Vincent Baker on mechanics, system and fiction in RPGs

[pemerton]

Someone asked (outside of this thread) - what is resources vs currency?

Resources refers to components of the character that are:

reserves he can draw on or use up: he might fatigue himself, he might get scared or rattled, he might oh I dunno start suddenly to precipitously lose blood. On his character sheet these might be hit points, wound boxes, fatigue levels, maybe endurance checks or saves vs poison.​

Resources differ from effectiveness in that effectiveness contributes "oomph" in the resolution of declared actions, whereas resources enable the character to stay active and keep going, and hence the player to keep participating.

In Torchbearer, rope, spikes, weapons, and much other gear are all effectiveness in that they grant bonuses to action resolution. Rations, candles and armour, on the other hand, are resources - rations protect against conditions accrued on the Grind, candles protect against darkness, and armour protects against hit point loss in capture, kill and drive off conflicts.

This example helps elucidate currency. "Currency", in Vincent's usage, refers to the relationship between these character components - that is, the relationship that the game establishes between effectiveness, resources and position.

In many RPGs, including Torchbearer, currency is quite complex. But one aspect of Torchbearer currency is established via the encumbrance rules - carrying a weapon limits carrying a candle; piling on armour limits how many rations you can carry; etc.

Here's another aspect of Torchbearer currency: by using salt, a player can increase their character's effectiveness at Cook, which can in turn help establish resources (preserved rations).

Because so much of Torchbearer's currency is focused on gear - acquiring it, hauling it, using it, replacing it - the game centres "bean counting" in a way that (say) Burning Wheel or Cortex+ Heroic does not.

 

[niklinna]

Someone asked (outside of this thread) - what is resources vs currency?

Resources refers to components of the character that are:

reserves he can draw on or use up: he might fatigue himself, he might get scared or rattled, he might oh I dunno start suddenly to precipitously lose blood. On his character sheet these might be hit points, wound boxes, fatigue levels, maybe endurance checks or saves vs poison.​

Resources differ from effectiveness in that effectiveness contributes "oomph" in the resolution of declared actions, whereas resources enable the character to stay active and keep going, and hence the player to keep participating.

In Torchbearer, rope, spikes, weapons, and much other gear are all effectiveness in that they grant bonuses to action resolution. Rations, candles and armour, on the other hand, are resources - rations protect against conditions accrued on the Grind, candles protect against darkness, and armour protects against hit point loss in capture, kill and drive off conflicts.

This example helps elucidate currency. "Currency", in Vincent's usage, refers to the relationship between these character components - that is, the relationship that the game establishes between effectiveness, resources and position.

In many RPGs, including Torchbearer, currency is quite complex. But one aspect of Torchbearer currency is established via the encumbrance rules - carrying a weapon limits carrying a candle; piling on armour limits how many rations you can carry; etc.

Here's another aspect of Torchbearer currency: by using salt, a player can increase their character's effectiveness at Cook, which can in turn help establish resources (preserved rations).

Because so much of Torchbearer's currency is focused on gear - acquiring it, hauling it, using it, replacing it - the game centres "bean counting" in a way that (say) Burning Wheel or Cortex+ Heroic does not.

Thanks much. As I mentioned outside of this thread, I wanted to be clear about the technical meaning of these terms, in the same way that in colloquial English, "speed" and "velocity" are nearly synonymous, whereas in physics, the two have very different, albeit related, meanings.

And so "resource" in this context, which colloquially we consider personal wherewithal in withstanding hardship, as well as something like spendable wealth (a most concrete form of currency), really just means the former. The technical term "currency" is by contrast reserved for how you exchange position, effectiveness, and resource for each other. That is, if any instance of those three can be traded for any instance of the others, it is being used as a currency, or put another way, any of the three can be a currency, but need not be.

And exchanges may well be (and often are) one-way rather than bidirectional—you can apply salt to your cooking, but you generally don't take the resulting dish and extract the salt from it! A counter to that would be systems where you apply magical reagents to enchant an item, and can disenchant item to gain reagents. There's usually some degradation in quality/value going the other way, of course, possibly including destruction of the enchanted item (as in World of Warcraft).

I'd like to explore some very specific examples, such as Inspiration in 5e, Fate Points in Fate, and forward & hold in Apocalypse World. And to use another example from 5e, Druid's Wild Shape ability is clearly an example of effectiveness (new capabilities) + resources (added hit points), but with an attached mechanic of uses/long rest. What is uses per time period considered? What if such uses can be regained by mechanisms other than a long rest? For that matter, what is a rest in this conceptual model?

Edit: Fixed a typo. I'm confident some remain.

 

[pemerton]

I'd like to explore some very specific examples, such as Inspiration in 5e, Fate Points in Fate, and forward & hold in Apocalypse World. And to use another example from 5e, Druid's Wild Shape ability is clearly an example of effectiveness (new capabilities) + resources (added hit points), but with an attached mechanic of uses/long rest. What is uses per time period considered? What if such uses can be regained by mechanisms other than a long rest? For that matter, what is a rest in this conceptual model?

Uses per time period - action economy - in this conceptual model seems to be a technical feature of effectiveness or resources.

Eg wound boxes or fatigue levels that get filled/marked-off may be resources that are recovered only by appropriate events in the fiction (eg visiting a doctor, or a spa). Leather armour in Torchbearer is a resource that can be used only once per capture, kill or drive-off conflict. Saving throws in classic D&D are at-will resources.

A rest in this model can be different things. In 5e D&D, for instance, if the players have access to Rope Trick or Tiny Hut, then a rest is a type of resource. If the GM hands out rests "when appropriate", a rest is not really a character component at all. In Torchbearer, the players entering camp phase or town phase opens up a whole new set of currencies.

Inspiration in 5e, in itself, seems to be a component of effectiveness. It is generated via a currency - ie position (traits, flaws, bonds, etc) generate inspiration tokens.

Fate points in fate are similar, I think. (I don't know Fate super-well.)

+1 forward in AW looks like effectiveness to me, at least most of the time; if used on a Harm check then it will be a resource.

Hold in AW might depend on what one does with it. Typically it seems like an element of effectiveness - spend hold to do this thing - but there might be other sorts (eg spend hold to reduce harm seems like a legal move structure in AW).

 

[niklinna]

Uses per time period - action economy - in this conceptual model seems to be a technical feature of effectiveness or resources.

Eg wound boxes or fatigue levels that get filled/marked-off may be resources that are recovered only by appropriate events in the fiction (eg visiting a doctor, or a spa). Leather armour in Torchbearer is a resource that can be used only once per capture, kill or drive-off conflict. Saving throws in classic D&D are at-will resources.

A rest in this model can be different things. In 5e D&D, for instance, if the players have access to Rope Trick or Tiny Hut, then a rest is a type of resource. If the GM hands out rests "when appropriate", a rest is not really a character component at all. In Torchbearer, the players entering camp phase or town phase opens up a whole new set of currencies.

Inspiration in 5e, in itself, seems to be a component of effectiveness. It is generated via a currency - ie position (traits, flaws, bonds, etc) generate inspiration tokens.

Fate points in fate are similar, I think. (I don't know Fate super-well.)

+1 forward in AW looks like effectiveness to me, at least most of the time; if used on a Harm check then it will be a resource.

Hold in AW might depend on what one does with it. Typically it seems like an element of effectiveness - spend hold to do this thing - but there might be other sorts (eg spend hold to reduce harm seems like a legal move structure in AW).

Makes sense, and all very helpful, thanks. Except for Fate points; I'm so disappointed in you!

 

[pemerton]

Makes sense, and all very helpful, thanks. Except for Fate points; I'm so disappointed in you!

One thing that I think the model helps with us breaking us out of an "in fiction" mindset (equipment, rests, training, etc) and into a "game design" mindset (what function does this character component perform in play, and how does that function vary over the course of play in relation to other components and their functions?).

A perennial problem in RPG design and RPG criticism, in my view, is relying on in-fiction descriptions and concepts as if they can help us understand what is happening at the table when real people actually play the game.

 

[niklinna]

One thing that I think the model helps with us breaking us out of an "in fiction" mindset (equipment, rests, training, etc) and into a "game design" mindset (what function does this character component perform in play, and how does that function vary over the course of play in relation to other components and their functions?).

A perennial problem in RPG design and RPG criticism, in my view, is relying on in-fiction descriptions and concepts as if they can help us understand what is happening at the table when real people actually play the game.

Hammer. Nail. Head.

 

[Emberashh]

A perennial problem in RPG design and RPG criticism, in my view, is relying on in-fiction descriptions and concepts as if they can help us understand what is happening at the table when real people actually play the game

This is a little ironic given you're insisting on a syntax that obfuscates what its saying and doesn't really open up to actionable design methods.

 

[pemerton]

This is a little ironic given you're insisting on a syntax that obfuscates what its saying and doesn't really open up to actionable design methods.

Huh?

Has been actioned => is actionable.

Dogs in the Vineyard, Apocalypse World, Blades in the Dark, Agon, Torchbearer, etc => Has been actioned.

QED.

(Also, subject to the odd typo my syntax is fine. So is Vincent's.)

 

[Emberashh]

Huh?

Has been actioned => is actionable.

Dogs in the Vineyard, Apocalypse World, Blades in the Dark, Agon, Torchbearer, etc => Has been actioned.

QED.

(Also, subject to the odd typo my syntax is fine. So is Vincent's.)

Argument from authority - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Manbearcat]

What are we even doing here? Haggling over terms like currency? The exchange dynamics between various commodities? How is currency not both (a) intuitive and (b) applicable here?

Are we doing the typical arguing over terms like fiction thing? Fiction is just imagined stuff and its relevant relationship to other stuff (like the continuity, implications, and trajectory of that imagined stuff). How is fiction not both (a) intuitive and (b) applicable here?

How are either of these controversial? TTRPGs have exchange dynamics between their various stuff and those dynamics make up a significant bulk of diverging moments of play and play experiences at large (from one game to another). TTRPGs have imagined stuff with relevant relationships to other stuff that are continuously referenced in order to update the play-space and to play at all (like determining where stuff is relative to other stuff and how stuff will respond to other stuff; both mechanical relationships and imagined thing to imagined thing relationships).

Is there ever going to be a point on ENWorld ever again where every_single_GD_conversation isn't nuked from orbit from "GO" by haggling over framing or word usage (particularly when its pretty damn innocuous)? These forums were a healthy, interesting place 10 years ago even with vigorous disagreement. Beyond the fact that many of the most insightful and interesting posters like Crazy Jerome, Balesir, LostSoul (among many others) are long gone...its just totally dead now, murdered and mutilated beyond recognition by forms of rhetorical warfare like this.