Intensity Escalation as a game mechanic

[Eske]

Mechanics like this can be great - but (to vastly oversimplify the issue because it's 3 AM...) they are also potentially dangerous. Interest curves, dramatic tension, whatever you want to call it, managing the intensity of an experience over time is extremely important to a good game. And integrating that management into the mechanics themselves makes the players feel it all the more.
The issue is that if you're going to do this, you'd better make very sure that your mechanics regulate that curve properly - And the proposed mechanic here does not do that effectively, not entirely anyway. Turning a failure into success to drive the tension up is perfectly fine, given the circumstances a player would do such a thing under, it will almost certainly give the proper climb to that curve. But your suggestion for how to lower the tension has one simple issue: It is under the control of the players. This means you are taking away one of the MOST important powers the GM has - the power to choose when the plot comes to a climax. Take a look at all the other examples of these sorts of mechanic people have given: This is why, in every case, the GM is the one who chooses when to 'discharge' the effect. When to use up the additional power the players gave them. And until they do, the players know what they have hanging over their heads, serving to reinforce the intensity of the situation all the more.


Or, TLR... The mechanic has potential, but you need to be very careful that you don't hamstring the GM's plans by letting players discharge the 'Escalation points' by their own actions, when it may or may not be dramatically appropriate.


(Also quite bluntly, you cannot limit what obstacles/enemies the GM can throw at the players. You just can't. Even if it might be a noble effort or improve the game, the GM has Rule Zero on their side. You never want your mechanics to oppose the GM without very good reason, so I'd suggest not relying overly much on that particular bit.)

Very good points, all of them. This is why I posted the idea here, so thanks.


As it is written explicitly in my first post, ES never limits the GM's ability to do anything. He has all the power a normal GM has, all the time. The point of an ES is to help the GM manage the intensity. As you point out, this is at the core of a good game - how do you ramp up and down the tension effectively?


The concept of the GM using the ES as points may have been overstated, since the game I am working on needs to be completely compatible with most genres of games. This means that a GM running a standard fantasy game can use the points strictly to increase combat or obstacle difficulty using ES points.


I am developing Modus to support games where the ES can have much more interesting uses in concert with other Modules. The idea of having an intensity mechanic can make or break a system, but with a modular concept, you can attach different, exclusive Modules to the basic ES module, thereby bypassing that danger.


Thanks again for the thoughtful post.

 

[Eske]

So after this site merger, I think I need to give this another go.


@ninbinz : that example of yours is how I see this Module working in a standard fantasy game. I'd like to think that this Module could be applied to most other systems, and your example shows that well, since it is independent of any actual core rules. Actually, if anyone would like to playtest the Module in whatever game they're running, I'd be happy to help and would love the feedback.


Some other random thoughts on the ES:


The GM should be able to offer soft and hard deals, meaning that one deal could cost 1 ES, while another could cost 4. Or will this make things too complicated? In general, I am going for the "flat fix" - meaning avoiding unnecessary math (it's a game - math ain't no fun).


The native Modus dice system uses D6 dice pools; but instead of the standard 5/6 = success, I am toying with the idea of using a 1=potential success and 6=actual success. Without going into too much detail, the idea is that a 1 acts as a success if there's a 6 in the rolled pool, but if you only have 1s, you gotta make a deal or fail the roll. Enter the ES deal.


(Also opens the door for a wide array of options - you could view it as a poor man's Rich Rolling, where 1s have different functions depending on the context. Again, this would be optional in the form of a Module).


What would be best - an ES mechanic that created several climaxes during one session, or one that would build towards one climax at the end of a session, either ending the session on a high note or creating a cliffhanger for the next session? Not an either/or, but what's your personal preference?


Off-topic: Could an admin please help me regain my number of posts and my picture? I feel silly getting trophies for "first post", etc....

 

[Eske]

I have now checked out how the Marvel Heroes games does escalation, and I think it is very different from my idea of the ES concept. It did give me some perspectives, though.


The Marvel concept is tied to scenes (as I understand it) and not the overall story. While scene escalation is also important, my version of the ES focuses on the session/maybe campaign as well.


So depending on the GM's feel for it, a deal can have consequences that happen at any point in the game.

 

[Shining Lotus Sage]

You're absolutely correct in that reading. I'm not sure I'd personally want to run a system where fudging a single roll imposes story-level challenges that weren't already in the offing, but there are many points at which our assumptions could vary: how often rolls are made, how far in advance the GM prepares, how active off-screen setting elements are, and so on.

 

[Eske]

[QUOTE="Shining Lotus Sage]You're absolutely correct in that reading. I'm not sure I'd personally want to run a system where fudging a single roll imposes story-level challenges that weren't already in the offing, but there are many points at which our assumptions could vary: how often rolls are made, how far in advance the GM prepares, how active off-screen setting elements are, and so on.

[/QUOTE]
Oh, the GM decides when to offer a "deal" with a player. Totally optional.


The ES can be used for tons of things; the latest bit I've written is how to make the players do stuff without railroading them. Using the ES, the GM has the freedom to make less interesting story arcs harder...