Friends, Gamers, Editors, Lend Me Your Ears! (New Rules)

[GMMichael]

Do you:

• love reading about RPGs?
• consider yourself a grammar fanatic?
• enjoy bashing on RPGs that aren't yours?
• have a minimalist streak?
• want a new, free, game to play?
• exhibit none of the above?

If so, follow the link below to an 11-page, medium-type-size .rtf of Modos RPG game rules presented in a newly discursive format. 11 pages is a lot for anyone to read these days, so you can use the table of contents to quickly find what might interest you, whether that's a grid-free movement system (Positioning with Postures), a skill-based, non-Vancian magic system (Magical Powers), or how you might give your werewolf a fearful howl even when there's no rule for it (Standing out with Hero Points). The rules are discussed in a progressive order, so if something doesn't quite make sense, you might want to look at an earlier section for more explanation.

Free view on ProtonDrive (1st draft)

Please let me know what works for you and what doesn't, because my goal is to provide a simple walkthrough of the rules that's more interesting than the 5-page rules catalog (which is still at ObsidianPortal but harder to access), and less bulky than the 80+ pages of Modos 2. I'm intending to add some charts to aid with visual learning, and to add some level of formatting and graphic design, so the file is just fodder for wordsmiths at this point.

Share your (hopefully updated) opinion in the poll, ask or comment on whatever you'd like, and I'll update the link when the file gets updated.

Thanks for reading, and thanks will also be in the form of a free module once this is all finished!
GMMichael

Update: Consolidated and Spoilered module sections follow.

Spoiler: Getting Started

Getting Started (000, 001)

One player chooses to act as the Guide of Modos (GM) who will set the scenes, moderate the rules, and adjudicate player-character (PC) ideas as well as non-player-character (NPC) activities over the course of the game. The rest of the players role-play as protagonists: the PCs. It is important for the Guide to prescribe general expectations for game play by creating a Campaign Theme for the game, which will help to guide the GM- and PC-decisions later in the game. The campaign theme is a general statement about the game that can describe what's in the game, what might happen, and how the game will be played.

For example, when starting a game, a Guide asks the players what kind of game they'd like. Based on their replies, the Guide writes the very short campaign theme: high fantasy with titans and strategic combat. The Guide keeps this as a reminder and as a notice for future players who might consider joining the game. This theme helps the Guide decide how many modules will be needed for fights (like basic, extended conflict, combat, and possibly a fourth module), what should be included in the lists (like lots of magic spells and big, powerful monsters), and how to interpret some individual rules, like what an average person in the setting might be like, and what announcement will alert the PCs that they are in combat.

A typical Modos RPG game will use a standard set of polyhedral dice. You can play games online, on a tablet, even around a campfire, so paper and pencil are optional, and miniatures might be fun, but they're certainly not required to play. When in doubt, ask your Guide!

Spoiler: The Contest

The Contest (002, 003)

Before you start making your character, there's one mechanism you'll need to know about, because the game revolves around it: the Contest. It is your d20 roll versus the Guide's d20 roll, and you will usually add an attribute bonus to yours, while the Guide adds Difficulty (more on these later). The Guide asks you to roll a contest to decide if something occurs favorably or unfavorably for you. There are three types of contest outcomes: Pro, Con, and Tie. If your roll is higher than the GM's roll, it's a Pro, a favorable outcome. If it's lower, it's called a Con, an unfavorable outcome. Sometimes the results will Tie, which can then be rerolled or treated as a neutral result. Whatever the result of your contest, you should have an idea of what that result means - what happens - so you can help the Guide continue the story.

For example, you want (your character) to balance a crystal on an art display where it belongs, because you just accidentally knocked it over. The Guide says, "if you do it fast enough, the docent won't notice that you're damaging the art. Roll a physical contest." You roll a d20, add your physical bonus, and get 4! The Guide rolls against you and says, "Con. What happens?" You reply, "I put the crystal back in place, and quickly pose like I'm appreciating the art. But I did it too fast, so the crystal falls again and clinks around on the floor."

Spoiler: Starting Your Character Sheet

Starting Your Character Sheet (100, 101, 102)

Just as essential as the contest is your character sheet, where you'll record all of your character elements. The character sheet is also a good place to display or draw a picture of your character, and you might use it for other things as well, like tracking damage, counting actions with a paperclip, ticking off arrows used, etc.

A good way to start making your character is to imagine and record a Character Concept: the short description of the character you'd like to play. The concept can include a profession, personality, history, vision - whatever you want! However, your concept should always have a Goal: something that motivates the character. Your concept also needs a Flaw, something that hinders your character, because no one's perfect.

Before your character gets any other character elements, you can consider your character to be an Average Person as implied or described by the Guide's campaign theme. This means that you can do and have what an average person might, unless your concept suggests otherwise and the Guide agrees.

For example, if the average person in the campaign has wings, you do too, and you can fly around just as well as anyone else can! Your Goal might be to "be more grounded," or something more grand like, "see the earth from space." If your Flaw is "missing a wing," you really set yourself apart from the average person, and you add some complexity to your goal choice.

 

[GMMichael]

Right. Bite-sized chunks. Well, the Getting Started section doesn't cover anything you don't already know (except maybe the GM's ability to shape the game as well as the setting), so here's the most basic of basics (and the rule numbers it addresses, 002 and 003):

The Contest (002, 003)​

Before you start making your character, there's one mechanism you'll need to know about, because the game revolves around it: the Contest. It is your d20 roll versus the Guide's d20 roll, and the Guide asks you to roll a contest to decide if something occurs favorably for you. There are three types of contest outcomes: Pro, Con, and Tie. If your roll is higher than the GM's roll, it's a Pro, a favorable outcome. If it's lower, it's called a Con, an unfavorable outcome. Sometimes the results will Tie, and the Guide decides how to resolve it. A Tie is one situation when extra role-playing on your part works in your favor, so let the Guide know why things might go your way! Whatever the result of your contest, you should have an idea of what happens next so you can help the Guide continue the story.
For example, you want (your character) to balance a crystal on an art display where it belongs, because you just accidentally knocked it over. The Guide says, "if you do it fast enough, the docent won't notice that you're damaging the art. Roll a physical contest." You roll a d20 and get 4! The Guide rolls against you and says, "Con. What happens?" Now you get to suggest what went wrong, and as you'll see later, you might gain a benefit by describing a particularly bad situation.

 

[pemerton]

I skimmed your document. From it, I can't work out how the game plays. In particular, I can't work out:

*What principles govern the GM's scene-framing and consequence narration;

*What happens on a "progress roll" in an extended conflict;

*What principles govern player narration of consequences;​

Here's an illustration of what I mean. The document includes this example:

For example, your starfighter encounters an enemy greywing. The Guide thinks that there is a chance that the greywing pilot will best you, so he asks you to roll "mental" (a contest with your mental attribute bonus). You'll add 1 point of mental bonus, and your 3 points of Pilot skill. In addition, your starfighter has a Handling Rating of 4 (in this campaign) that you can add. You're not too worried about the enemy's skill, and you definitely don't want to roll low, so you halfmax your d20 contest roll. Your contest result is 18 (1+3+4+10). The Guide could add up the enemy character's bonuses, but decides that it's easier just to rate the greywing as Challenging Difficulty, so he adds 4 points to his difficulty contest and rolls 7 on the d20. Your 18 beats his 11, so he says, "Pro. You make the dogfight look easy. What happens?"​

How does the GM decide that an enemy greywing is encountered? How does the GM decide that there is a chance that the greywing pilot will "best" the PC? What does "besting" mean in this context - is the PC at risk of being blown up? Captured? Embarrassed? Something else?

After the rolls, it becomes clear that this was a "dogfight" - when and how was this decided? And when the GM asks "What happens?", what is the player allowed to say in response? For instance, can they stipulate that the passenger on their starfighter is so impressed by the PC's display of skill that they fall in love with them? Can they stipulate that they outfly the greywing, avoid its scopes, and therefore are able to follow it back to its base?

And once the player says what happens, what (if anything) is binding on the GM's future scene-framing. Eg if the player declares "I blow up the greywing", is the GM allowed to respond "Cool! You see 3 more greywings approaching"? Or suppose the starfighter was hurrying to a rendezvous - is the GMy allowed to respond "Cool, you blow up the greywing! But the time spent starfighting has delayed you - when you arrive at the rendezvous point, the others have left without you"?

So, as I said at the start of this post - I can't tell how the game plays.

 

[pemerton]

A very good RPG that uses player narration after a conflict is resolved by rolling is Agon (by John Harper). That game also establishes a lot of structure around how conflicts arise, how they are framed, and what is at stake.

It might be worth you having a look at it, to get some ideas on how to set out your own principles for your RPG.

 

[GMMichael]

I skimmed your document. From it, I can't work out how the game plays. In particular, I can't work out:

*What principles govern the GM's scene-framing and consequence narration;

*What happens on a "progress roll" in an extended conflict;

*What principles govern player narration of consequences;

Thanks for taking a look, pemerton. You've got me questioning my decision to leave "what's a GM" and "how to role-play" out of the module But I'll set that aside for now. Here are some attempts at clarification, in case a little clarity inspires you to let me know how I might word things differently:

So, how the GM decides that a greywing shows up is that the GM establishes the setting, broadly, as a Star Wars-like universe that has villainous forces with starfleets. This comes from the "creating a Campaign Theme" idea in the Getting Started section. The greywing shows up in the game session because the GM thought it would be an interesting idea, as the GM is responsible for "setting the scene," also mentioned in Getting Started. Since the GM's idea of greywings includes that they tend to shoot Allied starfighters on sight, the idea of getting "bested" is yes, ambiguous, but the implication is that some sort of contest will ensue. So why the PC and GM are rolling contests isn't to establish what exactly happens - like picking events off a table of possibilities - it's to determine whether the encounter (the part that's been established) goes well or poorly for the PC. What does "well" look like? That's up to the GM and PC. That's imagination and collaboration territory. However, the GM could easily say something like, "a greywing shows up on your sensors, immediately followed by proton missile detection. Roll to see if you avoid the missiles." This roll, like the previous one, wouldn't explicitly determine "hits" or "misses," just whether the contest outcome is favorable or unfavorable for the PC.

What the PC may establish or narrate is up to the GM. That can stem from the Campaign Theme - if the game will be a collaboration or simulation. But if the GM is "moderating" and "adjudicating" (again, from Getting Started), Rule Zero is in full effect. Can the PC stipulate that the passenger on their starfighter is so impressed by the PC's display of skill that they fall in love with them? That depends on the result of the contest and the aforementioned adjudication. The PC can suggest that as a favorable outcome (if the contest was a Pro), and the GM takes it from there. I guess the biggest factor in what the PC can suggest is what leads up to the contest, like if the PCs are having a relationship-building scene prior to the greywing arrival, or if the PC had been talking about combat formations with high command prior. The PC could avoid the scopes and follow the greywing back to base too, if the GM sees that as a possible Pro outcome to the encounter.

Re: future scene framing - nothing's binding. The GM could say that "you blow up the greywing, but the others have left without you." The rules are effectively guidelines to help the GM tell an unwritten story, to which the PCs contribute ideas. The contests contribute ideas (specifically, the goodness or badness of ideas). Even the Attack-Damage mechanism isn't very concrete; there aren't binding ideas of someone being hit or wounded. Collecting damage just means that you're closer to the fight being over, and in an unfavorable way since collecting damage means not defending or attempting to defend but rolling Cons.

I can see how rolls for Progress might leave you wondering. I was trying to focus on everyone's favorite nitty-gritty, so I intentionally made that part short, which probably made it confusing. A short answer is that Progress is the Damage of non-combat. If you're in a scene and struggling against a competitor for the better outcome, you still roll Attacks and Defenses as the situation calls for it, but instead of progressing by doing Damage against your competitor (with a weapon), you progress with a Pro attack by rolling Progress. The attack is any action that might help you achieve your preferred outcome. How much Progress you need to collect to win the conflict is up to the GM (who can and should make that known to the PC, qualitatively or quantitatively).

 

[GMMichael]

A very good RPG that uses player narration after a conflict is resolved by rolling is Agon (by John Harper). That game also establishes a lot of structure around how conflicts arise, how they are framed, and what is at stake.

At your recommendation, I was able to grab the Paragon SRD off the web. I didn't see a lot of detail to the player narration, though. The GM presents a threat ("Hazard"), everyone rolls, PCs who didn't win describe their "suffering," and the PC who wins (if any) uses cues from Name, Domain, Style, or Advantages to describe how she defeated the hazard. But if it's a Showdown, the PCs take the additional step of deciding if they're rolling against the Disasters or the Seizing control of (part of) the Finale. Prior to the Showdown, the Paragon Contest strikes me as very similar to the Modos Contest.

Maybe I overlooked something, or maybe Agon goes into much greater detail than Paragon does?

 

[pemerton]

I can see how rolls for Progress might leave you wondering. I was trying to focus on everyone's favorite nitty-gritty, so I intentionally made that part short, which probably made it confusing. A short answer is that Progress is the Damage of non-combat. If you're in a scene and struggling against a competitor for the better outcome, you still roll Attacks and Defenses as the situation calls for it, but instead of progressing by doing Damage against your competitor (with a weapon), you progress with a Pro attack by rolling Progress. The attack is any action that might help you achieve your preferred outcome. How much Progress you need to collect to win the conflict is up to the GM (who can and should make that known to the PC, qualitatively or quantitatively).

I was wondering, though, what does progress look like in the fiction? Does achieving progress reframe the scene in some way? Does it change what actions and abilities might be used?

Different ways of answering these questions are found in HeroWars extended contests (the original version - the initial ability used determines the action points available; but subsequent declared abilities affect the difficulty of checks), 4e D&D Skill Challenges (the number of successes needed is independent of the skill used, but the skill chosen may affect the difficulty and will affect the fiction and hence subsequent skill choices - this is made even clearer in the DMG2 than in the DMG) and In A Wicked Age (the abilities to be used are set from the start, but the actions declared affect the fiction that is unfolding).

It's not clear how Modos answers these questions.

At your recommendation, I was able to grab the Paragon SRD off the web. I didn't see a lot of detail to the player narration, though. The GM presents a threat ("Hazard"), everyone rolls, PCs who didn't win describe their "suffering," and the PC who wins (if any) uses cues from Name, Domain, Style, or Advantages to describe how she defeated the hazard. But if it's a Showdown, the PCs take the additional step of deciding if they're rolling against the Disasters or the Seizing control of (part of) the Finale. Prior to the Showdown, the Paragon Contest strikes me as very similar to the Modos Contest.

Maybe I overlooked something, or maybe Agon goes into much greater detail than Paragon does?

Pgaes 68-71 of Agon set out the role of the Strife player (the GM). In very broad terms, it can be compared - no surprise - to the role of the MC in Apocalypse World. There is a discussion of establishing stakes, transitioning to a contest, and the finality of resolution. The example islands also illustrate how the stakes of contests are established.

In the SRD, you can see some of this in the reference to the disasters that will strike if the PCs don't successfully defend.

What the PC may establish or narrate is up to the GM. That can stem from the Campaign Theme - if the game will be a collaboration or simulation. But if the GM is "moderating" and "adjudicating" (again, from Getting Started), Rule Zero is in full effect. Can the PC stipulate that the passenger on their starfighter is so impressed by the PC's display of skill that they fall in love with them? That depends on the result of the contest and the aforementioned adjudication. The PC can suggest that as a favorable outcome (if the contest was a Pro), and the GM takes it from there. I guess the biggest factor in what the PC can suggest is what leads up to the contest, like if the PCs are having a relationship-building scene prior to the greywing arrival, or if the PC had been talking about combat formations with high command prior. The PC could avoid the scopes and follow the greywing back to base too, if the GM sees that as a possible Pro outcome to the encounter.

Re: future scene framing - nothing's binding. The GM could say that "you blow up the greywing, but the others have left without you." The rules are effectively guidelines to help the GM tell an unwritten story, to which the PCs contribute ideas.

OK, so all this is quite different from Agon. In Agon, stakes are established in advance, and resolution is binding on the GM as well as on the player.

 

[Kobold Stew]

To be clear, I think you are asking for questions about formatting and amount of detail, not engagement with the mechanics themselves. Is that right? Here are some thoughts on presentation:

• p. 1 "is the general answer" doesn't make sense. I think you means something like: A table might decide that "High fantasy with titans and strategic combat" is the starting point. (Is there a table of possibilities? Or perhaps: This might be "High fantasy with titans and strategic combat", "a wild-west space opera", "an espionage-themed political thriller", "a war-of-the-worlds invasion" or whatever you want!
• p. 2 "A tie is one situation...": something rubs me the wrong way with this, since it seems to suggest role-playing will help you out of one-contest-in-twenty. It's not what you mean, but id can be read that way.
• p. 2 "Now you get to...": the rule (players determine the consequence of a Con) is buried in an example; the general principle should be set out earlier.
• p. 4 I like the distinction of Locked skills.
• p. 4 I like the presence of both Hero points and Perks, and the example of how they get used to accomplish the same outcome with the C-3PO clone is effective. I still really don't have a sense of what these things are. If this is just a condensed ruleset, you might still want to have a dozen examples to show the comparative power-level of these things. How are they balanced?
• on p. 2 you say you can get by with a d20 and a d8, but on p. 4, the first time you mention a specific die, it's a d6.
• p. 5 "Each level grants...": this sentence should be made more prominent. Also "Most games begin at level 1 or 2: you have two hero points, two perks, and you've added two points to your starting abilities."
• p. 5 Can you choose to Halfmax every roll? Could a player choose to alway be average, and never risk the big losses?

Is this the sort of thing you want?

 

[TiQuinn]

This is going to sound harsh but it’s very confusing to me.

I got as far as the Fighting Tactically section and lost track completely. There’s no through-line with the system. It’s got a lot of system jargon but it really doesn’t help describe what the player is trying to do or that the GM is trying to run for their players. Because it’s generic, I think you’re making it really difficult to demonstrate the rules in each section. Before you’ve fully described a mechanic and how it works, you are starting to describe other mechanics, but also sometimes making it sound completely optional.

Here’s the section that baffled me:
“An extended conflict begins when the Guide calls for an Initiative Contest, and some campaigns have special code words to add to the mood and see if you’re paying attention!”

What does that mean? Why do I need to know about the exception before you’ve even described the mechanic? It has no context.

You then say the player can act at any time…then why have the initiative roll? Just for ties?

You can combine actions on your turn.

You haven’t described an action. I still don’t really know what basic things my character can do yet and you’re already describing how I can combine actions? Casting a magic spell apparently takes more than one action. Why? This is a generic system so what if the game is a sci-fi space opera with no spells? I still don’t know what kind of actions require multiple actions.

The Guide will tell you if your idea requires more than one action.

Okay, take away the arbitrariness of that from a player’s perspective, how do I as the GM decide whether something takes one action, or two actions, or all three actions? Maybe it explains this later in the document but I’m five pages in and it’s just feeling way too difficult and arbitrary - not rules light.

Other items of note:

Getting started - The rules really put a lot of weight on the GM to decide how the game will work without really giving them all of the decision points. Leveling is up to the GM. Difficulty contests are up to the GM. Whether a player’s idea takes multiple actions…up to the GM. Results of a contest roll…up to the GM. There’s no framework there that actually makes the GMs job easier. In your dogfight example, what does it mean “You make the dogfight look easy?” I mean, that’s not giving the GM information about how to scale combat. Does the player blow up the Greywing? Wound it? Chase it away? Outrun it? Immobilize it? I know…I know…it’s up to the GM. But also from a player’s POV, I have no idea if that dogfight is a life or death battle or a little fight that I can shake off if the dice don’t go my way.

Skills - What are the possible skills? You mention Linguist, Armed, Archery, Archeology, and these are fine, but some skills are going to be more useful than others. What if I just create a skill called Armed Combat and decide that covers any weapon I can get my hands on? Okay. I’ve now created a skill that covers Rocks, Sticks, Slings, Archery, Swords, Guns, Laser Rifles, Lightsabers, and Rocket Launchers. Good to go.

The ruleset is running before it can even walk, I’m afraid. It’s written in a way that just creates questions rather than builds on the reader’s understanding.

 

[GMMichael]

To be clear, I think you are asking for questions about formatting and amount of detail, not engagement with the mechanics themselves. Is that right? Here are some thoughts on presentation . . . Is this the sort of thing you want?

Well, all of the above. The rules work from a purely logical perspective, so the presentation of how to engage is important. Otherwise, the game's not playable, even if the gears don't grind.

Please let me know if these revisions resolve your notes:

• p. 1 "is the general answer" doesn't make sense. I think you means something like: A table might decide that "High fantasy with titans and strategic combat" is the starting point. (Is there a table of possibilities? Or perhaps: This might be "High fantasy with titans and strategic combat", "a wild-west space opera", "an espionage-themed political thriller", "a war-of-the-worlds invasion" or whatever you want!

Spoiler: Example Campaign Theme

It is important for the Guide to prescribe general expectations for gameplay by creating a Campaign Theme for the game, which will help to guide the GM- and PC-decisions later in the game. The campaign theme is a general statement about the game that can describe what's in the game, what might happen, and how the game will be played.
For example, when starting a game, the Guide asks the players what kind of game they'd like. Based on their replies, the Guide writes the very short campaign theme: high fantasy with titans and strategic combat.

Possibilities are endless, so there's no table. And I'm trying to keep the examples short, since this work's purpose is to summarize Modos 2.

• p. 2 "A tie is one situation...": something rubs me the wrong way with this, since it seems to suggest role-playing will help you out of one-contest-in-twenty. It's not what you mean, but id can be read that way.
• p. 2 "Now you get to...": the rule (players determine the consequence of a Con) is buried in an example; the general principle should be set out earlier.

Spoiler: Tie Rule and Contest Example

Sometimes the results will Tie, which can then be rerolled or treated as a neutral result. Whatever the result of your contest, you should have an idea of what happens next so you can help the Guide continue the story.
For example, you want (your character) to balance a crystal on an art display where it belongs, because you just accidentally knocked it over. The Guide says, "if you do it fast enough, the docent won't notice that you're damaging the art. Roll a physical contest." You roll a d20 and get 4! The Guide rolls against you and says, "Con. What happens?" You reply, "I put the crystal back in place, and quickly pose like I'm appreciating the art. But I did it too fast, so the crystal falls again and clinks around on the floor."

I figured it would be simpler here to just shorten the Tie, and add more example to the example

• p. 4 I like the presence of both Hero points and Perks, and the example of how they get used to accomplish the same outcome with the C-3PO clone is effective. I still really don't have a sense of what these things are. If this is just a condensed ruleset, you might still want to have a dozen examples to show the comparative power-level of these things. How are they balanced?

Thanks! I added some perk examples. I'm not sure if I want to bullet-point them or sidebar. Or . . . ?

Spoiler: Sample Perks

Some typical perks are: health boost (increases your maximum physical damage by four points), improved armor (your choice of armor provides protection of the next higher die type), and small size (you can use an action to treat one close range opponent as though it's at short range, until that opponent uses an action to negate the benefit).

• on p. 2 you say you can get by with a d20 and a d8, but on p. 4, the first time you mention a specific die, it's a d6.

Revised to "standard polyhedral dice."

• p. 5 "Each level grants...": this sentence should be made more prominent. Also "Most games begin at level 1 or 2: you have two hero points, two perks, and you've added two points to your starting abilities."

I could break that sentence out, I guess. Oversized quote? My hope is that the now-revised example draws more attention to the benefits of gaining a level. Here's that:

Spoiler: Level Up Demo

For example, last session, you and your friends defeated the endboss, Super-Krox. Your campaign grants a character level for each endboss defeated, so it's time to level up from level 2 to level 3. You add a point to your physical score, decide to branch out from your primary skill of Archery (2) and put a skill point in Repair (1) . . .

• p. 5 Can you choose to Halfmax every roll? Could a player choose to alway be average, and never risk the big losses?

Yes, you can choose to halfmax every roll. The guide can roll everything against you if things get boring. This is sort of the opposite of "players make all the rolls." Alternately, the Guide can halfmax everything against you too, because some disparities in bonuses aren't really worth rolling. E.g. if you'd win a contest 75% of the time anyway, it might be more interesting for everyone involved to focus on your narrative choices and not the numbers popping up on dice.

There's no Critical Miss rule. Is that what you meant by "big losses?" There are similar situations inherent in the rules, though.