Home of the Quantum Ogre, Agency, Theory, and Fun
On Sectors, Quickstarted.
Less than 48 hours left! Don't miss out!
I know explaining it doesn't do it, sometimes. So let me show you.
I can tell you from experience, it's pretty cool.
For context:
Come join before time runs out!
Or you could join the discord, or read the preview on DTRPG if you're curious.
On "Solving" the action economy part II
The manon, the grid, the world of cybertechtronic reality.
Nobody is getting a pizza while the Agonarch and the decker sit alone and play the game.
An Integrated Battlefield
Putting heat aside for a moment, moving everything onto the same battlefield instantly makes asymetric tactically interesting terrain. Yes, it's a standard corporate floor plan, but if the Network Access Node is behind that door, and there's two mages sitting in the middle of a ley line on the second floor, those are tactically relevant goals. Since these objects dramatically improve the utility of those who use them, even a wild random assortment will create emergent tactical situations.
So if it's just a question of standing there shooting at targets, it becomes kind of tedious. Once you're discovered, well, you're on a clock. I'm not a particularly big fan of clocks. I think they are kind of disingenuous. After all, does 'delaying' a real clock change the time? This not a serious comment, but my skepticism about their overuse.
Heat
Heat is triggered by action, but the results of heat are almost certainly going to cause heat to raise. Let's step through the following stages.
at zero heat, you're still in the alert/infiltration portion of the operation. It provides no modifiers or disruption.
Heat rises to one if you pop alert, or if you are identified as an outsider or seen performing a suspicious activity.
The result of this happening is a AR sensor drone is deployed at your location and security personnel are sent to your location.
A gun being fired immediately raises the heat to two. If you're confronted or identified by the guards, heat rises to two. If the sensor drone is destroyed or you engage in suspicious activity visible to it, heat rises to two.
When heat rises to two stars all intruder responses are activated, and all personnel converge on your location. At this point, the intrusion is considered a crime and has a 50/50 shot of raising the heat in the sector during fallout.
Also: During this heat level, all player tests get a free bonus die.
Any kind of explosion or escalation in response raises the heat to three.
Peaceful resolutions are, in most cases, off the table. The entire facility is notified and attempts to stop or eliminate you. Heat will rise by one in the sector during fallout.
Also: At three stars of heat or above, the target number drops. Three on veteran, four on professional, and five on prime.
Finally, any death or significant loss, or an engagement that doesn't end within two rounds raises the heat to four.
At this point, containment and responses have failed. High threat response teams are notified and will arrive in 2d6 rounds.
Also: All characters gain an extra action.
It's important to note, that these are not necessarily sequential. If an explosion goes off during infiltration, heat rises immediately to three.
The Solution to the 'action economy'
Finally, yeah?
I often talk about how Sinless is descriptive not prescriptive. The above resolution is adaptable to the specific unique situation of the mission. It's a guideline for the flow and pacing of the mission that's conformable. It doesn't tell you what to do, it describes different stages which are adjustable to specific implementations of operations. You don't fit the operation in the procedure, you adapt the procedure to the operation. Descriptive not prescriptive, yeah?
Assuming a general case, the above sequence is going to last, on average 11 rounds. It's possible for it to be as long as maybe 18 on the outside, and could be as short as six. The average is a little more than twice the number of turns in a miniatures game like Warhammer 40k, and it's approximately the same length of significant turns taken in tactical games like Age of Wonders to resolve a large conflict.
This is long, but "how long till the Heater Strike Force Murderface Five arrives" is an unknown quantity, and their arrival is generally noted by your sudden and violent death. It could be as short as two turns after they are notified. Suffice it to say, there's a risk/reward to this pull.
This information, although hidden, is objective. Do not rob your players of success by denying the possibility of failure.
The Tactical Flow of Play
Let's take a look at what all needs to be accomplished in those 11-ish rounds, in the context of the evergreen 'extraction' operation.
The target has to be located, secured and removed from the site safely.
The information recorded by cameras and surveillance equipment should be erased.
Optional goals need to be completed. (Erase records of the person you're extracting, steal encrypted information for the Johnson)
The network should be searched for paydata.
All of this is happening while mages cast spells, drones attack, augmented reality drones make things difficult for your deckers and riggers. Locked doors have to be hacked open.
Base movement for characters is 3" per action. Obviously this can be modified by having a grappling arm, replacing your legs with Iron Man style repulsors, or a variety of other options. This is why a charge adds variable distance, just like it would in a sand table miniature battle.
Here's where a lot of things come together to create a pretty amazing experience.
You see, the four pools of dice power both offensive and defensive actions. During conflict, this tactical phase of the game, the pools only refresh at the start of the round.
So you see, you can get extra actions with cyberware to fight in melee, or extra actions for drones using your VCR, extra actions on your deck. But it doesn't make you more powerful, just more flexible. This is why the clarity of the odds is so important. Players are bidding their efforts, their focus, towards many more actions then they have time to accomplish. And they power these actions by eliminating their resistance towards attacks that may be coming their way.
Once heat begins, they have to accomplish all the goals they have left on a very short clock. There are, very simply, too many things to do in too short a time.
So, you can see, within the context of these limits, emergent gameplay goals abound. Somebody has to do something about those two mages on the leyline right now or things are going to go to hell, and you can't move on because the decker needs to open a door, but he's pinned down by a pair of AR ICE constructs. And a robot dog with a rocket launcher on it's back just slid into the other end of the hall. And do we even have a location on the target yet?
Everyone is playing as a team, on the same board, in the same battle as time runs out.
Actions are resolved very quickly. . . the choices not so much. But the outcomes and risks of those choices are immediately clear to the players. The math is simple, and, oh man. Do I really only have four dice left in my finesse pool to dodge?
One final thing. You may have noted I started this by talking about how all life is life, and we're going to have to deal with things that are not us. Here's an open secret—there's no difference between the green and the blighted and humans. They are all just humans. Synths are indistinguishable from life and they reside in things like autocannons and drones. Humans are people working jobs. Dogs and animals are uplifted, being attacked by a dog is terrifying, but when he's also saying "I'm gonna tear your fucking throat out", I mean, what are you, some kind of cop dog killer?
Deodands hunt people, yet have speech. Is something that exists solely to hunt humans worthy of life?
I told you it wasn't an action game. It isn't just retrofuturism. It's cyberpunk.
I mean, sounds like a good time, right?
On "Solving" the action economy, or why hitting a troll is dull.
Hot take, but the actual straight tactical gameplay in modern games (Dungeons & Dragons, Pathfinder, et. al.) is fairly dull.
It ends up being not that big a deal, because of the tactical infinity involved. You can literally think outside the box. That's not a drawback—the dullness. But there are certain instances where someone thought it was fun to give opponents 400 hit points and attacks that do an average of 8.5 damage. In a disassociated ruleset that nullifies all the tactical infinity options, no less.
The early 2000's were a wild time.
It makes me think, you know, now that we are seeing so much content from people, that the vast majority of it is, well, pretty derivative and mid. That isn't an insult. It's a statistical necessity.
Is it ok, even allowed, to say the very basic fact that there are organic limitations to life? For example, I do not possess the ability to process oxygen from water, whereas a fish does. This is something that is very disturbing to think about.
All life is related. If you go back far enough we have a common ancestor with every creature that walks, lives, or crawls. We've developed different capabilities, but the divisions, our divisions, are artificial. They are not objective. They are decided by learned people in the field of taxonomy.
And we don't always agree which animal belongs where. It's not clear. Because every single creature is a unique soup, patterned, but varied, by its parents to better take advantage of its environment.
And they are all you. All life is you.
On the other hand, you commit genocide of bacteria every time you rinse your mouth out with mouthwash.
"Dread it. Run from it. Destiny arrives all the same."
We can, in fact, continue to ignore this reality until all of humanity is extinct of course, whether that happens in the next 150 years or sometime millions of years in the future. There's no end; there's no way off the ride. We are all here till the end.
We will be dealing with talking machines, talking animals, aliens, and more. Can we speak to another alien species when a quarter of our population is unable to participate in society? After over twenty years of working within the United States medical system, I've discovered that there are a large number of people who's general assessment of functioning is too low to live in society without aid. As the foresters say, there's considerable overlap between the smartest bear and the dumbest human.
These are questions without answers. Fantasy leans into it, manifesting our psychological fears in physical form-The lich, representative of unending, undying authority, the werewolf, for the man who works during the day and under influence of the (alcoholic) moon become a beast-reinvented for the modern society of the 90's. . . the 1890's as Dr. Jekyll, to address new insecurities. Zombies for consumerism and overpopulation. Vampires for rape and metaphors about nobility and blood. Dragons for greed.
It's healthy to slay your fears.
But the real world, well, it's less clear cut. The tactical approach of murder a big evil isn't appropriate for cyberpunk. You can't murder a lack of empathy.
A non-trivial reason why modern games are less common than fantasy games, is that there is just more. Cell phones, newspapers, video, instantaneous communication, transportation. Add in magic or some sci-fi, and it can become pretty overwhelming rule-wise quickly.
So let's talk about how I fixed the action economy.
Design talk for game design nerds
So I got to make a game from first principles from scratch. I eliminated all decision paralysis by deciding to create an homage to Shadowrun. What kind of dice? D6's with pools. What kind of character creation? Priority.
I looked at the historical issues with the dice system in Shadowrun, and the chain of solutions that have evolved to deal with that. I didn't want to go the route of "hero points", because I want the game to be focused on the choices the player makes diegetically, not mechanically.
Issue 1: Getting to play the ever-loving actual game.
My personal experience isn't true facts—but I've been running versions of modern games for a long time. I have a few thousand hours of play Shadowrun, Call of Cthulhu, and various World of Darkness games. In my experience, we spent an awful lot of time talking about how to prevent agency removal during transition.
This is my experience form both sides of the table. It's the classic example of not getting in the fucking car to go to get the mission all the way to being concerned about driving across town. You're going to be exposed, there's no defense, eventually you'll just be screwed through no fault of your own.
I've sat with this for a long time, because, as previously noted, I have been diagnosed with and treated for paranoia. But often these situations were me as the Dungeon Master/Storyteller making explicit claims that, "yes, Virginia, you can turn over your firearms before you talk to the Johnson in the club and it'll be fine."
Secondly, it was the early 'oughts, and illusionism was all the rage. Lie to your players. Invalidate their choices. Make your story happen to them. It was the child of the 2nd edition Dragonlance and Skills & Powers era, having grown and crystalized within it's cocoon of the loss of TSR into the butterfly of the new goth clique. Be a cool powerful person of the night. Also: Girls play RPGs now.
Thirdly, the games are literally about this. Shadowrunners get screwed during missions by the corps. The cult has already won in Cthulhu, it's just a question of when you'll go mad. The Vampires can't maintain the masquerade, Gaia is dying, the Technocracy is winning.
Much like the 70's, the 00's are filled with a lot of 'get fucked' media. Which, you know is cool!
But not so much to my taste at the table with (ostensibly) friends.
So of course that was the tenor of the games. It was the explicit instruction given to the people running them, and the players used every defense they had against it. Defenses which, well, weren't in the rulebook.
Issue 2: What do you want to actually *do* in combat?
I've not only played an absurd amount of Dungeons and Dragons combat in literally every edition, but I've done so for thousands upon thousands of hours in various Dungeon and Dragons video games, (Baldur's Gate, Kingmaker, Wrath of the Righteous, Temple of Elemental Evil, Neverwinter Nights.)
Straight combat is very swingy, which is very good for tabletop, and very bad when you just sort of have to kill a lot of enemies. I don't feel that this is a controversial statement. One of the most entertaining things they've done in Baldur's Gate 3 is allow out of combat shenanigans.
You can't just indiscriminately kill in the modern world. This is a game about iconoclasts doing the hard work of anti-anti-utopianism. History says violent revolution takes two centuries to recover from. I know there's madmen out there who ignore the thousands of years of evidence that substantial change and advancement can happen without violence. (Did we have to kill anyone to adapt soap? Enter the space age?) Often violence is involved: not as a goal, but as a byproduct of a dysfunctional situation.
You know who's a 'bad guy' in the modern world? No one. There are damaged people, sick people, ill people, but no evil people. We have killed whole kinds of people, extincted species, destroyed cultures, and obliviated entire gene-lines. Seems like it never solved anything to date, so maybe we should just, I dunno, give up on it?
This is so true, that the idea of a racist is synonymous with losing. You brand yourself as a racist and a totalitarian, you become a laughing stock to the rest of the world. E.g. the confederacy, nazi's, communists, North Korea, et. al. It's been well studied how those power structures are unstable. Race, in the way a racist would use it, doesn't exist scientifically or genetically. There's no significant variation in the current human species that differentiates you from any other human. We are all, in a very literal sense, the exact same race.
We almost certainly had a role in the end of our other cousins, Rudolfensis, Antecessor, Floresiensis, and the eighteen others (that we know of). Since there's no genetic difference in homo sapien, just normal variation in expression, it's . . . well, race is whatever someone says it is. It doesn't exist. You can't run a lab to determine it in any way that racists might find useful and meaningful.
So every time you found a society on that, the ingroup gets smaller and smaller, and the outgroup gets larger and larger, and then. . . well, then you take on your destiny as a loser.
I make it clear in the book—these character's aren't Sinless because of an inability to function in society, but rather as a rejection of it, and they become the agents of change.
So, how do we design around that?
Cognitive Overhead
I started with cognitive overhead. I wanted a 'playable' system. Generally the average person can track about 6-7 different things. This is the average and goes down when people are tired, or stressed, or distracted. This creates a conflict with cyberpunk tropes of gear and upgrading your character.
Having played a lot of Shadowrun, putting this complexity in the target number of a d6 is a huge cognitive load. I use an A4 white sheet with tiny writing front and back to assist me with all my calculations from my Shadowrun 3rd edition days. Entirely too time consuming and complex.
I'm aware of the issues with the static target number resulting in unengaging or exciting play (due to the regularity of success with huge pools). You should know I had this in mind when I was making these choices.
You are rolling between 1 to 12(ish) dice, A target number of 4 means half will succeed. 5 is 1/3 of the dice will succeed, and 6 is 16.bar. The operation for success is comparative, which is a low complexity operation, and chances based on how many dice you roll are very clear to both the Agonarch and the players.
"I am rolling 8 dice with a target number of 6, I know that I am likely to get one success"
Half of those dice come from the player and their level of skill, and the other half, from the gear. Integrating the gear into the core system like this—making it an expectation of the core math—means that a non-trivial amount of complexity in managing those upgrades is hidden. This is not the limit of the gear system but does make having appropriate gear a core part of gameplay.
It's not that the player can't take on something more complex. It's that the game is benefited by making things clear, because the choices aren't about the mechanics. It's about the action taken in the game, and clarity and simplicity in the mechanics enhances that.
When is a tactical decision engaging?
Interesting tactical games like Battle Brothers, Warhammer 40k, Delta's Book of War, Chainmail, Song of Blades and Heroes, Final Fantasy Tactics, and countless others structure your entire gameplay loop around the strategic engagement.
I'd like to caution against trying to implement game loops from computer games into the tabletop arena. You do want a flow of play, but 'game loops' involve satisfactory activates that cause you to further engage with the tactical level. A role-playing game can have both a satisfying tactical and strategic mechanics, but you don't want it to be about 'grinding' through to make your numbers go up.
Role-playing games use platonic solids to augur though a dark curtain to the reality of unseen realms. Let's auger something interesting, no?
So the reason those games are interesting isn't really the combat, it's due to the secondary goals in the combat. In Battle Brothers and BattleTech, you pick apart your enemy trying not to damage your loot. In Final Fantasy Tactics, you earn JP during the fight to craft your characters. In Warhammer 40,000 you draw cards every round to represent the dynamically changing goals of the battlefield.
This is similar to my favorite way to run a megadungeon. Encounter distance can be up to 360' away. While the players explore, the board is filled with more and more monsters, till it's time to get out.
I've played other heist games and found the 'reverse justification' as a functional, if not lazy, way to handle the complexity of a heist. The flashback from Blades in the Dark or Leverage. I like when the players plan. And if they plan well, I mean, they avoid a fight, right?
So tactical play is divided into two phases. First is the infiltration portion. This is where a group with good planning, a low profile, and skilled operatives can move around on site, without drawing attention. As the players act, alert rises. A group can specialize in managing alert and get very good at avoiding fights.
But the players can't have all the information. There are 24 different pieces of relevant information about operations. A veteran operation will find they can discover most of the information (with a target number of 4 for their information gathering skills) while on a prime mission, they might only get three or four pieces of information (with a target number of 6 for those same skills).
As an Agonarch, you just have to be objective. Did they not know about the guard dogs? Man, that isn't your fault. They got to choose what information they wanted.
So, in spite of their best attempts, they will raise alert. As they raise the alert, new obstacles are triggered that make it harder to not raise alert. Mistakes can cascade. Once someone fires a gun or alert pops, we move into heat.
The thing about action movies, right? You have to go, because the cops are on their way.
So in the future, when portals open to dark realms, and Deodands and Alzebo hunt men, we have high threat response teams. The heater teams. They are a hammer. They kill everyone dead and if they want to know something, they will ask your corpse.
So. . . they are on a timer. What is that timer? Well: It's the tactical game.
Tune in tomorrow to find out the exciting conclusion, of me stringing your attention along for capitalist algorithmic optimization purposes. (I mean it isn't my fault that you're 95% more likely to read two 1200 word essays than one 2400 word essay. Fuck it, I'm just tryin' to live here. I'm writing them in the same session. You just won't read the second half if I don't put it in another separate post.)
By tomorrow, I mean it probably went up while you were reading this.
Or you could back the kickstarter, join the discord, or read the preview on DTRPG if you're curious.
On the Friday Froo Fra Fra
I've got a lot on my mind.
Did you know you can have two contradictory thoughts at the same time? Or that there is no other single human on the planet that shares your thoughts and beliefs?
I'm doubly affected—a symptom of my mental illness is, uh, the diagnostic manual calls it "Have flat emotions or have emotional responses that are limited or not proper socially."
Well, I can tell you, that it's because both my awareness and concern about what other people think is a huge fucking goose egg. When I learned about peer culture, I thought it was a lie.
I did think about it in terms of violence, of course.
I keep getting these people accusing me of using AI to produce my drawings. I've got nothing against AI art, or AI products. But I drew all the pictures for Sinless by hand. They are in the same style I've been drawing in for the last thirty years. He asked where he could find more of my work. I told him to start with the mural I painted in Kimple Hall at the University of Arkansas and then work his way forward through my career from there.
The thing is, it doesn't have to do with the work. The words of the accusation are just noise. I'm not saying it's 'non-cognitivism'. I'm saying it's a call. A trumpet, or a song. An identity vocalization. And the call, it's just, not new.
Back in 2010, I had people accusing me of using map programs to draw my maps. The ones I drew live on twitch for Megadungeon.
I've read a lot of discourse about AI art. All I will personally say about my thoughts is this: "As a working artist I'm worried not at all". I'm certain everyone will draw their own conclusions and they will certainly be wrong. Knock yourself out.
If you're reading a conversation between people you know about AI, it's two people arguing about stuff they made up. It's the same with the abortion debate, gun control, or literally any other topic. If you're opening your mouth in public, you only express two things. Your complete and total ignorance of any of the reality of the issues at hand, and how important you've decided those issues are to how you think about yourself.
The fact that you are given these areas to confine yourself to and discuss among yourself is a system of regulation. Some might call that regulation control, or an exploitation of the traits of an organism. Say, a trait concerned about in-group/out-group dynamics and belonging and feeling.
Did you know some people have their corneas removed and can see in the ultraviolet spectrum? With their jelly vision-spheres? Did you ever spent time around another animal, and they just compulsively engage in a behavior that you have no direct frame of reference for? And you see them engaging in the behavior over and over, with no insight into their internal state?
It might be enough to drive a person mad.
The thing is, I see something different. I wrote a whole game about it (and ahda ahda he's on about the game again.) The use of religious imagery isn't accidental.
There is more than enough for everyone.
There's enough money.
There's enough food.
There's enough space.
There's technology available to manufacture and distribute anything we need anywhere on the planet.
The only reason things aren't better is because we decided.
Well, I mean, you decided.
Because, you know, for most people. Fixing the problems is less important than winning. And besides, if the problems were fixed, things might change for you. You might have to change or grow. You might feel diminished when faced with your own private experience being part of a planet among billions of suns among trillions of galaxies flowing in a river across the heavens.
I don't understand that. I can't win. I can't lose. I can't even feel a response to the opinions of other people. I'm not better or worse than anyone else—within my own sphere I'm struggling to do the best that I can.
Did you know people build lightsabers? It's an almost impossible engineering problem, and of net negative utility. But someone showed them something novel. Something new. And once they saw it, there was no obstacle that existed that would prevent the human organism from making it. It was dreamed into existence.
We live in a heaven or hell of our own making. And I guess I'm here for the show.
In the meanwhile, I'm going to imagine making better futures.
Corporate Assets (27/63)
You want to play the game that uses these.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
