Crowdsourcing Game Design - Sons of Liberty

[Neurosis]

My favorite thing about the Den is the procedure it invented for crowdsourcing game design. In my opinion, Frank is the second most important person in the field of RPG design theory behind Ron Edwards (and some of you might put him first, and that's fine, and some of you might be all like "FUCK RON EDWARDS he said xyz", and that's whatever, but he's never been anything but nice to me personally, and he invented GNS which is, while flawed, useful).

To the best my fragged up memory can recall, the Den procedure went something like...

1. Come up with high concept.
2. Design a four person party.
3. Design an adventure.

And I can't remember the rest, except that everyone would pitch in. And that most Denizens agreed that "system" or "numbers" didn't come in until towards the end.

If the Den could be said to have a legacy (besides legendary saltiness), I think this collaborative game design procedure would be it.

Remind me how the rest went?

***

By the way, I also intend to use this thread to ask for your help designing a game (setting).

0. Working Title - Sons of Liberty

1. High Concept You know the musical Hamilton? Well, apparently no one got to see it because 1000% of the tickets were sold out 1000% of the time. But maybe you've heard it? It's awesome. Anyway. I want an RPG that's just like that, only without singing, or dancing, or Alexander Hamilton being mandatorily Hispanic and Aaron Burr being mandatorily black.

Basically, I want an RPG that's...

Phase 1) ("Levels 1-10") Punch the redcoats in the dick.
Phase 2) ("Levels 11-20") Scheme, compromise, and form America.

12. System I really want to use Savage Worlds for this, primarily as an exercise in learning Savage Worlds.

Discuss.

Edit: Magic optional. I could be very happy with or without inserting magic into this setting.

[Chamomile]

This is the thread you're looking for.

[Kaelik]

he invented GNS which is, while flawed, useful

You one dumb stupid person.

[Neurosis]

TY Chamomile (!!)

[Neurosis]

he invented GNS which is, while flawed, useful

You one dumb stupid person.

Really, so you've never used "Gamist", "Simulationist", or "Narrativist" in a way that helped facilitate a discussion?

NEVER EVER EVER?

[Longes]

Sons of Liberty
...
Phase 2) ("Levels 11-20") Scheme, compromise, and form America.

BROTHER!

[Neurosis]

I lol'd. : )

[Kaelik]

he invented GNS which is, while flawed, useful

You one dumb stupid person.

Really, so you've never used "Gamist", "Simulationist", or "Narrativist" in a way that helped facilitate a discussion?

NEVER EVER EVER?

Nope. And neither have you.

[Longes]

12. System I really want to use Savage Worlds for this, primarily as an exercise in learning Savage Worlds.

You should reconsider. Savage Worlds is not very good. Arguably even bad.

Now, concept-wise it seems to me like you'd want to your party to be a scouting group gathering info on the enemy forces. Since being part of the actual infantry is not all that exciting for an RPG. So your party will have Sniper Jimmy, who is all sneaky and wears camo. Higher Self Jimmy who talks redcoats into spilling valuable info, Scientist Jimmy who tech stuff and traps and Colonel Jimmy who does a cavalry charge on the enemy.

[hyzmarca]

Crowdsource game design is problematic in that you inevitably end up with five guys who have six different visions of what the game should be, working to cross purposes. End results tend to be disjointed for this very reason.

[erik]

he invented GNS which is, while flawed, useful

You one dumb stupid person.

Really, so you've never used "Gamist", "Simulationist", or "Narrativist" in a way that helped facilitate a discussion?

NEVER EVER EVER?

I do not recall it ever helping me describe a game. Pretentious retro stupid has seen more mileage for me.

To expand...

Sometimes rollplay-roleplay is useful in RL conversation. And Tactical vs storytelling. But GNS is just never useful for me. Largely because of Gamist which is a bullshit category. I could thesaurusize N and S into storytelling and tactical, but G doesn't fit.

Moving onward. Why Savage World? What virtues does it have as a system? Do you feel it handles combat well? Skills? Anything? I don't think it passes for any category.

[Leress]

he invented GNS which is, while flawed, useful

You one dumb stupid person.

Really, so you've never used "Gamist", "Simulationist", or "Narrativist" in a way that helped facilitate a discussion?

NEVER EVER EVER?

Yes I have when I talk about the uselessness of GNS.

Also look through the TNE threads to see how a grand Den project goes

spoiler: As well as when you have a lot people with strong opposing opinions on game design.

[Neurosis]

where does pretentious, retro, stupid come from?

and does it map to GNS like...

Pretentious: Narrativist
Retro: Gamist
Stupid: Simulationist???

I see the first two analogies, but not the third.

[Blicero]

where does pretentious, retro, stupid come from?

The venerable Jeff Rients.
http://jrients.blogspot.com/2006/02/i-g ... e.html?m=1

[Ice9]

Sometimes rollplay-roleplay is useful in RL conversation. And Tactical vs storytelling.

Rollplay/roleplay is one of the stupid phrases of all time, and a lot worse than GNS. And I'm not convinced that "tactical vs storytelling" is all that useful either, considering they're not inherently in opposition.

Re: GNS - I'm not sold on it, particularly the way he describes it, but I think the concept has some merit. Different systems do resolve things on entirely different bases, and you should consider what you're going for when choosing one. Although I disagree that you can categorize an entire system as purely one style; almost none of them are.

[Kaelik]

I was going to tell you to pick a GNS thread, because he have like four of them.

But I picked one for you. The one you posted in: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=52999&view=next

For Bonus points, Erik shows you Retro Pretentious Stupid and where it comes from.

NOTHING IS NEW UNDER THE SUN.

[Neurosis]

@Kaelik: Wow, I was way more down on GNS Theory that day that I am today. I am a fickle little critter, aren't I?

***

GAME DESIGN FLOW - SONS OF LIBERTY

STEP 1: NAME THE PARTY

A party in Sons of Liberty is (are?) called "(The?) Minutemen", as in the Continental Army. I considered and rejected "Regiment", but a quick google told me that a Regiment included thousands of dudes, and was therefore completely inappropriate. I considered and rejected "Squad"--not late 18th century enough, too generic.

The party name changes to "The Delegates" in phase 2.

STEP 2: DESIGN A SIX MAN PARTY WITH WORDS, NOT NUMBERS

• Musketeer: The Musketeer fires his musket faster and more accurately than the other party members. This is important, because this is 18th century infantry combat, and rate-of-fire was a big deal. His ability to improve his rate-of-fire from terrible to not that bad is relevant and substantial.
• Patriot: The Patriot runs behind enemy lines and murders them with a tomahawk, preferably at night. Think the Mel Gibson movie of the same name as that's what the class is named after. Melee monster, with stealth, mobility, aggression, and intimidation. He also gets the equivalent of "sneak attack".
• Medic: The medic keeps the party from dying to musket and bayonet wounds from the redcoats, and the secondary infections that those cause. Don't dismiss him as a "healbot". At a time when medical science was basically retarded, he's the best the Continental Army has got. He's pretty good with a musket too.
• Spy: I haven't actually seen that show about spies during the American Revolution, but I'd imagine a lot like that. When he is not infiltrating the Lobsterbacks and stealing their plans on solo missions, he also gets the equivalent of sneak attack and improved uncanny dodge.
• Cavalry: You got a war horse and a cavalry saber and you're gonna ride. Hold out your hand at arm's length and off with their fucking heads! "Their" being the redcoats. In the combat minigame, you get even better mobility and damage than the Patriot, but no sneak attack, no stealth capabilities, and the worst ranged attacks in the game.
• To Be Determined: Suggestions welcome, magical ability optional.

[/b]

[momothefiddler]

My immediate concerns are that Musketeer, Patriot, Cavalry, and (sort of) Medic have nothing to do out of combat (if it's an only-combat game, I guess that's fine, but then what's Spy doing here at all?), and that Patriot and Spy seem heavily focused on party-splitting (you even explicitly mentioned Spy having "solo missions").

[ETortoise]

This premise is different enough than most RPGs that I think you should shuffle around the steps of the flowchart. What do you see an adventure or campaign entailing? Also, will players keep the same characters between phases? If so, what role does John Adams have in the first phase?

[Longes]

Yeah, you really need to define what the party actually does. Are they in the army? Are they independent volunteer squad? Are they a PMC?

[Prak]

Yeah, Hamilton: The RPG is totally something I want to stick my dick in. I've posted about the same thing myself, but iirc I rambled my way around to "you don't really need a new rpg for the parts you want to do, Prak."

But, so, looking at Hamilton, we've got The Revolutionary Set as our model party. Hamilton and Laurens are both Generals, meaning they have resources to spend on the Mass Combat minigame. Hercules is a Spy, meaning he is actually off somewhere else most of the time, but he contributes by playing the Espionage Minigame which I would imagine would allow the Revolutionary Set to dictate/change certain parts of upcoming battles (something like "The Redcoats will strike *here*, coming through *this area* over the course of *time*." "Awesome, we're going to sneak up and gank them *here* while they're marching.") Lafayette is something of a Fixer, since his important role is going to France and getting more GUNS. AND SHIPS. (AND SO THE BALANCE SHIFTS). Lafayette is also a general, though, and given that Hercules looks like this:



people are generally going to assume that he's pretty physically formidable himself. And let's not forget Alexander's "marksman's ability."

So the interesting thing, to me, is that an RPG modeled on Hamilton actually has built in "Things to do" for people who can't make all the sessions. If you know one player won't be able to make all the sessions, you can tell them to play the Fixer or the Spy, and do their stuff one on one and they can still contribute to the larger campaign by providing resources or intelligence. When they can be part of the session, you focus on the personal asskicking ability of the party with set ups like "While celebrating your latest minor victory, redcoats storm the bar/ballroom/your estate." You have no troops, but you've got plenty of guns (MERICA!) and you're all asskickers in your own right.


Hmm... actually, now that I think about it, you could do something where every character has two sheets, the Campaign Sheet and the Battle Sheet. The Campaign Sheet has stuff like "I'm a General, I command X00 men" or "I'm a spy, I can get info out of 20 British soldiers in a day" and it's used for a pbp/pbem mass combat set up, and the Battle Sheet is your more traditional character sheet with things like "Marksman's Ability" or "I Get The Fuck Back Up Again" and is used for more personal level skirmishes (and Alexander dueling fucks).

The fact that I'm using lines from the play for abilities is making me want to at least use the Aspects system from FATE, and I've written up ways to use that for non-FATE systems like d20 and AS, so it's not like you necessarily need to use the rest of FATE.


Also, the fantasy geek in me would be disappointed if there wasn't at least the potential for the campaign to end with the Revolutionary Set personally facing off against a King George that comes down off his throne and has a power up scene to make him a final boss threat. To Hell with historical accuracy, it'd be fun.

[Prak]

This premise is different enough than most RPGs that I think you should shuffle around the steps of the flowchart. What do you see an adventure or campaign entailing? Also, will players keep the same characters between phases? If so, what role does John Adams have in the first phase?

Actually, this is an interesting point that makes me think of something I realized the other day and then forgot about- after the war, new characters step into the niches that were occupied by Laurens, Lafayette and Hercules. Alexander remains constant, of course, because it's his story, but it's very interesting to have that split where you can see new characters stepping into the same niches/roles/archetypes.

[erik]

For Bonus points, Erik shows you Retro Pretentious Stupid and where it comes from.

NOTHING IS NEW UNDER THE SUN.

See you guys again in 2020

[Leress]

Also, the fantasy geek in me would be disappointed if there wasn't at least the potential for the campaign to end with the Revolutionary Set personally facing off against a King George that comes down off his throne and has a power up scene to make him a final boss threat. To Hell with historical accuracy, it'd be fun.

So the Final Fantasy Tactics/Jeanne D'arc/ Drifters route.

[Krusk]

Anyway. I want an RPG that's just like that, only without singing, or dancing, or Alexander Hamilton being mandatorily Hispanic and Aaron Burr being mandatorily black.

That seems randomly exclusionary? Any reasons its whites only?

12. System I really want to use Savage Worlds for this, primarily as an exercise in learning Savage Worlds.

Ugh, thats basically the worst.

Discuss.

This thread makes me think you are a racist who is also dumb.