Psychological randomness
Jacob Bouvier:
Going back to the Rorschach tests a bit, I'm wondering if they would still be viable as an influencing factor in given situations. Not having them guess what the dreamer is seeing, but having them act in character to say what they would see in the ink blot. This could then influence the nature of the action, or the power behind it. For example if one's character is angry, perhaps they are more likely to see something violent in the test, and even when trying to perform an unrelated action, that anger and perhaps violence might creep into it?
I'm pretty sure I'm not being as articulate as I want to be, so I'll leave it at that. Something really captures my imagination about what I've described, but it may be that it's entirely not what you're looking for.
szp:
The original idea with the Rorschach blotch was that the PCs being able to grasp what the Dreamer's mind thinks like allows them to have more influence on the dreams. I dropped this line of thought, though, because I felt that this was too vague to be a randomizer/conflict resolution mechanic...
szp:
After consideration, I actually decided to forgo random conflict resolution and use a point-based system similar to Nobilis -- ultimately, I did not like the idea of characters failing to do something, seeing that they are essentially reality warpers.
The current idea is this -- Whenever the characters take a special action (called Shaping), they must spend a certain amount of Clarity, which also happens to be their HP. Doing so absolutely creates the effect that the player/character desires, though this is not to say that they cannot be reverted or challenged indirectly. It is easier to manipulate elements that have not been introduced to the scene yet (it just happens to be that everyone forgot to notice the sword my character is holding) instead of changing something that already exists. The scope of the action characters may take is limited only by the resources the character is willing to devote to it. Effects that allows for more creativity (thus allowing the characters to bypass common sense) take more points of Clarity. The final cost is adjusted by traits the character possesses.
In combat or conflict situations, the end result of two diametrically opposed actions would depend on who was willing to spend more resources. While this could make combat simplistic, the scope of creativity the game promotes should help players to come up with actions that defeat the aggressive action without directly challenging it. Remember how we used to pretend-fight in playgrounds?
I've added on a more detailed description of this mechanic at the end of the wiki article (earlier portions need revision, though I'm waiting to do this until I'm certain I'm done), but they might need further clarification. What do you people think?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page