The concept underlying much of Forge Theory is that developing the elements of character, situation, color, setting, system and initial premise are organized to support  “coherence” which is an agreement on GNS focus and developed Premise, and to support stance, which should create more enjoyable play.

The basic idea is that while you might randomly happen to have fun in any game no matter how bad, if the system creates coherence and facilitates the elements that the players want, the overall chance of enjoyable play is higher.

I’m going to add my caveat here.  The special nature of Live Roleplay is that in it’s most common forms – absent an invite only, special interest community, or very small setting – it demands support for all aspects of GNS, because it is statistically unlikely to generate an audience of 20-40 people who randomly all agree on the same developed Premise. 

But the concept is still that “System Does Matter,” (that’s a catch phrase, learn to love it), so we’re going to talk about the elements of “Character” and “System”

Character

Obviously what we all want is for the system for creating characters to support the general creative agenda of the event.  I’m going to add a little personal theory here that isn’t part of Forge Theory, (it’s my blog!)

When we talk about “creating a character” I think that’s a little bit of a fallacy.  A character is an abstract set of qualities tendencies and points of view…the same as a character from drama, or fiction.   I think that when we begin to put numbers, stats, to a character that isn’t creating them and I think for live roleplay, and even RPG, that’s a bad way to think.  The numbers aren’t the character.  The character is the character. 

Years ago, Ken Brown and I talked about the term “Character Expression Language” for stat system.  The concept being that the character is an ineffable, and any stats system simply a language for attempting to quantify the character. 

In any case, moving along…

Forge Theory breaks Character into three major components:

Effectiveness – this is all the elements that determine whether or not you succeed in doing things, and if so how successful you are.   This is true whether the system has points and stats, or “in drama-based systems, effectiveness is governed by rules of dialogue.” 

A subsidiary concept is “Layered” effectiveness.  This happens when base scores combine with other numbers or elements of system to arrive at a final score which is different than the base score. 

Resource is anything which does not directly affect play but which act as a pool for Effectiveness or Metagame mechanics.   Knowledge, Cash, Sanity points, Hit Points, etc., are considered resources.  They don’t *do* anything but add to other mechanics

That’s a little different than our use of the term “Resources” in Threads of Damocles, where it is used to represent abilities that have an external locus of control – reside outside the character, for example “my friends”

Metagame – these mechanics allow players to override the Effectiveness rules, or concern things which do not have a specific formal effect on game play.  “Code Against Killing” in Champions is an example of one type of Metagame mechanic, and it could also include various “Schtick” mechanics which allow players to override the basic system with a fait accompli. 

In addition there are a few Core Concepts concerned with “Character”

Balance of Power - is the term used for the degree to which players or GMs are able to have control over the events of the game.  While very similar to the question of Internal v. External Locus of Control, Balance of Power relates very specifically to mechanics, and the Balance of Power is suggested by the presence or absence of strong Metagame abilities.  The more players are allowed to influence Metagame, the more likely the Balance of Power favors the players.

Currency – in most systems there is not simply an open ended ability to declare one’s character definitions.  If so, we would see many games where identical versions of the Greek God Zeus strode around with Godlike powers.  In most cases system uses some currence (points, or instances) to determine what mechanics one can have.  Usually these must be balanced between the three areas above.   In some games such a currency is elaborate and complex system of points.  In others it is a very simple system of instances  “pick three words to describe you.” 

Finally in discussing Reward Systems, and Punishment Systems I am going to bump to Ron Edwards at GNS and Other Matters of Role-playing Theory, Chapter 4

Currency is also related very intimately to Reward System and (for lack of a better term) Punishment System, because these feed back into the elements of Currency at every moment during play. Improvement processes are a common sort of Reward System, but not the only kind; damage and death for the character are a common sort of Punishment System, but not the only kind.

Reward systems have been very deeply researched by me, but they await a rigorous discussion, as the baseline concepts of GNS, Stance, and the components of Currency must all be integrated. Some of the issues include:

• What is being rewarded? Attendance? Role-playing per se? Player actions? Outcomes of conflicts? In-game moments?
  
• Who is being rewarded, the player or the character?
  
• Are reward systems necessary? At what scopes or time-frames of play are they more or less important?
  
• If we are talking about character improvement, how does it proceed? Linearly or exponentially? If exponentially, is the exponent positive or negative?
  
• Do changes in the values and aspects of the character affect the exchange rate of Currency itself?