From: markg@vulcan.anu.edu.au (Mark Grundy)
Subject: Re: Mechanics to Support Characterisation?
Keywords: characterisation, genre, mechanics, Pendragon, Vampire, CyberPunk
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 22 Aug 92 21:43:00 GMT

nick@iagu.itd.adelaide.edu.au (Nick Falkner) writes:

[Me:]
    >> Nick cited CyberPunk as a game without characterisation mechanics;  I
      don't agree there.   The characterisation  mechanics are lighter,  but
      they're still present.   The Empathy/Cyberpsychosis  mechanics are  an
      integral part of  the game.   They don't work  effectively as a  power
      balance mechanism -- because there's no real limit on how potent  your
      non-cyber arsenal can be anyway.   But they do have an important  role
      in the genre.  In effect, they tell the players: ``The only way to get
      respect in this world  is to get  cybered.  It will  stuff you up  for
      good, but you'll never be a nobody again.'' The same sort of thing can
      be said for Call of Cthulhu sanity mechanics.

    > I see them  more as a  means of limiting players  who would carry  the
      world in their backpacks than a  means of informing characters of  how
      cold they're gonna get as they turn into walking ashtrays.  I  concede
      that they do function on both levels  but I don't feel that they  were
      DESIGNED to force the characterisation to the level that I  understand
      is required of characterisation mechanics.

        Well, discussions on game intent  must be very subjective, but  here
    are my thoughts: If  I wanted to produce  mechanics for game balance  in
    CyberPunk that  had a  low impact  on genre  characterisation, then  I'd
    design mechanics based  on the  _metabolic_ effects of  cyberware.   I'd
    argue that  there's a  limit to  how  much metal  the meat  can  sustain
    without the meat packing it in...   that the delicate hormonal  balances
    of your body affect how much stuff you can cram in there without keeling
    over.  In such a scheme, the symptoms of cybernetic overload would  then
    be purely physiological, and would have far less impact on the character
    interpretation.

        The choice of stripping humanity as the cyberware gets heavier is  a
    far better choice, I  think, exactly _because_ it  raises humanity as  a
    characterisation issue.   If humanity  _weren't_ an issue  in the  game,
    then  all  the   empathy-based  skills  could   easily  be  moved   into
    cool/intelligence skills, you  could limit the  cyberware by  body-type,
    and I think you'd get  a totally different game.   Even though the  game
    balance would be identical to the previous game, players would no longer
    be encouraged to see the breakdown of their humanity as an issue.  As  a
    result, you'd likely find a big change in what sort of games are  played
    using that system.

        You can  apply the  same argument  to the  ``cool''  characteristic:
    imagine the game without  it, and then see  whether its contribution  is
    more to do with the  game balance or the genre.   Again, I think  you'll
    find that it's largely a  genre characteristic.  Most COOL-based  skills
    could be  just as  plausibly  managed by  basing  them on  body-type  or
    intelligence.  Once you remove  the genre mechanics from CyberPunk,  you
    very nearly get GURPS, and the difference really shows.
-- 

 -----                                                             ---- ------
 markg@arp.anu.edu.au                                              Mark Grundy