn't be there?

That's all I have to say right now. Overall, though, it looks great.

Some questions: does Earth have aethership ports or anything like that? If not, how does one get OFF earth? Can you be an Archon from somewhere other than Earth?

Hey Matt, I have downloaded the pdf and sneaked through it bit by bit here at work. I think it seems pretty solid. My two "issues" for it would be these at this point.

1) Tricks. I really don't get how they're earned. I liked the examples of Tricks being used...in a lot of ways they're kind of like spending Importance down in Universalis, so I was grooving on the concept...but mechanically I found myself, even after rereading that section several times a) not understanding how I get Tricks to spend, b) not understanding how long a Trick lasts (spend it or lose it, or save them for later, or is buying up attributes the way one saves them for later), and c) not understanding if there is just 1 sort of "Trick" as a resource, or if what you can do with Tricks depends on the card suits or what.

Perhaps I the source of my confusion was in not grokking whether "Trick" is used like "Stunt" or "Gimmick", or if since the game uses cards if its based on taking "tricks" in the card game sense. I had initially assumed the later and that somehow Tricks were captured from other players hands using some sort of card game mechanism...which since I got to the end and never found one led to my first "wait a minute" moment from which I never truly recovered.

I think perhaps a side bar on Tricks where you step out of the metaphysical game world and just outline the raw mechanics of how they work beginning to end would help (me anyway). Since I don't really get that part of the system I couldn't really judge whether there are too many or too few Tricks to power things the way your examples suggest.


2) I couldn't get a feel for what was really going on in the setting from the quick start. Earth I guess is the Earth of today with all of the planets being just planets as we know them...but then theres an "other world" like Nobilis that exists on top of our world and that's where the game is largely played. I couldn't tell to what extent people in general are aware of Archons (the way they're aware of Super Heroes...the way some have become aware of Vampires...or the way everyone is oblivious to them like Nobles).

I also couldn't get a sense of what the Immortals and Titans are really up to. I understand there's a war...but what does it look like. Are there armies marching under the banner of immortals ala War Gods of Aegyptus (or whatever that minis game is called). Is it all naval battles with aether ships like in Treasure Planet. Is the "war" more subtle of plots and assassinations and duels of deep magic. When Zeus isn't busy fighting Titans...what's he doing.

I also couldn't understand the role of the Archons within this war. Is it "every Archon for them selves" use your power to amass whatever personal power you can, or serve whoever you choose and try to avoid being squashed by someone more powerful than you? If so you'll need to ensure the final version has a lot of help in this area, because after thinking about it for awhile I couldn't come up with many really good "agendas" for my character to be pursueing. Is it possible to use your ability to amass personal power on Earth? How would a "god among mortals" campaign set on Earth differ from a "wander the aether involved in the Titanomachy look".

I kind of got a glimmering of my character, but I couldn't come up with a vision of what he was doing.


3) I do love the card randomizer mechanic. I think that's pretty slick. I would be in favor of incorporating the idea of cosmic Karma into the game, by not reshuffling after every deal. I'd take whatever suit was used and discard it, shuffling the rest back in. Using the same power over and over would thus drain the deck requiring the player to seek a balance with other Urges. Having a single high Urge would allow some really lofty totals...but would leave the character vulnerable when he ran low on that suit.

One could probably come up with some clever reshuffle mechanics. One I had thought of was allowing the player to reshuffle any time he wants at the cost of permanently "burning" one card of his highest Urge.

Riddle of Steel as the skill packages for a start, but the character concept is really up to you, and largely based on SAs. Sorcerer is even more open ended, like this text. How do you see those games (perhaps others you can think of) that do it better, for your tastes?

Matt said:

That said, I suggest to playtesters that players think of who their characters were before Prometheus awakens them, HOW Prometheus awakens them, and what they do now that they can traverse the Nine Worlds.

First off, Mike, I totally understand where you're coming from and what you're saying about not "getting" what an Archon is. The text will need work, as I've already said.

However, I am only slightly concerned that you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. Being an Archon is just neato. It's not what matters. What matters is being a human. When you say:

In Nine Worlds, I am asked to make an Archon. A what? Then I'm asked to pick muses to indicate what's important to him. I don't get that.

Either you have it in your head as to the what to do, and haven't gotten it down, or you need to get a sense of it yourself. Have you playtested the game yourself? It might be at the point where you need to playtest it so that your vision of the "what do you do" comes out in play.

I'll let others iron out the Tricks thing. Seems pretty straightforward to me. I have a couple of other topics, however.


You ought to make explicit certain "buck stops here" things, Matt. You tend to state things neutrally. For example, it doesn't say anywhere who decides what's "appropriate" in terms of Muses to be used in a Conflict. Phases are described as being anywhere from seconds to years. Who decides? Or, if it's a group sort of thing, who has final say? As written, it might imply that the player has full authority to determine what's "appropriate" in terms of Muses. Why not just always say that they're all applicable if that's the case? If it's the GM's call, we need to know. There are a few places like this.


Instead of counting all the cards up in case of ties, why not use a sorcerer-esque method, and just look at the highest ones, and compare. If these are tied, then go to the next pair, etc. If the opponent has no opposing card for comparison, you win. Only in the case of exactly the same cards, then, would you have to go to the single card draws. For narration, just do the reverse.

This has several effects:
* it's much quicker than adding things up.
* ties at this level would be even more rare (they have to be the same cards, not just the same total).
* it makes the kings more valueable than queens, etc. meaning that the player has to discriminate (in the system as is, you only have to consider that as a third tier assumption).
* it intensifies the strategy, as one has to look at the potential chain of effects, as opposed to simply posting the highest total. For instance, if I have three of each of two suits that have the same Urge value, instead of simply putting out the one with the highest total, I may have to consider a chain that's lower in total value, but has a very high card to start. So a queen, 3, 2, may be a better option than a 10,9,8, depending on how many other cards the opponent has. What's really cool, however, is that if It makes playing the Q, 2 (with the potential trick), a lot more attractive in comparison to the 10, 9, 8. Basically it encourages gambling.

Also, what ever you do, I'd skip having a third tier draw-off. Given the rarity under either system, I'd have some cool third event happen, other than win/lose. The obvious choices are actual ties, or delays, etc, but given the background, I'm sure you can come up with something more dramatic.

I also must mention that there's something in me that wants even more strategy to the card play.

As it stands there's no inter-player play, really, it's just the player trying to figure out their best hand from what they have. As an example, cards could be selected one at a time from the lowest the player intends to play, going up. Once during the chain the player could change suits. So the player has a chance to see what they're up against, and play out potentially multiple strategies. It would also allow bluffing by playing a middling card of a suit to start, you're saying that the following will all be higher, which might not be true as you then change suit. Anyhow, not a great example, but by doing something like this, you make for intra-player competition in the mechanic. Which I think would be cool.

Also, something like this would solve another problem that I see, which is that you don't have an order for play right now. That is, you simply say that players place their cards in play. But wouldn't you wait to see what your opponent laid? If he plays a low hand, then perhaps you can get more tricks by playing a hand that would not, otherwise, be the one most likely to win (especially aces). Therefore, everyone has incentive to wait until everyone else has played, and nobody will play.

You need to have an order. If it's all simo, that's fine, but a player would have to select his hand, place it face down, and then, when all have selected, reveal. Even that's not fair, however, as a player might note the size of the hand to be played, which could give an advantage. Playing cards simo, one by one, solves this, and adds a dramatic build up to the resolution (though it would be longer).

Other things could be added to intensfy strategy in the card play. Aces, for instance, seem very special. To really get people to gamble with them, have them worth two tricks instead of one (and if using the comparison method I have above, they are the first card that's compared, but still the lowest value, making them really risky), or maybe make this the function of twos. You could allow a player to discard four cards to pick another one. This would rapidly deplete a player's hand, but it would allow them to gamble when they think their hand isn't enough (OTOH, it allows strong hands to increase as well).

Lot's of possibilities.


One more thing. Have you considered only allowing "directorial control" on Hubris attempts only? And balancing out Arete with some other ability? I think that given the definition of Hubris that this might be appropriate, thematically.

Mike

About Tricks:
This is how I have understood the mechanics. After comparing the hands, the character with the highest Fate value gets a Trick per face card/joker/ace in both his own and his opponent's chosen hand. No cards exchange hands (ever). These tricks must be used with the Urge employed in the conflict.

But if your character is also defeated by another, then that entity gets the Tricks from your hand. This doesn't stop you from using Tricks against the one who defeated you though, right?

"Once victorious players have allocated their Tricks..." Page 16, To the Victor, first paragraph. Does this mean the counting up of Tricks or the actual use of them. If the use of Tricks is done during the narration, as I have gathered, doesn't this mean that the lowest Fate narrator, who gets to narrate first can actually have the advantage.

For Example, Archon 1, knowing his greatly victorious opponent Archon 2 has only Stasis Tricks to use, gets to lower A2's jeopardized Virtue to 0 before A2 gets to lock it. Is this right? Is it intended?

page 19 - why does Aegis capture Tricks from Alexander, but Lydia is unable to capture Tricks from Aegis in response? Lydia was "victorious" over Aegis just as much as Aegis was "victorious" over Alexander, no? In what situation are these things "captured"?

Following up on the above post,

Matt, one, I've never played Mage, which I assume you're talking about. If you're talking about Wizards in general, well, the one thing I do get from the text is that these are not like the Mages I play in fantasy games. In any case, I think it's dangerous to assume that people will just pick up on such associations.

And in any case, from what I hear of the WW game, this is a problem in that game as well. But it, at least (I presume) has splats to choose from to flesh out your character.

Second, it totally matters to me as a player what sort of archtype my character is in terms of what makes sense to me in terms of SAs, Sorcerous motive, Devil, or Muses. For example, I would never take as my Devil for my gunfighter, Nagging Wife, because it wouldn't be a character I'd want to play (and it's not even allowed as an SA). I did take that as the motive for my last Sorcerer character, because it totally made sense for a Sorcerer. And that may be just a personal thing (there may be some people who'd want to play the Gunfighter with the Nagging Wife, I dunno), but, well, I'm relating my own feelings to you.

You want to know if the game will inspire people to play? Well, I can't even think of a character. Gave it the old college try. But a game has to have something to inspire characters as a whole. Not just randomly chosen parts, but as Gestalts that speak to the player. And looking at what you have, I'm just not "getting" anything. I need to understand the archeype to start.

Now, you're writing up the setting? Well, that's all you had to say. With enough inspiration (or at least a GM who "gets" it), I'd probably have no problem at all.

I dunno, maybe it's the sim side of me coming out. But there you have it.

Mike

Lxndr wrote: page 19 - why does Aegis capture Tricks from Alexander, but Lydia is unable to capture Tricks from Aegis in response? Lydia was "victorious" over Aegis just as much as Aegis was "victorious" over Alexander, no? In what situation are these things "captured"?

That's fair, Mike. Like I said, I did understand where you were coming from. If you have no idea how to make a character, then it's something I'm concerned about revising. Seriously. On the other hand, I've said all along that Nine Worlds is NOT for everyone. It's a pretty unusual concept, and I do not ever expect it to have the same easy, wide appeal that Dust Devils did. This is modern magical fantasy, genre-wise, and a weird take on it at that. I don't expect everyone to dig it. That's cool.

Yes, if it has been unclear THIS IS NOT THE WHOLE GAME, FOLKS. The setting and "how to GM" chapters you haven't seen yet (neither have I, alas. . . . )will more than double the book's size. This is only the first three chapters. Effectively, the whole of the system.

Oh, and I would TOTALLY play a gunfighter with a nagging wife. Sure, it'd be for laughs, but what laughs! See: Paint Your Wagon, Hallelujah Trail, Blazing Saddles, Support Your Local Gunfighter and Support Your Local Sheriff.

Hi Matt,

Mike's actually put his finger on it for me.

You say the core of a player-character is the "person," not the Archon stuff. OK, that's good.

So what about the person pegs him or her as a player-character? How is that reflected in character creation or during play?

Let's take Megan, Dorothy, and Jane. Three people. Sticking solely with the "person" stuff, and not one bit of the Archon stuff, what's the impetus for play. In technical terms, what am I Exploring Character about?

Maybe the way to go is to ask, Matt, say you were making up a Nine Worlds player-character. Her name is Megan.

... go! Show us how. Remember, not one bit of Archon stuff, it's totally not what I need to know.

Best,
Ron

Why the challenge, then Ron? You said yourself that "the core of a player-character . . . is not the Archon stuff." Isn't that just like saying "the core of a Sorcerer player character is not the demon stuff?" What is the difference? That we "get" Sorcerers because we have some kind of occult knowledge/tradition, but don't "get" archons because concepts like the demiurge are more obscure? Is that just getting distracted by color? Or, is it more fundamental? Or is getting distracted by color a serious problem? (I'm asking earnestly, not foolishly railing against criticisms that I requested! That goes for this whole post.)

You either get the game, or you don't. If I can write it better, I will definitely address that! Still, not everyone will pick up this game and go, "Aha! What we've all been waiting for all these years!" I knew that going in. When all's said and done, I'll do my damnedest to help those interested but on-the-verge "get it," as I've said.

In other words, I don't see picking up a game and saying "I don't get it" as useful criticism, per se. Sure, if there are clarity issues, we'll work through those. But I don't see any substantical difference between "I don't get it" and "I probably wouldn't play this" and "I can't think up a character idea" and "I think modern fantasy games with subjective realities are really boring/lame/whatever." All of those statements indicate to me that this is not the game for you. Thus far, none of those statements are very helpful in improving the game I'm working on.

What is an archon? It's a creative person. In setting terms, it's a creative person, an imaginative human being who can really DO the shit they imagine in their head. This game is ABOUT being creative. It challenges players to be creative via narration, and it "tests" characters to decide whether they'll live in someone else's world (the gods) or one of their own making. If that doesn't grab you, I shrug. That's the game, and it may not be for you. If you can't think up a character concept like you would for Sorcerer or Mage or Nobilis or Riddle of Steel, I'll do my damnedest to lead you to water. You'll have to drink, though.

So, I'm saying: What is it you need if you're not "getting" this game yet?

Clearly, I get it, so it's hard to be objective. I also see how it could be hard to think up a concept like "I want to play one of Hermes' corporate vice presidents who's about to be a whistleblower on the quicksilver trade." Particularly so if you don't know the setting. So, what do you need to do that? More setting details, as Mike suggests? More explanation of what the hell an Archon is? More play & narration examples? Better written ones?

I'm having a hard time seeing the challenge Ron presented as instructive. Here goes, regardless:

Megan's concept

Megan is a young woman who has lived on the streets with her younger sister since she was 12. Her parents were deadbeats, and they just left them one day with a sandwich and two $5 bills. Despite her better efforts, she eventually turned to prostitution to make some money. But it wasn't enough. One ugly day, she came home to an empty aparment. Her sister had vanished. She sought desperately to find her. She failed. Then he showed up. A new pimp that treated her . . . different. He talked to her, told her strange things. he didn't want anything from her. She thought it was the drugs. Then she found out it wasn't. He was Prometheus, and he set her free.

Characterisitics

I, as a player "don't get it" and decide to just assign attributes as evenly as I can.

Arete: 4
Hubris: 5

Cosmos: 3
Chaos: 2
Metamorphosis: 2
Stasis: 2

Muses

This part, I get. I have a neat idea for a troubled teen character, a girl who aims to find her own inner beauty and power.

Love (4): Loves her little sister, who’s vanished.
Quest (3): Find out what ever happened to her parents, who abandoned her.
Code (2): Do things independently, without the help of others.

This is a perfectly legitimate, totally human and personal character. No crazy cosmological stuff hard-coded into the character. She's well suited for an "all Earth" series of sessions, but could easily stowaway aboard the Wayfarer or get lost in the crime-ridden underworld of Heliopolis, Apollo's city on the Sun.

The GM will likely take "non-Archon" things on Megan's character sheet like "sister's vanished" and turn it into "sister kidnapped by Titans" as play unfolds (players will contribute to the facts of the story as it unfolds, too). If they don't do something like this, I'd say they're playing the wrong game. Better check out something like Nicotine Girls, yeah?

Did the examples in the rules chapter not do a sufficient job of showing what you do in this game? I'm still not seeing a reply in that regard.

I posted a question earlier that I think got lost in the shuffle:

Does Earth have aethership ports or anything like that? If not, how does one get OFF Earth? Can you be an Archon from somewhere other than Earth?

Lxndr wrote: I posted a question earlier that I think got lost in the shuffle:

Does Earth have aethership ports or anything like that? If not, how does one get OFF Earth? Can you be an Archon from somewhere other than Earth?

I would like to see an answer to this question (even if it's just "that's forthcoming in the setting information") because "how you actually get off Earth" seems pretty important if you want to get into the aether. And "can you play someone from somewhere other than Earth?" also seems, at the very least, an interesting question.

If I wanted to get off Earth, and to Neptune, let's say (and your Glossary doesn't describe Neptune or Uranus one bit - is that on purpose?), where would my Archon go?

Matt,

I think it's game-defeating to keep throwing flags that say "I knew most people won't get this!" no matter if it's true or not. I think what's going on right here is not "I don't get it" but "What's to get?" It's hard to get quantum physics but it's even harder if you're trying to do that by reading Winnie the Pooh.

Okay, anyone here can make Character X from Anywhere, USA. Okay great. For most games this isn't much of a problem. It's the old "the GM will lead me" kinda deal. But in a game where the players are not only expected but required to deal evenly in the narration you need to provide them with as many tools as possible.

It seems to me you know this; you're asking people what they would like to see. For me, more cosmology and a lot more examples. I think it would be a good idea to give character creation examples for three PC: one who was pre-initiate, one who was a new Archon, and one who is old hat in the Archoning game. Then take each character in turn and progress them. A big question for me is: Why did Prometheus awaken me? What about me captured his eye? Is this answerable or is Prometheus just that big on shaking stuff up?

I couldn't get a feel for what was really going on in the setting from the quick start. Earth I guess is the Earth of today with all of the planets being just planets as we know them...but then theres an "other world" like Nobilis that exists on top of our world and that's where the game is largely played. I couldn't tell to what extent people in general are aware of Archons (the way they're aware of Super Heroes...the way some have become aware of Vampires...or the way everyone is oblivious to them like Nobles).

You've almost got it. The world as we modern, rela folks know it is an illusion, an artificial creation devoid of metaphysical Virtue or Power. There is no pluto becaue the Eternals don't recognize its value. There are no galaxies or God or whatever for the same reason. The Nine Worlds are real, they are Truth because the gods and titans say so. Humanity on earth, however, remains oblivious to all this.

I also couldn't get a sense of what the Immortals and Titans are really up to. I understand there's a war...but what does it look like . . . . Are there armies marching under the banner of immortals ala War Gods of Aegyptus (or whatever that minis game is called). Is it all naval battles with aether ships like in Treasure Planet. Is the "war" more subtle of plots and assassinations and duels of deep magic. When Zeus isn't busy fighting Titans...what's he doing.

Yes.

But seriously, folks. First and foremost, it looks like what you as a group say it does. Want a Cold War analog? Go nuts. Want War Gods of Egyptus? Set some sessions on the battlefields of Mars and have a ball. Hornblower-meets-Borges navy battles? Cool -- do that. All of these things are happening, but usually happening in small doses in different regions.

"Officially" (meaning, how I'll mostly write it in the book) it's most like the Cold War, with the Eternals (gods) and Titans maneuvering subtly, sometimes not so subtly. Lots of intrigue, blockades (and blockade runners, of course), political schemes, all treading upon the humanity of the players involved.

I also couldn't understand the role of the Archons within this war. Is it "every Archon for them selves"

The Archons take all sorts of roles in the ongoing Titanomachy. Some are "Do as thou wilt, every Archon for himself-ers". Others are members of factions like the Aquarians who are sorta like CNN meets Greenpeace. They want the world to Wake Up. Others work for the Eternals, others for the Titans.

I think the setting chapter will really answer a lot of questions that are being raised here. I'm writing it, I'm writing it, already!

Mike, I re-read the Nine Worlds playtest thread, and these two passage really struck me as why I'm having a hard time "getting" what you're, um, "not getting."

What Ralph said goes for me as far as not being able to get a sense of "what goes on". I mean, in Sorcerer, you make a sorcerer, and are asked to come up with why they're a sorcerer. I get that ....

Matt, one, I've never played Mage, which I assume you're talking about. If you're talking about Wizards in general, well, the one thing I do get from the text is that these are not like the Mages I play in fantasy games. In any case, I think it's dangerous to assume that people will just pick up on such associations.

Can we agree that whether you "get" an Archon, based on experience or whatever, is far less important than "what do I do when I play an Archon?"

Matt Snyder wrote:
I think the setting chapter will really answer a lot of questions that are being raised here. I'm writing it, I'm writing it, already!

You've almost got it. The world as we modern, rela folks know it is an illusion, an artificial creation devoid of metaphysical Virtue or Power. There is no pluto becaue the Eternals don't recognize its value. There are no galaxies or God or whatever for the same reason. The Nine Worlds are real, they are Truth because the gods and titans say so. Humanity on earth, however, remains oblivious to all this.

No need to apologize, Mike. We're all big boys and girls here, and it's largely my fault for misinterpreting what you were asking. Looks like we were on the same page for the most part all along.

As for whether being an Archon is old hat or not, it's up to the players. Blair suggested more sample NPCs showing different levels of involvement with things "beyond" or "arcane." I think I'll have to add that. Hell, maybe Megan will make an appearance.

This thread's been really helpful, if really overwhelming, in point out stuff I gotta add. Sheesh!

Smoke if you got 'em.....

Did my ramblings there make any sense?

I'll have a lot more trouble buying the idea that this is the NORMAL reality and we're all just blinded by some universal human delusion and can't see it.

Hello,

I knew this was going to get frustrating. Matt, I wasn't challenging you.

I have a neat idea for a troubled teen character, a girl who aims to find her own inner beauty and power.

I don't smoke. ;)

Matt said:

(FYI, there is no limit to declared opponents -- yes this means you can really, really kick ass if outnumbered given a good hand on your part)

Or is getting distracted by color a serious problem?

Did the examples in the rules chapter not do a sufficient job of showing what you do in this game? I'm still not seeing a reply in that regard.

Your example says that the Sun is provably real as ball of fusion fire, right? How would you prove that in the game? In the game, you'd enter a conflict with Apollo. Good luck, sucker. He's powerful. Let's say his Power is, oh say, 30. Your Hubris or Arete is really good, but not THAT good. You challenge his "illusion," trying to "prove" the sun is a fusion star. If you fail, guess what, his illusion maintains. You may or may not go on believing that the sun is a yellow star as astroomers define it. BUT, if you succeed, look out. Now, your goal has been met -- to take away Apollo's enforced reality. So, what is it? Is the sun a star? A city? Cheddar cheese? Now, you possess the virtue to say what the sun is. (How COOL is that?!? Well, not too cool if you just wiped out everyone who lives there, but still . . . . )

Can you get in a rocket and land on the rocky moon in this game? Yes. But to what end? If it's to prove the moon is a rock, not a wildlands of mythic beasts, then you're going to enter a conflict like that above. If you're going there as a sleeper to explore, then the game doesn't care too much. You go. It's real, or as real as your sleeper mind can tell you. But unless the Eternals say, "Yep, that act of going to the moon has virtue," then it just doesn't matter whether it's real or not. What matters is virtue. And the Eternals are a stodgy, miserly bunch when it comes to virtue.

... so if I repeat something, I apologize. I'm also very much going stream-of-consciousness here.

Page 1:
* 3rd paragraph: "The cause it" and "The do not..." should be "They".
* I got the basic gist of the game from this. Nice, concise summary!

Page 2:
* Lexicon: "settin elements of Nine Worlds" should be "setting". (I know! I know! It's the editor in me, I'm sorry!)
* The Aether and Aetherships feel a bit like Spelljammer. But in a good way.
* So an Archon is an Awakened, but an Awakened isn't necessarily an Archon? Is that right?

Page 3:
* You define NPC and PC, but not "Gamemaster" or "Player". I think you should either put all the terms in, or take out the assumed terminology.

Page 4:
* Saturn: You spell Kronos "Cronos" here.

Page 5:
* The Rule of Nines is clever, and makes things easy to remember.
* Pronunciations! What joy! You might want to move them into the Lexicon section, however.

Page 7:
* Not sure if it was intentional or not, but the Urges are laid out in paired fashion, making it easier to understand. It's easy to mentally pair Chaos/Cosmos and Metamorphosis/Stasis.

Page 9:
* I like Muses (seems along the lines of some ideas I kicked around myself, as I'm sure you've seen), but it's not clear what the numerical figure really MEANS. I know that it works into the system, but what does it mean to the character (and the player)? Does a higher number mean it's more powerful to the character, or it impacts him more? Some clarity on converting the numbers into some range for the "strength" of the Muse might be helpful.

Page 13:
* I like how using your better stats endangers your weaker stats. Nice balancing there. However, I'm not quite sure how it works in play. Does it just mean that the sacrasanct Trait can't be affected by Tricks in any way?

Page 16:
* I had some questions on narration, but "To the Victor" cleared them up for me.
* "defeated by some other any opponent"? Your base are belong to us? :-) Seriously, if A defeats B, and B defeats C, then B gets C's tricks, and A gets B's tricks (but not the ones he got from C)? Also, you get tricked PLAYED from your opponent, but can keep tricks played OR in your own hand?

Page 18:
* You might want to put "statis lock" in the Lexicon.

Page 23:
* I like how resolving Muses is also an "experience" mechanic. Very slick, and very reinforcing of the paradigm.

Overall, I think that the background will need a lot of detailing, in order that the players and GM have a firm common ground to tell stories from, but the system just seems to be in need of some elaboration, not necessarily revision.

I knew this was going to get frustrating. Matt, I wasn't challenging you.

snip ....

It seems to me that the equivalent in Nine Worlds is coming, not from "Archon," but from some element of the real-person side of character creation. That's the place where some text or some examples would pay off in a big way.

Damn, this isn't working at all. I did not have an answer in mind when I asked. I had a big honking question, which you answered, hence "answer I was looking for."

So it's not like a prof who asks a question and smiles indulgently as the students struggle to articulate something that matches whatever's in his mind. It was a plain and basic gaping void in my mind. You filled it.

I'll be looking over the manuscript some more before continuing.

Best,
Ron

Okay, I'm having a honking big disconnect.

In the beginning, it sounds like Archons are already who they are, but Prometheus jars them into the 'real world' of the Titanomachy, the Eternals, and the full use of their powers. Sometimes, however, it seems like they are granted their powers by Prometheus. Which is it?

This plays into the conflict between "Is the sun a big flaming ball of gas, or is it Heliopolis with a huge illusion slapped over it?" Did the Archons of ages past help create this divide between the 'True World' of 9W and our Earth? Or did the Eternals or some outside agency create it?

IMG, assuming anyone asks this (and they will!), the Eternals just got fed up with being 'gods', so they gradually set up a separate level of reality to buffer themselves from mortal affairs. Eventually, both just went their separate ways. Archons just became people who could do genius-level stuff, without the knowledge and desire to do more. And so it went.

Until Poseidon died. Because with Poseidon, so fell the inviolability of the waters. Now pollution and climate change can, in fact, threaten our existence on Earth. So now the Eternals are fighting the Titanomachy again, to save us and themselves.

Prometheus starts 'awakening' the Archons to who they really are and what they can really do. Why? Because he thinks that the Titans, his kin, are assholes, and he thinks the Eternals aren't much better. But he likes existence, and thinks humanity should have a say in what happens to their world. So he decides to rally humanity, and let the chips fall where they may.

That's IMG, and that's why Eternals aren't all that kind to Archons, even though they have some kinship. And why the Titans hate and fear them. Some Eternals regret turning away from humans, others say "good riddance." Others think they might be valuable in the upcoming war.

Matt, this kind of backstory is necessary to run this game. If one player wants to run a 'veteran' while others want to run 'newbies,' I can't withold that info from the vet. Some idea of what's what and who's who is necessary to playtest this game. We need more info.

Also, have you figured out why you wanted to make attributes sacrosanct or in jeopardy? If not, I'm not sure how to justify it to my players, either.
I was thinking maybe just lose the sacrosanct rule altogether, and just rule that only Virtues actually used in the conflict could be improved and locked. Seems simpler to me...

Ok, like Ron says, this isn't working at all. This thread is closed.

My apologies for not fielding criticisms as well as I should. It's frustrating getting this vision (which I'm obviously very close to) out there for everyone.

Spooky Fanboy, et al, you'll have to wait a bit for some answers as I get the setting finalized.

Thanks for the commentary, everyone. I do appreciate it. The following people will receive free PDF copies of the game when it's complete:

* Ron Edwards
* Shreyas Sampat
* Mike Holmes
* Eddy Webb
* Alexander Cherry
* Ralph Mazza

Thanks

So you don't want anymore playtest feedback?? Was just about to run a session with it.

No, I'm not dismissing feedback. Sorry for the confusion. In grand Forge tradition, I'm closing this particular thread to put an end to confusion and encourage new threads with specific questions. Call it putting on a fresh face on my part. Please do post a new thread here on the CC forum if you have feedback or questions.

Thanks!