benlehman | (no subject)

This is an RPG design post. It isn't a Forge post simply because it isn't focused enough to be. You have been warned.

As Vincent points out, we have the whole form of conflict resolution and resolution mechanics in general pretty much down. This is a monumental amount of work over a monumental amount of time, originating in the murky depths of the 80s and carrying through until the present day games of Dogs, HeroQuest, and Primetime Adventures. There is still a lot of work to be done, of course, but now we can classify it and really make it work.

But that doesn't mean that RPG design is done, or that it is all about refining conflict resolution mechanisms.

I want to talk about something else. I want to talk about non-conflict, non-task mechanism.

It is a sign of how hideously underdeveloped these mechanics and the theory surrounding them is that I cannot think of anything to say about these sorts of mechanics. RPG theorists (and here I am using a broad category) have, for a very long time, reducing RPG systems into their resolution systems (whether conflict or task resolution isn't really important to this point) and dismissed other aspects of RPG system as unnecessary cruft, or simply didn't recognize their existence entirely.

And I think it is time that we start to analyze them.

Here are some examples:
The chart in Polaris, and it's predecessor diagram in Sorcerer.
The Random Dungeon generation tables of AD&D1
The direct "use this game for this" instructions
Town generation in D&D3, and its predecessors in Spelljammer system generation charts and Thief's Handbook guild and city generation rules
Oriental Adventures (1st) random events charts
non-combat movement and maneuvering rules, including travel but also swimmingly, climbing and flight.

How can we categorize these things? How can we study them? How can we make them more graceful? How can we make them more fun?

Right now we are groping in the dark. We have no idea what these things mean. We throw them together, and see if they stick. Sometimes they are awesome, sometimes they aren't, but there is no understanding, yet. We are monkeys with typewriters.

Anyone want to start?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I think a key point is that all the Explorative Elements(System, Situation, Setting, Character, Color) are basically building blocks, or lenses that can be used to focus play and give momentum to the group. For example, a detailed setting, or the generative tools you are describing, serve as ways to focus what the game is about. Some folks, when handed GURPS, or Story Engine, or whatever your favorite non-genre specific game is, get completely lost because they need to have more focus to build upon.

In general, people have figured out how to apply setting in a good focal manner, usually in conjunction with Character and Color(Whitewolf's various splats and politics in their games). The particulars you are talking about apply to Situation and Setting, but are still worth developing further.

I think that's pretty insightful, yeah, although it still doesn't cover "flat-out abilities."

Hi! Didn't know you had a livejournal.

yrs--
--Ben

P.S. I have this idea for an L5R character now... still don't know if I'll be in town.

I think a key point is that all the Explorative Elements(System, Situation, Setting, Character, Color) are basically building blocks, or lenses that can be used to focus play and give momentum to the group.

Exactly. I find the elements extremely helpful to analyze mechanics & play, though a single mechanic, of course, can affect/interact with more than one (or all 5!) at the same time.

There's some talk about what's a conflict resolution mechanic and what's not. If we step back a bit, we can see that all mechanics are tools used by a group to help them determine what they want to establish into the shared imaginary space/stuff that makes up the in-game world & events. Mechanics and source materials are processes that assist groups in creative collaboration.

Rules may resolve a conflict (social--between two players) or they may head off a conflict. For example, the choice of setting in a particular game helps cut down on long, drawn out discussions and potential conflicts about what the background & setting should consist of. That's just one way, of course. The people could just talk it out, or there could be a mechanical procedure by which everyone's input is incorporated and concensus it built. Mechanics and rules can also coordinate players's inputs such that tension and drama is built (eg kickers, Dogs in the Vineyard conflict resolution). But what all of them are doing is giving people cues and processes that help them create things together.

Ack. I missed this. Sorry for the redundant post.

Its primary purpose isn't to resolve conflicts between the players about what is in the SIS. It's supposed to force a certain structure onto the sequence of in-game events.

This is a major new category of mechanic. Spotlight in Primetime Adventures. Endgame in My Life with Master. Escalation in Dogs in the Vineyard.

Yup. I really want to talk about those mechanics sometime.

yrs--
--Ben

P.S. (Modules in T&T and D&D)