Showing posts with label Put the G in GNS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Put the G in GNS. Show all posts

Friday, January 31, 2014

WotA, Fate, and Step Dice

I've posted about alternatives to Fate dice before, and it's an idea I keep coming back to as I work on Wrath of the Autarch. Mainly this comes in the form of varying a single dice by steps (d4, d6, d8, d10, etc) and then subtracting d6 from it. The baseline roll of d6 - d6 is a slightly more chaotic approximation to 4dF.

One of the motivations comes from compels. Traditional Fate compels aren't a good fit for the game. Their function is typically to introduce narrative complications into a character's life. They propel the story forward and add new wrinkles.
Will a d14 be needed?

But Wrath already has a mechanism for that. In the narrative phase, players can get narrative control and introduce all manner of complications. If they use an aspect as the basis for that narration, they get a Fate point. They have motivations for adding those sorts of complications.

So far, though, in playtesting, that doesn't generate quite a big enough stream of Fate points to the players. Using step dice presents another, more mechanical, option.

I've been playing with the idea of invoking aspects to step up the first dice, and compelling them to step down the first die. Once the first die is chosen, it's locked into place. After the roll, Fate points may only be spent on re-rolls. This opens up the option of players using aspects negatively against themselves, and just stepping down the first die roll.

This is less valuable than a normal use of an aspect, since it's only an expected value of +1, rather than a guaranteed +2. But it's also a little easier to keep the Fate points flowing, so maybe it will offset.

Also, this opens up some options for sources of increasing die steps:

Developments

It makes sense for different development types, such as Improved Casting, Advanced Armors, Thieves Tools, etc, to grant bonuses to the first die on any applicable rolls.

I would like it if at least some development provides bonuses for each mini-game (Infiltration, Skirmish, Diplomacy, and Warfare). Currently it's pretty random, with some mini-games like Diplomacy not having any such developments.

I'll have to think about that. I do have some developments that I'm not so keen on, and could probably swap out for a different effect.

Stunts

Stunts could also be used for bumping up dice rolls in a similar fashion. It will be tricky, though, to not overlap what developments are doing too much. Developments are more significant, since they apply to every character.

Using step dice also opens the door to stunts like this:

Wild Attack - Step up both the positive dice and the negative dice by one when using Fighting to attack.

So, a character could roll d8 - d8 to attack, increasing the range of the results.

Relationships

Currently characters have bonds with other characters that are just modeled as aspects. I reset all of these with one free invoke to encourage their use.

Another option would be to allow one step up/down on any applicable roll. This would make relationships really desirable, and make for some conscious choices on how characters interact.

Even more so if there are limited relationship slots. Because this is a troupe style game, this would make for some interesting choices when picking characters to take on a mission.

Stronghold Oath

Finally, there might be room for some sort of interaction with the Stronghold. After all, the Stronghold has aspects, and it's assumed that each character feels some way towards them.

So, in a similar style to relationships, having the option to step up/down the dice based on a particular Stronghold aspect might be interesting.

Baseline d4 - d6

If there are *too* many ways to step up dice without spending Fate points, it may be necessary for the baseline roll to be d4 - d6, just because the first dice will frequently get bumped up higher than that.

Rerolls

One thing that stepping up the first dice does is increase the value of re-rolls. As the range of results widens, they become more and more valuable.

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Tactical Compels

I enjoy tactical mini-games in tabletop RPGs that help to break up a larger freeform narrative. For example, in Fate Core, the conflict mini-game is utilized to allow for more tactical thought via zones, which make positioning and distance relevant.

Wrath of the Autarch has four such mini-games (diplomacy, infiltration, skirmish, and warfare), which take inspiration from the mini-games in Diaspora as well as the conflict rules of Fate Core. Much of this post was written after recent playtests of the warfare mini-game, but it could apply to other structured resolution systems as well.

I grapple with how to handle compels in these sorts of structured mini-games. Compels make sense to me outside of those more structured parts of the game (and I include Fate Core conflicts here), but during the mini-games I find them less satisfactory. When I switch to this more structured mode of thinking, I prefer less GM fiat, and allowing compels tends to bring in lots of fiat.

There's also the issue that compels aren't designed as levers to alter mechanical structure within those mini-games.

For instance, compels are "help the kid in distress" or "you're a wanted lady, here come the guards", not so much "end your movement" or "move to this zone because of this situation" or even "you show up two turns after the conflict has started". However, I'm interested in exploring the pros and cons.

It seems like there are a few options in dealing with compels in highly structured situations that have less GM fiat.

No Compels

Many different sorts of tactics are already possible just with a combination of the basic Attack, Defend, Create Advantage, and Overcome Obstacle actions as described in Fate Core.

Aspects can be created in zones to serve as blocks or barriers, or allow for various parties to perform defense rolls. Supplementing these actions with a form of Success with Cost that allows for success in exchange for consequences further makes compels unnecessary.

It could also be supplemented with the sort of tactical stunts that +Sophie Lagace has been blogging about for the War of Ashes RPG.

The one downside is the limited flow of fate points, which could be undesirable if the mini-game is epic (like a large warfare scene). Fate points would still move about by invoking aspects on target characters (or units, in warfare). But that results in a dwindling pool.

Limited Actions

In Diaspora, compels during the mini-games just have limited uses, also reducing the need for GM fiat. For instance, in the warfare mini-game, they can be used to end a unit's movement if an aspect justifies such a thing. There is no GM fiat at all in the Diaspora warfare mini-game.

It seems possible to twist this dial infinitely, so additional effects could be added for different mini-games.

Glow in the dark FTW!
The downside here is that a list of mechanical effects for compels may create a pretty complex mini-game without much added benefit.

It seems like the effects would have to be carefully thought out with the benefit of getting a fate point, but there may be some room for interesting ideas.

Done well, there may be some interesting options. Compelling that cavalry unit to slow it down while it marches through the fens is a good idea to allow your archers time to fire, but if the cavalry unit makes it to the archers, having lots of extra fate points to spare won't be too fun for the archers!

It's also easy to not do them well. For instance, ending a unit's movement is fine if you're controlling armies with many units, but nothing is more boring than losing your turn if you don't get many to begin with.

Actually, while writing this blog post, I found the following entry by +Brad Murray regarding the choices of compels in Diaspora mini-games: http://www.vsca.ca/halfjack/?p=479. Good stuff, and very much the sorts of things I've been thinking about lately.

Negotiated Compels

It might be possible to allow for any action given a more open negotiation framework. Off-hand, it seems like this could slow the game down unless there is a healthy dose of GM fiat to keep things in check.

Even with GM fiat, though, allowing compels to have any mechanical effect seems like it would invite abuse.

Thoughts

My current feeling is that compels aren't really worth it for these mini-games, since it seems like most situations could be handled without them. If an avenue for gaining fate points is really needed beyond getting your aspects invoked against you, it might be easiest to just offer a thematically appropriate avenue depending on the mini-game. Of course, I can't think of any off-hand.

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Missions in Wrath of the Autarch

Under advice from people smarter than I, I have been playing through the longer term strategy in Wrath of the Autarch, trying to get it humming along.  This takes the form of having a player handle the seasonal details of the Stronghold (building developments, rolling for threats), and then abstracting out the actual missions.  For lack of any better resolution system, I just give a ballpark result, based on what I think would (or should) happen.

Because the player running the Autarch is trying to defeat the players running the Stronghold, it is important for the players running the Stronghold to have some understanding of what options are available and why they would take them.  Unfortunately, the text at this point isn't all that helpful - so this article is the first of a few which summarizes the strategies present in the game.  Hopefully this will serve to crystallize my own understanding of the design, but it will also help players who are going through the strategy game understand their options.

The building blocks of the campaign are missions.  Each season, a few heroes from the Stronghold may undertake one such mission.  Choosing missions carefully is the backbone of any strategy.  Winning!
  • Conquest - Conquest missions allow the Stronghold to acquire a neutral region, from a list of available neutral regions.  Only one neutral region may be acquired each year (although the Cartography development grants two regions a year).
    • Why do it? Because regions are the lifeblood for resources, and resources are used for many different things.  Almost any strategy is going to require a couple neutral regions.
    • Mini-game - All mini-games are used, although most of the time Skirmish is necessary.
  • Trade - Set-up a trade deal with one of the five neutral factions.
    • Why do it? Successful trade improves disposition with the faction, and a high enough disposition means the faction becomes your ally.  Furthermore, trade helps build developments quicker (the type of development depends on the type of faction), as well as giving access to certain quests for artifacts.
    • Mini-game - Diplomacy.
  • Espionage - Steal secrets about a development from a faction.
    • Why do it? Makes building a particular development much easier.  In a few cases, developments provide a different benefit than build points (such as leverage against the faction in an upcoming Trade, or military advantages).
    • Mini-game - Infiltration
  • Sabotage - Destroy a development within a faction.
    • Why do it? The biggest benefit is usually a stability hit for the target faction.  If stability drops enough, the faction is no longer around - in the case of the Autarch, that's the victory condition!  In addition, a few developments provide other benefits, like neutralizing military advantages.
    • Mini-game - Infiltration
  • Military - Attack a region that a faction controls.
    • Why do it? To steal the resources a faction has, and lower their stability and population in the process.  To do this mission, the Stronghold really needs to be committed to a solid Military strategy, supplemented by many developments.
    • Mini-game - Warfare
  • Assassination - Take out the leader of an opposing faction.
    • Why do it? The stability of the target faction will most likely drop (sometimes by a lot if it's an influential leader).  Furthermore, getting rid of leaders can render a faction weak in a particular area (such as killing a military leader).
    • Mini-game - Infiltration
  • Quest - Gain a powerful artifact.
    • Why do it?  It's hard to gain access to quests, since it requires an allied faction.  Once one becomes available, it's usually worthwhile to grab it, since it can be the capstone of a particular long term strategy.
    • Mini-game - All mini-games, although Skirmish is mainly used.
  • Threats - Threats are all the bad things that happen in regions, with factions, and from the Autarch.