Core Value redo

Summary:

Your opinions are wanted.

Core Value redo

Colin_Fredericks 27 Dec 2009 01:19

Level 0: Window dressing, no game effect.
Level 1,2,3: Pick a bonus.
Level 4,5: Pick an unacceptable order.
Each level: Pick a restriction.

Samples are below.

Anonymity (Masquerade)
Bonuses: Avoid tracking. Conceal personal information. Hide in a crowd. Tell a lie about your identity. Invent a persona lens.
Unacceptable Orders: Tell me your name. Tell me who your friends are. Take your mask off. Give me a sample of your DNA.
Restrictions: Give out a different name every time someone asks. Nanites compulsively clean up after you. Have your mesh remove any distinctive personal habits.

Order (Cognitive Union)
Bonuses: Working with others. Working a system. Understand a set of laws. Stay calm.
Unacceptable Orders: Riot. Break a law. Rebel against authority.
Restrictions: Must obey the law. Obsessive-compulsive disorder. Have your mesh remove negative emotions.

Worship (Disciples)
Bonuses: Ignore sensory deprivation. Be still and quiet. Meditate.
Unacceptable Orders: Be loud. Wear something different. Betray your civilization. Leave your civilization.
Restrictions: Cannot change civilizations. Cannot betray your vows. Must meditate an hour each day. Do not speak.

Safety (Replicants)
Bonuses: Creating replicator technology. Improving the resolution or control of a mesh. Creating safeguards or backup systems. Assessing a plan for risk.
Unacceptable Orders: Risk your last instance. Leave the Replicants. Destroy a backup of yourself. Use an untested device.
Restrictions: Use a replicator at least once a day. Be sure at least half your instances are in Replicant space. Examine every plan before proceeding. Put yourself under recorded surveillance.

Re: Core Value redo

Hussar 28 Dec 2009 01:28

Interesting…

I like the more structured approach to Core Values. And, adding in restrictions along with bonuses with higher core values makes them more interesting IMO.

I'm assuming that the list is hardly exhaustive. These are simply examples? How serious should the restrictions be? Are there any consequences for ignoring a restriction? There is a couple of dangers with the restrictions: situations could arise where satisfying a restriction is impossible, so, what happens. Also, how do you make sure that all restrictions are roughly equal? Leave it up to the GM (a perfectly fine answer IMO)?

Re: Core Value redo

Colin_Fredericks 28 Dec 2009 15:49

Yes, the list is intended as a set of examples. I'd want to expand it some before using it.

In my mind, the restrictions should be serious enough that they'd come up about once per game, and could be the focus of an entire session once in a while (at least for that player). Some are less serious than they might seem - for instance, the Disciples use sign language, so they rarely need to speak to begin with.

If satisfying a restriction becomes impossible, I'd say the player loses a point from the CV for a while - their belief has been shaken, whether it's their fault or not. If you really believe, you'll probably be beating yourself up for not living up to your ideals. I'll have to think about it. It's not intended to screw people over, more to be a roleplaying tool.

Last edited on 28 Dec 2009 15:58 by Colin_Fredericks Show more

Re: Core Value redo

QHudspeth 29 Dec 2009 16:40

failing to live up to a restriction could be a Stress-like effect, a la Star Lost. Perhaps you'd need several failed instances to have a truly detrimental effect.

Re: Core Value redo

Colin_Fredericks 29 Dec 2009 17:24

I'm not familiar with Star Lost. Can you tell me the short version?

Re: Core Value redo

Colin_Fredericks 02 Jan 2010 22:59

Perhaps I am an idiot and have completely forgotten that Star Lost is the game you've been working on and talking to me about. I could have sworn that was Stories from the Shelter.

Last edited on 02 Jan 2010 23:04 by Colin_Fredericks Show more

Re: Core Value redo

QHudspeth 05 Jan 2010 14:10

Not an idiot, just busy! Yes, Stories had a name change about six months ago. Star Lost still isn't perfect, but it's better.

Re: Core Value redo

Colin_Fredericks 29 Dec 2009 18:48

An idea that came up in Aikanaro's criticism thread was that of making CVs something that can be defined and changed during play. I think this would be very useful; I just need a good way to make it happen.

What do you think? Good use for Twists? Good excuse to put in an XP system? Application for the Metatech Engineer or social characters in the group?

Re: Core Value redo

TauCeti 02 Jan 2010 02:00

My view is that role playing should reflect CVs and CVs should reflect role playing. If a character changes, their CVs change with the character. Personally, I do this whenever I notice that there is a discrepancy between how the character is being played and the written CVs, and I encourage players to do the same.

I’d recommend having it in the rules that when a PC’s CV’s change, it is an open thing, to prevent anyone from trying to game the system.

Personally, I don’t think that there should be any cost with changing a PC’s CV’s, other than having a reason. If something traumatic happens to a character, the player shouldn’t have to spend something to adjust the character’s personality to reflect that.

I have (as a player) changed another PC’s CVs via hardwired lens and metatech engineering. Of course, the personality edit was requested by the PC and her player. It was used to shunt a PC from one civilization to another (Masquerade to Stored, I think). (Specifically, we used a twist, and she took the complication of 'the edits stick').

Personally, I like having my character’s personality changed by outside influence (even other players). That said, I’ve found that many people really hate it when that happens. The game should be comfortable with both play styles.

Re: Core Value redo

QHudspeth 05 Jan 2010 15:10

Yeah, Tau makes a strong argument there. I've struggled with the same question for my Paths. I think I'd prefer them to be more fluid, but since I've tied them in with XP earning, I felt they needed to be bought.

But yeah, personality defining stuff should be changeable with a straightforward process. Even if it's just, if you can justify it dramatically, you can change it or add something new.

A cap would be necessary, but I wonder if there would be a trend toward a natural cap, by way of some non-overlap clause. By which I mean, don't allow CVs to overlap and require that they be rather more broad than Theme descriptors. Dunno, just a feeling that they'd naturally cap out if a player were really defining a character and not a set of munchkin ratings.

Re: Core Value redo

Colin_Fredericks 10 Jan 2010 22:26

On further examination, this system as written will result in an average of 12+ restrictions for every character in the game, which sounds a bit overkill to me. Pain in the butt to track, even for the players. So some of that needs to scale back.

Here's an idea for a flexible system, with some inspiration from the FATE system. I'm designing in the open here, so take all this as stream-of-consciousness rather than something handed down from on high.

At the start of the game, pick one broad restriction per CV. You can ignore these all you want. However, the GM can put you into a situation that conflicts with a CV and let the players dangle rewards in front of you.

GM: "You could get there on time, Mr. Stored, if you duplicate yourself and send a copy through the wormhole."
Stored Player: "Well…"
Player X: "No way, you can't believe in that. No Stored thinks that way."
Stored Player: "True. Hmm."
GM: "Go and you'll solve the problem. Stay and you'll get 3 Reserve."

Ooh, we could link it to Complications.
Go and things work out.
Stay and you get a Complication, but Twists or Reserve.
Twists suddenly come from using CVs.

Hmm. Food for thought.

Re: Core Value redo

QHudspeth 11 Jan 2010 14:07

I'll take your word on the 12+ restrictions. I like the "one broad restriction per CV" approach for the start of the game. Perhaps more specific restrictions could be worked in later as the character develops. Is there some way to reward the restrictiveness of the restrictions?

I like the idea of generating twists through use of CVs (but then, I designed an XP system that does the same, so kick me).
It's a "tangible" reward for staying in character and encourages the development of more CVs.
If we could somehow link the CVs and Theme descriptors in a self-limiting way, that might be useful, too.

Re: Core Value redo

Colin_Fredericks 12 Jan 2010 15:47

Perhaps more specific restrictions could be worked in later as the character develops. Is there some way to reward the restrictiveness of the restrictions?

I like both these ideas. Perhaps we could tie how badly the restriction is hurting you at that time to the equivalent level of Complication, and generate Twists that way.

Re: Core Value redo

Pneumonica 21 Jun 2010 06:28

CVs to repopulate Reserve pools might get a little wonky, though it might work out. If you make Twists less awesome, you could make them a more expendible resource.

For instance, instead of having Twists give you your Theme at full value, require a number of Twists equal to the theme. (Perhaps allow "overspending", allowing you to surpass your normal Theme by spending twice as many Twists.) Under this system, if you take a Complication based on your CV, you get a number of Twists equal to the CV. This makes the stronger CVs a lot more tempting thanks to the degree of benefit you get from them. This will also produce a number of phenomenon involving how people take CVs depending on their Import. A high Import character might have high CVs, in order to maximize their Twist potential, but on the other hand a low-Import character might do the same thing so that they won't need to take Complications so often.

This also means that heavily-Themed characters don't have a "win" button just by spending a Twist - they have to spend a lot to get that far. Low Import characters, on the other hand, can still capitalize on their Themes pretty heavily if they have high CVs.

Last edited on 21 Jun 2010 06:28 by Pneumonica Show more