I'm working on an oracle that is based on rolling 2d6 with a +3 to - 3 modifier. Because I want symmetry in the odds, I've decided that any result of 7 (the mid point of 2d6) will be a "special" result of some kind. This special result will be one of two things: A ripple(see links below) from a previous branching story point being felt NOW, or something else.
Let me talk about the ripple first, which I already know how I will implement, before I talk about the "something else," which I'm hoping to work out here. What the Oracle will do is spit out a previous story branching point at the player. The story branching points will most likely be whatever questions or statements the players put to the oracle-- including ones that get 'no' answers. When the Oracle spits such a branching point at you, it means that a chain of consequences has rippled through time as a result of the turn that point took. If you got a 'yes' for that particular question/statement, the ripple happens as a result of that coming in to existence. If you had got a 'no', the ripple instead happens as a result of that NOT coming into existence.
The player is responsible for figuring out how that affects their present moment. Whether they use the oracle to figure that out or use something else is their concern. Whether they want to figure out what the chain of events was or they are satisfied with knowing only the impact it has on the NOW is also up to them. I'm pretty set on this idea, but feedback is always welcome.
Something else
I also want to have another kind of "special" result. This result can stil be a yes or no, but with a twist. The twist itself is more about adding some interesting color or flourish that you perhaps would not have thought to add with a plain yes or no. "no, but" and "yes, but" are too open ended for what I want.
For example:
"Is he blonde?"
Do not want to prompt ideas that have nothing to do with hair color:
"yes, but he's really smart!" / "no, but he's really dumb."
Do not want to completely negate the "blond" part:
"no, but he has red hair"
What I want to encourage:
"yes, but he dyes his hair black(i.e. technically no)." / "no, but he dyes his hair blonde (technically yes)"
Another example:
"I jump. Do I make it over the chasm?"
Do not want to prompt ideas that have nothing to do with making it over the chasm:
"yes, but an angry goat is waiting at the other side." / "no, but you hold on to a branch and make it safely to the ground below."
Do not want to completely negate "making it over the chasm". It has to be at least technically true:
"no, but you hold on to a branch and hang there
"no, but you fall safely into the river below."
What I want to encourage:
"No. Your feet did land on the other side's edge, but you are falling now because you lost your balance and your foothold."
"Yes. You missed the other edge due to a bad jump, but a handy jutting branch allowed you to climb up."
I would like to find a phrasing that encourages the thing being asked to be either true though technically false, or false though technically true. I find this kind of subtle and directed modification to the fiction fun.
I'm also duly noting that an oracle like that is not to everyone's taste, but rather than get sidetracked on a discussion about the merits of that, I'd rather that this discussion focus on finding a way to succinctly get that idea across as an Oracle result.
####################################
For context you could read these posts, but it's "not exactly" necessary:
Ripples In A Pond
https://plus.google.com/108395059461267285712/posts/4eXHjfnCWXm
2d6 +3/-3 probabilities
https://plus.google.com/108395059461267285712/posts/7uBwhGBz5Yb
"Not Exactly" as an Oracle result
https://plus.google.com/108395059461267285712/posts/T94UKssaBLD
Re: Consequences
ReplyDeleteRipples are consequences, but the latter word can have negative connotations for people, like bad stuff happening as a reaction. I find the mental image of ripples to be handy in getting across what I mean, which is the chain of consequences engendering consequences, without any connotations . It's just causality.
Every AP I've ever read includes some sort of causality in them at some point, whether they're connecting some past event to a present one, or figuring out what reaction stems from a PC action. I don't know if people do this by instinct or something else, but it's never been missing where I have looked.
However, merely including causality is not really my point with the idea of ripples. I've been doing that along with everyone else since I started playing solo. My point with ripples, in the context of the original post, is the question of putting a conscious & formal limit on how long you should make a causal chain, as a solo player constructing a GM response, before you require a PC action. The idea has led me to vastly reduce my use of oracles by essentially making causality, formal rules/limits around constructing GM output, and my base RPG system be my GM emulator (with a big helping hand from predictive text apps to give shape to what those things dictate).
Incidentally, I don't particularly find that I've had to make a trade off between flow with this as compared to not using it in the past. My games have flowed equally, but the new approach i adopted during my Trollbabe game has increased the GMful feeling for me.
######
In the context of this oracle, I'm using the same mental image of ripples to explain the use of causality for a different end-- specifically, the connection of randomly selected past events with the present as an oracle mechanic. Mythic already does that with its "move towards/away from a thread" random event. I want to do something similar to that, but trigger it with "yes/no, but" results, and also fill in the "but" with the final link of a causal chain extending from a randomly selected event to the present moment. The randomly selected event is just a previous Oracle answer to a previously asked question.
Oh, okay, that makes sense. For what it's worth, I have no negative connotations for "consequences". That and "causality" have helped me understand better, I think.
ReplyDeleteI really like the idea of using a previously asked Oracle question as the base!
I think thinking about this stuff consciously is always a good thing, both for design and to increase the chances we'll all find our own "perfect" style of play!
all, I have a work in progress that is almost finalized. Chris Stieha has very kindly given me feedback. I am looking for one or two other play testers who might be interested in playing around with it and sending me feedback, and questions before I make it public. If I get more than 2, I'll probably flip a coin. :)
ReplyDelete