Game Format (S.E.T. 3)

[Recklessfireball]

This topic will be for discussing how we'll set up our game for S.E.T. 3 (Dogma, Norjax, Sulldawga, and whoever else might come along for the ride).

[Norjax]

Part#1 - RL's task is to place us on a course to a pre-determined destination/conclusion (know only to him) and allow us to select the path; akin to the choose you own adventure style.

Part#2 - When die rolls are required, RL would communicate the results of the actions with a player's representative (I volunteer myself) who will write the descriptive prose for the others to read. In this way the chosen representative (the Caller) would act like a secondary GM and alleviatete RL's burden.

I'm not sure I'm following you, here. Could you give me an example of what you mean? I don't necessarily have any objections, but an example would help me visualize what you have in mind.

Which part do you want an example of?

[Recklessfireball]

Part #2 is what I'm fuzzy on. I think I'm getting the gist, but I just want to be sure.

[Norjax]

Part #2 is what I'm fuzzy on. I think I'm getting the gist, but I just want to be sure.

Roger that! I'll write an example.

[Norjax]

Arranging the numbers into 10x10 columns might be a lot of work, but I can always make the players do that part. Or we can can just list them all in a single column, and I can roll 1d100 and count from top to bottom (or bottom to top), marking them off as I go. Anyway, we'll work all that out in the topic I set up in the game forum.

I think the players should make the 10x10 matrix/column and present it to you with the supporting macro roll. I will make a matrix sheet example and a column example and see which one would work best.

[Recklessfireball]

Sounds good.

[Norjax]

Choose your own adventure style PbP

The GM’s intent is for the PC’s to travel from Landing Zone Alpha to the Cliff Dwellings of Anaeroba. From Alpha to Anaeroba, there are 6 encounters for the PC’s to overcome. The encounter choices will determine the length and difficulty of the path.

The Game Master (GM) will write a descriptive introduction for the adventure party. The adventure party will designate a Caller, who will then correspond with the GM “behind the scenes” (via. PM) to direct the course of the adventure.

• Encounter #1 The Vorzine Chasm
  
  The PC’s come to a chasm that needs to be crossed.
  
  Choice A: Crawl down into the chasm, cross the base and scale up the opposite side.
  Choice B: Negotiate a rope bridge that is in a serious state of disrepair.

The GM will PM this outline to the Caller. The Caller will then write a descriptive prose for the other party members to read. The party will discuss the options and determine what actions they will take. The party will post their decision(s) and the GM will utilize the pre-rolled values to determine the outcome.

For example:

The players select Choice A, entering the chasm. “Bob” is the first to climb down the chasm wall. This will require several rolls and possible follow-up rolls. Using the pre-determine values, the GM is able to determine “Bob’s” fate without waiting for the player to post each set of rolls.

Let’s say “Bob” falls and is hurt descending the wall. The player for “Bruce”, the medic, has indicated he will automatically attempt to heal a wounded character. Thus, the GM uses the pre-rolled values to see if “Bruce” successfully scales the wall and heals his comrade.

The above results are PM’d to the Caller and the Caller will write and post detailed description of what happens.

Obviously, the players have to trust the GM’s judgment in any pre-determined actions that the player commits their character to.

I'm just throwing ideas around for discussion, so let's see if and where they land.

[sulldawga]

I don't know that the game has to be that much of a railroad. The players should have the freedom to go where they want, or at least choose the missions they want to choose.

I think about it more like this: there are major decision points and minor decision points. For the major ones, the GM stops play and asks the players how they would like to proceed. For the minor ones, the GM interprets previous instructions from the players and applies them as he sees fit to the situation and resolves it without direct player input. If the players don't like how the GM resolved a minor decision point, TOO BAD. No retcon. Move on. Give more explicit instructions next time.

For example, the players enter a bar. There is a choice of four NPCs to interact with. This is a major decision point so the players choose which one to talk to.

Once the conversation between player and NPC begins, the GM resolves it to a conclusion. Maybe the party said beforehand that they'd be aggressive and intimidating to the NPC. So the GM makes a reaction roll (minor decision point). If the NPC rolls high, he's intimidated and gives up the info. If he rolls low, a bar fight breaks out. The GM resolves the entire fight using pre-stated tactics from the players (e.g. I use my blaster until I'm at 25% hit points, then I bust out the stun grenade to cover my retreat).

If the NPC has a hidden agenda, the GM makes a Sense Motive check (or whatever the Star Frontiers equivalent is). If the players make the check, the GM can decide the players would pursue that further. If they miss it, then play moves and, just like in real life, the players don't know what they've missed.

[Recklessfireball]

Typically, S.E.T. Teams will be deployed with two or three (maybe even more) mission objectives in mind. This would give you a bit more flexibility in choosing what you want to do (and in what order). I typically roll with whatever the players want to do, but a more free form game is difficult to do when you're only posting once a week, or so- so there will necessarily have to be some restrictions of freedom to allow the game to move forward.

Once thing I'm wondering is how it would work, once we reach a major player decision point. Do each of you decide individually what your actions are- or do you discuss it with one another, then take one consolidated action as a group? I suppose the designated Caller would mediate this process? Also, I guess your chosen PSA's may indicated, to some extent, what your options are.

As GM, I do like the idea of giving the caller a basic summary of how events played out, then letting them post the results. It saves me a considerable amount of work and lets me concentrate on the games with more frequent post rates, with out getting bogged down with the other. The person taking on the role of caller would have to be willing to commit to a fair bit of work, of course- basically they'd be a Co-DM. If no one was willing to take on that responsibility, it won't work. I'd also want any Co-DM to understand that, even though their doing a great deal of the work, I have final say in any rules disputes, disputes between players, etc., etc.

[sulldawga]

Typically, S.E.T. Teams will be deployed with two or three (maybe even more) mission objectives in mind. This would give you a bit more flexibility in choosing what you want to do (and in what order). I typically roll with whatever the players want to do, but a more free form game is difficult to do when you're only posting once a week, or so- so there will necessarily have to be some restrictions of freedom to allow the game to move forward.

I'm ok with this.

Once thing I'm wondering is how it would work, once we reach a major player decision point. Do each of you decide individually what your actions are- or do you discuss it with one another, then take one consolidated action as a group? I suppose the designated Caller would mediate this process? Also, I guess your chosen PSA's may indicated, to some extent, what your options are.

If we end up going back and forth on our actions, doesn't that defeat the purpose of the once a week post rule in the first place?

As GM, I do like the idea of giving the caller a basic summary of how events played out, then letting them post the results. It saves me a considerable amount of work and lets me concentrate on the games with more frequent post rates, with out getting bogged down with the other. The person taking on the role of caller would have to be willing to commit to a fair bit of work, of course- basically they'd be a Co-DM. If no one was willing to take on that responsibility, it won't work. I'd also want any Co-DM to understand that, even though their doing a great deal of the work, I have final say in any rules disputes, disputes between players, etc., etc.

In this scenario, one of us has to "add color" to the basic summary of what happened? I'm ok with it, I guess, as long as I'm not the co-DM. Or not the co-DM all the time.

Maybe we could do it this way. The following is a hypothetical example.

• Each week, one of us is the Caller. It rotates every week.
  The DM gives the Caller the basic summary on Sunday night by 8 PM
  The Caller writes out the details over the next 24 hours, and then the details plus the next set of choices (presumably selected by the DM) are given to the group on Monday night by 8 PM.
  The group votes once on which choice to pursue by 11 PM that night. Any ties are broken by the Caller. If you don't vote by 11 PM, then you don't get to help decide.
  Once the party knows the choice made, everyone writes a post that describes what their character does and any contingencies desired by Tuesday night at 8 PM.
  The DM takes those and has until next Sunday to figure out what happens next.

[Recklessfireball]

Maybe we could do it this way. The following is a hypothetical example.

Each week, one of us is the Caller. It rotates every week.
The DM gives the Caller the basic summary on Sunday night by 8 PM
The Caller writes out the details over the next 24 hours, and then the details plus the next set of choices (presumably selected by the DM) are given to the group on Monday night by 8 PM.
The group votes once on which choice to pursue by 11 PM that night. Any ties are broken by the Caller. If you don't vote by 11 PM, then you don't get to help decide.
Once the party knows the choice made, everyone writes a post that describes what their character does and any contingencies desired by Tuesday night at 8 PM.
The DM takes those and has until next Sunday to figure out what happens next.

I have to say, I really like this method. It takes all the ideas, combines them, and breaks it down into a clear-cut, step by step way of moving the game forward. The only thing I would say about it, is not everyone may be keen (or have the time) to act as a caller, so it might be best to make it optional. What do the rest of you guys think?

[Norjax]

I like the idea of a designated day to play the weekly game. This gives us an organized time to interact. I accept the necessity of restricting our choices, but it doesn’t have to be limited to two.

I’ll volunteer to be the first caller. Do we have enough of a plan to move forward and see how this works? I still owe you the matrix example sheet.

[Recklessfireball]

Yeah, I don't see any reason why we couldn't get rolling.

One more thing though- Where would you guys like to deploy at, initially? You can choose either The Bay of Hakosoar or the Arcturan Wastes.

This topic: viewtopic.php?f=73&t=1236 has some information and visual aids, if you need help making up your mind.

[Norjax]

Here’s the proposed pre-rolled matrix.

Each player will fill out a matrix with 120 random values of 0-9. The GM will start in the middle square, roll the direction of travel and then use all values in that direction (including the opposite edge) until they return to the center start square. In the example, the GM rolls a "4".

When the same direction is rolled, the GM will offset in a clockwise direction and travel the parallel path. After all values are used, the players will create a new matrix.

This method should cut down on the die rolls for the GM and keep a sense of randomness to the game. By pre-rolling their own values, the players stay connected to their character’s fate.





Thoughts, concerns and suggestions welcome.

[Recklessfireball]

Okay, I savvy. If everyone else is good with it, I'm on board.

By the way, feel free to go ahead and submit a character for approval. Character generation rules are found here: viewtopic.php?f=73&t=1225

Post the finished product here: viewtopic.php?f=73&t=1226

If you have any unusual requests for characters or equipment, feel free to PM me. I can't promise you'll get exactly what you want, but I never dismiss anything out of hand, either.

[Norjax]

I vote for the Arcturan Wastes.

Are sulldawga and Dogma on board with the game? We should probably have a balanced party, so what do you guys want to play?

[sulldawga]

I'm willing to try. Is Dogma in?

[Recklessfireball]

I'll send him a PM today, to verify. Hopefully, he's still interested.

[Dogma]

Yes, I'm still in. I missed the post that directed over to here.

[Recklessfireball]

Cool