Mood-based Events Resolution Mechanics

+ + Mood-based Events Resolution Mechanics + The DRI/AIDO Events Resolution Taxonomy + + 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. + + + resolution mechanics + Drama-Kharma-Fortune (DKF) hierarchy + Fortune-at-the-Start (FatS) + Fortune-in-the-Middle (FitM) + Fortune-at-the-End (FatE) + DRI resolution taxonomy + AIDO events taxonomy + role-playing game + system design + play flow + + + Fabien + Niñoles + + + 2003 + Fabien Niñoles + + + + + 0.1cvs : + 2003-01-01 + + Initial release (incomplete). + + + + +

+ Introduction + + 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! + + 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? + + 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. + +

+ +

+ What is events resolution? + + 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 It's when you're rolling + dice.. 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: + +

+ The process by which the players decide on the follow-up + of the current role-playing situation. +

+ + 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. + + 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. + +

+ Previous works on event resolution + + 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. + + First of all, the most popular model for events resolution + is clearly Johnathan Tweet's Drama-Kharma-Fortune (or + DKF) 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. + + Children of the DKF, the Fortune-at-the-Start (or + FatS), Fortune-in-the-Middle (or + FitM) and Fortune-at-the-End (or + FatE), 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. + + 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 + dissecting 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. + + Another interesting reading is The + Travel of Mendes Pinto 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. + + 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. + +

+ +

+ DRI Events Resolution Taxonomy + + 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 The + Impossible Dream, 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. + + 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 later section, but let just + consider the definitions currently: + + + + Definition + + + 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. + + + + Resolution + + + 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. + + + + Interpretation + + + 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 resolution, the goal of + this article is not to describe them but instead to make + them in relation with the two previous elements. + + + + +

+ + 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 FatE, + FatS and FitM acronyms, + which is related to when the players control the game, and the + Balance of Power (BoP), which is more + concern about balance between the players, the GM, and the + rules. + + 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. + + 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. + + 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. + + 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. + + 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. + +

+ +

+ Defining Events + + Explain how to define elements. + +

+ Narrative Elements + + + Must find how to determine narrative elements + + +

+ +

+ Mundane Elements + + Actors + Issues + Decisions + Outcomes + +

+ +

+ Resolution + + + Example on how to use the resolution mechanics. + + +

+ The DKF Resolution Model + + How the DKF is related to all of this. + Including what's DKF and how it complement the taxonomy. + +

+ +

+ Interpretation + + Frankly, I don't know. +

+ +

+ History of the ABC/DKF model. + + Historic of the taxonomy. + +

+ +

+ Acknowledgements + + Acknowledge Mason, HighlandGreen and Pat + "Sleeper", as well as Ron Oswald and the author of Everway. + +

+ +