I had a thought the other day. What about a group collaboration in which we create a universe, a world, a setting complete with a detailed history to play in? what if we used the game Microscope http://www.lamemage.com/ to create the world and once it was created we play within it?

Would there be interest in such an undertaking? We could use the Microscope rules to play out the creation of the world and once it was complete, we could play in the game world and have a definite, creative, vested interest in the game. Obviously when we play it will be using GURPS 4th edition rules.

Below is a review of Microscope from http://rpggeek.com/thread/7164...re-a-game-microscope


Microscope In A Nutshell

In Microscope you outline a vast history and then zoom in and role-play the bits that interest you. You can create and play epics like the entire Dune series or the Silmarillion. Empires rise and fall, mankind conquers the stars, and so on. Instead of open collaboration, each player builds independently on what other people have already established, so you're constantly surprised by the details that emerge as you play.

First things first

Microscope is different from a lot of other role-playing games, so let's start off by eliminating some possible misconceptions. You don't have a single character. You'll play many different characters throughout the game. You may play characters other people played in previous scenes.

You don't play the game in chronological order. You build from the outside in, knowing how the history ends and then going back and exploring the middle. If in one scene the New Columbia sea dome is cracked by Soviet torpedoes, that story isn't over. You can always go back and explore what happened before it was destroyed. You might wind back and role-play the visionaries who built the dome, or dig into the sub commander's career at the academy to find out why he was willing to pull the trigger. You could play four more sessions and then have someone suddenly say "Oh, remember that Soviet sub commander from game one? I'm doing a scene from right before he fired the torpedoes."

What Do You Need To Play?

Three to four people is best, but you can go up to five in a pinch. People say they've had great seven player games but I can't imagine it. You can also play really great two-player Microscope games. You'll need a lot of index cards. I like the 2"x3" blank flash cards, but normal index cards are fine. Some table space or other flat space to lay out all your history cards (wind is the enemy). Pens or pencils. And you need the rules.

Setup: Thousands of Years in One Sentence

To start a new history, all you need is a simple summary like "mankind flees the dying Earth and spreads into the stars." That's your whole history in it's simplest form. Everything you do during the game will expand or explore that one line synopsis.

Next the group decides how your history begins and ends, establishing bookends on your story. That's right, you know how the entire history is going to end before you even start play. But you don't know the interesting bits, how and why it turned out that way. That's what you're going to discover in the rest of the game.

To make sure everyone's on the same page about the kind of fiction you're making, you then create a Palette of things you want to allow or ban from your history. You might make a fantasy setting but require all wizardry to be powered by mana drawn from the natural elements, or create a sci fi setting and forbid humanoid aliens. Then you're ready to start exploring your history.

Play: Zooming In & Out, Jumping Forward & Backward

Play is simple. On your turn you get to create a piece of history. You can make one of three things: either a Period (a large swath of time in the history), an Event (a specific thing that happens inside a Period, like a city being sacked or a soldier coming home from the wars), or a Scene (role-playing to find out what happens in a particular moment in an Event). It's a three-level outline: Periods contain Events which contain Scenes. You put down a card for each thing you make to keep track of the timeline.

You can create new Periods, Events or Scenes anywhere in the history, jumping backward or forward or zooming in and out however you want (q.v. you will not play in chronological order). To keep everyone's contributions connected, players take turns as the Lens, the person who picks a particular Focus that play will center around. So if the current Lens decides the Focus is going to be the magical sword Durandal, then for that round each player must make history that somehow relates to that sword. One player might make an Event where a warrior carrying the sword meets his wife, and another might jump back to a much earlier Period and show the sword being forged by ancient druids. So long as it relates somehow, it's okay.

If it's your turn, you have nearly unlimited authority, so long as you don't contradict anything we already know about the history. But because you can only make one thing on your turn, and you can't make a zoomed in piece of history without something to contain it (a Scene has to be inside an Event, etc.) more often than not you're building on something someone else created. If you want to role-play a Scene, you're probably setting inside an Event someone else described, which is itself inside a whole Period another player invented. So you're simultaneously independent and dependent on what others have made.

(there are other interlocking mechanics I'm not touching on, like deciding whether history is Light or Dark or adding Legacies)

We Role-play Together

When a player makes a Period or Event, they have absolute power to make whatever they want. There is no veto and coaching is forbidden.

But when someone creates a Scene everyone role-plays together to decide what happens. The player making the Scene poses a Question about the history (like "can the seventh rune of power destroy the very gods" or "did Captain Falkes know his wife was cheating on him"). That Question is the agenda for the Scene and we play until we learn the answer. The current player frames the scene (where is it, what's going, where does it fall in the Event), then everyone picks characters they want to role-play. Characters can be people we have already heard about in the history or people invented on the spot. Different players may have different ideas of what they think the answer should be and you choose characters that let you push the answer you want.

How does the game end?

It doesn't! Since you can always go back and add more detail, you can play the same history as long as you want. It's a fractal game. You stop playing a particular history whenever you think you've done enough, or when you're out of time to play. But you can always pack up the cards and come back to it later.

Where's the kaboom?

So everybody has vast creative power and no one has a veto. How can that possibly work? It sounds like a recipe for disaster, doesn't it?

There are a couple of critical factors that make it possible. The freedom to jump anywhere within the history means that if someone makes something you don't like, you just don't build on it. In a linear (normal) game what happens now determines what must happen next (if we attack the king, that irrevocably changes the plot). In Microscope it doesn't at all. Also, because you know how the history ends from the very start and have overviews of how Periods and Events end when they're first described, everyone is working within common boundaries. You can't stray too far off because you know where you need to wind up. Add the Palette synchronizing expectations, and it means you can give everyone vast creative authority without having the game explode.

World Building, or "Look on my works ye Mighty and despair"

When you're done, you've got a game world that everyone in the table has deep ownership in, because you made it together through an iterative process. The stuff that got built on and expanded was what everyone liked. Nine times out of ten, someone will say "Wow, I want to break out [d20/GURPS/FATE] and play a campaign in this world!" Which you absolutely can. In a way the entire process of playing Microscope brings the fun of being a GM and building a world to the table and makes it part of play.

I've played almost 70 games of Microscope with a lot different people, from veteran gamers to people who'd never role-played before. We playtested it for two years (and five separate versions) before arriving at the final rules. There's not a lot in Microscope that's accidental or hasn't gone through a lot of examination."

In reply to Bane Root (msg # 76):

Sounds like fun, but I don't want to buy Microscope, and wont pirate it. What's the feasibility of someone without that rule set participating?

I am working up to running a game as detailed here: link to a message in another game.  As I plan on using GURPS for most of them, I thought I would mention it here as well.

Jeff

Im still trying to acquire it myself and dont want to pirate it/buy it on Amazon either... I'll update you if/when I get a copy.

Re: Microscope.

Howdy all.  I don't post in the Lounge much (more of a lurker, really), but I did catch the above discussion about Microscope.  I checked out the review, and was intrigued enough to bite the bullet and buy it.  I've been itching to give it a test drive all week long, but my local group has been up and down with some kind of bug all week.  So, I thought I'd throw out an offer here for those of you who might be interested.

I'm looking for a small group (me plus 2 or 3 more) to give the rules a test drive.  You shouldn't need a copy of the rules yourself; they're very rules-lite once you get going, and the concepts are very straight-forward (bordering on genius, considering what you can do with them).  So, if you're interested in giving it a try, let me know here or rmail me.  I'm willing to oversee everything and explain the rules; if we get some interest, we'll give it a try.

Cheers,
Navanod

I am interested obviously.

Well then, me and thee and one more makes three, and if Gurpser wants in, that makes four, which is probably the most I can manage for the time being.  So, here's the link - link to another game.  Head on over and sign up.  I'll get started putting up the high points in the morning.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:42, Mon 10 Sept 2012.

Hiya.

As someone that's never GM'd before but is curious to try, let me ask you folks: just how important are detailed maps in a game?

I've been able to write several storylines, settings, characters, etc., but the main thing that keeps stopping me are the maps. I'm absolutely terrible at creating them in every medium I've tried; I'm no cartographer, and I never will be, and that makes me sad.

Any of you have the same problem? Have you never noticed a need for detailed maps in your games? Can you make it work without the maps and, if so, how do you do that? Is it one of those things that a "good GM" just has to be able to do?

I have GM'd a bit and would say the importance of maps depends on the game.  If it is important to the story, I try to find something I can use as I am like the worlds worst artist.  The only other thing is to just discribe the scene really well.

I don't think detailed world maps are all that important.  As long as you can come up with something legible and has all the major points covered that's all that really matters.  No one's going to care how well it's done.  Detailed maps probably matters more for battles.  I've never used it but map tools, for battle maps at least, is pretty popular.

I found a nifty little app called Hex Map that I've been playing around with on my iPod.  MapTools is great, though, and fairly easy to use.  The biggest thing is putting together an image library.

Hi. As the others I would say "it depends". [sorry this got a bit long]

First off it depends if you mean in real life or here on rpol.
IRL it is much less important as the players can simply ask if unsure and get an instant reply "How far am I from the car" or "Can I reach the orc this turn?". In fact, I am of the opinion that a battlemap IRL might actively get in the way of the story. Once you put down a battlemap players tend to go into boardgame mode and forget everything about roleplay and only do roll-play. The game also tends to slow down the game and make it lose dramatic tension. So, when playing IRL I try to minimize my map use. And when I do need them, make do with hastily drawn sketchy outlines. This is also to keep the images in our head where they are much more alive. Once you have a detailed map and especially if you have miniatures, players tend to forget the images in their head and only see what's in front of them - which will always be less impressive than what you can picture with your imagination.

But, I suspect that you are talking about rpol ;)

---

On rpol maps are much more important as the players can't get a quick instant reply to a question. And it doesn't take away from the mental images as you do not have the map in front of you in the same way.
But, that doesn't mean you have to have it, nor that it have to be detailed in any way. But again it depends.
For instance, here on rpol I tend to run battle heavy games, to the point where the battle is the focus of the game, and everything around it is fluff to link the battles. The battles are the places the characters get to play out their strength and weaknesses, show their individuality and make important decisions. So, of course in those game I need a good map just as much as an investigation game needs a detailed setup so the players can solve the mystery. It becomes important to have lots of different object on the map the characters can interact with and allow them to choose between depending on their abilities and personality. That said, the map could as easily be a black and white MSpaint drawn map with a hexgrid overlay. but, since this IS the focus of those games I tend to make a lot out of the maps as it makes the game more exiting and alive.

But, in any game where combat isn't the focus, it shouldn't be necessary. And as for IRL games a battlemap might ruin dramatic tension. For instance, in a zombie survival game it might take away a lot of the tension to know exactly how many yards the zombies are from you exactly how many there are.
In general I also feel that "games with guns" tend to work better without a map. Or, rather, "games with guns" often run into situations that are difficult to portray using maps. A firefight in a staircase. A long-rang encounter with 100s of yards in-between the combatants, an urban combat with people in windows on top of houses, inside buildings an down a street in cover behind cars. All of these situations work better without a battlemap.
Another argument for not needing a map is that unlike IRL if you make a detailed description, the players can always go back and reread it if they are unsure. Where IRL people might overhear or misunderstand something you say.

The only place I think it would be unwise to avoid maps is if melee-combat is somehow important to the game. As all the rules for weapon reach and facing is very important in melee and cumbersome to explain and keep track of without a map. But, thats assuming you are using all the Tactical Combat rules. If you ignore weapon reach and facings, then ta map isn't necessary after all.

---

tl;dr No a detailed map isn't a requirement at all. sometimes a sketchy map might be a good idea. Sometimes a map will get in the way of the story.

Thanks for the input, guys! And yes, I was talking about RPoL ^_^

I've tried MapTools, but I haven't been able to really get a knack for it; my main issue is that I can't find the images I need or like. Mostly I want to try an Age of Sail campaign, and everything I've been able to find is either super-science future or D&D past. Does anyone know where I could fine decent 16th-18th century images, or even anything close?

I've been pointed to HexMap before, actually, but I thought it only did outdoor environments; is that right?

The MSPaint scratch pad method of mapping seems about my speed - very little detail, but enough to give the players an idea. How would you draw something in Paint and post it online? You'd need a Photobucket account or something, right?

Sort of a related question (and my last one, I promise): are you often inclined to ignore the Tactical Combat rules? My own theoretical campaign there would be a lot of fencing and swashbuckling, so I think it would be safe to say that melee combat would be a big part. Imagine the fight scenes in Princess Bride (particularly Inigo vs. Wesley); would you need a map to run those fights? Could you do it without and still maintain the sense of action and drama?

Posting from phone, so short answer.

It depends how detailed you want the combat to be. One of the nice things about using the tactical combat system is that you can really emerge yourself in the tactical details. Reach and mobility suddenly become very important, and _player skill_ starts to play a role. Expert knowledge of the rules /can/ help a weaker character win over an opponent. I like all of that. But for a more climatic storydriven game. It might get in the way of the story and you might prefer to stick to basic rules. You could even allow a duel be resolved was quickly as a quick contest roll.

So, really, it depends on what you want. GURPS is a toolbox. What tools you need from the box depends on what you are trying to build.

...maybe its a good thing I can only post from my phone XD

I am contemplating putting together a very loose arena for the purpose of play-testing a house-ruled ST-Based Damage system. As a fair disclaimer, it's a very complicated system (the kind that uses an Excel spreadsheet), so I don't expect it will be everyone's cup of tea.

Would anyone here be interested in participating in (or learning more about) such a playtest arena?

I am, of course, happy to answer any questions if y'all would like more details about it.

I'm having the devil of a time getting RPMaptools to load properly from the download site.  Does anyone know if there's a Disc I can purchase that downloads everything all at once without having to download and unzip each and every individual file?

I'm a technical moron so am struggling here...

Similarly, does anyone know where I can find an overlay that can line up with hex grids that shows each grid numbered?

Would you consider the Advantage "Extra Attack" for a human be considered Cinematic?  Sword fighter wants to buy "Extra Attack" to shield bash in the same turn without the 2 attacks per round penalty (and countered the -4 off hand penalty with Ambidexterity).

I don't see anything inherently wrong with it, seeing the player spent a crapload of points for it, plus I know of some martial arts that are non cinematic that allow for combinations that allow 2 attacks per turn.

So whaddyathink?

I who am normally very conservative, tend to think its NOT necessarily cinematic, but I'd like to hear from my betters.

Well, Dual Weapon Attack is a cinematic technique, so why wouldn't Extra Attack be cinematic? (Since point cost isn't what makes things cinematic or realistic)
This message was last edited by the player at 15:56, Fri 04 Jan 2013.

Good point. Hence, my gut reaction to be wary of Extra Attack.

Just a note, if he's only looking for shield bash he can save points by not getting Ambidexterity. According to Sean Punch shield bash is not subject to off-hand weapon penalties: http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=38490

What if he wants to use two shields at once and just go to town that way?

I did a quick search for "extra attack" in basic and found this on B13:

Warrior. A professional fighter
needs high ST, DX, and HT, and might
wish to buy up Hit Points and Basic
Speed. Useful advantages include
Combat Reflexes, Hard to Kill, and
High Pain Threshold; cinematic warriors
should also consider Extra Attack
and Weapon Master. Combat skills are
a must, and Leadership, Strategy, and
Tactics can help. Modern commandos
should add skills such as Explosives,
Forward Observer, and Parachuting.

I would consider anything mentioned in the same breath as weapon master cinematic.  :)

Extra Attack itself says normal humans can buy one level, it represents unusually good coordination.

^{(sorry for responding to old post, you might have gotten things to work, but hadn't' seen the message).}

I don't think there is. But you shouldn't have to download several files. All you should need is one and then unzip it. It's been a while since I installed it to a new device but as far as I recall, you do not even install it as such. You just unzip it to the desired location and the first time you run it, it automatically create a couple of folder in your windows/user folder (like default maps and resources).

So get this zip: http://www.rptools.net/downloa.../maptool-1.3.b87.zip
Unzip it to wherever you want.
Run it, and you should be good to go :)


Yes, it's pretty annoying Maptools can't put coordinates on hex'es :(

What I do is take the map-picture and then use: http://www.nomic.net/~uckelman/mkhexgrid/ to create a transparent hex-grid with coordinates and lay it over the map, then load the map into Maptools.

mkhexgrid takes some getting used to as well. I suggest using something similar to the following as the spec-text:

columns = 30
rows = 42
hex-side = 22
grid-grain = v
output = png
outfile = tut1.png
grid-color=000000
coord-distance = 0
coord-format=%C%r
coord-size=8
coord-color=000000
bg-opacity=127
antialias=true

But change rows and columns to you prefered size, of course.
This message was last edited by the player at 19:16, Fri 04 Jan 2013.

Alternatively you could do this as a combination attack (MA p.80). It's actually not that much cheaper, but it is the more realistic alternative.

For instance:
Combination (Shield bash/Face + Broadsword thrust/Torso vitals)
 Initially this is at -11/-9
  Put 9 points into this technique and your up to -5/-3
   Also buy Targeted Attack(Shield bash/Face) for 5 points and you attack at -2/-3.
    Finally get Targeted Attack(Broadsword thrust/Torso-vitals) for 4 points and you are now at -2/-1.

So you now have a technique bought for 18 points that allows you to make a very specific but also deadly trademark manoeuvre "bash and stab" where you first attack the targets face with your shield, at a -2 penalty (potentially stunning him). And then stab him in the vitals with your sword at a -1 modifier. All for 18 points.


This is actually a pretty good move. Shield being an Easy skill is cheap to get a level higher and faces are often relatively unarmoured so the low damage doesn't matter as much. And if the shield hit, remember that any injury to face requires a Knockdown and Stun check. The follow-up vital thrust is always deadly, but now the target has lower defense (as it's attack nr. 2) and the target might be stunned!
 Hit or not, this move also opens up for being able to Feint with your shield (requires you to have actually made an attack using the shield). This is good because, again, Shield is Easy so it's cheap to get a high skill with it, and getting a high skill now serves both an offensive and defensive purpose.
finally I wasted some points on making both attack targeted attacks. You could get a regular shield bash/sword thrust for as little as 9 points at +0/+0. But this one has more style, and the targeted attacks can be used outside of this specific combination as well :)
This message was last edited by the player at 19:36, Fri 04 Jan 2013.