1KM1KT Free RPG Community

Thanks Gamma.

Can't say I disagree with a single thing you wrote, and some of it I am very glad of seeing that someone else got in spite of the convoluted writing. If I were reviewing Myrmidon myself I would have been less detailed and gentle. Especial thanks for taking the time to try to decipher the megalith in the form it arrived in!

Warm regards
Evan

You're quite welcome, Evan. I don't think "...darn near incomprehensible" was being particularly gentle, but I'm glad you're taking it that way. As I mentioned to some fellow judges, the time required to decipher it to the extent that I did was indeed considerable, but I thought the innovations in the design (however raw they might be at present) merited the effort, regardless of the competition issues.

It'll be interesting to see what direction(s) your further development of Myrmidon will take. The bidding/story-setup system invites comparisons (and contrasts) with Universalis which suggests the game could stake new ground along the "avant-garde" RPG continuum. But theoretically you could instead strip out some of the structural innovations and end up with a strong game with strong characters and situations and fairly conventional overall system, highlighting the unusual effectiveness and powers mechanics. Or keep everything, adjust and polish it, and prove it really can all work together. (Especially if you've got a complete vision of all the aspects of game play, but just didn't get it all across on paper this first try.) Or anywhere in between, or some combination.

I am relatively vicious at critiquing myself, and having done a re-read or two since the contest, the incomprehensible comment is definately gentle.

I have to say that the comparison to Universalis makes me very happy. I have only read that game through the forge boards, but I can definately say that some of the fundamentals of the M bidding system have root in the concepts that discussion of U has brought to my mind. That I got to the same ballpark on my own, more or less, is rather gratifying. That I came up with game concepts that might make their own mark in that ballpark, even more so.

I also am in something of a quandry and you have summed it up precisely. There are a lot of different directions M can go from here, with lots of different consequences for the game as a result.

Ultimately I think my decision on developing this will be half intuition (i.e. what strikes me as the best idea at the time), and half reasoning through the possibilities to find what is likely to have the broadest appeal and greatest intellectual satisfaction to the writer. Which might be two directions...

I do have a complete vision of role play for this. The problem as I see it is that a group needs to have at least 2 and probably more people willing to assume the classic GM mantle. For the tactics aspect of the bidding to really come into play my estimation of the group dynamic would really need everyone to have the agenda of wanting or willing to do that role. And that most definately limits the broadness of the appeal.

On the card/ability/desire matrix I am conflicted, but in a different way. It is an abstract way of manifesting ability and motive that I like tactically and conceptually, but needs a large amount of support to get to a simulation of reality that people are likely to buy in to. The Myrmidon's construct nature is a good avenue for this... My issue here is 'ok that works... but what is the player's goal?' I have resorted to the 'experience good, give points to make character better' idea of reward which doesn't entirely gel in my mind with the cards as they are manifest. Oh, I think it works. But I don't konw if it is the most elegant or appropriate solution.

Hmm. need to think on it some more. And perhaps solicit some advice here and elsewhere... anyone?

Warm regards,
Evan

Still hoping others will add their comments here, perhaps when some judging results [quiet *ahem* to my ninja bretheren] bring people back to the forum. In the meantime...

The comparison to Universalis is probably inevitable in any case, since we're talking about opening play with proposing and bidding on major elements of the story to come. In fact, I'm wondering if that comparison has become lazy criticism -- the way every movie review for a movie with non-chronological scene ordering has to mention Pulp Fiction whether there's any significant further similarity or not.

[commits seppuku just to be on the safe side]

[uses dark ninja powers to return to a form of shadow-life]

What's more interesting are the differences. If Universalis is role playing reduced to pure hydrogen -- always using the same straightforward way of reaching agreement about what goes into the shared imagined space -- then the Myrmidon bidding is some sort of organic chemistry. It's establishing the setting and other "tenets" of the upcoming episode, but resolved not by popularity but by who's willing to offer the most attractive distribution of protagonist and "GM" resources (if I'm interpreting that correclly). This invites another not-quite-gratuitous comparison, with Prime Time Adventures' Screen Presence mechanism. (This is a rather tenuous connection on the face of it, but a rather important one, I think.)

I can see that the proportion of gaming groups that have 2 or more participants willing to take on GM-like responsibilities might be an issue, but I'm not sure it's the biggest one. (I think that among groups willing and able to take on a game like Myrmidon, even in a hypothetical focused/refined form, you might not find multiple "GMs" that much of a rarity.) The issue is the juxtaposition of story interests (e.g. good prep by the storyteller player) and competitiveness. What other players seem to be telling the winning bidder is "We want to play the scenario you've prepared -- but only after we, by bidding against you, force you to offer us more resources and rewards for doing so than we'd be willing to give out ourselves (and/or cutting your own resources and rewards for being the storyteller closer to the bone than we'd be willing to put up with ourselves)." That goes so much against the grain of the conventional GM-player social dynamic that it'll take quite a bit of getting used to. It certainly makes my inner old-school caveman "me-GM you-grateful" role player cringe.

Not that that's a bad thing. It's probably a very healthy thing, if you can sell people on the concept.

I agree with everything you said about the card matrix. Yes, it might just be too mechanics-intensive (or German-board-game-like as one judge put it) to fit in here. Yes, the construct nature of the Myrmidons might offer a way to fit it in anyway. I agree that increased powers probably aren't the best way to go for advancement. Might I suggest instead, advancement via an increased supply of some resource that's used to override some of the card and die strictures set up by the initial bidding process? Those might even be traded off for a decreasing strength of "insect powers" (which would also make the flashier powers taper off appropriately from the heoric age to the more refined present day). Or do wine draught tokens already do that? This possibility is full of pitfalls -- for instance, given most players' traditional reluctance to choose less-than-tactically-optimal actions, could they possibly see having more available options at a lower success rate per option as advancement?

Just a minor point for consideration...honourable Judge Gamma suggested that you may have "a complete vision of all the aspects of game play", and you (PlotDevice) responded that you have "a complete vision of role play" (italics added for emphasis).

Are you thinking of cutting back on the strategy with the cards, or was that just a misinterpretation on someone's part (potentially just mine)? I'd like to see the strategy part remain, as well as the evocative bits...that's mostly in the writing, I guess.

Much food for thought.

M's bidding system started in my head by thinking about the old Canterbury Tales story contest. It has evolved since then a bit, and needed adaptation to the concept of a group story (i.e. rpgs). Constructing appropriate stakes for the roles has been one rather complex aspect of the game development. I find your take on the power structure of the GM role and the nature of the bidding & stakes illuminating. I'm gonna process that for a while.

Your ideas about a decreasing scope of power are likewise interesting. I don't know if they gel exactly. One linear progress that the story arc of M points to is decreasing power as game time passes but increasing free will. Maybe that is something I can play with a bit more. The increasing free will thing might be an excellent reward if managed properly. Much more thinking needed there.

Many thanks!
Evan

PS: seppuku and auto-resurrection on general principles... LMAO