*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 10, 2022, 05:51:41 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4285 Members Latest Member: - Jason DAngelo Most online today: 72 - most online ever: 565 (October 17, 2020, 02:08:06 PM)
Pages: [1] 2
Print
Author Topic: Fact mechanic for Capes  (Read 11635 times)
Grover
Member

Posts: 82


« on: July 21, 2005, 10:20:33 AM »

One thing that people have perceived as a weakness in Capes is that there is no mechanism to establish a fact in the game.  I don't see this as a huge weakness, but some additional expressiveness added to the system might be nice, and I just had an interesting idea for the mechanic, so I thought I'd toss it out.

It's very simple.  When a conflict resolves, instead of taking an inspiration, a player may choose to establish a fact with the same rating as the inspiration.  Any player may use an action to roll up a die with a fact (limited by the level of the fact and the current value of the die).  Any player may use any fact, but a particular fact may only be used once per scene.

Does this seem like a reasonable mechanic?

Steve
Logged
Larry L.
Member

Posts: 616

aka Miskatonic


« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2005, 10:34:32 AM »

Hi Steve!

So, how's this different from the Goal-In, Goal-Out rule that Fred proposed some time back?
Logged

TonyLB
Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 3702


WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2005, 10:57:55 AM »

Why would you want to give one player a permanent advantage over other players?
Logged

Just published: Capes
New Project:  Misery Bubblegum
Vaxalon
Member

Posts: 1619


« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2005, 11:43:55 AM »

Tony, you seem to be assuming that any given fact will always be an advantage for a given player.  Since characters can shift from one player to another, and since a given fact could be used by any player, then I don't see how a fact could become a permanent advantage for one player.
Logged

"In our game the other night, Joshua's character came in as an improvised thing, but he was crap so he only contributed a d4!"
                                     --Vincent Baker
TonyLB
Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 3702


WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2005, 01:08:26 PM »

It's a creative advantage for that player, whoever ends up using it.  It makes it more likely that other people will fall into line with his creative vision, as expressed in that fact.
Logged

Just published: Capes
New Project:  Misery Bubblegum
Shreyas Sampat
Member

Posts: 970


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2005, 02:08:12 PM »

It sounds like a reasonable mechanic to me.
Logged

Grover
Member

Posts: 82


« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2005, 07:13:01 PM »

One thing I forgot to mention was that facts can be removed the same way they're established.  It's not intended to be a dominating mechanic, just a way for players to describe the world in mechanical terms.

Steve
Logged
Doug Ruff
Member

Posts: 445


« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2005, 01:14:22 AM »

Hi,

There isn't a mechanism to introduce "Facts" into the game because it's not needed. Capes allows you to make stuff up all the time. I know this isn't a feature for everyone, but it is an essential part of the game.

I can see Facts breaking down in play as either:

- one player establishes a Fact, other players like it and use it too. It becomes an established part of the story, until someone gets bored with it and offs it. Nothing wrong with this.
- one player establishes a Fact, the other players don't like it. The player who introduced it keeps using it, which pisses off the other players so they team up to off it quickly. Much less happy with this. I also think it underlines Tony's "creative advantage" criticism.

But, basically, Facts provide an unfair advantage. Not to a player, but to a story element. And the Capes ruleset is designed to specifically encourage the story elements which other players are interested in too. There's a sort of "story Darwinism" going on, powered by the Story Token currency. Facts look innocuous, but I suspect that they break that system.

Yes, other players can negate the Fact by spending their own Inspirations if they don't like it. But ths requires players to actively negate each other's story contributions, and I think that's a bad thing. The current system allows players to shape the story through positive feedback only.
Logged

'Come and see the violence inherent in the System.'
Vaxalon
Member

Posts: 1619


« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2005, 07:26:30 AM »

I think the fact mechanics that Grover and I have introduced have been designed to counteract the positive feedback loop of progressively larger and larger events being done and undone without any mechanism for bringing it under control.
Logged

"In our game the other night, Joshua's character came in as an improvised thing, but he was crap so he only contributed a d4!"
                                     --Vincent Baker
TonyLB
Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 3702


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2005, 07:53:02 AM »

That particular positive feedback loop is a new one on me.  Do you think it's written into the rules?  Or is it just an effect of players progressively realizing that they're empowered, and therefore addressing larger things for the sheer fun of being able to do so?  Or something else?
Logged

Just published: Capes
New Project:  Misery Bubblegum
Vaxalon
Member

Posts: 1619


« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2005, 09:43:03 AM »

Logged

"In our game the other night, Joshua's character came in as an improvised thing, but he was crap so he only contributed a d4!"
                                     --Vincent Baker
TonyLB
Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 3702


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 26, 2005, 09:59:11 AM »

So... you're talking about knocking these things down in conflicts?  Or in free narration?
Logged

Just published: Capes
New Project:  Misery Bubblegum
Vaxalon
Member

Posts: 1619


« Reply #12 on: July 26, 2005, 11:33:15 AM »

Free narration.  We've been over this point before... basically, because conflicts are SO expensive, you can only afford to have a few (or even just one) in any given scene.  Everything else is undefendable. 
Logged

"In our game the other night, Joshua's character came in as an improvised thing, but he was crap so he only contributed a d4!"
                                     --Vincent Baker
TonyLB
Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 3702


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 26, 2005, 01:03:15 PM »

Ohhhh... so this is the same misguided argument from you that I've spent hundreds of posts to refute before.  Gotcha.

Everyone but Fred:  These rules modifications were off the mark the last time he proposed them.  Fred/Vaxalon himself was off the mark in various ways that have been pointed out over and over again.  The rules-mods and Fred are still off the mark, for all the same reasons.  Uzzah explained very concisely where the disconnect is in A lightbulb moment.  There's nothing new to see here. 

If anyone else wants to tilt at the Fred windmill, split off a thread and have at it.  Myself, I'm no longer interested in providing him with a sparring partner.

EDIT:  For what it's worth, I think Grover's suggestions are a whole differen rule-modification from Fred's.  They certainly haven't been refuted in anything like the same level of detail.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2005, 01:09:22 PM by TonyLB » Logged

Just published: Capes
New Project:  Misery Bubblegum
Larry L.
Member

Posts: 616

aka Miskatonic


« Reply #14 on: July 26, 2005, 01:25:49 PM »

EDIT: For what it's worth, I think Grover's suggestions are a whole differen rule-modification from Fred's. They certainly haven't been refuted in anything like the same level of detail.
Cool! I just really, really wanted to make sure we weren't kicking that horse again.

So Steve, they're mechanically like Inspirations, except you keep them after you use them?
Logged

Pages: [1] 2
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!