[Kosmos] Honoring the VFF of Everway

[Lxndr]

In my last topic, Ron and I came to the conclusion that I needed something like Everway's unturned Fate card. Which in turn is an integral part of the Virtue/Fault/Fate.

Now, since I'm using the Tarot, attempting to directly replicate the Virtue/Fault/Fate of Everway isn't all that good of an idea.  Everway's Fortune Deck has exactly 35 cards, each with pretty clear upright and reversed definitions (I'm ignoring the Usurper because it's very unlikely to see it in a VFF)

The Tarot is unlike this, in almost every way. So what I'm thinking of doing is trying to honor the intent of the VFF while also trying to honor the Tarot more directly.

Three is a good number. It's not too complicated, and not too simple. And there's a tradition for three card spreads in the Tarot. The simplest one is Past/Present/Future.

If we focus on simply the major arcana of the Tarot, there's only 22 cards instead of 35. 22 choose 3 is 1540, vs. 35 choose 3 is 6,545. But if we take the entire tarot deck, 78 choose 3 is 76,076. So... this seems to be a better way to go.

So, in Everway, the player specifically choosing one of the 35. This generally isn't too much of a problem for searching. 78 cards?  Probably worse.

But the Tarot is interesting in that it shapes perception through its randomness and its symbolism. So what I'm thinking is just have the player do a spread for their character.  Use this as a springboard for their concept.

Then at any opportune time, if their Future comes up... they can just *shift* their cards.  Discard the Past, Present becomes the Past, Future becomes Present, and now just flip over a brand new Future.

This gives us a goal, similar to the Fate of Everway, to work towards.  Instead of flipping the Fate, you just shift your spread's timeline.

While this appeals to me, it *does* remove the choice aspect of Everway's VFF. Which may or may not be an issue.

On the other hand, tarot meanings are much murkier than the Everway Fortune Cards, so this shouldn't trammel too much on the player's concept and desires - especially if it's done in the beginning stages, during conception.

Is it too much of an affront to a player's sense of control over their character to introduce this bit of randomness in the conception stage?

On one hand: people accept random rolls of dice for their statistics.  On the other hand: Not everyone likes that.  On the third hand:  this is less mechanical and more conceptual than, say, rolling for charisma. 

[Lxndr]

The follow-up question is:

does this Past/Present/Future work as a good and functional homage to the VFF of Everway?

[Christoph]

Hello Alexander

I'm only about to read Everway which I found a few months back in mint condition, so I can't really answer your question (but I'll be following along). However, mathematically, choosing 3 cards among 22 gives you 9240 (22!/(20-3)!) possible combinations, if their order matters, which seems to be the case in what you describe. It's 1540 combinations if the order doesn't matter (for any three cards, there are 3! permutations). If you want a few more cards in the deck, you could add the ace of each suit for example (giving 15600 combinations).

Also, does each player have one deck? Or does each player draw from the same deck? Then you'd have to take that into account as well.

[Lxndr]

For the Past/Present/Future, in reality, each player draws from the same deck, but they shuffle it before each player. 

So functionally, each player draws from a different deck (since the deck is 'reset' every time).

Same with Everway's V/F/F.  (only in this case it's 'choose from', not 'draw from')

You're embarrassingly right - I was using combinations, not permutations.  In that case:

Tarot: P(78,3) = 456,456
Tarot Major Arcana: P(22,3)= 9,240
Everway: P(3,3) = 39,270

Even so, my point, I think, is still made:  there's less possible permutations of the Major Arcana then there are of Everway's Fortune Deck.  And, despite my incorrect math, that still leads me to the same conclusion: "Let's just use the entire Tarot deck."

In fact this even further underscores my desire to do it randomly: 76,076 is already absurd.  456,456 is even more so.

Now I just need to figure out how "reaching your Future" is supposed to show in play.

(Assuming that this is indeed a worthy reckoning of the VFF.)

[Lxndr]

Hm.

Well, regardless of whether or not it's a good replacement for the VFF, it's still a good mechanic.

So it has now been added to the game.

Now I need to worry about whether or not it's "enough."

[Marshall Burns]

Now, since I'm using the Tarot, attempting to directly replicate the Virtue/Fault/Fate of Everway isn't all that good of an idea.  Everway's Fortune Deck has exactly 35 cards, each with pretty clear upright and reversed definitions (I'm ignoring the Usurper because it's very unlikely to see it in a VFF)

The Tarot is unlike this, in almost every way.

I'm not familiar with Everway at all, so I might be missing something, but you had me scratching my head like "wha?" at this point. All of the Tarot cards, major and minor, mean different things if they're upside down. It's generally an opposite meaning, or a negative aspect of the upright meaning. Are you just saying that this function doesn't do the same or similar thing as turning the Everway cards? Like I said, I could be missing something.

Also, allow me to be frank: every time (and it's been so many times) I see someone designing a game that uses the Tarot, I have to roll my eyes. I'm sorry, I can't help it. But I'm not here to crap on the idea! Let me ask, why the Tarot? What advantage do you see in using it?

If it's the idea that its symbolism is in any way timeless or universal, I'm going to (strongly) suggest that it isn't, despite the (totally bunk) insistences of various Hermetic folks. It's very strongly tied to a specific time and place (Renaissance Western Europe), to the extent that the majority of the symbols buried in the cards (for instance, the lobster on the Moon card. Or, hell, the Death card in general) slide right past modern folks. The proper interpretation of the Tarot requires the study of loads of forgotten symbolism.

Or if you're counting on individualistic interpretations, where people just go with whatever the symbols on the cards suggest to them as a feature rather than bug, then I have to still wonder, why the Tarot instead of something you made up for this purpose?

If you're hoping to capitalize on how widespread Tarot is, it's worth thinking about (even if you reject) using poker cards instead. They give you all but four cards (the pages) of the Minor Arcana, which are rather more specific and situational than the trumps anyway. You could even include a handout thingy with the Minor Arcana and a suit key (hearts to cups, clubs to wands, etc.). Way more people have a poker deck handy than a Tarot deck.

[Marshall Burns]

Oh! Another thing I just thought of. Although the Rider-Waite Tarot is the most well-known in English-speaking places (and also public domain as of last year, though there may be wrinkles with that the US, I'd have to check), you might want to think about Aleister Crowley's Thoth deck. Not only is the art way more far-out and cosmic, but much the symbolism (as much as I hate to admit it, as a non-fan of Crowley) is far more modern.

[Lxndr]

Marhsall,

On The Differences between the Tarot and the Fortune Deck

Everway's Fortune Deck is effectively a deck of equals.  No one card trumps any other.  It's also effectively a deck of entirely Major Arcana - while the Tarot deck has four other suits.

The Tarot deck is a deck of imbalance.  Like the trick-taking games that are the root of the deck, every card is numbered (or for face cards, otherwise ranked), and the higher beats the lower.

Also, Everway's cards have very clear definitions (even if interpretation is sometimes required).  Tarot?  The meanings of the cards are murky, not as clear. 

That's what I meant by saying the Tarot is unlike it in every major way.

So yes: They do have meanings, upright or reversed. That is basically the one feature they have in common. 

On Why the Tarot

So... Kosmos is an homage to Everway, so I was hoping, initially, to have something somewhat like the Fortune Deck. The Tarot, immediately, came to mind. But at the time, I rejected it, and thought to make my own deck for the GM.

THEN, turns out I had five statistics (the classical planets - Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn).  So, I needed something with five suits, more or less.

When I turned my eye back to the Tarot, it clicked: there are effectively five suits - Disks, Cups, Wands, Swords and the Major Arcana.  And they ALREADY more-or-less map to the planets. AND have numerical values, which is good for game-playing.

Plus, thanks to the Tarot being originally a trick-taking game, the Major Arcana also have numerical values.  (0-21 or 1-22, depending on where your particular deck puts the Fool)  AND, it contains some feel of Everway's Fortune Deck.

Initially, in the design, I wanted one of the various Planets to have a more difficult time of it - so a maximum of 21 (or 22) instead of 14 worked out well in my favor. (I should also note in the end I decided to count all court cards as 10)

So I already have a handout thingy, as you mentioned:  but instead of 'hearts to cups' it's 'cups to venus' and 'swords to mars'.  Annoyingly, tarot decks vary in their suit names.

I did, in fact, consider a poker deck. But with 5 statistics, it seemed foolhardy.  I did track down a few bridge decks with 5 (or more) suits. In fact, I have a few boxes now of 8-suited playing cards.

But - what's more common?  A tarot deck, or a rare 5-suited playing card deck?  If I were worried about how widespread it is - I'd still choose the Tarot deck.

I agree, by the way, that the Tarot wears its history on its sleeves. It's rather obviously NOT 'universal'.

In the end, 'why the tarot' is basically:  "It has all the features I needed." So why re-invent the wheel?

The Book of Thoth

While I am designing this game to allow for any possible Tarot deck, I do have a Thoth deck that I plan on using for all my personal playtests. Good call!

[Marshall Burns]

Hm. Sounds good to me!