Character and Ark Creation

Thanks for saying that MaJunior! And I've also not tried to rush us into making decisions, even if the flip side is that we aren't starting as quickly as we could've. Hope everyone's interest hasn't flagged, and that the discussions back and forth have been helpful to set the right kind of decision-making mood and perhaps even getting us excited about what lies ahead. There are six of you, so there'll always be a bit more discussion even as we start the game as there'll be choices to make along the way.

To help summarise from those who've chimed in, it does sound like Tech is a high priority, and rightly so. Culture you're prepared to ignore for now, so expect people to be unfriendly, demoralised, etc. For the last two, if you're generally okay with Food being low as well, the environment at the start will feel the shortage acutely, I'll describe that. Likewise if Warfare is low, I'll probably start the scene with a bit of a setback to the ark which you will need to recover from.

This is all very post-apoc! So you're on the right track!

I've taken a small liberty with our last proposal for development levels. As this is the beginning, I'm going to out all four categories at a starting level, so instead of 10, I've distributed it down to 8, just shy of the next level.

The more important and practical reason for that is narratively if we put Food and Warfare at 1, it'll literally mean you starve in one or two days time, and that you're utterly defenceless against any sort of enemy. Food 0 means starvation now, and Warfare 0 means a swarm of overgrown rats would scuttle the ship.

As described, Culture 0 doesn't just mean you have no art and stories. It also means there's no common narrative, no society to speak of. You're at anarchy. (And that's probably a great place to start a game!)

Ah, I hear you MaJunior, and I honour that view. I'd be happy to switch to Tech 10, meaning we put that to the next higher category. The narrative start point would be just as interesting. So no concerns from me there. In fact, I've posted to say how the people perfectly understand the water system and its importance, rather than to start with no one understanding how technology works, so I haven't tried to finesse too much the difference between 8 and 10 (in fact what I've described feels like 10 to me).

Let's have a discussion about actual DEV rating values though, I think that's the interesting conversation here. It is for certain that mechanically, 0-9 mean the exact same thing, according to the development tables (p113 for thos who need to quickly refer to it). Narratively though, I'd much prefer to run it as if it were different, ie a 0 should feel different from a 9, with 0 likely to mean you're out of food in a day, and 9 meaning you still have two weeks to a month, tops.

Same with Culture, Tech and Warfare. Had you gone for Tech 0, you would still have water, but have zero idea what the machine does and how to maintain it, and it'd be probably very close to breaking down. Warfare 0-9 would still give you Battle level 1, but at 0 I'd narratively describe how much easier it is to breach the ship at multiple points, how you have a shortage of bullets, or that your scrap weapons are way more prone to breakage, etc

Best for me to declare that I am likely to gauge successes rolled, and other numeric values, in a similar fashion. One or many succeses still mean you succeed, but perhaps narratively a big margin produces a more generous outcome than a single success, and so on. I'm happy to sound everyone out on this, to see if this is a concern.

So, let's pause for a moment, and talk about those DEV values again. But before that, tell me if my understanding of how I intend to apply the rules presents some difficulty for how we imagine this game to play out.

On a related note, I'm also not adverse to a different opening scenario if that's what you all have been imagining instead. I'm starting with a survivalist mood, as pitched. But if we prefer a more peaceful, idyllic start, let's bounce ideas. Remember my opening post is intended to seed some options so that when the party gets together you can propose your first project (or even projects!)

Again I hear you MaJunior, and I'm afraid I tend to lean towards having mechanical effects arising from narrative aspects. (We've shared at least one previous game together, and I'd like to think we've played well together, so I think you might be familiar with these leanings). I do so not because I'm trying to make a set of rules hard to follow for GM and players, ie I won't be doing so arbitrarily and on any whim. That said, I do favour the rulings over rules approach in general.

So for example I would definitely trigger a session body count (for PbP it'll be either per chapter, which is arbitrary, or per significant event, again arbitrary because I'd be the one determining when that significant event is) and it will definitely have more narrative impact if Food were at 0 than if Food were at 9. Because I'm not seeing the population only mechanically as alive or d6 worth of dead, I'll be seeing it narratively as a larger number of members too weak to fight or work near Food 0, versus people being able to soldier on at Food 9. The technically d6 dead is simply a rule, ie, just another indicator of how severe the food situation is in the collective. It's a way of 'telling' the GM and the players what the situation is, not merely '3 persons die', but if we raise Food to 10, then only '2 persons die'. That's probably a terrible way to tell a story. It also doesn't mean no others die from other causes like disease etc.

A similar vein for 2d6 after Hunting Parties. Sure we roll a 2, but maybe people are more confident, more prepared to stretch their supplies far longer. Whereas if we roll a 12, it means the hunting party hit a motherlode, suddenly we cross the redline from starvation to less anxiety about food.

I guess until we play this out a bit more, what I'm describing will still sound abstract or in theory, hence I'm declaring a session zero minimally for individual threads, followed by an initial chapter for a group thread. I don't know how else I can allay your concerns if you need more clarity than what I can currently assure you about my GMing preferences except to either invite you to go along for a bit, or observe the game for a while first. Because I'm pretty certain I won't be rules-lawyering as an approach to this games (or the others I run).

On a lighter note, (if that felt heavier!), I'm very open to feedback and criticism! :) Note how I'm very happy to accede to going back to Tech 10 if that makes you feel a greater clarity about the starting point. Like I said, 8 to 10 matters little, either no one really understands the water system at Tech 0, or a few people generally know how to maintain it imperfectly around 4-8, but when we hit 10, we should have a handful of individuals who are decently confident about maintaining it. Hence notice my narratively saying there's a roster to help do so. (If it were Tech 0 there wouldn't be a roster, there'd be just ignorant worshippers of the magic water fountain). Hope this last frivolous example helps!

Got it! Thanks all for the specificity of the discussion, I'm good with Tech 10 Food 1 Warfare 1 Culture 0, so let's park it as that.

Sorry if my proposal felt unilateral rather than discussed beforehand, which is one of MaJunior's points. I'll reiterate that where decisions are meant to be made collaboratively by the players, if I contribute in the discussion, it's not final, so feel free to have right of reply.

That's way different from if I have to make a GM call or ruling. The ruling can be disputed or raised for discussion, and typically I'm happy to accede, but if we can't solve it, then I'll go with my decision.

So glad all has come a full run.