January 31, 2013
Letter of Intent
I want to put this out here, partially for myself, but also for others.
The Escapade Engine is designed to be simple, usable, and fun. It has a heavy focus on integration of other gameplay elements. This either allows for different rules and genres to be played with the same engine, or for multiple gametypes to be played at the same time. That is, I believe, its manifest destiny.
The EE will be free- I am not going to charge money for this. There won't be any books, official dice-sets, or miniature figures. It's supposed to be a good time with friends, no more- the extra money can go to pizza for late-night gaming sessions
This is the same reason I'm not going to turn Adsense onto this blog. Odds are you're here for words of questionable wisdom, not "1 simple trick to perform a coordinated air assault on a stationary target," or similar.
So, whoever you are, game on!
~
"But why not play GURPS?"
-I like English, not physics. The EE has a focus on being easy to use, something GURPS fails at. Same goes for most D&D games, which put too much of an emphasis on combat encounters for my liking.
"I had, like, this really cool idea for a thing. Can I do it?"
-Of course. The rules should be simple enough that you can just wedge it in.
"I'm very impressed, or uniquely offended- how do I get into contact with you?"
-Send me an email at escapadeengine@gmail.com
Symbolism, tone
I'm going to stop talking about story eventually. It will be glorious, and probably involve bunker maps.
The overarching theme, as well as tone, are essential to any RPG. There's dirty and gritty ones, high-minded ones, perfectionist ones, crazy ones, etc. It's a bit harder to express due to the nature of the GM acting as interpreter for the game, but it's still there. Let's trace the theme of Sunburn backwards:
The EMPIRE are a bunch of potato people, grown in vats, computer-chipped, then given guns to accomplish whatever task their masters wish.
The TLA are the standard human sci-fi affair, with spaceships and power armor and whatnot. There's also a pun in there.
By putting the players between a rock, a hard place, and two opposing, faceless empires, the focus is all on surviving the planet, as well as figuring out just what the hell is going on. I could have just as easily drummed up names for either side, but that defeats the purpose. Sunburn isn't about politics, it's about survival. It's much more earthy and grimy than, say, Star Wars. It doesn't matter whose flag you have on your back- there's people shooting at you, and they have their own flag!
~ Intermission ~
The tone of Sunburn is vaguely inspired by Samurai Jack. And Fallout. Everything here comes back to Fallout, somehow.
Most of the game is spent walking in the desert, taking in the beauty of it. An appreciation for nature is supposed to come of this, and eventually compel the players to make a decision completely opposite of the one they made when they come to the surface. It's about finding beauty, and coming to peace with a harsh situation.
This is punctuated by moments of intense combat, and close-quarters encounters with EMPIRE troopers. Not just for dramatic contrast, but also for plot, item mechanics, and to break up the long travels. Also a good chance to get all your ass-kicking done in one place.
This is one thing that so many games miss the boat on- have a theme, as well as a tone. It's not enough to have something which has an immediate draw- give it some staying power, and a style of its own. Otherwise, you're just making Call of Duty. I'd much rather make Sunburn than CoD.
The overarching theme, as well as tone, are essential to any RPG. There's dirty and gritty ones, high-minded ones, perfectionist ones, crazy ones, etc. It's a bit harder to express due to the nature of the GM acting as interpreter for the game, but it's still there. Let's trace the theme of Sunburn backwards:
The EMPIRE are a bunch of potato people, grown in vats, computer-chipped, then given guns to accomplish whatever task their masters wish.
The TLA are the standard human sci-fi affair, with spaceships and power armor and whatnot. There's also a pun in there.
By putting the players between a rock, a hard place, and two opposing, faceless empires, the focus is all on surviving the planet, as well as figuring out just what the hell is going on. I could have just as easily drummed up names for either side, but that defeats the purpose. Sunburn isn't about politics, it's about survival. It's much more earthy and grimy than, say, Star Wars. It doesn't matter whose flag you have on your back- there's people shooting at you, and they have their own flag!
~ Intermission ~
The tone of Sunburn is vaguely inspired by Samurai Jack. And Fallout. Everything here comes back to Fallout, somehow.
Most of the game is spent walking in the desert, taking in the beauty of it. An appreciation for nature is supposed to come of this, and eventually compel the players to make a decision completely opposite of the one they made when they come to the surface. It's about finding beauty, and coming to peace with a harsh situation.
This is punctuated by moments of intense combat, and close-quarters encounters with EMPIRE troopers. Not just for dramatic contrast, but also for plot, item mechanics, and to break up the long travels. Also a good chance to get all your ass-kicking done in one place.
This is one thing that so many games miss the boat on- have a theme, as well as a tone. It's not enough to have something which has an immediate draw- give it some staying power, and a style of its own. Otherwise, you're just making Call of Duty. I'd much rather make Sunburn than CoD.
January 30, 2013
Narrative through Gameplay: Guns and Water
One thing I wanted for Sunburn was to make the weapons variable in nature. Most will come "stock," but a few are better or worse than others. This adds a reason to keep looking for weapons, and gives players something to look forward to with each looting run.
Every time they pick up a weapon, they roll a D20:
1-2: -3
3-4: -2
5-6: -1
7-17: Stats as listed
18: +1
19: +2
20: +3
There's a 55% chance any weapon (knife, machine gun, grenade) will be average. 30% of the time it will be worse than listed, and the remaining 15% of weapons are better than average. Sunburn is a tough game, for serious people with lots of stubble. Also, the players are going to pick up a LOT of guns during the game, so I'm stacking the odds against them. I have no doubt a determined group could get everything in +3s, but it would take a while. It won't affect gameplay a terrible amount, but it still makes gun-collecting a fun activity.
I wanted to do something similar with dehydration. I'm sticking with rule of 3 on this one:
This mechanic regulates fluid levels, and is a backup in case water begins to run short. The tougher players can start to skip every other day, and be fine on 1 canteen per every 2 days. If it gets really hardcore, they can skip to one every 3 days, but that gets risky.
In a narrative sense, this is sacrifice. I have no doubt some characters will be more susceptible to thirst than others, and it becomes a choice for the "strong" (in this case): give them water and starve out yourself, or keep your hide in 100% condition for the up-and-coming fight. Of course, I have serious doubts my group are going to hold water from each other. But you never know...
Enjoy, ponder these thoughts, and come up with a great narrative mechanic for your game.
Every time they pick up a weapon, they roll a D20:
1-2: -3
3-4: -2
5-6: -1
7-17: Stats as listed
18: +1
19: +2
20: +3
There's a 55% chance any weapon (knife, machine gun, grenade) will be average. 30% of the time it will be worse than listed, and the remaining 15% of weapons are better than average. Sunburn is a tough game, for serious people with lots of stubble. Also, the players are going to pick up a LOT of guns during the game, so I'm stacking the odds against them. I have no doubt a determined group could get everything in +3s, but it would take a while. It won't affect gameplay a terrible amount, but it still makes gun-collecting a fun activity.
I wanted to do something similar with dehydration. I'm sticking with rule of 3 on this one:
- Healthy (day 0)
- Parched (day 1, DC 0)
- Heat exhaustion (day 2, DC 4)
- Heat stroke (day 3, DC 8)
- Death (day 4)
This mechanic regulates fluid levels, and is a backup in case water begins to run short. The tougher players can start to skip every other day, and be fine on 1 canteen per every 2 days. If it gets really hardcore, they can skip to one every 3 days, but that gets risky.
In a narrative sense, this is sacrifice. I have no doubt some characters will be more susceptible to thirst than others, and it becomes a choice for the "strong" (in this case): give them water and starve out yourself, or keep your hide in 100% condition for the up-and-coming fight. Of course, I have serious doubts my group are going to hold water from each other. But you never know...
Enjoy, ponder these thoughts, and come up with a great narrative mechanic for your game.
Narrative through Gameplay: Random Encounters
I'm always tooting my horn about narrative joining with gameplay to make RPG experiences: Here's an actual example of it.
Most of Project Sunburn is spent wandering around in the desert, trying to find water. It's a slow-paced intermission between brief periods of intense conflict (bunkers), and a good area for players to absorb atmosphere.
Speaking of atmosphere: Random encounters should have a purpose. A fight (for fighting's sake) is kind of pointless, and just pads for time. Even if the purpose is to reinforce the idea that the world is a dangerous place, random encounters should have a purpose.
In Sunburn, the random encounters have the purpose of showing what a typical day on OHS-817 is like, and letting the players get the complete wandering nomad experience. This might be modified a little bit, but here's the rough draft:
On a D12:
1: EMPIRE patrol (light)
2: EMPIRE patrol (heavy)
3: Drahn eating the remains of an EMPIRE patrol
4: Water-bearing plants (light)
5: Twister!- run through it, or walk around
6: Chasm- spend another day traveling
7-12: Quiet, uneventful day
On a D6:
1-4: Encounter happens during day
5-6: Encounter happens during night
Let's walk through the math and story of this. There's a 1/2 chance nothing happens. Sand, sun, and not a drop of water in sight. This is the "neutral" encounter. The twister and the chasm (1/6 chance) are both "negative" encounters- the players will lose resources, with no gain. This represents the serious hardships in the desert. The first four encounters are positive- the players gain water (the most important resource), sometimes by putting a few bodies below the sand. 1/3 chance of this happening.
So, statistically, there is a 2/3 water gained/lost ratio. Traveling in the desert yields no water, neither do twisters or chasms. But, the encounters yielding water will give a little more than one per player. This will drop player's water supplies gradually, and with enough fluctuation to make it scary.
From a narrative perspective, this is exactly what I wanted- a struggle for survival. Serious enough to warrant a lot of player brain-storming, but not deadly enough to kill the entire party if they get a few bad rolls (there's a reason I only have one chasm and one twister, but two patrols and two non-lethal water sources).
The day and night rolls were purely for aesthetics. I'm not going to apply sleep deprivation to players (yet), and it's mainly so I, as a GM, get to describe it differently. I'll ask who's on watch if it's a night-time encounter, but no major changes to gameplay.
It's a succinct little package designed to characterize the character's lifestyle outside of major encounters, shed some light on the nature of the planet's surface, and put a focus on survivalism. Next post will detail more about the random nature of weapons and water deprivation.
And, for those of you wondering- heavily inspired by Fallout. Wandering around in the wastes, not sure what zany thing you'll find, was one of my favorite parts of the whole experience.
Most of Project Sunburn is spent wandering around in the desert, trying to find water. It's a slow-paced intermission between brief periods of intense conflict (bunkers), and a good area for players to absorb atmosphere.
Speaking of atmosphere: Random encounters should have a purpose. A fight (for fighting's sake) is kind of pointless, and just pads for time. Even if the purpose is to reinforce the idea that the world is a dangerous place, random encounters should have a purpose.
In Sunburn, the random encounters have the purpose of showing what a typical day on OHS-817 is like, and letting the players get the complete wandering nomad experience. This might be modified a little bit, but here's the rough draft:
On a D12:
1: EMPIRE patrol (light)
2: EMPIRE patrol (heavy)
3: Drahn eating the remains of an EMPIRE patrol
4: Water-bearing plants (light)
5: Twister!- run through it, or walk around
6: Chasm- spend another day traveling
7-12: Quiet, uneventful day
On a D6:
1-4: Encounter happens during day
5-6: Encounter happens during night
Let's walk through the math and story of this. There's a 1/2 chance nothing happens. Sand, sun, and not a drop of water in sight. This is the "neutral" encounter. The twister and the chasm (1/6 chance) are both "negative" encounters- the players will lose resources, with no gain. This represents the serious hardships in the desert. The first four encounters are positive- the players gain water (the most important resource), sometimes by putting a few bodies below the sand. 1/3 chance of this happening.
So, statistically, there is a 2/3 water gained/lost ratio. Traveling in the desert yields no water, neither do twisters or chasms. But, the encounters yielding water will give a little more than one per player. This will drop player's water supplies gradually, and with enough fluctuation to make it scary.
From a narrative perspective, this is exactly what I wanted- a struggle for survival. Serious enough to warrant a lot of player brain-storming, but not deadly enough to kill the entire party if they get a few bad rolls (there's a reason I only have one chasm and one twister, but two patrols and two non-lethal water sources).
The day and night rolls were purely for aesthetics. I'm not going to apply sleep deprivation to players (yet), and it's mainly so I, as a GM, get to describe it differently. I'll ask who's on watch if it's a night-time encounter, but no major changes to gameplay.
It's a succinct little package designed to characterize the character's lifestyle outside of major encounters, shed some light on the nature of the planet's surface, and put a focus on survivalism. Next post will detail more about the random nature of weapons and water deprivation.
And, for those of you wondering- heavily inspired by Fallout. Wandering around in the wastes, not sure what zany thing you'll find, was one of my favorite parts of the whole experience.
January 29, 2013
Bite-sized thoughts 2
Villains-
There's a few rules for villains I bumped into while reading on RPGs. It's so simple, but I didn't fully realize it until I thought about it.
Rule 1: They have to be bad. If the players have no moral disagreement, there's no conflict, and he's just another buddy of theirs. So many of my villains had perfectly reasonable intentions, but just went about it in a convoluted, evil way. They were compelling enemies, but none of them were truly hateable.
Rule 2: They have to be visible. Keep reminding the players that there's a bad, bad dude out there. He's on billboards, his minions are constantly looting caravans, he's screwing with the stock market, or he's so popular everyone is talking about him. Be creative, and remember that his actions (and the results of) are just as good for face-time.
Rule 3: They have to be a legitimate threat. No good if the players just stomp on him. He learns from his mistakes, switches up his strategies, and is always looking for allies, just like the PCs are. I was watching Logan's Run the other day, and Box (robot who catches and freezes people for food) fails at this. Forty seconds of fisticuffs and being shot at, and he falls over. Complete push-over, in more ways than one.
Apocalypse Proliferation-
We are living in a post-apocalyptic world. A great empire rose above all others, and controlled the world. It was called Rome. Now, it is no more- pictures on a wall, words in history books, and a memory of a simpler, more barbaric time.
I'm forced to believe "apocalypse" has replaced the word "disaster," due to its biblical undertones. Almost every RPG I can think of has ruins. Someone lived in them once, but now they don't. There's a reason. It could just be that they made newer buildings, or they could have been scourged by the sun. Either way, "apocalypse" is hardly a blanket term, and I'm trying to cut back on using it as one.
Dice rolls/surprise rounds-
In any non-threatening situation (no time limit, no one trying to kill you), dice should auto-crit. Maximum possible roll, automatically. For one, it's boring as hell to roll for everything. For another, it gives the surprising party an edge in combat, infiltration, etc.
Speech is Combat-
I love Fallout. To my grave, I love it. But, the speech skill is so gaudy. "I'm one point short of being able to convince you to drop dead for me. That's how I roll." There's no intensity, no interaction- like real talking.
So, my theory is to use an engine similar to combat. Everyone who participates in the conversation is in "the grid." Anyone who chooses to not be a part of it isn't represented, so they cannot give or take flak. Then, the combatants go around using various attacks- joke, boast, coerce, admire, etc. Slowly, the enemy's "distrust" is whittled down, until they'll work with you, or are convinced of X, etc.
Because trust is something I'm leaving to the players (not the characters), anyone important will also have a "patience" bar. If it runs out (by making successful attacks against players) the character thinks they've had enough, and exits combat.
It's not a perfect solution, but it's an improvement. It's versatile, interactive, and has parallels in actual conversation. If you aren't even good at talking, your character should have an option to remain in the conversation, and buff someone by just agreeing with them. Nodding, saying "yeah, truth," etc.
I'm not going to implement this for a while. Sunburn is already too damn large. But, this is definitely going to happen. Press X to convince the man to not kill himself.
There's a few rules for villains I bumped into while reading on RPGs. It's so simple, but I didn't fully realize it until I thought about it.
Rule 1: They have to be bad. If the players have no moral disagreement, there's no conflict, and he's just another buddy of theirs. So many of my villains had perfectly reasonable intentions, but just went about it in a convoluted, evil way. They were compelling enemies, but none of them were truly hateable.
Rule 2: They have to be visible. Keep reminding the players that there's a bad, bad dude out there. He's on billboards, his minions are constantly looting caravans, he's screwing with the stock market, or he's so popular everyone is talking about him. Be creative, and remember that his actions (and the results of) are just as good for face-time.
Rule 3: They have to be a legitimate threat. No good if the players just stomp on him. He learns from his mistakes, switches up his strategies, and is always looking for allies, just like the PCs are. I was watching Logan's Run the other day, and Box (robot who catches and freezes people for food) fails at this. Forty seconds of fisticuffs and being shot at, and he falls over. Complete push-over, in more ways than one.
Apocalypse Proliferation-
We are living in a post-apocalyptic world. A great empire rose above all others, and controlled the world. It was called Rome. Now, it is no more- pictures on a wall, words in history books, and a memory of a simpler, more barbaric time.
I'm forced to believe "apocalypse" has replaced the word "disaster," due to its biblical undertones. Almost every RPG I can think of has ruins. Someone lived in them once, but now they don't. There's a reason. It could just be that they made newer buildings, or they could have been scourged by the sun. Either way, "apocalypse" is hardly a blanket term, and I'm trying to cut back on using it as one.
Dice rolls/surprise rounds-
In any non-threatening situation (no time limit, no one trying to kill you), dice should auto-crit. Maximum possible roll, automatically. For one, it's boring as hell to roll for everything. For another, it gives the surprising party an edge in combat, infiltration, etc.
Speech is Combat-
I love Fallout. To my grave, I love it. But, the speech skill is so gaudy. "I'm one point short of being able to convince you to drop dead for me. That's how I roll." There's no intensity, no interaction- like real talking.
So, my theory is to use an engine similar to combat. Everyone who participates in the conversation is in "the grid." Anyone who chooses to not be a part of it isn't represented, so they cannot give or take flak. Then, the combatants go around using various attacks- joke, boast, coerce, admire, etc. Slowly, the enemy's "distrust" is whittled down, until they'll work with you, or are convinced of X, etc.
Because trust is something I'm leaving to the players (not the characters), anyone important will also have a "patience" bar. If it runs out (by making successful attacks against players) the character thinks they've had enough, and exits combat.
It's not a perfect solution, but it's an improvement. It's versatile, interactive, and has parallels in actual conversation. If you aren't even good at talking, your character should have an option to remain in the conversation, and buff someone by just agreeing with them. Nodding, saying "yeah, truth," etc.
I'm not going to implement this for a while. Sunburn is already too damn large. But, this is definitely going to happen. Press X to convince the man to not kill himself.
January 27, 2013
The ideal Tabletop-Gamer
This one's really opinionated. It represents my views as of now, and is not an absolute truth. It's just what I think is best at the moment.
We game for escapism. Everyone does. It's why we watch TV, play video games, and go to art galleries. Escapism isn't necessarily pretending you're an elf in space, but just NOT being who you are every day of the week.
Mark Hermanson is a good guy to be, but sometimes I want to be someone else. Watch the movie "Darkon," they've got some good quotes on this one.
So, my first suggestion for an ideal player is someone who wants to escape from real life for a little bit. Look for the quiet ones who wear dark colors. Someone who doesn't fit in, and really doesn't want to. The outcasts, loners, and social pariahs that our world creates have some of the most amazing things in their heads.
Gaming is storytelling. The best players (doubly so, the best GMs) are the ones who want to make a convincing narrative that everyone can enjoy. The game is secondary, but still a very strong factor. For this reason, people with Roleplaying experience (and not just from team-building exercises at work) are some of the best gamers.
Similarly, players with experience in creative writing, movie and literary appreciation, or even a thoughtful video gamer are also good candidates. Someone who can understand story, and have an awareness of the devices surrounding them, will mesh incredibly smoothly with a good group. Problem-solvers usually aren't good, because Gaming isn't about finishing the game- it's about playing it.
The journey is more important than the destination... but the destination is still pretty awesome.
Creative, enthusiastic minds are the best for creative characters. Even if the character is really boring, the player should be able to make them into a compelling piece of the narrative. This one I'd put as less important, because compelling stories still happen around otherwise bland characters, especially if the players catch on.
These are some loose thoughts, accumulated over the last couple of weeks. I was considering putting this in Bite-sized thoughts 2, but it's a little big for that.
Recap:
And, in the end, that's really all that matters: having a positive experience.
We game for escapism. Everyone does. It's why we watch TV, play video games, and go to art galleries. Escapism isn't necessarily pretending you're an elf in space, but just NOT being who you are every day of the week.
Mark Hermanson is a good guy to be, but sometimes I want to be someone else. Watch the movie "Darkon," they've got some good quotes on this one.
So, my first suggestion for an ideal player is someone who wants to escape from real life for a little bit. Look for the quiet ones who wear dark colors. Someone who doesn't fit in, and really doesn't want to. The outcasts, loners, and social pariahs that our world creates have some of the most amazing things in their heads.
Gaming is storytelling. The best players (doubly so, the best GMs) are the ones who want to make a convincing narrative that everyone can enjoy. The game is secondary, but still a very strong factor. For this reason, people with Roleplaying experience (and not just from team-building exercises at work) are some of the best gamers.
Similarly, players with experience in creative writing, movie and literary appreciation, or even a thoughtful video gamer are also good candidates. Someone who can understand story, and have an awareness of the devices surrounding them, will mesh incredibly smoothly with a good group. Problem-solvers usually aren't good, because Gaming isn't about finishing the game- it's about playing it.
The journey is more important than the destination... but the destination is still pretty awesome.
Creative, enthusiastic minds are the best for creative characters. Even if the character is really boring, the player should be able to make them into a compelling piece of the narrative. This one I'd put as less important, because compelling stories still happen around otherwise bland characters, especially if the players catch on.
These are some loose thoughts, accumulated over the last couple of weeks. I was considering putting this in Bite-sized thoughts 2, but it's a little big for that.
Recap:
- A desire to escape reality for a few hours
- Previous experience as a role-player
- A basic understanding of narrative mechanics and storytelling
- Patience to be in the game, and enjoy the experience, rather than trying to finish it
- Creativity to lend vibrancy and compelling personalities to characters
And, in the end, that's really all that matters: having a positive experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)