This is the place I'll use on this forum to cover my design log and progress, as well as post any questions I have.

Right now the Alpha version is complete and I am writing the Beta version.

This game revolves about the following ideas/principles:

1. Drive up tension between the different players.

2. The Triangle is a viable enough social form to have things not break up completely yet causes friction between participants.

3. Most of the action is inward, the game explores philosophical/theological memes. Even if they do not show in the actual text or gameplay. The action happens in a "Mindscape" of sorts.

4. The game is planned to have a finite end, ala DitV, Polaris, Under the Bed, Breaking the Ice, etc. The game has "Win" and "Lose" situations, which differ from win/lose for the characters and the players.

5. Each player plays a different aspect of the triangle forming up one of the PCs.

6. Elements #1 and #4 give this game a boardgame feel.

7. Simulation is thrown right out of the window.

I had a dream, where someone asked me what kind of fucked up person do you have to be to come up with such a game. The answer is, my kind of person. The self-questioning kind.

All comments are welcome.

Current information can be found Here, from RPG.Net.

Enter the third and fourth of March, 2006. I am doing a weekend shift at the army. A perfect opportunity to write a 24 hour RPG; albeit the fact that I am completely without my books or even internet. Just me and my creativity.

I begin with the triangle that you see in the file. I add things to it, a great many things, brainstorming wildly. Everything up to and including X and Y are Z was part of the triangle. I cut it off the triangle and put it in its current format after realizing what a pain in the ass it is to do it by graphics. I think it has more punch this way.

I thought of mechanics, of background, of random ideas. I will probably scan it later to show you what a mess I've written on one page and its back side. Example: "Rainbow Scene - Equilibrium. The following line(blank page, so "line") has "Flood Scene?? - Has something to do with water, also gives water more to do." Most of the Alpha is basically taking conflicting ideas from this page and making them work together, cutting off what doesn't work. Expanding one-line reasoning of mechanics into what is currently present.

The alpha took much time as the sheer amount of information on each page is huge, and it's condensed to boot. It's like looking at HoL the cliffnotes and then taking them apart.
Much of it is because the game took hold of my mind, going to sleep at 0030 on Sunday proved pointless as every 20 minutes I had a "Zing!" moment and just had to jot down another idea.

I also scribbled down the sheet, knowing what it's going to look like is part of the game's "Name", same as a character needs its name, so does the game need its sheet. Mostly Triangles and some resulting Hexagrams(Seal of Solomon, Magen David, Shield of David).

Eventually I realized I don't care for the 24 hour RPG idea, I just needed the 24 hours limit in order to coerce myself into a spurt of activity, and once this spurt was done I've achieved my goal.

More to come later. And people, I'd be thankful if you'd post your thoughts over RPG.net.

The Beta, aside from an updated Play Example, ToC, Bibliography and Character sheet is ready.
Head over here to grab a copy. 25 downloads an hour, the rest will have to go to the yahoogroups linked to there, unless someone wants to host it. Please note that I'll probably take the file down in seven days and head into a more closed-format playtesting.

Cheers! And please tell me what you think :)

Edit: File is available from here. There is no limit on how many downloads you can get per hour.

That'd be great, could you PM me your email or just host the file and send me the link?

Heh, actually that's the playtest version, and yes, that's what Betas are, a workable outline.

Further drafts(beyond the character sheet and bibliography, I did the ToC) will come through your playtesting!

The above Wiki will hopefully tomorrow have material added and will be CR main.

In the meanwhile, I'll copy-paste the material from The Forge, since it applies to the "Design Log" thread, that discussion is the cause to most of the changes from V.1 to V.1.1

EDIT: Sorry for the two posts, didn't know there's a character limit at about 5k characters...

Guy: Me updated game to make some things clearer and to fix a couple of omissions, me want you to type your comments.
Andrew: I didn't finish reading, I'm on page 9. A major problem I see is finding 4 people with enough quality storytelling ability to roleplay it ;)
Guy: Well, that means you didn't even get to mechanics!
Guy: Well, you can train them into it by playing other Indie games, assume you have such a group.
Andrew: Your writing is a trip to read, btw. I understood everything but Legend of the Moon. ;)
Guy: Define "A trip to read"?
Andrew: Yes, it's very abstract.
Guy: I said, "Define" what you meant :P
Guy: I want to know what you meant when you said that line.
Andrew: trip, acid trip = abstract
Andrew: I like everything up to the mechanics.
Guy: Re-download the file, it's been updated a bit.
Andrew: new link to new material?
Guy: I'll link you now.
Andrew: hoppy-shops = hobby shops
Guy: Heh, thanks :)
Andrew: So if Dirt is 4 and Rat is 5, and there's a contested physical action and Dirt rolls 4 successes and Rat rolls 5 success, Dirt actually has 16 successes?
Andrew: "Zoom in"?
Guy: No, 4 Dirt and 4 Successes, the multiplier is 1, so 4*1=4 successes.
Guy: And that's my anti-Death-spiral mechanic.
Guy: The lower you go, the higher a chance you have for this occuring.
Andrew: Yeah, I notice it.
Guy: The higher you go the more Dice you have in your Die Reservoir, need to give the small guys some way to counteract it.
Guy: At 1 you're too small to really fight back. And it causes mechanical wonkiness :D
Andrew: Maybe at 1 you just reroll every time you get a success?
Guy: Hmmm, at 1 you're no longer really a balancing factor, there are two big Aspects who will duke it out, one may help you in order to impede the other. I will consider your idea though.
Andrew: *nods* Another possibility would be that a 1 can save dice from scene to scene, so that he or she may not act for a while and then throw a curve ball in there eventually.
Guy: Hmm, or he gets to add Dice, every time he succeeds he keeps the dice, till he fails and it resets.
Andrew: *nods*
Guy: Note though that need some seperation between real-world tests and bidding tests.
Andrew: Have you ever considered using 4 characters and shifting the role of enlightened as well as the aspects?
Guy: Yes. Want to know why I shy away from it?
Andrew: Sure. Also there is a problem with a rule balancing
Andrew: Why spend 2 dice to give a person another die when they are bidding, instead of stealing one die from their opponent?
Guy: The Triangle is an instable form, even on a social format, that's why I use a triangular relation system. I want the game to happen, to occur, when competition increases you need someone to be impartial, need the game to use a square, with one set point, to have it work on the real world level.
Guy: If you're stealing then you're participating, adding is for those on the sidelines.
Andrew: Sidelines can't steal?
Guy: You have no dice pool. What use will stealing give you? You don't steal to the Reservoir, but to the pool.
Andrew: It adds one to you reservoir. page 12.
Guy: Right.
Andrew: So, on the sidelines you should steal not add to better yourself.
Guy: 1, you can also steal Dice that are being bidded, to a minimum of 1, limiting how much you can steal.
Guy: Assume we have Rat 4, Dirt 4, Water 8.
Guy: If we're having Rat Vs. Water then Dirt will better help Rat, because they need to stop Water.
Guy: Stealing from Water is less likely to help.
Guy: You want to help Rat.
Andrew: Why? If they're both 2 for 1. I'd better myself.
Guy: You don't better yourself. But you're right, I did think of it, need to rework it. You're paying 2 and gaining 1, end result is still better, you're right.
Andrew: Why not remove the stealing and instead allow tokens to let you steal?
Guy: Maybe helping is 2 for 1 or 3 for 2. Hmm. Token+Die, spend 1 Die, give the person you steal from 1 Token, steal?
Andrew: I was thinking about spending a token to subtract one die from their pool and add it to your resevoir.
Guy: I know.
Andrew: You could give 2 dice from your res to add 1 to their pool, or spend 1 token to add one die to your pool (used when making a non-bidding action.)
Guy: Note you can also help at the rate of 1 Token per die, once again we're left with no reason to help(aside from in real world situations).
Andrew: *nods* If the character dies does all three aspects lose?
[06:50] Guy: Well, a character dies by reaching any Trait at 0. Which can't happen so long as not all Aspects are at 1. In which case Trait going to 0 results in Aspect 0. And game end.
Andrew: Hrm.

Discussion with Eric Bennett, the other lead to the revisions in the Beta, mostly in terms of feel and clarifications:
This will also be broken into two posts.



Eric: Ah, yes. Well, on a superficial level (to start off), where did you get the Rat/Dirt/Water trio from? I understand what they represent, and think they do so in a very intuitive way, but I'm curious why you picked 'em. :-)
Guy: Well, Mud and Rat came from the Ronnies, as you can see from the general design log, then I added Water, I then thought. Shit, isn't Mud basically Dirt+Water? And thus we got Dirt. Mud and Rat came from us being made from "clay" and the Rat burrowing in. Rats also come in part from Pratchett, where I have the image of rats as infective emotions.
Eric: Ahh, I see. I asked because they seemed to represent terms that could have easily been spoken of with plainer words, and the choice of them seemed to "load" things in a way that made the idea interestng.
Guy: I like loaded things.
Guy: If you'd have read my LJ you'd have seen how I use symbology and words like that.
Eric: Ah, yes. Reading your actual play, where the players propose the way they would drive the character to act in the situation mixed with a bit of Resident Evil: Outbreak I was playing yesterday to bring about this idea/question: Running the game in such a way that the same situation is played through (wether simply through ooc fiat or through some in-setting mechanism) but with each player rotating their position on the Rat/Dirt/Water triangle? The line..Michael: I have Paul do nothing, considering he's the type who sits in the background and
does nothing. I think the best thing would be for him to stand in the background, not
attracting attention.
Guy: I could have him run away out of fear, but fuck that shit, Daphne is here, this is my
chance, this is my day. I'm going to have him jump over Grizzly bear and take his gun
away!
Anyway, the question is about setting up the game to do that. I'm still digesting the game a bit, but from what I think I grasp of it the game would be really cool framed like that to explore the players, rather than the character in question. I'm not really sure if that makes a good question or not, but I think if I can gather my playtest slaves for such a thing, that it would be an excellent evening's gaming. ^_^;; Sorry for the vague nature there.
Guy: It's possible, but it's not necessary. You don't need to see each player's views on each situation through each Aspect, especially as players after the first are influenced by what the first set did. You have three Characters, the three players play all three Aspects, a different one for each character, so you can see how they act for the Aspect in the appropriate character!
Eric: *checks the pdf* Ah, is this a new idea? Because I like it, and it does seem to move away from risking that the second set of Aspects will act like the first.
Guy: Besides, if you want to create sympathy and care between Aspect and Player, you need to keep them coupled, if you had switching chairs on Settlers of Cattan no one would care about winning as much.
Guy: No, it's always been there. I don't know how, but people keep thinking there is only one character and three aspects.
Eric: *grins* Which page is it on?
Guy: Hmm, it's not specificied directly.... I'll make it clearer, but look here: (Link: http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=19160.msg201025#msg201025)http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=19160.msg201025#msg201025. :: edits the portion about Character Generation to make it clear...::
Eric: Oh, cool. Yeah, that didn't seem to come out in the rules.
Guy: Does this make the game seem actually cooler?
Eric: Yes. Sorting the players out different ways for different characters, in the same game (not, for example, like running different shows altogether in PTA or something)...that feels much more, well I'm not sure "punchy" is the right word for it, but it makes the game more appealing, yes. *shrugs* Gut reaction and all that. (Ah, I think I utterly glossed over the scene setting section, where it makes the multiple characters thing pretty explicit)
Guy: What did you think/make of The Legends. Anyway, edited the file to make it all that clearer.
Eric: The Fall had a cool take on the old myth, the World doesn't have as much "hey, that is a neat take on things" as the Fall or the Child, though it does bring to mind this semi-creepy imagery of somebody reading a flyer or somesuch when they start hearing these voices talking to them and each other in his head. I'm not sure if that is what you intended, but it has that kind of surreal quality to it, when run through my mental filters.
Guy: And The Moon?
Eric: The Child is just great. I think its the best of the three in terms of making things clear about how things might be played out, as well as just being plain creepy. As for the Moon.
Guy: The Play Example also shows at the end that there are multiple PCs.
Eric: Looked at one way, it feels a bit weaker than the other three, but looked at another way (the drive to survive urging people out of desperate situations and into the unknown) it makes me want to play Lovecraft with it.
Guy: Legends of the Child's last two lines are Anansi Boys influenced for the simpletons, or merely folk-tale influenced for those who know more.
Guy: Ah, it also shows you the relation between Rat and Water, and that things aren't as they seem. Rat is instinct, but look where it gets you afar from shore ;). And yes, the light and ocean of darkness give certain Lovecraft vibes.
Eric: *nods* Gotcha. I think I am going to be, depending on who I playtest this with, running a "folks who get eaten by the Mythos" thing, where two characters are different investigators and the third is the Horrible Cultist, or...zombies.
Guy: Consider this, for I did. You can have one Character be a soldier in WW2, a second being his grandson, a security guard in a mall, and the third being a random who knows. The thing is, all three characters should cross-paths, if not go along.
You can even have one character be a Hyrborean Conan, the second being the "Author" writing him, the third being the author's successful cousin. That'd give your players a shake-through about the nature of Reality.Combine that set-up with The World and watch their eyes light up ;)
Eric: Might I suggest that you highlight the possiblity of taking that sort of angle? Little sidebars or something with different takes on how to distribute the three characters?
Guy: I will, after writing influences/Play Examples, as this sort of things belong there.
Eric: I think one of the best things Cranium Rats has going for it, by the way, is that it opens up a kind of story you don't often get to tell in a group setting. That being, all those ones which tend to focus on "first person" style tales.
Guy: I added Repeat the above for each Character. You have one Rat, Water and Dirt per player, each Character has all three Aspects.
For example:
Players are P1, P2, P3.
Characters are C1, C2, C3, each has (W)ater, (R)at and (D)irt.
P1 is W, C1; R, C2; D, C3.
P2 is W, C2; R, C3; D, C1.
P3 is W, C3; R, C1; D, C2.
An Aspect belongs to one player.
To the end of the Character Generation section.
Guy: What about the Gamist fun? :P I want people to get a Munchkin or Settlers of Cattan feel! I want them going for the other players' throats!
Eric: *hasn't played Settlers, but has heard much of it* If you want them going for each others throats...well, I will be doing it by playing up the madness angle for the Lovecraft and zombies thing. Conflicting urges and all that. Oh! And I have nowhere near anyone who would play such a game, but I can also see a very amusing "Day in the Life of a High School Student" thing. Two characters are students from different cliques, the third is a teacher...
Eric: *grins* I suppose an excellent compliment on the work is that it fuels such a variety of stories...hell, Indigo Prophecy would fit in there rather decently, on the Lovecraft angle.
Guy: Well, I want players going at throats, not characters. Look at how I set it up, there's a finite pool of Aspect Dots, you can only go up by taking others' dice, you're bidding them for narration, all resources...

Cranium Rats has reached another mile-stone, it has created an off-spring, a game which riffs off of it!

I present to you Slime Octopi and Coral. A competitive game to build off of Cranium Rats's design goals and system and combine it with H.P. Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos as a background and backdrop.

Very early stage of development, developed with Eric Bennett who posts here as OutOfMind.

Hey dude, aren't Cranium Rats a piece of intellectual/copywritten property form the Planescape universe?

Game text handed to 8 people in person. Awaiting detailed feedback.

Gearing up towards IRC playtest/running 30 minutes to 2 hours "playtest session" at a Sci-Fi/Fantasy convention next week.

Have at least 5-6 people interested in playing on IRC.

Need to spend some time on other projects, tangenital ones, like Slime Octopi and Coral which has a more interesting premise it seems, and Glass House and Rock, which takes the same basic concept and does it totally different.

Thread has no content from other posters.

That's because you're not asking any pointed questions, you're just kinda stating stuff and asking "What do you think?"

"What do you think" =/= Directed question. It's not going to get people involved.

New thread on The Forge, this one about Dice Mechanics, possible changes, and the reasons.

Note, even if I get no replies, the mere act of writing these threads makes me look harder at my mechanics, why I use them, what brought them to begin with. This will be invaluable if I change/add/remove them or some of their aspects later.

Dotan Dimet posted a substansive review/critique of the game.
I posted my equally long reply.

I'm looking for more reviews and hopefully, some playtesting.

Please? :(

Cranium Rats Beta version 1.2 is now available.
Changed specific rules, not a total rewrite.

Change log:
Added “Legend of Wrath” to Background section.
Inserted updated sheet.
Removed Aspect Multiplier from Resolution.
Removed “Rack up the Stakes”.
Removed “Owned Tokens”, All Tokens are now the same.
Stealing is now 1 Token, thought it was that to begin with.
Changed the order in which sections are presented all over.
Tokens are now worth 2 dice each.
One may use 2 Tokens to fully replenish one’s Pool, this may only occur after completion of a Goal and outside of Conflicts/Bidding.
Inserted “Sweet in the Middle” rule for Die Reservoir under Tokens, if would go over the Die Reservoir limit each other player gains one Token.
Narration rights now always belongs to Water, unless someone offers him a Token and he accepts it.
Die Reservoir Limit is set to 6.
Each Rainbow scene gives the Water Aspect one Goal.
Added Game Zone portion.
Removed most of the Glossary.
Added “Setting Questions”.

For some reason it's not here, it's not on file but it will be added next time I change the file:

Clarification and Codification of Narration:

1) Enlightened Sets general stage.
2) Rat/Dirt pick Goal, Narrate Scene.
3) When a Conflict of interest arises, or any of the Aspects wants something to happen they interject; Roll the Dice or Say Yes.
4) When a Conflict between the character and an NPC occurs and the dice are rolled, OR when the different Aspects strive for different goals, Roll the Dice.
5) Water Narrates results according to Stakes.
Repeat Stages #2-#5 as necessary per character.

"Free play" or story development only happens at stages #2 and #5. The only story happens in order to get to or as a result of a conflict.
Scenes have _at least_ one stage #4, if stage #4 leads to another such immediately after, any player may call for scene continuation, subject to Enlightened's Veto.

One big error fixed.

Page 17, bottom. When you lose a Conflict you lose a Die, not a Dot.

John Kirk posted his Design Pattern Analysis thread for Cranium Rats on The Forge.

Fixed split table on Aspect Ratio Chart, Sheets and Charts now take 3 pages together.

And it's up.

A thread concerning Tokens and meshing Competition with Story was posted on the Forge. I have a possible solution posted, but I still feel this is not... right.

The need to "Solve" this issue was presented in the above playtest thread.

Neko Ewen (Cluney) posted about Cranium Rats(and Panty Explosion) on his blog.

Of specific interest are the choice of tone, or rather tones, in the text of the game, and character generation, which was the focus of the post.

I also mention the tendency to go "Silly" when first playing games with vast player input and how it relates to character generation(and I guess also tone).

Well, we have a couple of things to report:

The Underkoffler partial remix thread where what's wrong with the game text is discussed. I just posted a question regarding content there.

Over at GameCraft we have a thread discussing the scene that wasn't and what it could showcase for the game, or how the game fails.

Last week I had received art I've comissioned:
A logo for my would be company.
A colour cover for Cranium Rats.
Rats' black and white "Violence" strip.

I'm waiting with it till I have a new version of the game to show.

Or at least an Alpha for "Rats".