So, to start off very basically, what do you do in this game? Hunt rogue programmes? Be rogue programmes fighting against the evil Master CPU? People from outside the virtual world inserted into the computer?

And what differentiates the setting? What makes it exciting, gives it the sense of wonder factor? Retro-computing kitsch? Exciting cyberspace battles? Actually, that might be something to think about: deliberate kitsch or up to the minute tech. I'd go for 80's tat, as everything will be out of date in five minutes anyway.

A 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink, oh no, Tron? Certainly not! Wouldn't dream of infringing the IP!' thing would be the way to go for me. Perhaps something with 'Tron' in the title: Cybertron? Computertron? Orgasmotron?

Maybe not the last one. Or any of them, actually.

Cheers
Malc

Contested Ground Studios

Do you play the programs or the users? Or both, which could be cool. I noticed when I was at David's that the Pokemon computer game is very Tron-like (I see the world in strange ways...). Basically your Pokemon character is the user, who casts programs (pocket monsters) to fight things in the virtual world. I don't know if I'm explaining that well. But you could be playing a user ("operator" is that a good work, like sysop or admin) who activates a program to play in the game. If the program is taken offline you can activate a different one, or even switch between them between scenes to use their different abilities.

In some ways I used to really enjoy the Tron-like netruns of the original Cyberpunk (for clarity, not Cyberpunk 2020, with its grid and movement squares).

I'd like to see a game of this, and help out in any way I could by the way. Oh, and thumbs up for d8s.

Any and all of the above. I generally provide games as a sandbox in which the players can do what they like, or the GM can tailor the game to his concept for an adventure. I prefer to present a game that strongly suggests several ideas of what the players might do, rather than a cast-in-stone premise.

Mostly it will be the translation of technological concepts into a fantasy-like setting. Although the basis is kinda sci-fi, the thing that I loved about Tron was its weird almost-religion, and I want to preserve that. So basically you'll have beings that are computer programs and use strange devices related to various computer gizmos, but they'd be more like magical items, holy weapons and stuff. I also have plans for a sorceror-equivalent character type who casts 'Hexes' to fiddle with the code of the world and produce magical effects. The sense of wonder will therefore come from seeing the familiar trappings of computer science from an anomalous slant.

Cybertron is trademarked via the Transformers license, so no go there. I was thinking of using Computopia, but that's apparently also been used in a novel series. Names always were a weakpoint of mine.

One of my early ideas about the game was for each player to take the part of both a User and a program in the mainframe, so that they could be active simultaneously in the real world and computer world. The program would do all the high-action stuff, while the user would provide buffs, cheat codes and things like that from afar without knowing what was really going on inside the computer. I'm currently veering away from this idea, except maybe as a supplement. At present I think it would work best if the players were all programs, with the option maybe of having users digitised into the computer a'la Tron as an adventure seed.

Hmm, I like Sysop, that might work... the Great and Mighty Sysops, without whom we are nothing... hehehehe.

As a side-note, I wonder how achievable a full-colour print run would be?

Ash

No no you should do all the illustrations in those cool pictures made from varying densitys of ASCII characters :)

I'm not keen on the binary resolution mechanic, especially in the Tron sense. If you remember the bit, which could only say yes or no, was much simpler than the programs, they were above that level. Indeed pretty much the whole concept of a program as an entity is to implement something that can manage logic more sophisticated than yes/no.

If you are going for that semi-mystical thing, though, then what about something where success is something that can be pushed, by expending cycles, or energy (which you can replenish from rivers, or coms towers or the equivalent), i.e. the core of the resolution system is that, except for things which are the function off your program (like Tron at fighting) you need to expend energy to do it at all.

Solipsist RPG Website

1. Keep the religion. Let's pretend this game is set in a world where the evil dictator has just recently been overthrown (say....) but there are still going to be lots of his Control programs running around. Still picking on Believers. After all the system has been running for so long under the dictator control that most programs won't know any better.

2. I like the idea of the User being involved but this should be a one off fate point type thing. The exact opposite, in game terms, of the deus ex machina. Remember that computer actions happen in timeframes of millionths of seconds now so one game session might be long enough for a user to do one useful thing. It could be a plot point or for the gamer types, something like UPGRADE (to give the program new abilities) or REBOOT (to force an end to a scene) or KILL PROCESS (to just put an end to an annoying enemy)

3. Magic. The mystical magic of the users, the IO towers and the tower guardians was so well done. Don't spoil it with "Hexes". At least call them "Matrices" or "Algorithms".

And the name?

Bugger me, haven't all the good ones gone? I'd keep far far away from "tron" and go more with "digital" or somethig like "TerrorByte" or "Pret-a-Byte". I'm joking here....

--
http://www.lategaming.com/

What about using the doubling dice from a backgammon set?

You know, the one that goes 2,4,8,16,32,64?

I have an 8 sided one which goes up to 128, but they are not so common.

I'm sure there's something in that.

I suppose 'Computron' is out as well :)

Solipsist RPG Website

Well, it's astonishingly easy to do that kind of thing, so I might make use of that very faintly in the background as a watermark, though there's no way it'd do for illustrations in general. I actually wrote a small program to convert B&W images into ascii art a few years ago, I'm sure I've still got it and it wouldn't be difficult to recreate even if I don't. Or I could just grab one off the internet, there's a lot around. I just liked mine best because you could use any font you like, adjust resolution to suit and stuff.

Aw, I kinda like Hexes, it's short for Hexadecimal, which is the prime component of machine code and what most early cheat codes worked, and is still used in some modern cheat systems such as the Action Replay cartridges. The idea was that people are uncomfortable around Hex because it's playing around with the way the universe works (which is against the will of the Operators) and if you poke the wrong byte you could end up doing almost anything. Still, I'm always open to peoples' views, and Algorithms sounds nice too, it just doesn't have that 'black magic' ring to it. It's more something I'd see the religious types using.

Definately gotta have bugs as weird giant insect things that sneak into the city and rip you to pieces, or get accidentally created by those naughty Hexers messing around where they shouldn't (I guess I could change 'em to Hackers, how does that sound? Then we can have Hax instead of Hex :D )

Energy or some equivalent (Runtime? Resources?) definately does need to be in there for fuelling magic and other stuff I think. I'll work on ideas for that once I have a more solid idea of how the main system will function. Hmmm... Function... might be a good word for the average PC. That way, each isn't a whole program but a small subset within a program, allowing players to work together. The Program would be the party-equivalent, thus providing coherence and a group objective where this is desirable.

Ash

I was thinking of energy / cycles being for more than just magic, but for everything. Or in other words magic is just more program functioning, but transcending it's normal levels, as in the bits where Kevin repairs the broken sorters and so forth.

I'm thinking something like Nobilis, where everyday tasks, superhuman feats, and magical powers, are all based on the same system and are a continuum of the same set of powers. That way a program can do something easily in its specialist area that another program would need extra power to achieve.

Solipsist RPG Website

Sorry Ash but that is incredibly weak as a reply. You have to focus your game otherwise the players wont know what to do with it. Even games like WOD focus their corebooks to a particular area of the world. The generic book is focused towards paranormal investigation for instance.

Maybe you could concentrate on the technology versus religion aspect of it, or the 'Freedom from opression' angle that is presented in the film.

Choose something and stick with it. You must be able to answer this question: What is your game about? You should be able to answer it in a couple of sentences.

Cheers

Iain
Mob Justice now available!

'The Giant Brain':Small games, big ideas.

I can't agree with that Ian. Do D&D or GURPS tell you what specific sort of adventure you will be playing? Do many of the Indie games that don't even have a concrete setting? I'm all for directed and focussed games, but I don't see anything wrong with presenting a setting, a rules sytem, and loads of different things that you can do in that setting.

For a Tron-RPG I'd definitely appreciate the chance to be both good and evil programs. Being a user I could take or leave though.

http://www.solipsist-rpg.com/

While I agree with you that a game does need central themes to make it interesting, approachable and playable, these need not be enforced so rigidly to be successful. In my experience it is enough to suggest in the background text what the players might do, rather than tell them overtly what they must do. Take World of Darkness, as you provided in example. The only proviso it makes is that players are supernatural creatures of some kind (even that doesn't hold true really, since they could also be mortals). Everything else is merely suggested. Once you step away from the core rulebook this becomes far more obvious. How the players might act is suggested by their clan or affiliation, for example, but they are not restricted in their choices in any way during the game and nor are the various choices of clan and so forth so similar that they could be thought of as a single concept. On the contrary they are extremely diverse. On the face of it, the main book has to be aimed at paranormal investigation because it is meant to lead normal people into the world of the supernatural. They aren't just providing a core rulebook, they're providing enticers for the supplements. Now, certainly, each book has a central theme. However that theme tends to be 'Vampires' or 'Werewolves', maybe coupled with some kind of abstract emotion that is associated with such. They most certainly don't tell you "...but you've got to be a good guy." or "...but you've got to obey the prince." They provide information on the kind of thing you can expect to happen to you if you don't, but they don't enforce. This is what I mean by suggesting rather than enforcing.

Now, to address the problem as you see it, the central theme of the game is likely to be defending the city against incursions from the wild wastes of the Internet. That could mean anything from seeking out enemy agents (spyware, malware and adware) within the walls, purging a bug infestation, defending the city firewall from attack, or less violent causes of action such as going on a mission to an enemy city to retrieve vital information, helping to purge a virulent virus from the population, or taking part in the city's internal polotics. What I don't want to do is produce a game that says "You're all anti-virus software" or "You're all accountancy programs" and so forth. I don't like forcing ideals onto the players or the GMs who may want to run the game differently. The game will certainly be slanted towards the concept of antivirus agents, but there will be enough information and support for players to take almost any role in the digital world. There will also be plenty of points-of-interest highlighting the other important factors of daily life in the city such as religion, secular views on the use of hacking and maybe even what accountancy programs actually do. The city may be at war with enemies from the internet, but it is also prone to its own petty prejudices that can bring it down from within.

It is my belief that it is better to guide subtly by means of inspiration than to enforce rigidly by rules.

Ash

Firstly, both are generic systems, not full games.

Secondly, D&D tells you pretty clearly what you do: You kill things and take their stuff and get more powerful. You can run games with other premises, but that's the core function of D&D.

That's a very interesting concept. In what way id D&D not a full game? Does a game have to be provided with a full setting to be a game? In that case GURPS does qualify, in 4th edition at least, since it has a full fledged setting and the rules to support it.

It seems to me that a game provides a system that supports a certain style of play (e.g. kill the monsters and take their stuff), and may or may not provide a detailed setting in which to do it. Settings are normal, but they are not universal, and a game is still a game without one. Its in that sense, for example, that the first Dragon Warriors book, or the Fighting Fantasy game are still games, even though both were lacking more than the roughest suggestion of a setting.

http://www.solipsist-rpg.com/

David,

IIRC, Gurps 4th presents the dimension hopping setting from the old 3rd ed Time Travel book, right? And so it casts the PCs as Homeline Agents (or whatever the term was, I sold my Gurps 4th books last year). Thus it presents a setting with a pretty well defined campaign structure (the PCs are Agents, hopping dimensions and thwarting the plans of the Centrum or whatever they're called).

Sure, you can use Gurps for any kind of setting*, but if you read the one in the book it suggests who the characters are and what they do.

* Well, sort of. I mean, the system has it's limitations which we don't need to get into here...

'Suggests' being the key word I think. The point with GURPS, being a self-proclaimed 'Universal' system, is that it really does lend itself more to being an 'Anything RPG' than any one specific setting. Sure, the dimension-hopping aspect is there, but how many people actually use it in that manner? Most GURPS games I've ever seen or played in have been set in a single universe, ignoring the dimension-hopping aspect entirely. Players didn't need to be told what they were supposed to be doing because the campaign books themselves provided a broad plethora of ideas for GM and players alike.

Ash

Yes that's correct, though it is a little altered in background details its pretty much the same thing, and forms the best stab at a cannonical setting for the game.

But the existence of that setting is not restrictive. Sure you can be Homeline agents, but you could be centrum agents, or natives of any of the worlds, or traders, or wizards, or psionic world hoppers, or of course nothing to do with the world hopping setting of course.

I'm getting a little confused though (and *way* off topic, sorry Ash), since you said GURPS wasn't a full game in your previous post.

We should split this discussion though

http://www.solipsist-rpg.com/

Ash, if you want some of this moved to a different topic, shout up. I think it might be worth persisting, as some of this discussion it gets to the heart of the questions at hand so is useful.

The thing about GURPs is that it's already told the players what they'll be doing and why it's interesting. The supplements just tell the group where they'll be playing it. GURPs is only an anything RPG if you take anything to mean "something that plays exactly like GURPs".

This gets tricky when you start discussing game design, cos people come in with questions like "what do the players do?" and you're answering at a level below that answer of "isn't it obvious? they play an rpg?" But the whole point of that question is it's asking what the meat of the structure of play is about, not what the ephemera within it are like.

-Matt

Realms Publishing

I think you're missing the point I'm making. The point is, while GURPS attempts to tell (or at least suggest) the players what they should be doing, it is very rarely played in that manner. Players and GMs are quite capable of inferring both what they should be doing and why it is interesting for themselves, given a solid background that provides compelling ideas. As for being 'something that plays exactly like GURPS', let's not confuse the mechanics of the game with the setting of the game. Though one may very well influence the other to varying degrees, they are nevertheless two very separate things.

Ash

Just to qualify, I'm very much not talking about the recent GURPS "travel and infinite universe" thing. I'm talking about the raw "this is why you play this game" stuff that is in every GURPs edition since the year dot.

I'm not talking about setting at all, either. I am most definitely not confusing setting and system. I'm talking structure/process of play stuff, some of which is mechanics, some is "how to run the game" stuff.

I'm talking about stuff that, admittedly, is very ingrained in the culture of play that surrounds the game so you might not notice it. Stuff that's become "the whole point of roleplaying" for a lot of people.

But this is diverging from the topic, which isn't what I wanted.

So maybe an alternative tack for this discussion is to ask you what roleplaying is to you and how you see Digital helping you do that? Is it just a setting for you to play the way your group always play in? Or are you looking to facilitate something different?

-Matt

Realms Publishing

From your original post me old mucker, sounds like you've got a strong idea in your head of the concept of what the setting it about, but that's not coming across. GURPS is primarily a system, (and arguably so is D&D, what with all the Open Licence do-what-you-will stuff) that's intended to be used for lots of different things.

You've not got a system yet, and even if you do, will it really be one that is very generic and could be used in all sorts of games? Or is it actually going to be geared to acheiving the objectives of your specific game?

Just looking at most small press games, most are focused and give you an idea of what you're exploring or trying to acheive or where the fun will come from. There's usually a simple (relatively speaking, compared to GURPS for example) system to back this up. That doesn't mean yours has to be that way, but there are lots of good models out there for you to look at what works.

It is a problem in certain games that players have no clarity of concept and don't know what to do. Saying "here's a setting, do what you will!" leaves a lot of players flumoxed, or leads to them all heading off in different directions. I like the basic idea of your setting, but it would be good to know where your heading with it in terms of mood, theme, objectives or whatever.

You've got a fairly specific idea about what your game reality is all about, so you should also have a rough idea what players will do don't you think? Playing Tron might be kewl, but I need to know where the conflict comes from, or my motivations or what have you. You might want to set your game up to be played in more than one way?

Just my two penneth, for what its worth.

Gaz

Actually you sold me on Hex :)

http://www.lategaming.com/

And more importantly - where's the fun?

Also if you're adamant on exploration of the setting as the basis for play - what is the advantage of using your (non-existent) system over D20 or GURPS or (insert system of choice here)?

What I'm trying to say is - you need to decide which aspects of the game setting you want the players to explore and then tailor the mechanics to them.

+++
JoE
+++

Prince of Darkness Games
Rock N' Role-Play....

I don't know why people aren't getting this.

The basis for play is that players take whatever sides they want (and whatever sides their GM will allow them to) in the ongoing struggle between the city they live in, the predations of other cities, the affairs of religion, and the horrors of the wilderness. Ideas for what players want to do will arise naturally from the way in which the setting and game mechanics are presented. Going back to GURPS for a second, read any supplemental book and you'll find they are jam-packed with side notes and things that are specifically designed to make for good campaign ideas. Similarly, in White Wolf, the various clans provide driving forces behind what the players do. That's the kind of approach I prefer myself, unless a game very strongly needs a specific direction to go in I like to give players and GMs enough freedom to do what they want but enough ideas so that they aren't wanting for inspiration. I'm very much against the idea of forcing a specific moral code on player characters as part of a game's fundamental makeup, and assuming that they will all want to save their computerised city rather than selling it out for a fast buck or whatever else they might think of would be impacting upon their freedom of choice.

I understand that a lot of Indie games like to lay out specific (sometimes extremely specific) scenarios in which the players will adventure, but I do not in any way feel the necessity to follow that model myself. Sometimes it's fun to, especially if you're making a very brief one-shot game. In this case however I would much rather produce something that lends itself best to extended and varied campaigns.

Would it make anyone happier if I formalised the idea of the player 'functions' forming an extended family amongst themselves called a 'Program' or 'Application', then providing a number of different types of program as examples, each of which would come with its own sets of goals and ideals?

Now, addressing the point of mechanics, I am strongly of the opinion that the mechanics should echo and reinforce the setting that they are married to, so you have no need to worry there. If they don't then you might as well just write a sourcebook for an existing universal game system. It's possible to start with an idea for a mechanic and look for a fitting genre or setting that suits that mechanic. However here I already have a solid concept of the setting, so I shall certainly be tailoring the mechanics to support the core concepts of computing, viruses, hackers and the religion of the sysops (or whatever they end up being called). That's what the dilemma about binary dice mechanics (d8 vs success/failure) was about further up the thread, creating an atmosphere through mechanics. It's something I've not really had chance to think about yet though, as I'm still formulating the setting on which I will base the mechanics.

Ash

I'm on your wavelength here Ash. There is a big difference between setting (the world / environment that the game takes place in), style (the spirit of play best supported by the rules), and campaign (the actual thing that you are doing in the game).

It is impossible for any system of rules, or even collection of rules variants and supplements, to be neutral on style, because style is a function of what the rules do best. If you have a detailed system for combat with hit points and armor and parries and movement distances, then your system is never going to support Wuxia fighting, and will be hard pressed to avoid combat even if you want it to, its inherent. So of course when GURPS says 'anything' it means 'anything that is sort of gritty, mechanically consistent, based on physics or physics-like systems' and so forth.

But that doesn't mean your game can't be (mostly) neutral on setting and campaign. Any setting you like, as long as it fits the basic style of the rules, can be added to your game and they are equally valid, which is the GURPS approach.

And once you have a setting then, as Ash says, Campaign is something else still. I'm perfectly happy to be given an interesting world and a solid system and then find my own adventures in it. I'll read the background, pick out a sentence and say "oh, wouldn't it be fun to play those traveling feather magicians it mentions in the sidebar on page 130, they should cool!".

If Traveling feather magicians are a part of the setting then I don't need the game to tell me that I might play them, and I certainly don't want the game to tell me that I *have* instead to play the stay at home technomancers who regard the feather magicians as scum, because that is what the game is *about*. Of course books have limited words, and as an author you write to support what you think people might do, but if I write a game about heroic hamsters and you choose to play their insect enemies, even though the rules didn't give as many details on them (because I, the author, thought you'd like the hamsters more), then you aren't doing it wrong or misusing the game.

http://www.solipsist-rpg.com/

NOW I want to play a travelling feather magician! Quick, somebody write that game!

Ash

Yeah I have the same problem. I hate it when my throwaway examples sound more interesting than my finished concepts!

http://www.solipsist-rpg.com/

There you go - you've even got a reason for the PC's to be together!
That beats 90% of 'sandbox' RPGs straight away.

+++
JoE
+++

Prince of Darkness Games
Rock N' Role-Play....

If I do include it, it'll be an option not a requirement. It makes good GM advice though; if you're worried about your players disrupting the game by creating intentionally dissonant characters, enforce a Program. It's not as restrictive to player character type as it sounds either, as any computer program will have a number of different functions from handling Input/Output streams, dealing with other programs, calculating the complex mathematics and so on.

Ash

You need a default, even if only to have a safe harbour to drift the game from.