RPGnet <http://www.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/slib/ads/forward-ad.php?nextURL=http://www.polymancerstudios.com&imageURL=http://www.rpg.net/images/ads/polymancer2.jpg>

	Reviews <http://www.rpg.net/reviews/> 	Forums <http://forum.rpg.net>

News & Press <http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/press.phtml> 	Columns &

Info <http://www.rpg.net/columns/index.phtml> 	RPG Wiki

<http://wiki.rpg.net> 	RPG Shop <http://shop.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/members/>

      The Impossible Dream

    #6: Putting Theory to the Test

*by Hunter Logan*

May 12,2003

It's time to put everything discussed thus far to the test. I've been

describing a hierarchical design process, a process where a designer can

begin with the very general and work to the very specific. This creates

a hierarchy with levels, and the finished play flow looks like an

outline. The top level of the hierarchy provides a broad overview of

game play. Detail is added on lower levels. As detail is added, the

design becomes more specific. In this installment, I will refine my

thoughts about play flow and show how everything I've discussed thus far

can help you produce the functional core of a game system.

Refining the Universal Play flow

I've been flogging the idea of play flow for a while now. My thinking

about it is becoming more refined from the effort. This is the pattern

I've been following:

    * Build to Event.

          o Description. The players discover the current situation.

                + Situation is described. This may set an event in motion.

                + Situation is clarified.

          o Decision. The players decide what to do about the situation.

                + If the situation leads to an event, go to /II. Event./

                + If the situation does not lead to an event, return to

                  /I. Build to Event./

    * Event. Something happens in the game.

          o Decision. Players decide how to handle the event.

          o Resolution. Players resolve the event.

    * Continue Play. Return to /I. Build to Event./

The pattern is useful, but it's not as elegant as it could be. I based

it on the idea that the event is the pivot point. Players build to the

event and then resolve the event with decisions at each step. That isn't

always the case, though. The description given during /I. Build to

Event/ may very well place the characters in the middle of an event.

Then, the event is no longer the pivot point because it already exists.

So, the pivot point becomes event resolution. In response, I devised

this alternative. I think it's more elegant and more accurate.

    * Description. The players discover the current situation.

          o Situation is described.

          o Situation is clarified.

    * Decision Point. The players decide what to do.

          o If the situation requires resolution, go to /III. Resolution

            Point./

          o If the situation does not require resolution, go to /IV.

            Continue Play./

    * Resolution Point. The players resolve the event.

    * Continue Play.

          o Situation is different as a result of player decisions and

            character actions.

          o Return to /I. Description./

An Actual Design

I want to stop playing with theoretical play flows and show how all this

/stuff/ can help a designer create the core of a game. This design is an

experiment I am developing in my spare time. I want to emphasize that

it's not my intent to turn this column into my game designer's journal.

I just needed an example to help validate my theorizing, and this is

what I've got.

The Early Decisions

In Installment #1

<http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/dream01jan03.html>, I suggested

a /Play Flow First/ approach to design. I think play flow is the most

important design consideration, but it's not necessarily the first step

in the design process. I am usually methodical in my work, so for me, it

makes sense to start a design by choosing which player goals I want to

support. From my Big List

<http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/dream10feb03.html>, I decide to

actively support Conqueror, Creator, Storyteller, and Tactician. I may

support other goals along the way, but these are my primary interests at

the start.

These goals lead to my desired BoP. I want my game to have a GM, but the

players may have a lot of control over what happens in the game. I think

my play flow will most resemble example VII in my Balance of Power

<http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/dream20jan03.html> article.

I look briefly at Cohesiveness, Complexity and Verisimilitude. If I

follow my own process, Cohesiveness should fall into line - At least, I

think so. For complexity. I want to keep the actual mechanics as simple

as I can, but I want to provide options. That leaves verisimilitude. I

like action, political intrigue, and a swift pace for play; but I also

want believable results. If pressed, I think player satisfaction is more

important than perfect accuracy. I keep these ideas in the back of my

mind while I write.

The Basic Play Flow

As a result of my early decisions, I rework the play flow as follows:

    * Description.

          o Situation is described. The GM describes the situation for

            the players.

          o Situation is clarified. The players ask questions about

            specific details. The GM answers as appropriate with the

            intent of causing an event.

    * Decision.

          o Players reject the situation.

                + Players attempt to alter the GM's description or set

                  some other event in motion.

                + The GM evaluates the effect of the players' efforts.

                + Continue play. Go to /B. Players accept the situation./

          o Players accept the situation.

                + If the situation requires resolution, go to /III.

                  Resolution./

                + If the situation does not require resolution, proceed

                  to /IV. Continue Play./

    * Resolution. Players resolve the event.

          o Players declare actions.

          o GM and players determine an outcome.

          o Players may use resources to change the outcome

          o GM evaluates the effect of the players' efforts.

                + If the event is not resolved, return to /A. Players

                  declare actions./

                + If the event is resolved, go to /IV. Continue Play./ 

    * Continue Play.

          o Players evaluate current status.

          o Return to /I. Description./ 

Resolution Mechanics

Now, I want to add resolution mechanics. I like to think play flow and

resolution mechanics work together in support of my design goals, but in

many ways, the two are quite independent. A designer can easily devise

and insert any of a thousand different mechanical arrangements into a

given play flow, and each arrangement would change the game play. So, I

think about the problem in terms of my preferences. I like simple

mechanics and the feel of a die roll, but I have a bias toward Ability.

I don't want the encumbrance of heavy math, and I like unified

processes. Exceptions are a hassle, so I want to make sure the method of

rolling dice and evaluating the outcome is fairly constant. After

considerable fiddling, I work out a solution for event resolution:

I begin with */Die Result vs. Challenge/*

where */Die Result = Die Roll + Attribute + Position Modifier/*

*The Die Roll*

I choose 2d6 for the /Die Roll/ because it generates a bell curve. A

player has a 44% chance of getting a result from 6 to 8. I prefer a

narrower, more reliable range of results; but other people prefer to

gamble. They want a wilder ride, so I decide to manipulate the result

curve two different ways: /Lucky/ and /Skilled/. The /Lucky/ roll will

have a much wider range of results and provide risk with reward for the

gambler. The /Skilled/ roll will provide a limited range of results,

allowing player skill and character expertise to carry the day. I plan

to let the player decide at character generation whether he wants a

character that is /Skilled/ or /Lucky/. Here are the die roll

manipulations:

*Skilled Die Roll* Die Roll	Result	Percentage (%)

2	-3	3

3	-2	6

4-5	-1	19

6-8	0	44

9-10	+1	19

11	+2	6

12	+3	3

*Lucky Die Roll* Die Roll	Result	Percentage (%)

2	F*	3

3	-3	6

4	-2	8

5	-1	11

6-8	0	44

9	+1	11

10	+2	8

11	+3	6

12	S**	3

*Automatic Failure. Die Result is 0. Make Penalty Roll curved as shown

and subtract the result.

**Automatic Success. Die Result is 8. Make Bonus Roll curved as shown

and add the result.

*Bonus/Penalty Roll* Die Roll	Result

1-3	0

4	1

5	2

6	3

*The Attribute Range*

Now that the die roll is sorted out, I look at the Attribute. What I

really want to do is establish an attribute range. I think 0 to 8 is a

good range for my purposes. The rating for a competent, trained

character is 4.

*The Position Modifier*

If the character has a significant advantage or disadvantage in the

situation, the GM may supply a Position modifier.

*Position Modifier* Position	Modifier

Terrible	-3 to -5

Bad	-1 to -2

Neutral	0

Good	+1 to +2

Excellent	+3 to +5

*Unopposed Outcome*

The Variable Scale is my primary tool for evaluating the outcome of

unopposed character actions. The GM assigns a Challenge rating to any

action the player declares for his character. If the Die Result equals

or exceeds the Challenge, the character is successful. I added an

Absolute Evaluation, the Quality column, to point out the strength,

efficiency, or outward impression of the character's effort.

*The Variable Scale* Die Result	Quality	Challenge

<0	Disaster	No Roll

0	Pathetic	No Problem

2	Weak	Easy

4	Average	Average

6	Strong	Hard

8	Heroic	Unlikely

>8	Special	Impossible

*Quality Notes*

    * Disaster. The character did something very wrong. The worse the

      result, the worse the disaster.

    * Pathetic. Below lowest acceptable standards. The character failed.

    * Weak. The character does very little, and may look clumsy doing it.

    * Average. The character made a competent effort. For many jobs,

      this is the minimum threshold for success.

    * Strong. The character did well.

    * Heroic. The character did exceptionally well and looked good doing it.

    * Special. The character did something in a way that is truly

      unbelievable. Even people who saw it happen may have a hard time

      believing that it happened. The player describes the outcome.

*Difficulty Notes*

    * No Roll: The GM decides that the player need not roll the dice.

    * No Problem: There is no real reason a competent character should fail.

    * Easy: The job is easy for a competent character.

    * Average: This is common job for a competent character.

    * Hard: This is a tough job, even for a competent character.

    * Unlikely: This is a tough job even for an expert.

    * Impossible: There is no obvious way a character could do this, but

      the player may still want to try. The GM sets the Challenge >8;

      usually 11 with 9 to 15 as a possible range. If the character

      fails, he either has no idea what to do, no idea how to do it, or

      no way to do it.

*Relative Outcome*

Now, I extend my mechanics to include relative outcomes. These are most

useful for opposed resolution, but they're also good for situations

where the GM wants to determine degrees of success or failure. For

opposed actions, the opponents both generate die results and the GM

compares the results using the Relative Scale as an additional tool for

evaluating the outcome of actions. For unopposed actions, the player

rolls against the Challenge and the GM determines the outcome based on

the Relative Scale.

*Relative Scale* Difference	Result

-5/worse	Disaster

-4	Defeat

-1 to -3	Losing

0	Push

+1 to +3	Winning

+4	Victory

+5/better	Special

    * The Difference becomes the Position Modifier if the player wants

      to take additional action or try a different method for resolving

      the event.

    * Disaster. The character has lost and something especially bad has

      happened.

    * Defeat. The character has lost.

    * Losing. The character is getting the worst of it.

    * Push. Opponents are fairly equal in their efforts. The Unopposed

      Scale determines the outcome. Weak die results mean both

      characters failed. Average or better die results mean both

      characters achieve some measure of success.

    * Winning. The character has gained the upper hand.

    * Victory. The character has won.

    * Special. The character has won and something especially good has

      happened. The player describes the outcome.

The Play Flow with Resolution Mechanics

This play flow is rather complicated. I devised five different methods

of resolving events. These are the methods I actually use when running a

game. These methods are /Unopposed/, /Opposed/, /Played/, /Combat/, and

/Chaos/.

    * */Unopposed resolution/* uses the Unopposed Scale for resolution.

      This is my most common method of resolution.

    * */Opposed resolution/* uses a comparison of die results between a

      character and his opponents. This is used for negotiations or

      combat between the PCs and their opponents.

    * */Played resolution/* is based on player intent and character

      ability with only minimal use of die rolls or resources. This is

      both the most demanding and perhaps the most rewarding method of

      resolution.

    * */Combat resolution/* is based on opposed resolution, but it

      includes a countdown for multiple characters where the order of

      events is important. This is strictly for combat. I don't use it

      unless the order of events is crucial, such as in a duel or a

      climactic battle.

    * */Chaos resolution/* is freeform. It includes a countdown, but it

      allows the GM to handle many different, simultaneous actions using

      /Unopposed/, /Opposed/, or /Played/ resolution as needed. This is

      how I prefer to handle situations where players are headed off in

      several directions at once.

    * Description.

          o Situation is described. The GM describes the situation for

            the players.

          o Situation is clarified. The players ask questions about

            specific details. The GM answers as appropriate with the

            intent of causing an event.

    * Decision.

          o Players reject the situation.

                + Players attempt to alter the GM's description or set

                  some other event in motion.

                      # Players declare desired changes.

                      # GM declares the modifiers.

                      # Players roll the dice.

                      # The GM determines the initial outcome.

                      # Players may spend resources to change the outcome.

                      # Once resources are spent, the GM and players

                        determine the final outcome.

                      # Continue play. Go to /B. Players accept the

                        situation./

                + Players accept the situation.

                      # If situation requires resolution, go to /III.

                        Resolution./

                      # If situation does not require resolution,

                        proceed to /IV. Continue Play./

    * Resolution. Players resolve the event.

          o The GM decides how he wants to resolve the event based on

            the situation. He may choose /Unopposed/, /Opposed/,

            /Played/, /Combat/, or /Chaos/.

                + */Unopposed Resolution/*

                      # Declare and Evaluate Intent

                            * The player declares a course of action for

                              his character.

                            * The GM qualifies the action and provides

                              modifiers. 

                      # Determine Initial Outcome

                            * The player rolls the dice.

                            * The GM and player evaluate the die result

                              using the Unopposed Scale and determine

                              what happened.

                      # Determine Final Outcome

                            * The player may spend resources to change

                              the outcome.

                            * The GM and the player evaluate the new

                              result and determine the final outcome.

                      # Determine Status

                            * If the event is not resolved, the player

                              declares a new course of action. Return to

                              /B. Resolution./

                            * If the event is resolved, Proceed to /III.

                              Continue Play./ 

                + */Opposed Resolution/*

                      # Declare and Evaluate Intent

                            * The player declares a course of action for

                              his character.

                            * The GM qualifies the action and provides

                              modifiers. 

                      # Determine Initial Outcome

                            * The player rolls the dice.

                            * The GM and the player evaluate the die

                              result use the unopposed and Relative

                              Scale to determine who has the upper hand.

                                  o All participants have weak die

                                    results: Nothing happens.

                                  o All participants have average die

                                    results: Essentially a draw.

                                  o All participants have strong die

                                    results: All combatants do well.

                                  o A large difference in die results

                                    indicates a clear advantage for some

                                    participants. 

                      # Determine Final Outcome

                            * The player may spend resources to change

                              the outcome.

                            * The GM and the player evaluate the new

                              result and determine the final outcome.

                                  o All participants have weak die

                                    results: All efforts fail.

                                  o All participants have average die

                                    results: Still a draw. No one has a

                                    clear advantage.

                                  o All participants have strong die

                                    results: All participants do well.

                                    In a duel to the death, the

                                    participants may injure or kill each

                                    other.

                                  o A large difference in die results

                                    indicates victory for some

                                    participants. 

                      # Determine Status

                            * The event is not resolved. The player

                              declares a new course of action. Return to

                              /B. Resolution./

                            * The event is resolved. Proceed to /IV.

                              Continue Play./ 

                + */Played Resolution/*

                      # Declare and Evaluate Intent

                            * The player declares a course of action for

                              his character. The detail depends on the

                              situation and the player.

                            * The GM determines qualifies the action and

                              provides modifiers. 

                      # Determine Initial Outcome

                            * The player rolls the dice.

                            * The GM evaluates the die result using the

                              Unopposed Scale to determine the strength

                              of the character's effort.

                      # Determine Final Outcome

                            * The GM roleplays the NPCs involved in the

                              event, describing their actions and

                              declaring their intentions. The player

                              roleplays his character.

                            * The GM and the player evaluate the result

                              based primarily on declarations and

                              roleplaying to determine the final

                              outcome. For the player, effective

                              roleplaying may seal the deal while poor

                              roleplaying may kill it.

                      # Determine Status

                            * The event is not resolved. The player

                              declares a new course of action. Return to

                              /B. Resolution./

                            * The event is resolved. Proceed to /IV.

                              Continue Play./ 

                + */Combat Resolution/*

                      # Initialize Countdown

                            * The players choose combat as their

                              characters' course of action.

                            * The GM qualifies the participants,

                              determines modifiers, and calls for a

                              combat die roll.

                            * The players (including GM) roll dice for

                              combatants.

                            * The GM qualifies die rolls from highest to

                              lowest. The countdown is set at the

                              highest current die result.

                      # Resolution. The players resolve actions for the

                        current count.

                            * If there is a tie, the GM takes steps to

                              resolve the tie.

                            * The players resolve the action for the

                              combatant with the highest die result as

                              an /Opposed/ action.

                            * Players then resolve the action for

                              combatants with the same die result as

                              /Opposed/ actions.

                      # Determine Status

                            * The count decreases by 1.

                            * While the count is above 0.

                                  o If the combat is not resolved.

                                    Return to /b. Resolution/.

                                  o If the combat is resolved. Proceed

                                    to /IV. Continue Play./ 

                            * When the count reaches 0, the combat

                              sequence ends.

                                  o If the combat is not resolved,

                                    return to /a. Initialize Countdown/.

                                  o If the combat is resolved, proceed

                                    to /IV. Continue Play/. 

                + */Chaos Resolution/*

                      # Initialize Countdown

                            * The GM determines the order of player

                              declaration, either around the table (left

                              to right or right to left) or in groups

                              based on the situation.

                            * Resolution. The GM resolves actions in the

                              determined order.

                                  o The GM qualifies the current

                                    character's action, determines

                                    modifier and method of resolution

                                    (/unopposed/, /opposed/, or /played/).

                                  o The GM and player resolve the

                                    current action by the prescribed method.

                            * Determine Status. The GM determines

                              whether or not all actions have been

                              resolved.

                                  o If actions remain for resolution,

                                    the GM advances to the next

                                    character. Return to /ii. Resolution/.

                                  o If all actions are resolved, proceed

                                    to /IV. Continue Play./ 

    * Continue Play.

          o Players evaluate current status.

          o Return to /I. Description./ 

That's it. There is still a lot of work to do to finish this game, but

the core is firmly in place. Next installment, I will discuss the

ubiquitous and useful Play Sample. Thanks for reading.

      What do you think? <http://trio.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110>

Go to forum! <http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=110>