Topic: Diary Entry Two - Where to start...

[John @ ICE]

Well, last time I posted I laid out what this forum topic was about.  Now I’m going to bring people up to speed on what I got done thus far.

So, I lugged out all my old boxes of writing  - you see, I was the GM for my main game group and most others I was involved with. It is extraordinary how much I wrote. I have 5 full campaign worlds and another 4 or 5 half written. I wish I had worked that hard in school!  But actually, like my father said to my mother when I was spending ALOT of time on my game in high school, he is writing, researching, learning, doing math, being creative and NOT doing drugs!  So it worked for him.  In hindsight, I got ALOT of value out of gaming, just learning organizational skills, self discipline to sit down and write to meet deadlines for the next game session, and being fair and impartial amongst my best friends despite how I might be feeling about them personally outside the game at the time.

Anyway, I started looking for inspiration... and the kids walked in – “Watcha doin?” [ Isabella Garcia Shapiro voices a la Phineas and Ferb – and yes, that’s the best cartoon on TV right now] showing the kids all this...stuff.

“Ooooooo! What’s this?” a box of lead miniatures in her hand...So I showed them the all the figures painted over 25 years ago in many cases. Then the dice (including my GM player slayer), lots of pictures, old dragon magazines, game screen with house rules paper-clipped to them. And tons of game books (MERP, ROTG, HARPS, D&D versions through 3.0, including an original white box in “very good” condition.  An old video tape of the animated hobbit movie (can’t even watch that now!)

And this was a good way to get them juiced up to play. What was true was that the dice and the figures REALLY got their interest.  So right then I knew the lead minis would need to be part of the game.

I did manage to go through a lot of my writing and took an idea for a campaign I wrote based on medieval England.  But knew I had to start again – I did this stuff in high school and it was lots of facts and figures, not something that’s going to work for two young girls...

Which got me on another path of thinking – will I need to change the type of game we play to appeal to female tastes (let alone kids), and what are those if they exist at all?  I’m not trying to be sexist here, but I get the sense that boys are pretty happy, most of the time, with hack and slash dungeon crawls.  And I also think it’s true that the girls will like that too, but I think...not all the time and maybe less than boys. 

So, this brought me back to the game rules itself, and I think I now have developed four main things I need to do: (1) It certainly will be derived from RM/HARP (obviously!), (2) It certainly needs to be simple in the sense that a 20 minute reading of the rules means you can play since I need to assume parents won’t always be around to direct, (3) the rules need to support ROLE playing – not just violent resolution, but riddles, tricks, traps, problem-solving, who-dunnits, etc. – and more, than that but I think role-playing in the sense of obstacle/resolution of social interactions, even “social climbing” – not trying to be sexist here, but I note Charley really does feel sad and hurt for certain characters in books who are picked on and unpopular and likes to see them achieve something and become “liked”.  So can I capture that concept as well?

I want this game to be played in a way, even, where violence is a last resort, particularly when it comes to obstacles presented by intelligent beings. 

Wow, now that’s a far cry away from the way I played games in the past for sure.  But, as a parent, I’m desperately trying to avoid my kids seeing any sort of violence.  The nightly news should be rated “R”.  The new Dark Knight movie?  No go for my 11 year old...waaaaay to scary and way to violent.

And I think my wife will feel fairly strong on this point, so I need to get buy in that “this is not bad for the kids” which I know in my heart it’s not, and not only that, it’s GOOD for them!

And I suppose that’s what it comes down to.  I want it to be GOOD for them.  I want it to teach all sorts of math and English skills of course, maybe inspire an interest in history, certainly inspire them to read more. I know it will help them learn how to critical think, problem solve, become leaders and be creative too.  It should also allow them to become proud at their own efforts when they achieve success and learn from failures. In fact all the things my own father recognised as being good for me! And, of course, it has to be FUN. I can’t achieve any of the aforementioned if it is not fun. They won’t play if it becomes “like school”.

So, back my next move. If I am going to try to make a good “starter” game, I need to do a little research.  Yes, I am going to start with our ICE products, but the industry has produced 35 years of innovation and we have no monopoly on that.  So I spent quite a bit of time doing some research and asking industry people and putting some requests out on boards for some “simpler-ruled” games and game systems where social interaction is “ruled up” since I might want this to be a more important element in my game. 

[GrumpyOldFart]

(3) the rules need to support ROLE playing – not just violent resolution, but riddles, tricks, traps, problem-solving, who-dunnits, etc. – and more, than that but I think role-playing in the sense of obstacle/resolution of social interactions, even “social climbing” – not trying to be sexist here, but I note Charley really does feel sad and hurt for certain characters in books who are picked on and unpopular and likes to see them achieve something and become “liked”.  So can I capture that concept as well?

I think a key point in that, and one I suspect many GMs forget, is that people talk. In a small town of a few thousand (which is a big town in a medieval setting),

If you show up at the healer's covered in wounds, demanding priority over all the other patients and willing to pay top dollar for it.... everybody in town knows within 24 hours.
If you come into town escorting an overloaded wagon, bristling with weapons, pull up in front of the moneychanger's and try to keep everyone from seeing what you've got as you haul it inside... everybody in town knows within 24 hours (probably more like 24 minutes.)
If you try to sell a piece of jewelry that would buy the entire city, goodwill and all, and still not make a dent in its value...everybody in town knows within 24 hours.
If you're rude to the serving girl, or dishonest with the merchant, before long everyone knows. If you tend to look for an excuse to break out weapons and go to carving on people, before long everyone knows.

A major weakness in RPGs, especially those where PCs travel a lot, is trying to put in social pressure. Most of our favorite characters would be outcast as violent psychopaths in almost any civilized society.

I want this game to be played in a way, even, where violence is a last resort, particularly when it comes to obstacles presented by intelligent beings.

If it's going to be an introduction to RPGs, from which they can in theory "level up" to the scenarios the adults are playing in, there needs to likewise be an introduction to violence. That said, if part of the purpose is to develop good roleplaying, well, violence and death should horrify, no? So far as I can tell a big part of PTSD in soldiers is the sense of loss when they realize violence and death don't horrify them anymore. They correctly feel that they've lost something vital to their humanity.

To quote my sister some 35 or so years ago after her first D&D game, "I get it now. It's a game played with fake blood and real fear." Well, add real horror and real disgust to the mix, and you might likewise get a real caution toward using violence and a real regret when it's necessary.

[ubiquitousrat]

...there needs to likewise be an introduction to violence.

I would echo this sentiment. Violence is a part of life, whether you choose to accept it or not. Society might place limits around the forms violence can take, and try to stop those "psychopathic" heroes we all seem to love, but nonetheless it's there.

I would take up the suggestion of making violence something to avoid because, by its very nature, it is too dangerous and icky. Adult players who are subjected to Rolemaster quickly (and I mean within the first adventure) change tack and start to roleplay encounters to avoid unnecessary violence. Why? Because as cool as the Crits are, they are deadly.

Make the game focus on interaction and reasonable play, but allow violence to spark off. It probably will at some point anyway... but make it immediately feel unpleasant, too risky and undesirable.

The biggest problem D&D4e had was that fighting was just too much fun and not at all dangerous. Thus, the game was a skirmish game. Make your game feel real and they'll avoid fights at high costs.

My two-penneth, anyhow.

Game on!

[GrumpyOldFart]

In terms of putting the 'ickyness' of violence into the actual game mechanics, I think I'd start by looking at Cthulhu SAN checks, various SF games' forms of cyberware induced psychosis, and for that matter the Sanity System alternative for HARP right here in the Vault.

http://www.ironcrown.com/ICEforums/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item331

Being exposed to violence, and especially coming to accept it as part of 'normal' life, can and does change your worldview and personality.

That said, violence is hardly the only thing mind-wrenching enough to leave a permanent mark. I'd want to include the risk of such things in spell fumbles, encounters with demons and undead, etc. Your first dragon should certainly entail the risk of leaving you blubbering when you should be running for your life.

The bottom line is that any game of any kind is only fun through some form of challenge/conflict. There are lots of non-violent forms of challenge/conflict, violence is just usually the easiest for a GM to run and for players to relate their own individual efforts to the success of the scenario. There's not a lot of satisfaction to evacuating 500 people from the volcano when 10,000 total got evacuated and 1,000 died. The picture is too big for the average guy to feel like he matters in it, even though he sure mattered to every one of those 500.

[markc]

 For keeping it interesting IMHO you should pull events and people from the modern day if you are doing a modern day/fantasy type game. Have things that interest both adults and kids, the wonders of the world, heritage sites, historical sites where big events happened. And work those into you game some how.
 I used to run a modern game/spy/hidden magic (players thought it was advanced tech) and I often pulled events from the weird things that happened in the world that week. I do not know the web page that that section was pulled from but it was great to highlight just how unusual things are in the world.
MDC

[intothatdarkness]

There's also the tack that modern shielding and portrayals make violence seem TOO clean and too antiseptic. After all, it wasn't all that long ago (and still goes on in many parts of the world) that kids were expected to go out and help kill dinner (be it hunting or killing some chickens). As death becomes more distant and abstract, the exposure to it becomes more shocking and traumatic (which is another explanation - coupled with better understanding - for the rise in PTSD...although I'd contend that it's been a part of conflict forever but that society has fewer accepted coping mechanisms and rituals these days). I don't know that you need a new set of rules to model that for your kids. Simply losing their first character (that they likely spent much time creating and getting to know) may likely have that effect.

[JimiSue]

On the social climbing side, that reminded me of a situation I had in a 2nd edition D&D game years ago. My character was a paladin of a good, but unpopular god (Forgotten Realms, just after Time of Troubles, paladin of Helm, for those who know the background). Anyway, my character was quite high level, 12th or 13th or so, and travelling between two places on her own (except for the mount, natch). The DM rolled a random encounter, which turned out to be slavers. Because my character probably could have walked them quite easily, he decided to make them a horde of goblins, who had just ransacked an entire village and had all the population of that village with them.

Of course, Ms Paladin charged in, and what followed was a bit of a lesson in why lone PCs shouldn't be overconfident when the DM pulled out the rules for overbearing... but after a close run battle, my character was quite badly wounded, but victorious. But... the saviour of that village. She escorted them back home again, fighting off something more serious (I forget what, but lay on hands and healing spells were required) en route.

The village could not do enough for my character after that, but she went further - donated money to help them rebuild and hire soldiers to protect them, that kind of thing. They ended up building a church to Helm and almost all of them converting. My character was feted as a hero whenever she went back there (which she did often, even building a residence there) - and when I retired her from play (at level 17, she was able to route a lair of red dragons - a mated pair and two young, and I felt at that point things were getting silly), she retired to that village to serve her faith and protect the people.

It all came from a random encounter, and a village not even marked on any map, but gosh darn it sure felt good to be actually welcomed somewhere, for all the right reasons

[GrumpyOldFart]

After all, it wasn't all that long ago (and still goes on in many parts of the world) that kids were expected to go out and help kill dinner (be it hunting or killing some chickens). As death becomes more distant and abstract, the exposure to it becomes more shocking and traumatic (which is another explanation - coupled with better understanding - for the rise in PTSD...although I'd contend that it's been a part of conflict forever but that society has fewer accepted coping mechanisms and rituals these days).

True. But kids who have hunted all during childhood still get rattled when faced with a situation where they have to kill something when they're not immediately defending themselves, and they have no intention of eating what they kill. Sheesh, even when they are immediately defending themselves, it still tends to throw them a shock.

[Langthorne]

A further idea that might pique their interest - drawing a picture of their character, or making one using an online program like Hero Machine. I have found that the kids enjoy both.

I think the idea of a simple starter system has merit, but the good initial delivery of any system is what will get them interested enough to eventually pursue it themselves. Start with some more free form roleplaying, gradually introduce parameters using rules. Start with something that interests them (a pretty cottage with flowers and animals?) and then have the outside world encroach upon it, and see what happens.

Well that has worked for me anyway.

[pastaav]

I think it might we worthwhile to look at popular children books like the Harry Potter books. Even if you look at the first of them there is quite a strong theme of  possible danger there. It goes pretty much with the notation of adventure that bad stuff might happen. It is true that the later books have more deaths and more combat, but at the root of it I think it is more a matter of style of the story telling than the subject of death being absent in the first books.

It is my experience that kids are quite able to deal with violence in fiction quite well provided that there is good enough context for it. Heroes going on a quest and having combat with monsters is not really an issue. On the other hand a scenario when children are suffering from realistic war or children getting abandoned by parents might be very scary for them. I would never run even a horror light scenario with kids. 

[jdale]

Which got me on another path of thinking – will I need to change the type of game we play to appeal to female tastes (let alone kids), and what are those if they exist at all?

Not necessarily -- I've certainly played with women who were fight-everything munchkins. And in our current party, all the pure Arms characters are played by women, and all the pure spellcasters are men. The main thing is to listen to what your players want and find a way to offer it. But that said, I wouldn't be surprised if your girls want a game where establishing relationships with people is important -- making allies, friends, finding mentors, etc. And perhaps helping resolve differences is as interesting as vanquishing foes.

I want it to teach all sorts of math and English skills of course

One idea for the latter is that they might need to write letters to people who they need help from. That gives them something to think and talk about between games, and you can also have fun making responses that are in-game props (aged paper, wax seals, scents, etc). I bet they will respond well to real, physical props. (Of course, I'm a LARPer so that's a personal bias as well.)

[GrumpyOldFart]

I want it to teach all sorts of math and English skills of course

One idea for the latter is that they might need to write letters to people who they need help from. That gives them something to think and talk about between games, and you can also have fun making responses that are in-game props (aged paper, wax seals, scents, etc). I bet they will respond well to real, physical props. (Of course, I'm a LARPer so that's a personal bias as well.)

Okay, so what we're looking at is a cross between National Treasure, The Da Vinci Code, and Wizards of Waverly Place.

[GrumpyOldFart]

"...and I would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids..."

 

[bennis1980]

Yesterday evening I played HARP for the first time with my nine year old son as GM. It went well and I found he learned alot from the experience.

First of all, I think the best roleplay for young kids to start with is paperless / diceless. My son has been begging me to play since he was four, experiencing first hand the fun I was having with my long term gaming group. I played with him the way I used to with my brother (before we knew RP existed), once off stories with the same style as the old text adventures on the BBCB like "The Hobbit" for example.

Eventually he began running games for myself and my two brother-in-laws, of course without rules and normally ending badly for the players (in some way my son found funny). I slowly introduced him to the rules, letting him make guest appearances in my regular RMSS game (as the Brone Coche, the greastest fighter "ever") and a short Spacemaster campaign I ran. It provided light relief for my other player due to the temporary style change (required to interest a kid).

He is now of the age where his attention span is long enough, his maths and language skill are sufficient and his hunger to GM (and learn some rules) is strong enough, so I suggested he try my newly acquired copy of HARP with the easier development and less tables.

My final point on the subject is not to force it. Regardless of product or system, it can be scaled down to suit the age of the player (my son used a Space master character with eight skills - with pictures instead of descriptions). I have tried systems developed for kids (eg RPGkids) and you might as well play Heroquest because it isn't roleplaying. Children need to be able to do whatever they want to do in roleplay, with no restrictions. They're reasons for playing are the same as ours, escapism, exploration and entertainment.

Good luck. I hope you come up with a good way of introducing roleplaying games to your kids and that they love it, especially if it is an effective gateway to Rolemaster or HARP.

[markc]

  Another thing I do not think has been thrown out there is you do not have to be at a table to play. When going on a trip include it in the story somehow. Have the players count birds or something that has an impact on the game. Look for special buildings, have them look for information at locations (like counting a specific animal at the zoo), etc. This involves a lot of prep by the GM to keep it interesting and does not necessarily need any dice. It promotes observation skills and some creativity.
MDC

[intothatdarkness]

Another thing that I think is important with this sort of thing is that you allow the younger players to fail. I work at a university, and we see more and more kids coming in who have never been allowed to fail. They think everything they do is perfect, great, and generally outstanding, and it comes as something of a shock to them when things don't go the way they expect. Gaming provides a good environment to let them learn how to fail, pick themselves up, and try again. Let them experience adversity.

[Rochndil]

Good afternoon!

I heartily applaud your idea, and wish you much success. I've read a number of articles over the years about introducing youngsters to RP, and have a few specific points to address.

First, there is one very simple method to reduce the "deadliness" of RM. Don't remove the crit tables, just attenuate them. Add a third die, and renumber the results so that the lowest result is the most likely, the next-lowest is next-most-likely, etc. Or, just use large or SL for everything. You'll lose some of the flavor, but also radically reduce the likelihood of sudden death or maiming-for-life. Admittedly, this steers the system a bit closer to that & game, but it still allows for the extraordinary to happen...once in a while.

Second, and this is from my background in writing: conflict. I agree that, especially with the youngest players, that combat/killing should not be the main/preferred method for resolving a conflict. AND, it's equally important to understand that "conflict" in a literary sense doesn't mean JUST some kind of fight. Any type of disagreement is a potential conflict. "I think we should go check out the light under that door." "No, we need to see what's outside the window" Boom, conflict. How do you (they) resolve this? Obviously they won't (I hope) draw weapons and fight to the death! That's where RM really shines. In addition to a superb combat mechanism, you have a whole world of skills, and skill resolution processes, to draw upon.

SO, one of the things you can do is to structure a story (or a critical event) where fighting is SIMPLY NOT AN OPTION. For example, a dragon kidnaps someone. Fighting him (at zero level) is suicide, but, can he be negotiated with? Why did he kidnap someone instead of killing them? What does he want? Can he be reasoned with? Tricked? Bribed? Duped? Flattered? There are an infinite number of similar situations you can construct, where there are a number of possible solutions (tailored to the players' capabilities).

Another scenario (used in many YA stories) is to have some method of disappearing/incapacitating all the adults. With them out of the way, the kids/youngers HAVE to step up and take care of things, often with unanticipated (by them) consequences.

One thing to be careful of, though, is treading too far (for really young players) into morally grey areas. The very young usually have a very black-and-white worldview. People are GOOD or BAD, and they can be confused and/or frustrated if the distinction isn't clear - though you can still usually get away with a reversal if you're clever. That's an important lesson to learn AS THEY GO, but it's best to start slowly and feel them out.

And a final little thing you can use to really hook them in - the cameo. Imagine, if you will, after a late night traveling through a terrible storm, our heroes finally see the welcoming lights of an inn (more food and less booze than a tavern) on the hilltop. Arriving in the courtyard at the same time as them are a giant man bearing a funny pink umbrella, and young man with dark hair combed over his forehead. They help each other through the door and into the welcoming warmth of the main room. They might even have a meal together, or the two may just head off privately to their own room, to be gone in the morning. The length of interaction should be very limited, of course, but can you imagine how exciting it would be to meet The Boy Who Lived? Those are the moments they'll remember.

Rochndil, who has a massive crossover project in the works...written and not RPed, though some thought has been given to that aspect.

[GrumpyOldFart]

"I dug down about one foot but my wife just wanted to me to cover it back up because we had three children running around at the time. I always wanted to dig it out to see if I could find a pot of gold at the bottom."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/medieval-well-discovered-beneath-couple-living-room-191037139.html

Okay, but what if the kids are the ones who discover it?

"Don't tell Mom and Dad, they'll tell us not to play in it, stop us digging it out. Just keep quiet until we find the treasure, and then we'll show 'em."

"What treasure?"

"It's a hidden tunnel under a house, there's got to be a treasure, it stands to reason."

 

[markc]

I loved that story. And I was thinking the exact same thing.
MDC

[GrumpyOldFart]

Now comes the hard part. Figuring out what it leads to.