The Rules of Data Brokering (or, 'So you wanna be a Lore Monkey')

I've mentioned it before that I am a fan of information gathering in games. I enjoy finding Lore, whether it's from the setting or from the players themselves. Backstories, locations and items of notes, secrets and documents, the full gamut. I also like data analysis and piecing together those bits of information to put together a narrative, or be able to take those pieces and be able to add it to the narrative as need be. It's one of the reasons why I enjoy playing and running in conspiracy games, because there are so many dots to connect and ways and means of exploiting those nodes against each other.

I'm a real life Mekhet, what can I say?

That's really where I found out I was good at dealing in information, or at least a fan of it. I used my talents both in game and in real life to listen and discover tidbits from people. Never got to use it, but by the end of game I had accrued a few sizeable bits of information that could be exploited if needed. It's the preferred MO of my favorite character, the Mage Rhys. He uses his knowledge of the magic in the City to investigate and discern pieces of information. He doesn't get the whole picture, but he can get enough pieces and push them together. My 7th Sea character, Aiden, was a thief who liked to play the Inish stereotype while stealing your conspiracy plans early on in the game. Playing Lore monkeys and data gatherers is kinda my jam in most games. From teenager hackers to that guy who knows every one. Some players are out to game the system, I'm out to game the setting. 

Of course, not every game is meant to explore the setting too deeply. Some GMs are more use to riffing the plot and don't have a lot of information saved up to make investigations viable or information consistently useful. Sometimes, the Game has a very tight plot and finding information nets you dead ends. I've run in to several of these games and I tend to find myself getting frustrated. There's no point in someone trying to find info if that info isn't some that isn't able/worth to be discovered. 

So here are my thoughts for Players and GMs who find themselves want to add some data brokers in their games.

The Rules for Brokering

The Rule of Necessity

The information that you're dealing in needs to be of use to the other PCs in the game. Whether you're a player or a GM, the information you're doling out must have something vital inside of it. It doesn't not need to be relevant to the immediate situation, but it should be something that can be used later on as necessary. 

Lately I've been watching and listening to the Critical Role podcast. During the earlier parts of the series, during a conversation the players were having, an NPC name dropped two antagonists from one of the players backstories. The player got to respond to that, but nothing is done for ten episodes. 

You can use the brokers to seed future information, to put Chekhov's Gun on the wall and wait to see when it fires off.

The Rule of Contradiction

Despite the fact that you're suppose to be selling this information in game, you're trying to give this information away out of game. Info brokers are meant to serve as a means of forwarding plot or otherwise finding ways to enhance or aid the plot move along. Finding a contact that can provide access, or a key secret of an enemy. 

The key thing for Players and GMs to be aware of is that this is a plot for plot economy. You're giving out information to handle plot to potentially have more plot (personal or setting based plot) later on down the road. 

While talking to other players while writing this, the notion of someone who gathers information and doesn't share is seen as a problem player. This is especially true for newer players trying to catch up with the plot and are willing to pay. If you're a broker, or have a broker NPC, your job is to catch those players up and tie them further in to plot. Giving people something to do is good work and promotes interest...and a character tied to making some interesting decisions.

The Rule of Acquisition

There must be some means of tracking this information down. Maybe you're a hacker, maybe you're a spymaster with a network of informants. Maybe you're psychic, maybe you're a psychic hacker with a network of psychic cyborg informants (I've played this game before). Varys has his little birds, Holmes his Baker Street Regulars. The method is almost as important as the information.

The reason I say this is twofold: 1) How you find this information out provides the context of that information. Are you dragging someone across the coals looking for information? Are you bribing a susceptible cop? Do you have blackmail information on some senator? Are you collating data from social media using algorithms that I will never, ever, be able to understand? 

How you get that information is important to context. Interrogation is notorious for not giving the correct information, and that brief information. Blackmail is a good way to cause enmity, passive collections means less vital information. 

I played a hacker in the later '80s, one of the first all time hackers....Hollywood hacking had everything set up on the computers, so cracking data wasn't as good as using the phones more often than not. You could do a lot with a tapped phone and a pencil than you could with the most powerful IBM computer. 

The other reason why keeping the means of acquisition clear is because it helps establish character. Social characters tend to create a network of informants and co-workers that can be relied on. Interrogators are often cold and ruthless. Hackers are eccentric loaners, and so on and so forth. These characters provide a service, that doesn't stop them from being characters.

For players, whatever your means, be prepared to work for your information. Data is not free, you know that as a fact. If it's information that you can easily acquire then it probably isn't worth having, despite how powerful your stats are in game. The rule of the game here is to make sure this information is good, and vital, and can help further along the game. 

And for GMs, make the acquisition of this information challenging to the players. Not just in dice rolls and challenges, but in hooks and traps for the brokers as well. A broker who isn't invested is a broker who isn't doing their job right. Keep the broker invested, but make them work for it. 

The Rule of Subjectivity 

Simply put, information is open to interpretation. That's what the point of Data Brokers are for, to sift through the information and sell the context. The information you find can be wrong, or that the information gathered isn't complete. 

This is one of those where I have to separate the player and the GMs needs here. I encourage GMs to have multiple sources of information (whether they are competing brokers or not) that have different interpretations or pieces of information. I also encourage that information to be open to interpretation that can be gotten wrong. 

I've mentioned before that in my Mage game, I had characters who investigated things in different ways. Spirit servitors, Ghostly provocateurs, Scrying Windows, and Dream Visions. Depending where and when they ask, they will all get similar but different points of reference. I did this to tie the different and disparate PCs closer together and also to corroborate what was valid and what wasn't. Sometimes they got information wrong, sometimes they got it right.

Let me make it clear that wrong information does not mean a dead end. Sometimes getting things wrong causes its own storylines, or reveals something new about the world and its characters.

For players, You can be wrong about your information, but you cannot be the source of that, especially to the other players. If you're dealing information to your other players, you are working on a level of trust with them. If you consistently dead end them they will not deal with you and you'll be in a corner playing with your index cards full of information you cannot use. You're providing a vital service for the rest of the game in a support role, if you can't provide it, what are you doing?

Words of Advice

For the GMs

Playing the information game isn't easy. Because it requires having information about the plot already set up. This means that it is very possible for the PCs to figure things out early. If you're someone who prefers a plot driven story that players and PCs react to, then this may not be for you. That's fine. Let your players know that if they're edging towards information gatherers. Let them know that information may not be easy to get because things are in such motion that you can't get access to it. Be transparent that this is not the kind of game for that. Again, been there, it's a good way to lose a player. 

For the Players

Being an information brokering PC is a form of support role. Your job is to gain and disperse information. You have a valuable service to provide. You don't have to be a friendly character, you can have your ulterior motives, but you are playing to further along plot. Information that isn't being used is useless. You drive the plot bus that the other players get on, and you're the one with the map navigating to the next stop. Be prepared to work for the information you're looking for, be prepared to  work with the GM to get this information.

The information broker, or the lore monkey, or how you want to call it is one of my favorite types of play in the game. It's discovery of the setting and sharing that information that makes it intriguing. It's digging in to the world and digging yourself in to deals and troubles. I love doing it because it allows characters to delve in to the setting by using their wits and their words. I hope my words have helped you, and I'd love to hear your experiences with dealing in information in gaming.

Later

I have a Patreon, focused on my serialized fiction. One of my series, Bleed, focuses on the lives of role players both in and out of game. It is released to the public monthly, and patrons receive early and immediate access. If you like what you read here, please consider supporting. That'd be cool of you.

Kensei and Building a Positive Gaming Culture

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