Video game designers use two terms worth understanding for all game designers and adventure designers, "atoms" and "loops". Some time ago I talked about Loops, this time it's about Atoms.
Why do we care about Atoms? Adventure design is a subset of game design, and I'd expect most of the GM's who read this are more active designers than the typical RPG GM. Game design cannot be done by rote, by following a formula, it's about critical thinking and observation. Game design theory is mostly intended to help people focus on what's important (and not important) as they design games.
Like Loops, Atoms are simple. Mostly.
An "Atom" is the smallest part of a game that could be regarded as whole and complete, e.g. play of one hand in a card game, play of a round (a turn by each player) in board games, one "encounter" with significant opposition in an RPG. Players usually want to play at least one Atom during a session, often more. Consequently the Atoms – especially the common ones - have to be self-contained and enjoyable. If Atoms are enjoyable, players will keep coming back to the game.
Loops don't depend on the specific goal of an adventure. Specific Atoms can partly depend on the goal, but rarely depend heavily on the goal (if any) of the campaign.
There is no hard and fast rule about what you regard as an Atom. Can an Atom be as small as a swing of a sword? Swinging a sword might be a major loop in a melee-only game. I can't say it cannot be an Atom, and if that helps you focus on what happens when someone swings a sword that's not a bad thing. But you certainly want to do more than swing a sword during a typical FRPG session, so I prefer the Atom to be regarded as an encounter with some opposition/non-player entity. If the players tend to be combat-oriented, most Atoms will include fighting. If they like to talk and role-play a lot, most Atoms won't include fighting.
Within each Atom, at least one of the primary loops of your campaign will be running. Recall, a "loop" in a game is a repeated action that makes up a significant part of the game or adventure. A "core loop" is a part of the game repeated many times during play, or perhaps more than any other loop. Aiming and shooting a gun while dodging in a first-person shooter is a core loop.
The Atoms in an adventure derive partly from the game rules (which tend to supply the loops), partly from the GM's intentions and actions.
The success of the Atom derives mostly from the GM, some from the rules. I was once asked whether you could run any kind of campaign with any RPG rules. My answer was, more or less yes. That is, the nature of the campaign depends far more on the GM (if a good GM . . .) than on the rules being used. There are extremes, of course: it's really hard to run a wargame-like campaign with FATE rules, for example.
The success of the Atom is much more in the hands of the GM than success relies on the rules of the game. I'd expect regular readers of EN World to be the kind of GM who takes responsibility for their campaign and modifies rules accordingly. But your average GM relies heavily on the rules and on adventures devised by someone else, so that the Atoms don't really come from the GM (though a poor GM can still screw them up).
Some rules are going to emphasize different kinds of typical Atoms, whether combat, or intrigue, or stealth and thievery, or war-oriented, or interpersonal relationships, or interaction with other races and species, or many other possibilities. In other words, different rules will focus on different kinds of "fun."
So what are the Atoms in your game like?
contributed by Lewis Pulsipher
Why do we care about Atoms? Adventure design is a subset of game design, and I'd expect most of the GM's who read this are more active designers than the typical RPG GM. Game design cannot be done by rote, by following a formula, it's about critical thinking and observation. Game design theory is mostly intended to help people focus on what's important (and not important) as they design games.
Like Loops, Atoms are simple. Mostly.
An "Atom" is the smallest part of a game that could be regarded as whole and complete, e.g. play of one hand in a card game, play of a round (a turn by each player) in board games, one "encounter" with significant opposition in an RPG. Players usually want to play at least one Atom during a session, often more. Consequently the Atoms – especially the common ones - have to be self-contained and enjoyable. If Atoms are enjoyable, players will keep coming back to the game.
Loops don't depend on the specific goal of an adventure. Specific Atoms can partly depend on the goal, but rarely depend heavily on the goal (if any) of the campaign.
There is no hard and fast rule about what you regard as an Atom. Can an Atom be as small as a swing of a sword? Swinging a sword might be a major loop in a melee-only game. I can't say it cannot be an Atom, and if that helps you focus on what happens when someone swings a sword that's not a bad thing. But you certainly want to do more than swing a sword during a typical FRPG session, so I prefer the Atom to be regarded as an encounter with some opposition/non-player entity. If the players tend to be combat-oriented, most Atoms will include fighting. If they like to talk and role-play a lot, most Atoms won't include fighting.
Within each Atom, at least one of the primary loops of your campaign will be running. Recall, a "loop" in a game is a repeated action that makes up a significant part of the game or adventure. A "core loop" is a part of the game repeated many times during play, or perhaps more than any other loop. Aiming and shooting a gun while dodging in a first-person shooter is a core loop.
The Atoms in an adventure derive partly from the game rules (which tend to supply the loops), partly from the GM's intentions and actions.
The success of the Atom derives mostly from the GM, some from the rules. I was once asked whether you could run any kind of campaign with any RPG rules. My answer was, more or less yes. That is, the nature of the campaign depends far more on the GM (if a good GM . . .) than on the rules being used. There are extremes, of course: it's really hard to run a wargame-like campaign with FATE rules, for example.
The success of the Atom is much more in the hands of the GM than success relies on the rules of the game. I'd expect regular readers of EN World to be the kind of GM who takes responsibility for their campaign and modifies rules accordingly. But your average GM relies heavily on the rules and on adventures devised by someone else, so that the Atoms don't really come from the GM (though a poor GM can still screw them up).
Some rules are going to emphasize different kinds of typical Atoms, whether combat, or intrigue, or stealth and thievery, or war-oriented, or interpersonal relationships, or interaction with other races and species, or many other possibilities. In other words, different rules will focus on different kinds of "fun."
So what are the Atoms in your game like?
contributed by Lewis Pulsipher
[FONT="]Save[/FONT][FONT="]Save[/FONT]
