Hi everyone,

This is a game about social interactions; probably centered around court intrigues, but not limited to that alone.

Get it here (in HTML).

It's frequently been noted here that many games have all their rules be about combat even though that's not what the designers seem to be suggesting the game is about. It's also been noted that detail creates focus. Here I've tried to make a game that takes the detail usually given to combat and applies it to social situations.

ItC has a simple mechanic that is elaborated on in several ways with no real meta-mechanics at present. Each character has about 15 abilities: all but 3 are socially-oriented. The goal was to identify facets of the "socializing" or charisma skill a character might have in other RPGs. Charactrs are driven by "motivations" which are essentially like Spriitual Attributes in Jake Norwood's The Riddle of Steel. (I've stolen Character Maps and Kickers from Sorcerer as well).

To some degree, the game is a bit of an experiment...but I'm keen to play it as well, since it will be different from what most people around me usually play. That itself is part of the experiment, and why the game is not as "avant garde" as I might have made it otherwise: part of the idea behind it was to make an RPG that would ease players into dealing with social situations in a way they usually don't in D&D.

By that I mean that often, social interaction is either not dealt with via rules at all, or it is done without details: "Roll your charisma to see if the gate warden likes you, if you convince him of your plan, and if he will give you the information you want. Also roll charisma to sleep with the elf maiden. You rolled high? Okay, cool. You sleep with the elf maiden. On the next day you set out for more adventure...." Obviously not everyone glaxes over things this much, but some do. You might also say that it's just a matter of preference, how such situations are handled. I agree, but I think part of that preference comes from a "comfort zone" that simply has not been pushed -- and that with just a little more pushing, a little more structure, getting into emotional matters and relationships wih other characters can be made more comfortable.

As I hinted at, this applies to some players I know. Is this just a creative agenda issue? I don't think so, at least not entirely. I really think that it at least could be an issue of some people just not having had the encouragement to try something new...and feeling lost when they tried it.

Okay, well this is getting to be a long explanation of my purpose here. On top of all this though, I did just want a fun court-intrigue game to play!

The kinds of feedback I'd especially like to get (in no order):

1. Most basically, are the rules clearly written, and are the examples useful ones.

2. Are goals totally unnecessary? They're a bit of a tack-on in a way, but by being tied to Character Points (needs a new name), they do have purpose...although they could be removed.

3. How about Character Points in general? Exactly what they mean in-game is a little up in the air, but I think that's okay. I kind of like giving players the ability to pick and choose what they really want to put some "oomph" into. But are they redundant with motivations? Do they need more bite?

4. Although I tried to do some basic kind of job explaining how to organize play, including the use of character maps and scene framing, I've wondered about including an overtly meta- mechanic that would regulate scene framing and maybe some other things as well. Probable it would involve a bidding between players to determine where the next "shot" is. Necessary? Useful? Coutner to the feel of the game, or in support of it?

5. What kind of creative agenda you feel it promotes. I have my ideas (and had my goals when writing it) but I'd like to see what other people think.

6. Anything else you have to say.

I have been looking for a game like this for a while, and I think you are on the right track. However I think your game could use some more focus in its setting and/or genre.

Here's an example of why I think so: the character Abilities. The abilities you've described are generic, and I suspect the reason is because you're not 100% sure what kind of court dramas people will be playing. Rather than have abilities like Acting and Lying, or Argument and Presence, all of which arguably have some overlap, I would suggest deciding exactly which courtly setting you'd like to emulate, and create specific abilities that fit that setting. I think that will help focus the game, and firm up some of your goals with Character Points, Goals, etc.

For instance, if you want to emulate a court game of feudal japan, you might have abilities like Save Face, Poetry, Subtle Insult, Music and Seduce. All of these abilities could be approximated by Conversation, Wit, Charm, etc, but the above give players information about what the game is all about.

In short, make this game more specific. That'll also make naming easier, and probably help you refine the meta-game aspects like CPs/Goals and Resources. Consider: a game like My Life with Master could've been written as the more generic Henchmen, with less descriptive abilities (Less than Human == Flaw, etc)... but it wouldn't be as compelling a game.

I thought ItC was well written, and found the examples of play very useful for understanding the game. However a minor complaint: the shouting match between Elizabeth and Simon for Donovan's attention didn't seem very courtly.

In the interest in giving feedback on at least one of the areas you requested, I think Goals work pretty well. I think you might combine Goals/Motivations and CPs into one mechanic, where a point value is assigned to your goal that you get as a reward for acheiving it.

I think you might combine Goals/Motivations and CPs into one mechanic, where a point value is assigned to your goal that you get as a reward for acheiving it.

I disagree that you need a strong setting to play, as you already have a strong focus.

I see CPs are a powerful setting-characterizing tool: you could require that the expenditure of a CP is accompanied by a Color-appropriate narration, as such:

In the Shogun's Court, you can spend a CP to:
- Compose or recite a relevant and clever haiku.
- Perform an action without the risk of losing face.
- Display your learnedness and wit through a subtle, literary insult.
All these provide a dice bonus.
- Draw strength of will from your own Motivations.
- Display the honor and virtue of your Motivation.
- Use the Motivations of another as leverage against them.
- Use the Motivations of another to show him as a dishonorable and unenlightened barbarian.
All these provide an ability bonus based on the Motivation that is relevant.

On the other hand, having the usage of CPs not being directly tied to M/G makes them weaker; I'd be tempted to restrict CP use to things that at minimum indirectly serve those things.

I like the idea of requiring a colorful narration with CP use. I'd also considered restricting them to situations directly relating to Motivations, or maybe very perilous situations as well...but since Motivations already give a bonus to any relevant action, are CPs not made somewhat redundant?

They would still give the player the ability to choose where the story would go by choosing where/when a character succeeded...which seems to be a more "meta" role for CPs. I'm not sure if that makes sense with where they're derived from, which is very character-centric. I've considered transforming CPs into a player resource, rather than a character resource, and thus as a sort of reward mechanic as well, but there's no gaurantee that a given player will be controlling the same character at any given time.

I guess I'll need to pin down what exactly I'd like CPs to represent, and what their use should promote in play.