tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post5275206373939520110..comments2024-03-27T01:28:28.346-07:00Comments on False Machine: Sticky Goblinspjamesstuarthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-42488161439466162302021-03-04T06:07:31.391-08:002021-03-04T06:07:31.391-08:00You've put the thoughts in my brain directly i...You've put the thoughts in my brain directly into words<br /><br />Too often have my city encounters resulted in "we turn around, and walk the other way, and pretend that we saw nothing".<br /><br />Like, I don't care all that much whether or not the players can have a meaningful impact on the encounter. I probably should, but I don't. I just need ways to make the above method the *worst* way of resolving stuff, especially for players that are busy and want to avoid fuss. Without being too ham-handed about it either... hmm.Spwackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07247063374457045751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-12816551035315994872021-03-04T01:53:43.956-08:002021-03-04T01:53:43.956-08:00Right now am trying to go hard on Demon-Bone Sarco...Right now am trying to go hard on Demon-Bone Sarcophagus and Queen Mab.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-24963831172753029562021-03-03T07:39:57.963-08:002021-03-03T07:39:57.963-08:00It seems to me that Neutrality & Consequences ...It seems to me that Neutrality & Consequences are pretty much the same thing.<br /><br />Thinking about these elements from the perspective of the players, Openness seems to be an evaluation of "HOW can I interact with this piece of fiction? What is likely to happen to _my character_ if I take action X, or action Y, or action Z?" The more of those vectors that line up with the player/character's motivations, the more "open" the encounter is. The design challenge is to evoke in the players ideas about what those actions might be, and to align them with player motives.<br /><br />"Neutrality" and "Consequence" to me both seem to be asking, "WHY should I interact with this piece of fiction? What is likely to happen to _the world_ if I take action X, or Y, or Z?" The more of these outcomes that the player/character finds "interesting", the less neutral or more consequential the encounter is. The design challenge is to evoke in the players ideas about what those outcomes might be, and to align them with player interest.<br /><br />There's probably a good third tentpole to be lashed on here, but imo HOW and WHY are probably the two most important questions to answer so maybe that is sufficient.Jason Reidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02749906366794684228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-37869763303272491342021-03-03T06:59:58.354-08:002021-03-03T06:59:58.354-08:00What products are you working on these days?What products are you working on these days?Shivahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01221965860071283428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-31710429170789359152021-03-01T11:15:18.442-08:002021-03-01T11:15:18.442-08:00I also think these are useful concepts, especially...I also think these are useful concepts, especially in the (openness, grabbiness, tail) version. <br /><br />My gut feeling is that in general you want the average encounter to be highly open, moderately grabby, and have _some_ tail. And across all encounters you want a distribution around those, with the "tail" one being flatter (i.e. more prone to extremes).Rob Alexanderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06382136438003995340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-31292570451998699482021-02-27T03:36:43.805-08:002021-02-27T03:36:43.805-08:00Yes sustained interaction with a milieu is a key t...Yes sustained interaction with a milieu is a key thing with deepening all of these, especially Encounter tail. pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-16707169998792315092021-02-27T03:35:41.401-08:002021-02-27T03:35:41.401-08:00Hmm, maybe this is better/clearer
Open - How easy...Hmm, maybe this is better/clearer<br /><br />Open - How easy and simple would it be for the PCs to dick about with this.<br /><br />Grabby - will *non-interaction* stick to the PCs. Can they just walk away with no connsequences.<br /><br />Encounter Tail - how big and how deep are the consequences of this encounter;<br />A - for the PCs play. <br />B - for the *players*.<br />C - in the imagined world, even if it doesn't affect play.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-10144422498455904042021-02-27T03:16:59.216-08:002021-02-27T03:16:59.216-08:00AhhhhAhhhhpjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-8107282845761399562021-02-26T14:05:29.639-08:002021-02-26T14:05:29.639-08:00I think it makes sense. Actions need to have conse...I think it makes sense. Actions need to have consequences, though i think we could differentiate between known and unknown consequences. Going back to the quarantined city scenario, the party might think it's a no or low consequence scenario if they have no idea who those involved are (likely in most pre-written adventures since the party tends to be "strangers" to the adventure by default)unless you design in the facts that need to known in an interactive manner (i.e., not in the backstory but through previous interactions, or clues (their clothing/ids of stature for the example).Shivahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01221965860071283428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-73247228575212775782021-02-26T06:36:55.032-08:002021-02-26T06:36:55.032-08:00Oops, that was a typo on my part. I meant "A ...Oops, that was a typo on my part. I meant "A low Interactivity encounter with low Consequences might as well be an empty room."<br /><br />I thought I understood the post (I enjoyed reading it at least), even if I would slice things a little differently. But maybe I'm mistaken.Mus Rattushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12000159318854652875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-80021644611741518902021-02-26T06:30:18.066-08:002021-02-26T06:30:18.066-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Mus Rattushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12000159318854652875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-31540420610087703332021-02-25T13:38:09.852-08:002021-02-25T13:38:09.852-08:00I think these are useful and original concepts.
In...I think these are useful and original concepts.<br />In these terms, I try and keep openness pretty high; most elements I plan into a particular environment can slot the party unless it's a background drama that is driving world events, in which case the party interface for it comes in the form of smaller scenes specific to a locale.<br />In a murderhobo campaign, the party are (logically) a shiny object to most of the movers and shakers they'll encounter; something to be employed, exiled, interfered with or denied to the enemy. A wandering force/force multiplier that is flexible, expendable, deniable and unaccountable to a higher authority besides the decision maker and the gods. In other campaigns the party are usually a force with an impetus towards authority and action; nobles, Jedi, Space Marines, policemen. <br />I put in high-neutrality situations that are interesting or experimental but not necessary; these are teasers that the players can enter if they want to, but that I don't plan for them to be critical.<br />My high-consequence encounters are usually setpiece, but have *very* long tails; the fall of the society the PCs are embedded in, the destruction of a colony they have helped develop, a twenty-degree cooling in global temperatures, the destruction of the highest good god. <br />Again, I think these are useful concepts. I use conceptual frameworks from many different people when I analyze my own output; for example, the idea that an adventure can have a premise that isn't pre-answered by the GM but rather by how the players live it out ingame, or the idea of conceptual density, or Scrap's idea of being a good glove, or your idea of psychic energy.<br />I suppose one measure for stickiness in murderhobo campaigns is how much it will change the *conditions* in which the players operate; if they don't engage with the scene, how much will their action or inaction affect the environment in which they operate regardless of their atomization? This might be a worthwhile tradeoff for them, and may make for an interesting decision one way or anotherHer Christmas Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09445850026904816000noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-72873800062888055282021-02-25T12:08:35.566-08:002021-02-25T12:08:35.566-08:00But is an empty room really something you can inte...But is an empty room really something you can interact with? For interaction don't there have to be results of some kind?<br /><br />sigh - now I've confused myself again. I think what it is is I just wrote a bad, blurry post I think.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-41916157021613823362021-02-25T12:06:59.335-08:002021-02-25T12:06:59.335-08:00Good points. The existence of factions is a key th...Good points. The existence of factions is a key thing.pjamesstuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13288777018721199748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-65988362198823150102021-02-24T11:10:23.349-08:002021-02-24T11:10:23.349-08:00If I understand correctly, neutrality is about eff...If I understand correctly, neutrality is about effecting the world (ignoring a beggar won't change the world significantly), while consequences are more personal (an helpful blind dog isn't very useful). Which makes me think that the quarantined city example is much more about consequence (the factions would likely interact with the PCs) and not neutrality. Maybe another example for a very non-neutral encounter would be witnessing a duel between two heads of states. It's not very open, but if the PCs change the outcome of the duel, it would effect the game world immensely without necessarily making the winner like them too much. <br /><br />I think that, in general, Hot Spring Island has many polar encounters. There're many fine balances which the PCs can stumble into and throw into chaos.<br />I would even say that factions are probably one of the easiest ways to increase the polarity of encounters, while not always increasing the consequences, at least not as much. <br /><br /> wivrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00480440847984887892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4522018539311056682.post-53855969129616315862021-02-24T10:16:06.289-08:002021-02-24T10:16:06.289-08:00The concept of Openness seems pretty clear, but I ...The concept of Openness seems pretty clear, but I am also having trouble separating Neutrality from Consequences.<br /><br />As I understand it, in this framework, an encounter is more neutral if it less Open, or of lower Consequence. <br />Or I might think of Neutrality as potential moral/psychological Consequences, as opposed to social/physical Consequences.<br /><br />---<br /><br />If I were to divide things up, I might do it like this:<br /><br />Avoidable - can the PCs (more or less) easily avoid this encounter?<br />Interactive - can the PCs (more or less) easily interact with this encounter? <br /><br />High or low in either category, forms it's own cartesian grid:<br /> Difficult to Avoid, Easy to Interact | Easy to Avoid or Interact <br /> Difficult to Avoid or Interact | Easy to Avoid, Difficult to Interact <br /><br />I think Difficult to Avoid should be mostly... avoided. But you can't run forever.<br />Eay to Interact with is a good thing. In a power-fantasy game, as many encounters as possible should be easy for PCs to interact with.<br />In other games, Hard to Interact encounters might show the PCs' standing in the world, or encourage them to find more oblique methods of interaction. Encounters that are easy to Interact with in some ways, and harder in others can be good to give different PCs and play-styles opportunity to shine.<br />Avoidance is about the encounter, not its consequences. Avoidable consequences are simply lesser consequences. In this framework, the locked-down city wouldn't make the assault encounter less avoidable, just more consequential. If it happened in a jail cell next to (or with!) the PCs, that would make it less avoidable.<br /><br />Consequences<br />What do the PCs stand to gain or lose by interacting with the Encounter? If they avoid it?<br /> Material - what can be gained, what danger will be faced<br /> Informational - what can be learned<br /> Social - how will the opinions of other groups/individuals change<br /> Moral/Psychological - how will the players or characters feel about interacting (or not) with this encounter? what will it Say About Them?<br /><br />A Interactivity encounter with low Consequences might as well be an empty room.<br />An encounter the PCs can screw around with but having little consequence might be fun, but too many of them might not. So, you'll probably want some Consequences, and variety is nice.<br />The Interactivity/Avoidability of an encounter can certainly affect the Social or Moral/Psychological Consequences of an encounter.Mus Rattushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12000159318854652875noreply@blogger.com