Beyond the Mirror, a sci-fi game on memories and humanity -in development
Rafu:
Uh, I forgot: the above system also needs IMO some way Light player can "gamble" with Blur.
For example, this:
After rolling dice Light can choose to place an extra token in the Blur column (to be added as a Blur token by end of conflict unless reset with an extra "+"). If they do this, they roll additional 2dF to replace any two other previously rolled dF of their choice.
Paul Czege:
As long as a player cares about the different possible dice allocations, the Otherkind mechanics can definitely feel like difficult decisionmaking in play.
One of the notes I made as I was reading Beyond the Mirror exactly matches Ben's concern. "Will anyone actually want to be revealed as human?" If you've confirmed in playtesting that players aren't much interested in being revealed as human, here's a thought. Maybe have different epilogue tables for humans and synths. And the tables grant and withhold thematically substantial aspects of player goals. Maybe it's harder for a synth to get his goal. Maybe the options even give the player a choice that they answer during their epilogue narration. "You find short term happiness on Earth. Or, if your goal involved getting offworld, you're destroyed in the attempt." "You get your goal, but an important memory turns out to be false, tainting your happiness." The important bits are earth vs. offworld, true vs. false memories, getting your goal or not, and whether you or others turn out to be synths or not. Am I missing anything?
Also, ditch the "You gain your goal completely" option. It's not dramatically interesting, and it's easy for a player to not prioritize it.
Paul
Tazio Bettin:
Awesome insight, Paul. Being or not being a replicant may make the difference. Now logic would dictate a rather tragic ending for a replicant, right? The happiness on Earth would be short term, in your example.
My problem would just be that I, instinctively, would pursue a tragic ending (blame Hollywood and the nausea I got with happy endings, I guess).
But you're pointing a definitely good direction, and now I'm going to think how to pursue it. Thanks!!
(side note: in no playtest but Ben's so far did it ever happen that anyone actively pursued being revealed as replicant... that's one reason why I haven't considered the though thoroughly enough, maybe... but it's a definitely crucial point).
Tazio Bettin:
Paul, your idea on separate endings put quite some gears into motion.
I've been thinking about a possible simplification and took your suggestion of ditching the complete success.
It might work with lists like this:
for humans
If your goal is above 3, choose one for each point by which it is higher than 3. If you do not chose one, then the Shadow Speaker has authority on whether and how you get it (have to think this over: the other possibility is "you don't get what you don't choose").
You reach your goal
You stay alive
You save your relationship
If your goal is below 4, you do not get your goal. In addition, for each point by which it is lower than 4, you must choose one:
You end up in mysery: all what made your existence bearable in this dying planet is lost, including any chance to go Offworld
You die
You lose the most precious thing you had
Notice how the two lists are mutually exclusive. If your goal is above 3, then the second list just does not apply.
Also I'm thinking of introducing relationships. One per character, and it's a png controlled by one Shadow Player (not the Shadow Speaker, unless it's a two-players game). These basically work as flags for the Shadow and as something that gives you extra options during the ending phase. I've been talking with Rafu about it.
If I introduce relationships, they'd have to work like this, I think.
Relationship. At any time one of the Shadows (not the Speaker, unless it's a two-players game) may create an NPC to be the Light’s relationship. This character is defined by a name, a generic description and is created by the shadow who introduced it.
Only one relationship per Light. If the light introduces the relationship in game during the framing of a scene, one of the shadows (not the speaker) must control it. If possible, the same shadow who created it. Only the Light can introduce a relationship in a scene.
A relationship can only be revealed as replicant as the result of a culmination, typically in the “if you fail” clause declared by the Shadow Speaker. Same goes with the death of a relationship, because that would count as risking something, a condition for a culmination taking place.
The problematic part is getting a list for the synths. Much more challenging.
Might be:
By default, a synth’s epilogue implies that the character’s identity is wiped clean. It is the same mechanism that made the synth’s true identity hide itself behind a layer of false memories, a cycle that is restarted. The character loses memory of everything that happened during the fiction. His memory was a mere construct, any solace tied to it also is a lie. In addition, choose from the following list.
Plus
You go Offworld
You reach your goal, but lose all you had
You retain your identity
Minus
You are scrapped
Your relationship betrays or abandons you
*****thinking about the third one at the moment*****
Tazio Bettin:
Quote from: Rafu on May 16, 2011, 02:41:15 PM
Tazio, what I suggested at the time was an implementation of an "Otherkind dice" system.
Specifically, it was:
Light player rolls 6dF (and no d6s or anything else)."+"s become Light player's own dice to place (see below), "-"s become Darkness player's, blanks are discarded.Players take turns placing their dice over three "columns": Focus, Blur and Success.Note: since they "take turns", initiative is important. Maybe tie that to current Blur vs. Focus totals?
Focus: by default, a conflict generates 0 focus, unless "+"s are placed here. Number of "+"s in column minus number of "-"s in column equals Focus tokens generated, 0 minimum (conflict cannot result in lost Focus).Blur: by default, each conflict generates 1 Blur token (I suggest physical token is placed in column). 1 more token for each "-" Darkness player puts in this column, minus number of "+"s Light player allocates here (which can result in 0 Blur taken, but can't result in diminished Blur).Success: sum up "+"s and "-"s in column algebraically. Positive sum means Light succeeds at their intent/stated outcome in conflict, negative sum means they fail. Goal score is increased/diminished by the whole sum representing long term progress toward goal (or straying away from it). Note: lots of thing could be made to happen on a 0 sum or "tied" result.
I admit this system still involves manipulating dice with no immediate fictional outcome, but with just 6dF I purport the handling time is negligible. Compared to the d6+dFs method, I expect this one to decrease the impact of randomness and accentuate the feeling one is making choices.
It doesn't work.
I tried this mechanic today and it doesn't work... basically, even with many dice, the Light must go through a great deal of fatigue in order to just avoid the Shadow doing damage to her, by placing - dice either on blur or on success. The Light can thus only play defensive and she will never place dice on the focus column unless she gets a very lucky roll. Adding more dice (i.e. roll 8 instead of 6) of course nothing changes. There is no real choice for the Light, therefore the conflict loses its purpose (to pit the player against a tough choice)... sigh, it did sound like a great idea, but in the end...
I even tried other solutions (roll four dice, you HAVE TO place at least one in each column, and it's only the Light choosing, for instance), but things don't change and the pace of the game becomes incredibly slow...
The way it is now (roll 1d6+4dF, the Shadow removes one) or variants (roll 1d6+4dF, the Shadow rolls one dF and chooses whether to remove one of your dF or switch her dF result with one of yours, for instance), remains the better choice, for now.
I think I'll concentrate on the ending solution, just like Paul suggested. Maybe that's where the real problem is.
The fact is, whenever you roll dice, be it d6+dF or dF only, you have equal chances of having a lucky roll that solves the situation with no real choice.
I'm even thinking of a solution that doesn't involve dice, come to this point. But I'll do it later. First, the ending mechanics.
At least all this pointed where I should proceed first, and this is a precious insight.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page