I've come to the conclusion that game developers are secretly anthropologists. They may not notice it or really think about it when they make their games, but the ground work is there. Their writing and mechanics define the expectations and permissions of the world that they wish to create. Some games have really thought about this. Dystopia Rising's system has a spread out mechanics, where if you are going to survive in the threatening environment of the world after nuclear and zombie related war, then you NEED to interact with others. Combat-centric characters need the support characters to survive, and the support need combat centric characters to sell their gear to or use their skills. It's a game of trying to work in symbiosis under great stress of both a personal and environmental level.
The White Wolf system used in Mind's Eye Society really doesn't allow that. It focuses more on the individual. Their skills, their assets, their resources. That makes it very easy to think only of oneself. Combined with the predatory and political nature of the White Wolf games, things tend to take on a CvC and sometimes PvP angle without it being intended. This has caused epic levels of drama both in and out of game. Entire games collapse because people aren't working together In Character or Out because they are too busy focusing on their own.
This has sometimes turned the games that are played into what I've previously referred to as "Pokemon with Sheets". By this I mean that players aren't roleplaying, they are just showing off their sheet savvy. I've seen this turn into a toxic environment, which ultimately ends in the murder of those games. Playing your sheet is, to me, anathema to the whole process of roleplaying.
What this all leads to is me trying to come to terms with the development of my own game: Kensei. Kensei is a larp set during a competitive martial arts tournament. While the game is focused around the fighters, there is an entire community around them of managers, trainers, gamblers, medics, merchants and media. It's meant to be a game about competition. The problem: I've seen too many people trying to game the system, breaking the spirit of the game.
How do I work on a game that is inherently about winning and victory without making it a complete clusterfuck of players trying to out do each other?
Some of the ideas so far are as follows. They are subject to change:
1) All skills must be accomplished by Role Play
Even if you're a fighter, if you're using a skill, it must require some element of role play. From a special attack, to persuading a merchant to slash his prices for you, to even bumping up your Health and Energy stats. You must have a significant level of role play to justify your skills. Your character defines your skills as much as the reverse.
2) You can only advance through collaboration
This is aimed more at the fighters than anyone else. The Social characters are there for the Fighters, but the Fighters cannot advance without working in some form or another with the other characters. A Fight can walk in by themselves and just fight. You can do that, that's great. But you and your gear won't advance. You need to know a trainer, and you need to know merchants and maybe even medics to work with. Keeping the media on your side is also a good idea because
3) Your actions do go noticed
One of the things I enjoyed from playing Requiem was the role of the Harpy. One part Social Column, Another Part Court Reporter. They were the eyes and judging gaze of society. They could raise and lower a person's status within the City, which overall granted some extra benefits and responsibilities. In theory, Harpies were an in character way of keeping the players both in character and true to the venue and the culture. I like the employment of that.
4)Interaction and Oversight by the GMs
The GMs represent both the out of character and in character authority in games. The Marshals are the referees. They must be present for all combat scenes through one form or another to ensure that the rules were maintained. If someone tries to break the rules, well, they also get to be the events security Ninjas, who can put a character down if needed.
5) Trust and Mediation
This is a game where people are in open competition with one another. Their characters can deploy backhanded tactics, their players shouldn't. Ops will have mediation and debrief available for those who need them when situations become too intense or if players come into conflict with one another.
Those are the ideas from now. The problem with developing the culture is that you can plan all you want but the players have to take to it. Another thing about cultures is that they tend to evolve over the years. Maintaining the spirit of the game is something that requires being mindful of the game world, and the players and checking to see if improvements can be made. The idea is to be proactive with involvement in improvements. I've seen too many games fold under their own rules by changing things due to incidences.
For those designers and game runners, how do you help maintain the culture of your games? How do you keep the game honest to it's setting and themes without compromising your players?
Later,
C
