dri-aido.xml
branchecjdr
changeset 0 9119688b1f02
child 30 bbd7d782878a
--- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/dri-aido.xml	Mon Dec 26 19:21:22 2005 -0500
@@ -0,0 +1,476 @@
+<?xml version='1.0'?>
+<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.2//EN"
+          "/usr/share/sgml/docbook/dtd/xml/4.2/docbookx.dtd">
+<article>
+  <articleinfo>
+    <title>Mood-based Events Resolution Mechanics</title>
+    <subtitle>The DRI/AIDO Events Resolution Taxonomy</subtitle>
+    <abstract>
+      <para>In this article, the author propose a taxonomy of
+        resolution mechanics in role-playing game.  The objective of
+        this taxonomy is to provide a basis for orienting the choice
+        of a resolution system not based on the action being
+        simulated, but instead on the mood that the GM want to create.
+        For this, the taxonomy will be compare to other existing model
+        of events resolution, such as the DKF hierarchy, and especially
+        its subelements, which are FatS, FitM and FatE.</para>
+    </abstract>
+    <keywordset>
+      <keyword>resolution mechanics</keyword>
+      <keyword>Drama-Kharma-Fortune (DKF) hierarchy</keyword>
+      <keyword>Fortune-at-the-Start (FatS)</keyword>
+      <keyword>Fortune-in-the-Middle (FitM)</keyword>
+      <keyword>Fortune-at-the-End (FatE)</keyword>
+      <keyword>DRI resolution taxonomy</keyword>
+      <keyword>AIDO events taxonomy</keyword>
+      <keyword>role-playing game</keyword>
+      <keyword>system design</keyword>
+      <keyword>play flow</keyword>
+    </keywordset>
+    <author>
+      <firstname>Fabien</firstname>
+      <surname>Niñoles</surname>
+    </author>
+    <copyright>
+      <year>2003</year>
+      <holder>Fabien Niñoles</holder>
+    </copyright>
+
+    <revhistory>
+      <revision>
+        <revnumber>0.1cvs :</revnumber>
+        <date>2003-01-01</date>
+        <revdescription>
+          <para>Initial release (incomplete).</para>
+        </revdescription>
+      </revision>
+    </revhistory>
+  </articleinfo>
+  <section id="intro">
+    <title>Introduction</title>
+    
+    <para>I try for a long time to create a truely generic
+      role-playing system, able to handle a large range of both scale,
+      but also genre or atmosphere of role-playing game.  Those goals
+      were often considered like a chimera impossible to reach, since
+      some playing goals are just complementary to each other, as
+      opposed to each other by their very own nature.  Still, I was
+      sure that it was possible although the idea were very vague.
+      Although some people will put this confidence as a symptom of my
+      great stubborness, pointing to the many failures of so-call
+      generic role-playing systems in the market to prove it, I think
+      I have an asset on my side: I GMing myself for more than 15
+      years in the same world with a very high variety of genres and
+      settings that I must mixed together for the pleasure of my
+      players.  So, if I can do it, why no other people could?
+      Except, if from words to practice there is a big step, the step
+      backward is often as harder!</para>
+
+    <para>Looking back at other role-playing systems, and on my many
+      tries to adapt each of them to different settings, I find out
+      that the same settings elements (like magic, combat, health,
+      etc.) but with very different mechanics depending on the mood
+      they want to create.  Also, in most role-playing game creators
+      forums, if you ask people what is the most important thing in
+      creating a role-playing game, it's the mood, or the flavour of
+      your role-playing game.  Not the system or the setting, but the
+      mood, the genre.  Too often, mood and settings where mix
+      together, but is it true?  In this case, shouldn't we stop to
+      create mechanics based on specific settings and instead, goes
+      directly to the mood, the real thing that make all the
+      difference between an interesting role-playing game experience
+      and a boring one?</para>
+
+    <para>This paper is a first attempt to elaborate on what such a
+      role-playing game must contain.  In fact, it goes a little more
+      farther than this, as well as a little bit narrower.  We will
+      study a single aspect of role-playing game, tough an important
+      one, which is the events resolution system, but we will study it
+      in depth, questionning even the way GM treat this aspect of
+      role-playing game, but keeping our focus on how the mechanics of
+      events resolution can be used to create a specific mood.</para>
+
+  </section>
+
+  <section id="whatisit">
+    <title>What is events resolution?</title>
+
+    <para>What's events resolution?  Ask in the role-playing community
+      and you'll end up with a lot of answer which more or less
+      resumed to something like <quote>It's when you're rolling
+      dice.</quote>.  Well, this may be exact for some rpg but clearly
+      not for all of them and especially this is a little bit short to
+      define what's a major component of all role-playing games.  For
+      the purpose of this article, I want to use a little more broad
+      definition, which will be develop a little more later but we can
+      be first state as:</para>
+
+    <blockquote>
+      <para>The process by which the players decide on the follow-up
+      of the current role-playing situation.</para>
+    </blockquote>
+
+    <para>This definition is quite broad.  In fact, a whole
+      role-playing game session can be resume with it: a situation is
+      described, some options are offered and players decide, in
+      accordance with their common judgements, rules, and/or some
+      randomization mechanism, what will happen next.  This new
+      situation can then create another resolution events, forming a
+      long chain of events, or, sometime, the resolution itself
+      include it's own chain of more specific events.  For example,
+      the initial situation can be that the players families where all
+      kill in a monstruous carnage.  Players decide to investigate and
+      get some justice for their family.  The possible outcome is that
+      either the players get their revenge or not.  Which one will be
+      chosen call for a whole chain of events that make an adventure
+      by itself, including a lot of different resolutions.</para>
+
+    <para>Some people will disagree with this very broad approach, too
+      generic to correctly representing a role-playing game session
+      with its non-linearity, multiple subplots and surprised events
+      coming into play.  On the contrary, I find it important to
+      concentrate on such details.  Too many role-playing session have
+      seen its players lost their first goal and often, concentrating
+      back to the primary goal of the game help GM and even players to
+      focus back on the game and add some coherence to the whole
+      story.  We will see also how this can help GM resolved events in
+      a more meaningful way by opening their usual methods of
+      resolution for typical situations.</para>
+
+    <section id="previousworks">
+      <title>Previous works on event resolution</title>
+
+      <para>Although I doesn't pretend to make a complete presentation
+        of every studies on events resolution, I should at least
+        mention the work of others that influence a lot this
+        taxonomy.</para>
+
+      <para>First of all, the most popular model for events resolution
+        is clearly Johnathan Tweet's Drama-Kharma-Fortune (or
+        <abbrev>DKF</abbrev>) hierarchy.  First publish into Everway
+        RPG, the work was taken back by Ron Edwards which make it an
+        important part of his role-playing game theory.  The DKF
+        hierarchy is mostly concern with the resolution mechanics
+        itself, defining the choice of resolution mechanics as a
+        hierarchy where more and more control at give from the players
+        to the rules and some randomizers like dice.  So, the
+        principle of the hierarchy is to emphasis on players control
+        instead of rules, an approach I will also try to
+        follow.</para>
+
+      <para>Children of the DKF, the Fortune-at-the-Start (or
+        <abbrev>FatS</abbrev>), Fortune-in-the-Middle (or
+        <abbrev>FitM</abbrev>) and Fortune-at-the-End (or
+        <abbrev>FatE</abbrev>), is another taxonomy of resolution
+        mechanics that try to study more specifically how Fortune
+        resolution can be used to favorised players control over rules
+        or fortune control.  It is slightly different of the DKF
+        itself, but kept mostly the same point of view, that I will
+        try to include in this taxonomy.</para>
+
+      <para>Finally, I want to include the excellent work of Hunter
+        Logan in the Impossible Dream column of RPG.net.
+        Specifically, M. Logan talk about Play Flow, in a very similar
+        although more detailed approach as I used to describe events
+        resolution, as well as Balance of Power, which explain how the
+        Play Flow can influence the balance between players, GM and
+        rules.  I will compare the work of M. Logan with my own work
+        in a later section.  M. Logan also get back the three ladders
+        of the DKF hierarchy but used it in a more
+        <emphasis>dissecting</emphasis> way to describe resolution
+        mechanics.  He has however the good taste to used a different
+        naming so that we not confused his definitions with those of
+        misters Tweet and Edwards, calling his Three Means Chance,
+        Ability and Intent.  Currently only used to describe different
+        resolutioons mechanics, by the time of this writing, we still
+        don't know how M. Logan want to use it in correlation with his
+        Play Flow and Balance of Power.</para>
+
+      <para>Another interesting reading is <ulink
+        url="http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/collists/ruleslaw.html">The
+        Travel of Mendes Pinto</ulink> by Sergio Mascarenhas.  This
+        amateur role-playing game is not only excellent but a very
+        good reading for all the notes and explanation that the author
+        give on his design.  The section 4 about action is especially
+        relevant here, since the author elaborate his own theory about
+        game action resolution, which consist in a context, a goal, a
+        performance and an outcome.  I will also try to respond to the
+        elements appearing there and to the excellent ideas that
+        populate the game.</para>
+
+      <para>This resume quite briefly what I consider as the most
+        important elements of actual Role Playing theories about
+        resolution mechanics.  This is by far a complete survey since
+        such survey is very hard to done (must libraries doesn't keep
+        a good set of role-playing theories books, or even magazine,
+        and also, must of the litterature on the subject was done in
+        either commercial rpg, special editors magazines, and other
+        difficult to consult elements).  I will be please to heard
+        about different approach to events resolutions, especially
+        those that break with the current tendancy to consider events
+        resolution strictly in terms of rules mechanics.</para>
+      
+    </section>
+
+  </section>
+
+  <section id="DRI">
+    <title>DRI Events Resolution Taxonomy</title>
+
+    <para>What the DRI stand for?  DRI stands for Definition,
+      Resolution and Interpretation, the three steps involved in every
+      event resolutions mechanics.  The view of DRI on event
+      resolution makes it very near the definition of play flow, as
+      specify by Hunter Logan in his RPG.net's column <quote>The
+      Impossible Dream</quote>, and as such can be considered the
+      central element of any RPG, whatever freeform or rules-light it
+      can be.  However, although this taxonomy take good notice of
+      some narrative aspect of RPG, it doesn't explore as in depth it
+      could have.  Doing so, it neglected an important part of RPG,
+      part which can play a great role to the immersion of the player.
+      However, the interest of the method are more into the
+      interactive elements of narration, as well as of the decision
+      process in RPG, a very different topic.  So, to avoid to mix
+      thing too much and having a too broad and often useless tool,
+      the taxonomy accept to be less general than other method and
+      keep focus on its primary goal: offering a good understanding of
+      the resolution mechanics of RPG, so that the designer as well as
+      the game master can choose the best fit for the system or the
+      situation at hand.</para>
+
+    <para>So, DRI is a mean to classify the process of events
+      resolution in RPG.  The taxonomy identify three important part
+      in events resolution: the Definition of the events, the
+      effective Resolution and finally the Interpretation of the
+      results.  Each of them happen in order, and different games or
+      play style will put a different emphasis on different steps,
+      putting more or less details in one, taking more time in another
+      or according more or less power to the players, the GM or the
+      rules in another part.  We will see how all those aspects affect
+      the role-playing experience in a <link
+      linkend="DRIFortune">later section</link>, but let just
+      consider the definitions currently:</para>
+
+    <variablelist id="dridefinitions">
+      <varlistentry id="definitiondef">
+        <term>Definition</term>
+        
+        <listitem>
+          <para>Each events can be defined using a set of parameters.
+            Some parameters are mundane, or in game, such as the event
+            description, who's involved and in which manners, what's
+            the possible outcomes and what are the odds for each of
+            them, and which parameters can influence them, like
+            difficulties, materials or skills.  But another important
+            aspect are more on the narrative, or meta-game, level: How
+            important is the event to the story? Are they any outcome
+            that is necessary for a good continuation?  Are they any
+            outcome that is unwanted?  And what are the general
+            purpose of the event for the game?  Which atmosphere such
+            events must create?  Those narrative elements are often
+            more important than the mundane ones.</para>
+        </listitem>
+      </varlistentry>
+      <varlistentry id="resolutiondef">
+        <term>Resolution</term>
+        
+        <listitem>
+          <para>The next step is to determine the resolution mechanics
+            used to resolved the event.  There is many way to
+            determine the final issue of an event.  The taxonomy here
+            doesn't aim to describe them in details but instead try to
+            precise which caracteristics such mechanics should have to
+            handle the event just describe previously.</para>
+        </listitem>
+      </varlistentry>
+      <varlistentry id="interpretationdef">
+        <term>Interpretation</term>
+        
+        <listitem>
+          <para>Finally, the resolution mechanics give just the choice
+            of an outcome, but this in fact let to the players, again
+            both GM and role-players, some liberties of
+            interpretation.  The interpretation can contain two parts:
+            the effective performance (what happen) and the outcome
+            (the result).  This last one doesn't need to be choose
+            from the possible outcome determine in the first step and
+            can even be completely different.  Don't hesitate to
+            create new situations from it, it will just add to the
+            story.  Also, as for the <link
+            linkend="resolutiondef">resolution</link>, the goal of
+            this article is not to describe them but instead to make
+            them in relation with the two previous elements.</para>
+        </listitem>
+      </varlistentry>
+    </variablelist>
+
+    <section id="DRIFortune">
+
+      <para>The control on the game events can be seen accross two
+        dimensions: who have it and for which part they have it.  The
+        current RPG theory currently have two models for it: The
+        Fortune model, describe through the <acronym>FatE</acronym>,
+        <acronym>FatS</acronym> and <acronym>FitM</acronym> acronyms,
+        which is related to when the players control the game, and the
+        Balance of Power (<acronym>BoP</acronym>), which is more
+        concern about balance between the players, the GM, and the
+        rules.</para>
+
+      <para>DRI provide a model based on the Fortune one, and so is
+        more concern about the when then the whom.  Although I
+        consider this issue very important, is just that the current
+        model doesn't add anything very useful to it.  We can all see
+        who are in control at which moment, but it's less clear how
+        the exact balance is affected.  I let's this to the BoP
+        model.</para>
+
+      <para>The original Fortune model include three different models:
+        FatE, FatS and FitM.  FatE, which stand for
+        Fortune-at-the-End, is the most popular one: players describe
+        what they try to achieve and roll the dice (or enable any
+        resolution mechanics asked by the rules) and see if they
+        succeed.  This model is the one where the players have the
+        less control on their character's destiny, since although they
+        can decide what they do, they can't do anything to oriented the
+        game after a bad roll, leading to PC die, etc.</para>
+
+      <para>Fortune-at-the-Start try to give more power on the players
+        about the issue of an action.  The player roll the dice first,
+        and seeing the result, decide what to do.  This is most often
+        used for initiative rolls, although some games try to use it
+        for their resolution system, for example by letting the
+        players draw cards and choosing their actions based on the
+        cards in hand.  FatS let you more control on the issues, and
+        so on the story.  FatS allow you to avoid most bad situation
+        without need to fudging the dice, although it gives players
+        less freedom on what their characters can do.</para>
+
+      <para>Fortune-in-the-Middle, you guess, is a mix between both
+        the precedent.  The players choose their actions, call the
+        resolution mechanics and, based on the results, describe their
+        actions.  This is the model which give the more narrative
+        control on the events by the players.</para>
+
+      <para>In DRI terminology, the three model can be describe using
+        camel-cased variations of DRI.  The use of uppercase signal
+        players' control for this part of the events resolution, where
+        a lower case letter signal rules control.  So, FatE will be
+        Dri, FatS drI, and FitM will be DrI.  One will remark that the
+        three models don't contain an uppercase R.  It's may be seen
+        obvious, giving this, that the reason for this it's, as long
+        you are using fortune, calling to the resolution mechanics is
+        always giving the control to the rule.  Elsewhere, the game is
+        no more contain Fortune element and so, can be better describe
+        using either the Drama or Kharma mechanics. Well, I choose to
+        say no to this hypothesis.  Player cans have the control here
+        too.  Usually, players or GM let the rules describe which
+        resolution mechanics used for a specific action: used this
+        dice roll under this statistic for combat, or roll this
+        statistic that number of time until you succeed thrice or
+        more.  A R system will offer you to choose the mechanic based
+        on what you want the action to look like, not what's more
+        appropriate.  Used open roll for cinematic action, used
+        extended roll to put more thrill, used simple roll on
+        unimportant issues.  Briefly, based your mechanic on narrative
+        factors, instead of descriptive ones, since what you really
+        want it's a good story and good atmosphere, nor an objective
+        description of events.  Although this look like a very
+        narrative statements, credible simulations can still be
+        achieve by such system.  Currently, RPG used only one or two
+        universal mechanics for most of their events resolutions.
+        Simulation is often reach more through fine-tuned parameters,
+        detailed tables or statistics or other related parameter, not
+        through the specific resolution mechanics.  Also, most
+        resolution mechanics can be easily modified to give the same
+        probabilities but with a different overall feeling.  Since
+        only the probabilities are essential for good simulation, this
+        part is untouched and so can mood-based simulation system is a
+        possible dream.</para>
+
+    </section>
+
+  </section>
+
+  <section id="definition">
+    <title>Defining Events</title>
+
+    <para role="todo">Explain how to define elements.</para>
+    
+    <section id="narrative">
+      <title>Narrative Elements</title>
+      
+      <para role="todo">
+        Must find how to determine narrative elements
+      </para>
+
+    </section>
+
+    <section id="mundane">
+      <title>Mundane Elements</title>
+      <para role="todo">
+        Actors
+        Issues
+        Decisions
+        Outcomes
+      </para>
+    </section>
+
+  </section>
+
+  <section id="resolution">
+    <title>Resolution</title>
+
+    <para role="todo">
+      Example on how to use the resolution mechanics.
+    </para>
+
+    <section id="DKF">
+      <title>The DKF Resolution Model</title>
+
+      <para role="todo">How the DKF is related to all of this.
+        Including what's DKF and how it complement the taxonomy.</para>
+
+    </section>
+
+  </section>
+
+  <section id="interpretation">
+    <title>Interpretation</title>
+
+    <para role="todo">Frankly, I don't know.</para>
+  </section>
+
+  <section id="history">
+    <title>History of the ABC/DKF model.</title>
+
+    <para role="todo">Historic of the taxonomy.</para>
+
+  </section>
+
+  <section id="ack">
+    <title>Acknowledgements</title>
+      
+      <para role="todo">Acknowledge Mason, HighlandGreen and Pat
+        "Sleeper", as well as Ron Oswald and the author of Everway.</para>
+
+  </section>
+
+</article>
+<!-- Keep this comment at the end of the file
+Local variables:
+mode: xml
+sgml-omittag:nil
+sgml-shorttag:nil
+sgml-namecase-general:nil
+sgml-general-insert-case:lower
+sgml-minimize-attributes:nil
+sgml-always-quote-attributes:t
+sgml-indent-step:2
+sgml-indent-data:t
+sgml-parent-document:nil
+sgml-default-dtd-file:"/home/fabien/.sgml/article.ced"
+sgml-exposed-tags:nil
+sgml-local-catalogs:nil
+sgml-local-ecat-files:nil
+End:
+-->