Intentionally giving people metagame abilities.

[Crissa]

You spot a tapestry, you search the square the tapestry is in. Of course, this is where spot and search get hinky - can you 'spot' the breath of the creature hiding behind the tapestry, or must you 'search' to find him (assuming he's got full concealment)? What about his scuffmarks on the floor? Is that a search or a spot?

If I'm searching a room, the random chance is the character finding or missing the key atop the doorframe. Do I really need to also miss it because I didn't say 'doorframe'?

-Crissa

[TheWorid]

An example of metagame knowledge would be, "The vizier is actually a vampire and the treasurer is really a doppelganger." Such plot elements should not be used without detailing the actions of all the important NPCs. If the treasurer is a doppelganger, then you cannot allow him to interact with the PCs without first giving him a full introduction. So abilities like Master of Disguise shouldn't matter because all of the important NPCs should already be on the table.

I think I see where you're going with that, but those statements are not, by themselves, metagame knowledge. If I spy on the treasurer and see him changing form, then I now have that piece of information, acquired in a non-metagame manner. If, on the other hand, I looked at the GM notes and saw that he was a doppelganger, or if I used some sort of metagame technique (something akin to the Master of Disguise thing) to find it out, then it would be metagame knowledge.

I'm not sure what I was trying to say with the trap, but I think the gist of it was that if your system rewards metagame knowledge, then you shouldn't try to punish people who use that knowledge; you should remove the reward.

That I agree with. Metagame knowledge should either removed as much as possible, or you shouldn't punish people for using it; if you leave it there to be had, and then smack people when they decide to take advantage of it, it's your own fault (or at least the fault of the system).

[RandomCasualty2]

You spot a tapestry, you search the square the tapestry is in. Of course, this is where spot and search get hinky - can you 'spot' the breath of the creature hiding behind the tapestry, or must you 'search' to find him (assuming he's got full concealment)? What about his scuffmarks on the floor? Is that a search or a spot?

If I'm searching a room, the random chance is the character finding or missing the key atop the doorframe. Do I really need to also miss it because I didn't say 'doorframe'?

Yeah, a system of selective searching can get unfair really quickly if it's done wrong. Not to mention, it can also lead to a bunch of tedium if players are randomly turning every torchholder they come across.

Still, I think it can add something to the game if it's done right. Mainly because if done correctly it gives the players a sense of more control (always a good thing), because they can choose or not choose to search a given area. And if you can actually point out a clue they missed that indicated they should search the area, then they'll feel like "Oh, yeah we missed the secret door, but we'll find it next time."

Just having a check determine it makes them feel rather powerless, or can also lead to the tedium of having them take 20 searching everything. But really, that's sort of a dungeon design thing regardless.


As for search versus spot, honestly I like to just combine them (along with listen) into the 4E style perception skill. That solves a lot of the problems, and also removes a lot of tedious rolling.

[Kaelik]

My system has always been passive search at assumed roll of 5 when PCs are moving around.

If they specifically call out a search using their standard action, then they can roll or take 10 or whatever.

And then they can search an area 5ft square for one action, or they can call out a specific thing: "The Door" and get a roll against the area, and also get a situational bonus finding anything about the door.

The bonus can increase based on the size of the called out object.

So for example:

You find an dresser:

I search the dresser, but especially looking for the underwear drawer, cause that's were people keep money:

Roll for area, +5 versus anything hidden in underwear drawer.

[Agrinja]

This is a random interjection from someone who's going to likely regret opening their mouth...but, here goes. Weapons of the Gods uses a metagame ability system as it's entire equivalent of XP. It's a wuxia type game, and you didn't level up as much as you say to the Sage [DM, who oddly enough is in game, and killable, living on some high mountain...] "I spend my plot coupon [forget what the hell the things are actually called] so I can meet a ye olde master who can teach me the Style of the Monkey's Third Leg." Then at some point the Sage either works that into the story on the side and actually play it out, or work it into the main plot, or if it's too hard just go "Okay it happens during downtime."

[Mandella]

The Cortex Game System uses this idea too. Their version of "Edge" is called plot points and can be spent on story altering events.

The events altered range from minor,

1–2 Inconsequential: This is the bar that serves that particular
kind of elven wine you always liked.
3–4 Minor: This is also the bar where Riga, the gossip and
local rumormonger, likes to hang out.

To significant,

7–8 Significant: Aren’t the guards usually in this bar at the same time
every night, practically leaving the guardhouse wide open?

To pretty darn story breaking,

9–10 Major: Why, it looks as if the last person to occupy this room was
a wizard. He’s left his invisibility potions and everything.
11+ Defining: Did I say wizard? I meant incredibly powerful and helpful dragon

At the low levels the plot points are a pretty cool game device, since you don't have to worry so much for the exact location and number of your characters' local contacts, just have them spend plot points to know somebody. And the point is also specifically made that the GM can refuse the expenditure if it doesn't fit his local story, so if it doesn't work for him the GM just has to say, "sorry, you don't know anybody here" and hand the points back.

But at the higher expenditures? Frankly, if any of my players ever wanted to spend 11 plot points to completely rewrite the adventure, I'd call a hold, close the books, and ask the players in all seriousness just what game would they *rather* be playing, since it obviously isn't the one I'm trying to run...

[Smeelbo]

I'd suggest looking at Diaspora, which is a very elegant FATE-based RPG, where story making responsibilities are distributed among the players, not just the GM. Works very well in practice, especially if you are an overworked GM. In FATE generally, one can make knowledge checks, not just to discover facts, but to declare them.

I found this to be so much fun, that I started using in other games.

In Frank's ShadowRun campaign, I often use a trick I call "The Horrible Future." I say "Since it's the Horrible Future, isn't X true?" Then, if Frank is sufficiently amused, it is true. So for example, we had broken into an organ legger's apartment, and found some awful incriminating meat, but no dude. So we wanted to determine when the owner of the apartment would come home, and how many people would likely accompany him.

So I asked, "Since this is the Horrible Future, doesn't the guy's insurance company require a coloform bacteria counter on his toilet in order to reduce their risk and reduce his premiums? If so, I'd like to hack his toilet log, and graph bacteria counts over time in order to determine when he usually gets home (and probably takes a dump), and the number of dumps taken in the first hour after he gets home (indicating the likely number of buddies)."

And the answer was, "Why, yes he does!"

Honestly, this kind of meta-gaming is good for just about any kind of roleplaying game, and in fact, is almost always allowed, although often informally. Just about any RPG allows players to declare facts about the world via their character background, and not just at character creation.

I've found embracing this kind of player participation makes for a substantially better game, one that is both more vibrant and easier to GM. I've found that "letting go," and letting players make declarations about the game world is a great and powerful technique.

While FATE formalizes this, it is applicable to any roleplaying game that is not over restrictive of player options.

Such declarations are a great way to keep the story moving forward.

"Long Live the Kurdo-Armenian Cooperation Council!"
Smeelbo

[Username17]

Honestly I'm not sure what the point of making granular plot point expenditures and sliding scale costs is. I don't really see the difference between making a declaration that a bar has a particular menu item versus making a declaration that a bar has a particular kind of clientèle. Those really seem wholly equivalent to me, so I don't see what the point of having costs of 1 to 4 points for those actions is.

-Username17

[ubernoob]

In Frank's ShadowRun campaign, I often use a trick I call "The Horrible Future." I say "Since it's the Horrible Future, isn't X true?" Then, if Frank is sufficiently amused, it is true.

In the game I'm currently DMing, a couple of my players do similar things to help write the plot all the fucking time. It's awesome because I don't ever have to prepare for the sessions and the players get what they want to have fun with.

[Smeelbo]

Honestly I'm not sure what the point of making granular plot point expenditures and sliding scale costs is. I don't really see the difference between making a declaration that a bar has a particular menu item versus making a declaration that a bar has a particular kind of clientèle. Those really seem wholly equivalent to me, so I don't see what the point of having costs of 1 to 4 points for those actions is.

-Username17

In fact, Spirit of the Century specificly encourages consequential declarations over inconsequential ones.

The base difficulty for a declaration is 0, modified as follows:

• Is the declaration interesting or funny?
  Are there interesting consequences if the declaration is acted upon, but is wrong?
  Does the declaration suggest an immediate course of action which is interesting or heroic?

For each question which is answered no, the DC is increased by 2.

Basicly, declarations that move the story forward are easier than declarations that are boring or have uninteresting consequences.

The opposite of what the scaled system above suggests.

Smeelbo

[MGuy]

I was thinking of trying to add something like this to my rule set. The only major question I have is whether or not its worth it to make the ability to effect the plot in various ways COST something. In various systems you have plot points, Drama Dice, Fate Points whatever but if I just WANT my players to change it should I bother making these up with some arbitrary point expenditure system or should I just say once every session you can make the sun shine on a stormy day?

[RobbyPants]

In the game I'm currently DMing, a couple of my players do similar things to help write the plot all the fucking time. It's awesome because I don't ever have to prepare for the sessions and the players get what they want to have fun with.

That is awesome, and I suspect it would work really well in a solo game.

Lately, I've only been able to play/DM with one other person, so if I'm running the game, I try to get as much info during CharGen so I can write up a plot that he'll like. Giving him the ability to shape the world during game play would be pretty damn handy. After all, in a one-on-one game, the PC is the whole purpose of the game world.

I could see this working well for a group too, so long as no one went stupid crazy, or tried to step on anyone else's toes with their Ad Hoc additions.

[Mandella]

Honestly I'm not sure what the point of making granular plot point expenditures and sliding scale costs is. I don't really see the difference between making a declaration that a bar has a particular menu item versus making a declaration that a bar has a particular kind of clientèle. Those really seem wholly equivalent to me, so I don't see what the point of having costs of 1 to 4 points for those actions is.

-Username17

Basically, non-game changing fluff costs one or two points (in one of my games, a player spent one point to grab a beer bottle before it fell off an overturning table), while three or four would be, in the above example, for making sure an informative contact is where you want them to be.

The whole system is meant to be adjudicated on the fly by the GM, really. Even though the above example from the book is fantasy based, the Cortex System was originally designed to handle fast paced, logically "loose" action from sci-fi TV shows such as Firefly and Battlestar Gallactica. As such, plot points fly fast and are spend faster, and can of course be used for much more than changing the plot. Buying actions, improving rolls -- all the usual uses of Edge.

But giving that much power to the players does give a certain tone to the game that might not be appropriate to all genres. Horror, for instance, comes to mind. Games built on intrigue and suspense might also suffer.

[A Man In Black]

Basically, non-game changing fluff costs one or two points (in one of my games, a player spent one point to grab a beer bottle before it fell off an overturning table), while three or four would be, in the above example, for making sure an informative contact is where you want them to be.

Why would you charge for non-game-changing fluff at all?

[Mandella]

Basically, non-game changing fluff costs one or two points (in one of my games, a player spent one point to grab a beer bottle before it fell off an overturning table), while three or four would be, in the above example, for making sure an informative contact is where you want them to be.

Why would you charge for non-game-changing fluff at all?

For the same reason, in another game system, I might require the character to make a Dex roll, and probably cost an action.

If you make something free, it becomes valueless. That player paying *something* to save that beer bottle made a defining statement about his character that made a far greater impression on both the other players and the GM than a simple "I grab the bottle before it falls," "Sure, fine, you do that," from the GM ever would.

Of course, this works for my players and gametable where it might not work for yours. Styles vary and all that...

[Orion]

Okay, I can see how you would want a mechanic to make the table slow down and notice the cool, stylish things your character does. But adding a cost just punishes people for giving their character a personality.

Wouldn't the game have been better if you had *awarded* one XP for snatching the beer?

[Mandella]

Okay, I can see how you would want a mechanic to make the table slow down and notice the cool, stylish things your character does. But adding a cost just punishes people for giving their character a personality.

Wouldn't the game have been better if you had *awarded* one XP for snatching the beer?

Oh don't worry. There were plenty of rewards for good roleplay in that game. Besides, Cortex encourages a *lot* of plot points awarded and a lot spent -- it's trying to simulate the fast and loose logic, contrivances and cinematic action of the movies and TV.

The guy wanted to influence an event outside of any action or roll, so he spent a point. Plus, (if I can remember after a couple months), his actual statement was, "can I spend a plot point to have one beer not break?" His choice, and his reward was a virtual cold one when the fight was over.

The player seemed happy.

[Mask_De_H]

In Frank's ShadowRun campaign, I often use a trick I call "The Horrible Future." I say "Since it's the Horrible Future, isn't X true?" Then, if Frank is sufficiently amused, it is true.

In the game I'm currently DMing, a couple of my players do similar things to help write the plot all the fucking time. It's awesome because I don't ever have to prepare for the sessions and the players get what they want to have fun with.

This is basically what I'm doing with my current IRC game, as uber can attest to. If it sounds cool enough or if it's amusing, then it's now a part of the story.

This is much easier if you don't have a story in the first place

[Smeelbo]

Okay, I can see how you would want a mechanic to make the table slow down and notice the cool, stylish things your character does. But adding a cost just punishes people for giving their character a personality.

The way FATE works is that characters (and other "things," like scenes, ships, artifacts, organizations, star systems, and so on) have up to ten "aspects," which are used to trigger the expenditure of FATE points (this is the so-called "FATE economy").

For example, Gnick Gnosis, Psychic Investigator, has the aspect "Just Psychic Enough...". He has been suprised by the sudden appearance of the mysterious Egyptian. His player prefers that Gnick gnot be surprised, so he invokes Gnick's aspect, declaring that Gnick is "just psychic enough" to avoid complete surprise. If the referee agrees, the player hands over a FATE point to the referee.

Where do FATE points come from? Well, suppose that earlier, Gnick and company attended a seance hosted by Madam Bealowsky. In order to advance the exposition, the referee may decide that Gnick" is "just psychic enough" to channel the spirit of the recently deceased "Maureen DuBois." The referee pays Gnick's player a FATE point, and takes control Gnick for purposes of exposition.

That is in general, when an Aspect works in favor of the character, they pay a FATE point, and when it works against the character, they earn a FATE point. This means that the "best" aspects are ones that can work both ways. "Noticeable limp" will mostly work against a character, when in disguise, or in a chase, but might be invoked to have the character dismissed by a NPC as not being enough of a physical threat to take precautions against.

The FATE economy ensures that the story is not dominated by a single super character, as a lack of negative aspects means that the character will quickly run out of FATE points. Instead, all characters are earning and spending FATE through out the game.

Aspects also allow for a fast, elegant game that does not require long enormous enumerations of conditions and penalties. Scenes can have Aspects like Dark, or On Fire, goons may be Over-confident, or Fed Up With The Boss, and the exact game mechanical consequence is defined collaboratively, in game, by players willing to spend FATE on a specific consequence.

FATE is the basis of several fine games, especially Spirit of the Century and Diaspora, which yield very different styles of play.

In my opinion, FATE is the best thing to happen to role playing games in decades.

Smeelbo

[RandomCasualty2]

Aspects also allow for a fast, elegant game that does not require long enormous enumerations of conditions and penalties. Scenes can have Aspects like Dark, or On Fire, goons may be Over-confident, or Fed Up With The Boss, and the exact game mechanical consequence is defined collaboratively, in game, by players willing to spend FATE on a specific consequence.

How do the scene or NPC aspects work? Does the DM just pay the PCs fate points when an NPC uses an aspect or what?

[Smeelbo]

A scene or NPC may have specific aspects on them for a number of reasons:

• The referee places them in advance, e.g. a "dimly lit," "cluttered" warehouse, an "egotistical" villian, and so on.
  A player could make an appropriate skill check to discover or declare such an aspect, e.g., "These natives Respect Strength."
  A character can make a skill check to "manuever," or add an aspect, e.g. "I pour gasoline on the crates, and toss my cigarette onto the floor," in order to add the aspect "On Fire" onto the scene.

Usually, the first use of these Aspects is free (a "free tag"), while subsequent uses cost a FATE point to whoever is taking advantage of them. FATE points are paid to the controller of the entity whose Aspect is invoked, usually the referee in the case of scenes and NPCs. Some objects, like space ships or organizations, may have their own pool of FATE points that is tracked separately.

Really, you should try a FATE game. It will forever change the way you roleplay, even when you're playing other games.

Smeelbo

[Username17]

Aspects also allow for a fast, elegant game that does not require long enormous enumerations of conditions and penalties. Scenes can have Aspects like Dark, or On Fire, goons may be Over-confident, or Fed Up With The Boss, and the exact game mechanical consequence is defined collaboratively, in game, by players willing to spend FATE on a specific consequence.

How do the scene or NPC aspects work? Does the DM just pay the PCs fate points when an NPC uses an aspect or what?

Yeah, pretty much. Alternately, the PCs can pay Fate points to activate those aspects on their behalf.

Fate does something admirable, which is to give a demonstrable and fluid reward system for players being engaged with the game. However it does not do what the designers apparently want it to do, which is to keep one player from hogging the spotlight. You can essentially buy screen time with fate points, and you get fate points for... having screen time. It's pretty easy for a player to run away with things by playing 3 Stooges for a while and then basically telling the rest of the story. The only way to stop that is for the other players to interrupt and have cans of paint fall on their own heads for a while to get comedic screen time to pay for heroic screen time.

That's the bare equation: every scene where you get screen time in a comedic or tragic fashion causes you to accumulate points that allow you to purchase screen time in which your character gets success in a heroic, investigative, or romantic context. What that does, structurally speaking, is to get players to actively seek screen time even (perhaps especially) in which their character is doing things other than pressing the I Win button. And if you have a hard time convincing your players to role play periods where their characters get drunk or have their wallets stolen by prostitutes, that's a revelation.

But yes, its handling of situations, such as the room being dark or the floor being slippery, is not particularly robust. In fact, I would go so far as to call it "very poor." The game basically encourages you to spend time wandering around in shitty tactical positions because doing that makes you accumulate Fate points that you can spend later. Weak encounters don't "soften you up" they make your characters act retarded so that their Fate meters fill up. Players don't actually get off the see saw to shoot until the end of the battle when they cash out to blow the villain away with a super attack. It's actually kind of dumb.

But yes, the basic mechanic where players get mechanical benefits for making unhelpful suggestions to the GM does make the story more engaging. Which is Fate's actual purpose.

-Username17

[Smeelbo]

And yet, that's not what happens, in practice. FATE is not a game for optimizers, for min/max'ers, and indeed, in that case is fail.

However, those behaviours are not what I see when I play FATE RPGs. Instead, player's really do mostly share the spotlight.

Indeed, I think this speaks to my big philosophical difference between the way Frank and I evaluate game mechanics. He is very concerned with the theoretical implication of various game mechanics (e.g., binding cheese, the wish economy), whereas I find that in practice, I do not find myself in games where these implications have any consequence.

The difference I think has to do with story. There reason I don't see any binding cheese is that there's no story there. A D&D game revolving around Lesser Binding doesn't happen, at least not to me, not because it can't in theory happen, but because no one is going to play that game: not the referee, and not the players. And if it does start up, it'll end pretty soon, because the referee and the other players will soon lose interest. Frank's Candle of Cheese may make for an interesting conversation or forum thread, but, as an actual game, it's simply not happening.

Likewise, the FATE cheese Frank suggests, while obvious, does not actually occur, or occur very much. Instead, players use the mechanics for their intended purpose, which is make story happen.

Frank really should know this. When we both younger, we played a lot of Champions, a seriously flawed game which was trivial to break mechanically. Did that matter in practice? Not really. What mattered was that the Was-Wolf had spent a subjective ten million years in the Evolutionary Chamber with a discarded issue of People magazine, which drove him mad, and that's why he kidnapped Jody Foster. What matters is that neo-Atlantean Surf-Firsters dispose of their stolen goods via 1-900-ASK-JOSH (only $4.99/minute).

What matters is the story that the players collaborate to produce, and not what in theory might be produced using the mechanics. If the mechanics flow well enough, and they enable the group to get the results they want, that counts for much more than any theoretical game mechanical flaws.

Smeelbo

[RandomCasualty2]

Fate does something admirable, which is to give a demonstrable and fluid reward system for players being engaged with the game. However it does not do what the designers apparently want it to do, which is to keep one player from hogging the spotlight. You can essentially buy screen time with fate points, and you get fate points for... having screen time. It's pretty easy for a player to run away with things by playing 3 Stooges for a while and then basically telling the rest of the story. The only way to stop that is for the other players to interrupt and have cans of paint fall on their own heads for a while to get comedic screen time to pay for heroic screen time.

Oh wait, the PC can voluntarily have bad stuff happen to gain fate points?

I thought the DM had to invoke the bad stuff and gave the PC fate points as a sort of consolation for fucking him over.

That seems kinda dumb if the PCs can actively invoke bad luck on them at times it doesn't even matter so they can pwn later.

[Prak]

no, players can invoke bad stuff too. For example, playing a dragon sealed in human form in Dresden Files, I invoked my trouble aspect to cause me to immediately shift to dragon form so I could protect the party from a rocket fired at them, and won three fate points for it. (I think I spent one to invoke it, but still)