Hello,

This is the third of a few little readings-over I've finally made time for. All of them are games that I think are phenomenal starting-out phases in their development, only a few playtesting experiences away from the I'll-buy-it point. Check out Alan Barclay's game Hardboiled here and its starting thread, Hardboiled - RPG proposal.

At least a dozen RPGs I know of have tried to "do noir," either as the main goal or as some kind of atmospheric component. None of them, in my opinion, have succeeded beyond pastiche. I think that's because in some ways the source material itself evolved into such pastiche that it's almost impossible to do anything except remind oneself of the sources, rather than to create something new in that medium. "Noir" is a victim of its own success - now, a creator is stuck with the ease of doing a Bogey imitation and the nearly-impossible attempt to make a new and uniquely powerful movie in the medium of The Maltese Falcon. Unfortunately, adding new elements (e.g. supernatural horror, as in Angel Heart, or translating the story into a new culture, as in most 'hood movies) only reinforces the former: new ways of doing Bogey, not a new "thing to say" at all.

Can Hardboiled do it? I don't know. Its main influences (Sorcerer, Trollbabe, and The Riddle of Steel) are all aimed at empowering the author's voice and ethos.

Minor points and comments
My main issue for this game is that there seems to be a lot of layers that interact kind of messily. You have the character's Motives (up to five), a Secret Crime, Relationships, and a converter variable called Insight that arises from failing conflicts. My concern is which of these are motors for which and which work in opposition. I like the way that success in conflicts and using Motives are connected, and opposed or at least reversed relative to failure at conflicts, increasing Insight (which has to do with actual insight into aspects of a scenario), buying re-rolls, shifting points among Traits, and establishing relationships. But on the other hand, you add Descriptors (essentially skills) by spending Insight. To my way of thinking, this sort of improvement seems better associated with the first set of elements, not with the second set.

The Secret Crime is especially problematic, which is why it's not surprising that the rules for it are still in the question-mark phase. It makes sense as a primary source for the starting Motives ... but since Motives are entirely labile during play (in the same sense as their parent, the Spiritual Attributes from The Riddle of Steel), that kind of leaves the Secret Crime in the dust. Let's say after a couple of sessions, I happen to have altered all of my Motives entirely. Instead of Driven to Kill The Woman I Thought Was My Mom (etc, etc, all based off my Dark Secret that Grandma and my Dad were my real parents), I'm now all about Cleaning Up City Hall, and all the NPCs in my Motives were introduced during play.

Is this bad? Good? Or what? If the Secret Crime represents a mechanic of its own, then doesn't that undercut my author-power to transform my character in this fashion? Or, if character development necessarily entails writing a new Secret Crime, isn't that kind of, well, melodramatic? Few characters lurch their way from full-blown Secret Crime to full-blown Secret Crime, after all.

Major point
Not surprisingly, it's the exact same Major Point I made for both Empire of the Dragon Lotus and Thugs & Thieves - text that both explains and inspires the right kind of scenario preparation and application for the game. Here I am, GM Bob, faced with three or four characters all full of Secret Crimes and revving Motives. What do I do? What do I provide? What elements of prep and so forth will bring these bundles of violent drives into action in a way that turns us all on?

As I wrote before, I've provided as much answer as I can for Sorcerer in the series of books I've published. But what does that advice look like for Hardboiled, especially given the pastiche-problem I mused about above? Alan, that's your call, and I gotta say, I don't even have an answer for myself, much less one to offer for you to compare to your own. That's why my own role-playing tends to veer more toward Tarantino and the Coen Bros, and less toward the "pure" classic noir. But whatever your answer is, do your very best.

My other advice is to read, read, and read some more ... but a shade off-canon, away from sleuthing per se and more into the gritty shadows. Check out James M. Cain and Jim Thompson, especially, to get away from the somewhat moralistic Ross MacDonald side and into the plain and stark "mind of a criminal" side. James Ellroy and Joe R. Lansdale are good sources too.

Best,
Ron

Thanks Ron!

Yours and Paul's comments in the original thread have got me thinking. I've also had a whole host of new ideas. I've had a feeling that there were "too many layers" for some time and I'm trying to focus and integrate the whole thing. Strip down the rules to what's needed.

I intend to take some time to script an imaginary session, then ask myself what seems important.

As for sources, while I've read Hammet and Chandler, I rely mostly on my repetroir of black and white movies - and a screenwriter's course on the detective film, which I have on audio.

The key elements of detective Noir seem to be

- Issues of Interior vs. Exterior, Public/Private, Outsider/Insider
- Trust
- Truth
- Quiet desperation

I think that my current Premise "How will you bring justice when you are flawed" doesn't quite hit this.

Likewise, one thing I suspected when I posted my first thread was that, while my Motive/Insight mechanic is elegant, it doesn't support these goals in any particular way. I'm looking at cutting some things and that might be it. I can save it for another game.

Design Goals

I keep realizing there're details I've assumed as design goals, but haven't externalized:

- GM preparation would be a relationship map (in the Sorcerer sense) with a history of corruption for the NPCs. The GM would not determine who the actual villain is, as this would be discovered in play.

- Games would be played in 4 or 5 sessions, but PCs can be played in more than one Game.

- a reward mechanic will encourage PCs to seek relationships, hooking themselves into the Rmap.

- "Facts" would be created by players during the investigation. These would lead to a theory of the crime and accusations.

- Likewise, the PC background (details of the secret crime or whatever) are created in play as well, rather than at the start. This gives the player a chance to connect his character to themes that develop in the situation.

- two parrallel things happen in play: players discover (create) the details of the crime while also pursuing their character's agenda. I'm working on formalizing phases, as found in InSpectres.

- How a PC answers the Premise may deterimine his fate, but it WILL determine the fate of one or more Relationship NPCs. So when a detective accuses the wrong man, for example, that NPC will suffer punishment for the detectives "crime".

Hi Alan,

It strikes me that in many of the source stories, the protagonist doesn't change much. Some of them have even made peace enough with their pasts that they are almost like avenging angels, cutting a swath through the lies enmeshing everyone else. (H'm! In one of my books on the topic, the author claims that Executioner-style fiction is a derived version of detective fiction, which all of a sudden makes sense. Bullets instead of spoken truths.)

So turning almost all the consequences of a session or scenario into NPC-affecting phenomena makes a lot of sense. In other words, traditional "character improvement" could be almost or entirely replaced with "changes effected in the situation."

Interesting ... kind of a mix between Sorcerer and InSpectres, huh?

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: It strikes me that in many of the source stories, the protagonist doesn't change much. Some of them have even made peace enough with their pasts that they are almost like avenging angels, cutting a swath through the lies enmeshing everyone else.

Ron Edwards wrote: (H'm! In one of my books on the topic, the author claims that Executioner-style fiction is a derived version of detective fiction, which all of a sudden makes sense. Bullets instead of spoken truths.)

Ron Edwards wrote:
Interesting ... kind of a mix between Sorcerer and InSpectres, huh?

Some of them have even made peace enough with their pasts that they are almost like avenging angels, cutting a swath through the lies enmeshing everyone else.