Thursday, 17 February 2011

Fundamental laws of a fictional universe (6)

Two more fundamental laws cards, inspired by recent posts on identity, especially the discussions of naming in fiction and of ourselves, the arrival of the Grey Knights and the nature of choice, specifically re the D2, but also the deep thought on the nature of life.

As ever, I challenge you to identify the sources of the quotes in the titles. I think it's a little trickier this time than usual.





The usual supplementary information now, copied, pasted and updated from the last.

If you missed the earlier cards (ten in total - two here, two more here, one here, four here, and one here), the idea is to allow the big events of fiction into your games, to break down the barriers in how we define game types, to identify recurring tropes as the first step to moving beyond them, possibly by making them so familiar we've had all we can take, and even to recognise both us in the game and the scope of fiction.

The aim is to have them useable in both wargames and roleplaying games, and ideally any game type. They're unlikely to be anywhere close to balanced, and could have effects dramatically different across systems, but that's part of the fun. Dare you risk it? Definitions are in the first instalment. I'm claiming no copyright on any of the cards.

5 comments:

kelvingreen said...

Second one is Ghostbusters. Not sure about the first one.

meandmythinkingcap said...

do you hve instructions list anywhere/

The Happy Whisk said...

Hey Porky. Just came by to say hello. Worked another 10.5 at the shop today and haven't been around the blogs yet. Headed to bed soon, but wanted to stop in and say howdy hello.

The Angry Lurker said...

I see with the first one you know all about your enemies abilities and resourses, comes under good intelligence gathering or a spy in the enemy camp I suppose.

The second one could be more of the same with a vital piece of equipment or individual who up until then was an asset but know turns out to be a terminator in disguise, its like your own dog biting you.

Who framed Roger Rabbit and the Mr.Stay Puft.

Porky said...

@ kelvingreen - Yes! "If the answer is "yes," then don't wait another minute. Pick up the phone and call the professionals..."

@ meandmythinkingcap - Actually not, as strange as that seems. The series started as a bit of a joke and I didn't think to add any procedure, even as the number of cards grew.

The idea is simply that all the players of a game - and it's probably best if this is a wargame, skirmish game or roleplaying game - are dealt a hand of the cards, with the number dealt depending on group preference. To keep the wackiness low this number could be as low as one, but dealing a number related to the relative size of the game would probably work best. A dice could even be rolled for both players together, or for each individually for even less balance. It's an inexact science also because of the range of games they could be used with and the variation in rulesets.

At any rate, once the players have their hand they can play each card at the time given on the card. When a card has been used it's removed from the hand and cannot be used again, unless a card being played overrules either of these two points.

You've made me realise I really ought to lay this out more fully in a post of its own, and I almost certainly will soon. Good question!

@ The Happy Whisk - Howdy doody! I'm honoured by the visit. I'm also keener than usual to get the answer to your contest this week because for the first time ever I have at least a very slight chance of success, just above infinitesimal, and thus - of course - winning all the world's gumdrops! I'll keep dreaming, until the dream dies, and I wish you a good, refreshing sleep in the meantime!

@ The Angry Lurker - To adapt another quote, you came, you saw, you kicked the quiz's a**! I'm impressed, especially in the light of your answer to Whisk's contest, which was not only the first, but now seems quite likely to be right.

Good rationalisations too, though I'll admit this particular series has recently become much more about the potential weirdness of fiction than the plausibility of the effects. I feel a little like I'm walking a tightrope between the realistic and apparently impossible, and I'm wobbling.