Furry RPG thoughts
So, back from AC, and thinking a bit about furry wares in general. It's really cool to see how there are now multiple outlets (And I'm sure I'm forgetting some!) for long-form furry fiction; it really seems like this is one place where print-on-demand has actually somewhat fulfilled its promise.
There was also a new RPG, Shard, with ridiculously ( Read more... )
There was also a new RPG, Shard, with ridiculously ( Read more... )
That's a lot to think about. :) I'll post some initial thoughts here, but you've given me things to think about for quite a while. Thank you!
Reply
Furries do well with descriptivity already - this is actually a reason to put more, not less. It's something that appeals, which makes it a draw into the system; the ability to taxonomize your character and create something you can compare to other peoples' characters. This is the key behind the "let me tell you about my character" impulse, and also behind the [geek|furry|dragon|foo] codes that static across peoples' email signatures. Embrace it; it's the vehicle for getting people to play with your system.
Conflict resolution needs to be swift and unambiguous; as such, it probably needs to work without a randomizer insofar as it's present. What conflict resolution might mean, in this context, is figuring out how far you can narrate someone else's character before you've overstepped. (Look at the way that people begin to narrate for each other as a scene goes on on a muck. People who know each other can step over the lines of their character; people who are less intimate need to work more in terms of the intention-acceptance model.) This may look less like dice, and more like a way of divining who has authority over any particular action's chances of success.
Narrative drive is the biggest benefit, I think, but it's the hardest. I think if you can answer how to bring stories out of freeform interactions, you solve many interesting issues. I think a GM is unworkable, because it implies a privileged agent in the interaction, and that means you need someone to act as that agent - but a mechanism for pushing narrative goals into the system might be workable somehow - I want to think on this...
Reply
A thought comes to mind for the first of these: For setting establishment, it seems like if you can't come up with something specifically player-privileged (i.e. a unanimity of setting, either established by the event organizer or by a meeting of the various players) or via some randomizer. The back of my mind tickles with the notion of "plot cards" of some sort, that can be used to draw the foundations, plot complications, etc. It's an old cliche', but "in a bar" and "fleeing authority" aren't bad hooks and there are ways to fit almost any character into those molds. The trick would be to make them as meta-setting agnostic as possible, and also not limiting to the nature of the characters people would bring in (implying a potential veto). Alternatively, one of the more common ways of handling this is that via popular acclaim or democratic selection, one person does most of the scene-setting, giving them a pseudo-GM role without being all that privileged in actual play.
With one-on-one freeform narrative, it's fairly easy - challenge/response is the norm in this situation. When you get multiple actors, it can be difficult to pass the narrative effectively, especially if one character has a plausable reason for monologuing. I'd considered the notion of a plot token that would get passed back and forth, but that's both too formalized and limiting if you have multiple thins going on at once (unlike on the mucks, you can't jsut clone an item on the fly RL. That would be the epitome of "game-breaking mechanic")
Challenge/reward dynamics strike me as potentially contentious as well. Freeform, to me at least, implies a lack of traditional character advancement schema - levels, XP, character points, etc. Would this even need a reward mechanic, and if so, how would such a reward be determined? (the extra "best RP moment" XP bonus that players vote on at the end of the session is one way to handle this, but I'm sure there are others)
I apologize if this seems disjoint - I'm writing it between meetings.
Reply
One major question gets implied by these: In what contexts would such a game be played? On a muck, the answers to all three of these are implied: Setting is established by where in the game-world the players gather, narrative control is handled by the general "round-robin" style of courtesy that's evolved in multiplayer scenes, and advancement is non-existent. In other contexts, of course, these may vary.
Reply
I think some of the things you mentioned there, the plot cards, could be tied into the whole narrative control question here. I really like the concept that some indie RPGs have that players are rewarded, or at least encouraged, to throw complicating factors into the situation themselves. This could provide a good give-and-take dynamic with more than two players.
As far as rewards, I'm not sure it's necessary, like you said, freeform RP doesn't have them, and I can't say I miss them. If this were usually in a convention game context, though, a best/coolest/cleverest contribution award might be appropriate, though. :) It seems kinda standard in event games.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment