The Forge Archives

This is a half-arsed idea that I've been mulling over this weekend.  The idea is to knock up a quick and dirty RPG about cheesy action movies.  Please note that this is all a bit stream of consciousness and not at all well thought through yet.  A lot of this really does need a lot of work but I'm posting it here to see if anyone has seen anything exactly like it: there's a lot of stuff out there and I know this isn't the most original idea I've ever had.  This has become like an itch I've got to scratch.  If this game already exists, then I don't need to create it.

Also some of this might just be blatantly stupid.  Any input at this stage might save me wasting loads of time later.  Obviously this owes a lot to other games.  Dust Devils is a fairly obvious influence and so in Once Upon a Time.

Danger Dudes:

The basic premise so far is that the characters are a team of secret agents/commandos/ninjas/pirates etc.  Exactly what isn't important.  It's intended to be written as a generic Die Hard/Hard Boiled/Jackie Chan style thing, but it could just as easily be a Sci fi/Supers etc.  It's my first attempt at this whole "shared narrative" thing, but this feels like it OUGHT to be written that way.  The players ought to be narrating this as much as the GM, and there ought to be a way to share the workload.  The idea is that those movies are so formulated that there shouldn't really need to be any significant preparation required.

The main theme of this game is that the characters are always doing the most extreme stunts they can.  The more ludicrous something is (to a point), the more likely it is that an action hero will succeed.  Players need to "push the envelope" without breaking it.

For instance, a character sneaks into the enemy HQ and in interrupted by a guard on patrol.  The player realises that he needs to take the guard down before he can raise the alarm and decides to shoot him with a silenced pistol.  Simply shooting the guard is one thing, but if he decides to heroically somersault across the table and then shoot the guard as he lands, that's actually more likely to work.  If he decides to somersault across the table, swing from a lamp, bounce off the wall on the far side and then kick a chair into the guard's face to knock him out, that's pushing it too far and is likely to fail.

It reminded me of the card game Pontoon, which is commonly known as Blackjack or 21 in the US.  You have to draw cards, getting as high as possible without going over 21.  You "push the envelope" without breaking it.  The more cards you have, the more extreme the stunt looks on screen.  If you go over 21 though, you fail.

Characters will be created by choosing 2 "cool factors" and a plot hook.  Cool factors will allow you to add or subtract from you hand's total whenever they can be brought to bear on the situation.  Generally CFs ought to be rated 1 or 2.  1s are things that will apply most of the time.  2s will be fairly specific.  Characters ought to have one of each.

For instance, Skip Chow has these CFs:

Fight with 2 guns (2)
Cool Hair (1)[/list:u]

Whenever he's fighting with 2 guns, he gets to add or subtract 2 from his hand, making him much more likely to succeed.  Anytime his hair can be seen on camera, he gets an additional +/- 1.  If he's trying to jump over chasm, only his hair is applicable, so he's at +/- 1.  If it's raining really hard, he's wearing a hat or it's just too dark to see his cool hairdo, he wont even get that.

Plot point will be something like "Ex Wife" or "Man on the Edge", basically something that the player might want the character to live up to.  There is a bonus for fulfilling this.

Players will start off with 5 betting chips each.  The GM determines a total number of chips which the players must have in order to achieve objectives within the plot.  As players get these numbers of chips between them, they achieve the goals.  Loosely defined, this ought to be something like (assuming 4 players):

End of act 1 (players investigate diamond robbery and catch robber) = 30 chips
End of act 2 (players raid a warehouse trying to recover the diamond)= 42 chips
Climax of the story (players find out that Doctor Nasty has the Diamond and has used it to build a massive weapon on his island lair.  They need to foil his plan to hold the world to ransom!) = 55 chips

Players bet chips and win/lose them as per the rules of Pontoon each time they attempt an action that's relevant to the plot (such is shooting the guard as mentioned before).  Dealer (GM) still wins ties, but player characters usually have at least a +/-1 bonus to their hands, so they're likely to win on balance.  Once they accumulate enough chips, they move on to the next part of the story.  Characters are injured if the player runs out of chips.  Bets will be limited to one or 2 chips per bet.

Players can "sacrifice" their characters during the final act to grant everyone else a bonus.  That players divides his chips among the other players however he chooses and his character cannot take any more part in the game.  Exactly what happens to him is up to the player, but usually it'll be a wound that prevents him fighting any more or similar.  characters in this kind of thing rarely actually get killed.

The players WILL win in the end.  It's just a matter of how and how quickly, what happens along the way and who contributes what.

Hey Rich,

You had me up until you went from talking about 21 to talking about chips. Do you mean that you play a round of 21 to resolve actions, and the chips are for betting, or do you mean something else? I like the idea, I just have no idea how the rules work.

Later,
Grant

Hi Rich,

Are you familiar with the game Extreme Vengeance? I think it's required reading for anyone putting together an action-movie oriented game.

This is not to say, "Already been done, forget it," but rather to say that there exists some great work that can help you focus better on just what you want out of the game you're working on.

Best,
Ron

Grant,

He said, use Pontoon, which is non-US for Blackjack as he explained.

Rich,

I assume that you're thinking this way, but I didn't see it above, the idea is that you should narrate another addition to the action for each draw of the cards? That is, you say, "I'm going to jump the chasm, looking cool", get's you your two cards. Let's say you get only 12 on the first two cards, and ask for a hit. It comes up a four, so you narrate that he does a sommersault on the way across. Then you decide to hit again on 16, and get a ten. Busted, the GM narrates as you smack your head on the cieling on the way across, and fall into the chasm landing in the river below.

Do I have that about right?

Mike

Quote from: ThreeGeeYou had me up until you went from talking about 21 to talking about chips. Do you mean that you play a round of 21 to resolve actions, and the chips are for betting, or do you mean something else? I like the idea, I just have no idea how the rules work.

Yeah, that's not terribly well explained in the post.  It works like this:

1) You say you want to do something that's dramatic. (like shooting the guard in the example)
2) With the GM as dealer, you play a hand of 21.
3) Players stake either one or 2 chips after they get their first card (this is the way things work in English Pontoon, I think it might be a bit different in Blackjack though).
4) Cards are dealt to all the players who're acting, so if there are 4 of you trying to deal with the guard you all get dealt cards.
5) Players can buy or twist more cards until they're happy with their total. Players also get to tweak their totals according to their CFs.
6) Dealer plays his hand as per the normal rules of 21.
7) Players who beat the dealer collect chips equal to their stake, anyone who loses to the dealer loses their stake.  
8) Player who beats the GM and has the highest total without going bust narrates the scene.  If all players lose or go bust etc, the GM narrates the scene in such a way that the players don't achieve what they wanted to.  They have had a setback to their goal (ie lost a bunch of chips) and the GM narrates what the setback is (in the above example, the guard sounds the alarm and Skip gets surrounded).  If the GM goes bust, any players who aren't bust win and get chips.  Highest one narrates.  Genarally one of the players ought to win most of the time.  When narrating a scene, a player is obliged to narrate things as more spectacular the more cards he had in his hand.  A winning hand with 4 cards and a total of 20 is a spectaculer looking success, while a hand totalling 20 with 2 cards is just as successful, but looks less cool on film.

That's the jist of it anyway.  Like i said, it needs work...

Quote from: Mike HolmesHe said, use Pontoon, which is non-US for Blackjack as he explained.

Not quite, the way betting works in Pontoon is very slightly different to Blackjack: you look at your first card, then decide your stake before you get the second card.  So it's bit more risky for the players.

But as far as I can tell, it's the same.  Wouldn't really make any difference which way you play.

Quote from: Mike HolmesI assume that you're thinking this way, but I didn't see it above, the idea is that you should narrate another addition to the action for each draw of the cards? That is, you say, "I'm going to jump the chasm, looking cool", get's you your two cards. Let's say you get only 12 on the first two cards, and ask for a hit. It comes up a four, so you narrate that he does a sommersault on the way across. Then you decide to hit again on 16, and get a ten. Busted, the GM narrates as you smack your head on the cieling on the way across, and fall into the chasm landing in the river below.

Do I have that about right?

Yes, that's pretty much it.  I'm assuming that when there's one players they'll describe what they do as you describe.  If there's more than 2 or 3 it might be easier to hold back and describe what happens at the end.
Falling in the river is a good example: the characters here won't die, or even get injured unless the player runs out of chips.  Other than that they just get winded or have bruises/fleshwounds.  If the player in you example had staked really high and lost his last chips, there might not have bee enough water to break his fall properly, but otherwise he'll be washed up downstream, soggy and losing his Cool Hair until he can dry out...

Getting post-crossover here.  I'm at work and can't really concentrate on this properly!

Rich

Quote from: Ron EdwardsAre you familiar with the game Extreme Vengeance? I think it's required reading for anyone putting together an action-movie oriented game.

This is not to say, "Already been done, forget it," but rather to say that there exists some great work that can help you focus better on just what you want out of the game you're working on.

EV is out of print.  I've looked for a copy for ages, but I've never found one.  I have read every review I've ever seen very closely and talked at great length with people who've got and played the game, but it's not the same...

This is more of a "sit at the pub and play it a bit" game, rather than something you'd bother to scedule like a "proper" rpg.  It's not "sillier" than EV, nor is it less complex (from what I can tell) but I think it's a bit different to what I understand EV to be.  There's perhaps a bit more focus here on players as storytellers rather that at the GMs mercy as they are traditionally (and don't get me wrong, I don't think there's anything wrong with the "1 GM + N players" model).  Less/no prep for the GM is an important objective.

I found my copy on Ebay.  It usually pops up there every couple months or so.  Use the Search Feature and you'll get an email when the next one is available.

Quote from: ValamirI found my copy on Ebay.  It usually pops up there every couple months or so.

Not many copies appear to have made int to this side of the Atlantic.  I'll find one eventually though (oh yes, it will be mine!)

Hey Rich,

Ah! I understand, now. So, each player is trying to beat the dealer to win chips, which represent plot advancement, and the player who wins with the most cards also gets to narrate the action. Is there just one round of betting, or do you bet each time you take a card? I apologize if my rules questions seem terribly obvious, but I have played too many card games by too many different rules to take anything for granted.

For a beer and chips game, I like it. Nice and simple. Not much crunchiness, but I imagine you will be expanding things a bit to explain the difference between winning the round with two cards as compared to winning with five.

Later,
Grant

Quote from: ThreeGeeAh! I understand, now. So, each player is trying to beat the dealer to win chips, which represent plot advancement, and the player who wins with the most cards also gets to narrate the action.

I'm not 100% settled on who gets to narrate, beyond the dealer gets narration if nobody beats him.  Dealer narrates if he dosen't pay out. Players are only eligable for naration if they gain chips (ie they beat the dealer).

Other than that there appear to be a number of options:

The player with the most cards narrates (most spectacular action steals the show)
Player with the best hand narrates
Player who gains the most chips narrates[/list:u]

I'm leaning towards the first one at the moment.

Quote from: ThreeGeeIs there just one round of betting, or do you bet each time you take a card? I apologize if my rules questions seem terribly obvious, but I have played too many card games by too many different rules to take anything for granted.

There must be a million variants :)

Players bet after they recieve their first card, they can look at itand then decide whether they want to bet one or two chips.  Then they get their second card.  After that they can chose to "buy" extra cards (adding one chip to their stake) face down or "twist" extra cards face up without adding to their stake.  A players cannot buy any more cards once he twists one, but can twist until he has 5 cards in his hand or goes bust.  So stakes will be between 1 and 5 chips.

Quote from: ThreeGeeFor a beer and chips game, I like it. Nice and simple. Not much crunchiness, but I imagine you will be expanding things a bit to explain the difference between winning the round with two cards as compared to winning with five.

This will end up being 70% examples.  Only way to do a game like this.

I'm thinking that there might be a way not to have a "permanent" GM here, simply a "narrator of the moment".  Whoever wins narration rights keeps them until someone beats them.  Maybe then the player who has the most chips at the end "wins".  That way, assigning narration rights to the person who wins the most chips makes sense: you can't collect chips if you're the narrator (they go to and from the bank, like in monopoly) and your "stash" is frozen.  That way you want to win, because that gets you chips, but winning too much loses you the chance to win more chips.

Need to think on that more...