Again, apologies for the watermark.

One of the game’s main themes involves investing current power into future options, and the choice between what works right now and what might work in a few moments. I’m going to keep with that theme when implementing maneuvers. Instead of just being able to activate them left and right at will, or placing artificial “only once per shindig” limitations upon them, I’m going to require that players actually use cards from their hand to activate them. Each maneuver will have an Activation Rank, starting at 10 and going down with character advancement. By sacrificing a card from your hand with a face rank higher than the maneuver’s activation, you can use that maneuver’s ability.

This enhances the strategy behind the conflict, and should hopefully work nicely with the innate risk vs reward setup. Players will have to choose between holding onto the higher cards for use against their opponent, or investing them into their maneuvers for immediate effect.

Now it just remains to be tested.

Initial player-established War details were wicked awesome: The war is an “undeclared foreign war” against “massive hordes of unwashed primitives.” Despite their side’s use of “rolling dreadnought tanks with massive 100+-member crews,” the war was ultimately lost, the home economy across the sea ravaged, and the soldiers were all stranded there with “nothing to go home to.” The locals are usually known by their derogative nickname, “the shitweeds.”

The First Founding featured four soldiers in a moment of crisis: The war is lost – do we follow the suicide charge orders, or do we retreat to live and fight another day? The Sergeant tried to convince everyone that this charge was their destiny, their duty as soldiers. The Recruit dissented, having a family back home, but was quickly insulted by the Sapper. This provoked the Recruit into lashing out, which spawned a vicious explosion-heavy fight between him and the Sapper. The Recruit ultimately took the Sapper’s head, but the fight was so traumatic that he then simply fell to his knees and wept as The Enemy ran him down. The Sergeant and the Veteran, meanwhile, finally agreed that this was indeed a waste of their lives, and they rode off into the night, retreating from the charge.

This resulted in their Pack’s First Founding being colored by the following three grabs: Desertion, Regicide, and Survivors. Ouch.

Character creation was next. Sarge and the Veteran remain in the pack today as Den Mother and Trail Blazer respectively, along with a new Leader (the Road Captain) and a Masked member from the local populace (The Enforcer). A nice variety of Bikes and Fighting Styles were chosen, although the group’s off-road capability is very, very limited.

Following that the players laid out the actual details of the Pack itself. Calling themselves the War Pigs, they all wear masks styled after demonic boars, which are required attire when astride their bikes. The leader’s command icon is an old bleached skull from a massive pig-monster which once almost wiped out the entire Pack. Called The Boar by the pack, each member has also secretly given it its own name that no one else knows. This skull is mounted as a standard on the leader’s chopper, and frequently adorned with trophies from fallen enemies. Attaching these trophies is called “feeding the Boar” and one of the Pack’s taboos is that the Boar must be regularly fed, or bad things happen to them. They ritually partake in copious amounts of drugs, frequently going on peyote-like spirit quests, guided by the Boar. They don’t care about hairstyles, as long as their facial hair is curled into Boar Tusks (one of them even has similar facial tattoos). Finally, they have a taboo against sleeping in the same bed twice, unless they are “on furlough.”

Their prospect-initiation ritual is rather gruesome. Upon being first allowed to ride as prospect, the newcomer must wear a mask made from an actual boar’s face, tanned and stinking. This mask must be worn until he makes his first solo kill of a marked enemy of the Pack. There was also discussion of the Prospect having to eventually stew and eat the mask, but I’m not sure if those details got hammered out and committed to Pack law.

I look forward to seeing The War Pigs in action in the coming sessions.

Post-Session Musings

The default “suicide charge” First Founding scene seems to work well enough, but I’m thinking it might not be fully apparent that committing to the charge doesn’t necessarily mean the characters are doomed to die. Believing that they are might factor into their decision.

The basic conflict mechanic worked out well, but needs some in-the-face clarification. I need to make a cheat sheet and print it on the character sheet itself, just a quick bullet list of things to consider (like the two ways in which Ki can be spent for bonus cards).

Some dragging aspects of the Pack Creation system were very immediately apparent. Sacrifices were too many, and took too long to come up with and then write down. Going forward, I’m changing it to a stripped-down, more group-inclusive process: define one sacrifice for yourself, and one each for the guys to your left and right.

There are too many initial Grabs. Revision: First Founding survivors get two free Grabs (those they inherited from the first scene). All characters get one free grab attached to each of their three Trappings (Role, Style, and Bike). The Pack as an entity itself has three Grabs as well, established at the end of the First Founding. Undecided if players can then nominate one last bonus Grab for the player next to them.

Also, the Rank bidding system is confusing and ultimately unnecessary. I’m stripping it out and replacing it with simple group discussion.

One very valid concern that was raised during a recent design-jamming session is related to the very nature of the motorcycle pack. In this game, the characters are all members of an outlaw motorcycle gang, and along with that membership come several assumptions that could feasibly be made about their natures. With this game I am envisioning play going back-and-forth between scenes involving exploration of setting and situation, and scenes involving motorcycle samurai action – y’know, sword duels and motorcycle races and all-out gang-on-gang warfare.

Given the typically rugged, brutal, take-what-you-want-by-force nature of the typical outlaw gang, the question was poised: what is to stop the gang from just rolling into town at the beginning of the scenario, putting everyone to the sword, taking what they want, and leaving, without taking the time to explore and network?

While I don’t want to completely invalidate the above tactic – after all, that could definitely be a fun approach to a situation, right? – the question posed highlights the need for a definite pre-game “tutorial mode” which can introduce the players to the mechanics, without departing too heavily from their own situation.

To handle this, I’m now hammering out the rules for running an event I’m calling the First Founding. After sitting at the table and getting out all the usual pre-game chatter and sillies that invariably accompany gatherings within this hobby, the first real game-related thing that players of Hagakure ’66 will experience is the First Founding. In this event, the players act out the events of the war that initially sealed the founders together into what would become their post-war Pack.

The initial idea for the core conflict at hand is thus:

The battle is over, your forces are smashed, your leaders dead or captured. All around the battlefield you see the destruction that has been dealt to your side, and you hear the victory calls from the horns of your enemies. As far as you know, you seven are the last remaining fighters on your side. The question has been posed: do you run and hide in the hills, or do you make one last charge?

The seven mentioned above should of course be changed to fit the number of players in the group. The players are given choice to pick from several pre-made template characters, designed around archetypes that would have been common within the ranks during the war. The Grizzled Vet, the Brash Young Recruit, the Silent Scout, etc. They will then play out a scene in which their own characters argue and even fight to determine the final fate of their unit.

The idea here is for the game to begin with a moment of mutiny, which could potentially cloud the honor of the Pack’s founding. Some of them will want to fight, others will want to run, and the scene plays out until this conflict is resolved. Resolving the decision will end the scene, and move the game into actual character creation.

The scene is intended to be a deadly one. Elements will be involved that will put the characters’ lives as risk. Perhaps they will fight each other, perhaps they will be ambushed as they argue. Perhaps the players come to a quick unanimous decision, so we play it out a little further through the actual charge or retreat. Either way, there is a very strong chance for one or more characters to die, and this is intentional. The players should see the mechanics first-hand before the game begins, and they should be introduced to the deadliness of rash action from the onset of the game.

An idea here is to have there be multiple options for the nature of the First Founding conflict. I like the idea of mutiny and honor being at the core of it, but the Final Charge could be one of a handful of possibilities available. Others:

• Your lord general has decided to betray his own lord ruler, and has commanded all his troops to follow him and support the enemy. The time has come for the battle tide to change. Do you follow your lord general, or do you continue to fight for the original lord ruler?
• Your commander has sent your unit off on a mission that you all recognize as being a suicide run. Some among you believe that this is an unnecessary waste of your unit’s skills. The time has come to decide.

Again, the intention is to have the players take sides and resolve the situation, which will then be established as the event that sets the tone for the group’s first founding. After the resolution, the group will then go into actual character creation. Those who survive can stay on as pack elders, having made it through the war and stuck together to found their own Pack. Character attributes can be shifted and adapted to represent the passing of time, and other players can make new characters who have joined in the time that has passed since this event.

On the homeward commute yesterday, I began considering the idea of using Playing cards, instead of dice, as the core tangible resolution mechanic. This thought process all started as I was trying to work out some ideas for the All-Out Pack Warfare rules. I was initially thinking it could be a system in which two players face off over a row of seven “fields” or spaces on the table. Each member of the pack would play a card in a field of their choice, showing their effort in that field of the battle. Cards would get played, revealed, and matched in an order currently undefined, wht the results of those matches would score the fields and ultimately declare a victor in the battle. A quick game of strategy to determine the tides of an entire battle. Future product tie-ins, as well, but that’s thinking much further down the line.

This got me thinking: why use dice at all, then? How about just do the entire thing in cards?

Re-working the cards ideas a bit, the variables could be modified as follows:

• Pack Rank: Determines # of cards in your set hand
• Alignment Scale Position: Determines maximum # of cards you can play at once during relevant conflicts (scaled from 3 at the lowest to 9 at the highest)
• Ki Pool: Spend tokens to add cards to your hand before playing
• Grabs: Evoke a Grab to play more cards from your existing hand.

Cards are still played in sets of either 3 cards or 7 cards. Ranks are added and used to beat targets, card combos multiply scores or add to them somehow. Possibly even anime-esque levels of power escalation and exponential growth. I can see a well-played seven-card set totally destroying a mountainside, that kind of thing.

This gives me a whole new idea for implementing the Risk Investment theme of the Broad Scenes. To re-cap, what I’m calling “Broad Scenes” function primarily as storytelling and narrative exploration scenes. It is in the Broad Scenes that the stakes are set for future Action Scenes. While exploring Broad Scenes, characters can pursue side goals and missions to attempt to Up the Stakes for action scenes, such as persuading the town guard to fight for your cause, or convincing the mistress to reveal your enemy’s secret weakness.

Previously, I had figured these could give extra dice if established before a conflict, at the risk of higher stakes for loss. Instead, I’m conceptualizing a way for players to find these side goals, work them, and then invest face-down cards into them for future use. Say, work the mistress over, and then place one or more cards face down on the side for her, which can then be re-drawn into your hand as bonus cards later, should you work her into an actual conflict.

For example, I’m currently aiming at having the Code “Way of the Sword” empower the resolution of conflicts via both the direct application of violence and the complete avoidance of violence altogether. A character who is at Balance within this Code (aka “Rank 4″ out of seven spots on the scale) will roll a base of five dice in either situation. Each space further outward on this Code (towards the seventh spot) will raise the Violence ability by one die while likewise lowering the Non-Violence ability, with the furthest-outward space giving the character eight dice for violent acts and only two for non-violence. Likewise, moving instead inward does the opposite, and at the innermost space (spot #1) the samurai would have eight dice for non-violent ways, and only two for acts of violence.

I’m hoping to set each of the other two codes into a similar template. What mechanical empowerments, then, would the Codes of the Pack and the Highway respectively provide? The Code of the Pack represents the balance between individualism and Pack Identity – further inward makes the character more self-empowered, further outward makes him stronger as a member of the group. My immediate thought is that it would be the difference between “Acting alone” and “Acting With the Pack,” but that actually seems a bit too situational. Another idea would be to connect this to Honor, using it as a means to an end much in the same way that the Way of the Sword uses violence. Further inward could then empower your use of your own personal Honor as a tool (as well as when you defend it), while the outward could empower your application and defense of your Pack’s honor. I’m not sold on this yet, as I’m not picturing any exciting conflict scenes in which these would be used.

As for the Highway, I’m equally perplexed. The immediate reaction to the question is to apply it to your character’s riding skill, but what would be the relevant dichotomy? What could the Code of the Highway, which represents the balance between human empathy and a zen-like connection to your bike, bring to the table that isn’t already covered by the violence/peace empowerment of the Way of the Sword?

Or is the Way of the Sword too broad as it is?

First, let’s address the roles specifically. These are separate from the pack Ranks, mind you. Ranks cover things like Leader, Core Guard, Masked, and Prospect. Roles, on the other hand, describe your duties and responsibilities within the Pack, both in daily life and in Battle.

I’m wanting there to be at least seven roles available, each with its own narrative guidelines and battle mechanics. So far, here are the few notes I’ve drafted up last night on these Roles:

The Tail Gunner

1. Always rides at the rear of the convoy, usually with a heavy and/or loud bike. Responsible for carrying medical and other important supplies for the Pack.
2. When the pack retreats, the Gunner is responsible for issuing a “parting challenge” to the pursuing enemy, in order to stain their honor somehow. “Bet you can’t hit this target!” or the like.
3. Battle Move: “Parting Challenge”

The Historian

1. Responsible for keeping the Pack’s records, and maintaining their “mon” (badges)
2. During Battle, the Historian chants the lineages of the members and the exploits of the Pack. This should be done aloud and in character. This is to both bolster the Pack’s confidence and intimidate the enemy.
3. Battle Move: “Litany of Glory”

The Road Captain

1. The Road Captain rides at the front of the convoy, and in Battle, he always leads the charge.
2. This is the rider the enemy will see first, thus the Road Captain must be visually representative of his Pack’s spirit.
3. Battle Move: “Rallying Charge”

The Trail Blazer

1. A good ‘Blazer scouts out the battlefield in advance.
2. When traveling, the ‘Blazer rides ahead of the pack, sometimes far, but rarely closer than just visible cresting that far hill.
3. Battle Move: Undecided

The Armsman

1. Responsible for keeping the pack in line, and enforcing Pack Law within the ranks at the behest of the Leader.
2. Is rarely the leader, but more frequently the Leader’s right hand man.
3. Acts primarily as a thug and enforcer.
4. Battle Move: Undecided

The Errand Boy

1. Usually filled by the Prospect
2. Cleans the bikes, gets the coffee, packs the gear, executes all the items on the Honeydew lists.
3. Battle Move: Undecided

The Den Mother

1. Strong samurai packs keep their ranks free of women and avoid the wily affairs of the fairer sex. The strongest Packs dismiss this superstition, and ride with a strong Den Mother in their ranks.
2. The Den Mother is a unifying force on the battlefield, bolstering those who ride with her.
3. Battle Move: Undecided

I’m mulling over ideas on how to both A) further define these roles outside of combat, and B) further define the rules of actual Pack Warfare. I’m also considering having the rules be changeable in-game. Maybe give each role two special moves – one for whoever happens to switch into that role in the fly, and one additional move that only the true holder of that role knows (the guy who chose it during character creation).

On Stages of Play

I’m seeing actual play happening in two major stages, which for now (and lack of better theme-appropriate terms) I’m calling the Broad stage and the Action stage. Play will flow freely between the two stages, often with definite scene breaks to signify their transitions. Musings on these follow.

The Broad Stage:

In the Broad stage, the players guide their characters along, trying to complete a mission given to them by their Patron, whoever that may be in the scenario. This is akin to “exploration” and “open” scenes and play from other more mainstream rpgs. It is through Broad stage play that the players explore the setting and scenario.

The only real mechanic is based in the uncovering and completion of minor scenario objectives. These involve the character putting something important on the line now in order to reap the benefits of it later. The samurai puts his life on the line by swearing to provide protection to the troubled magistrate, in order to secure the magistrate’s backing against the town council. He puts his honor on the line by talking to the prostitute, in order to learn the secrets she knows about the evil Lone Ronin.

These risks provide the samurai with bonus dice in later conflicts, but can turn against the samurai as well. Once a Risk is taken, it remains in play regardless of the samurai’s use of the bonus dice.

Aside from creating these risk opportunities, there are no intended mechanics for these scenes. THis is still under consideration, though.

The Action Stage:

Conflicts are set up in the Broad scenes, and resolved in focused Action scenes. These scenes focus entirely on the resolution of previously-established conflicts and duels. These are the ambushes in the dark, the duels at morning, the debates in the tea room, the pack vs pack highway battles.

Action scenes will always take place on the previously-established Fields of Conflicts, set up both by the GM and the other players before the scenario began. Dice will be rolled, fates will be determined.

It is during an Action scene that the Risks previously taken by the Samurai will be judged. Gaining bonus dice from these risks can give the samurai an edge in a conflict, but they can also turn against the samurai. He may defeat the Lone Ronin, but his honor is so smudged by his methods that he suffers ridicule regardless.

I am reminded of an Episode of Avatar: The Last Airbender, in Season 2. Zuko has masked the mature of his nationality, and been taken in by an Earth Kingdom family. When the family is bullied by brigands, he steps up to defend them. However, the fight proves too much for his sword skills alone, so he calls upon his firebending and successfully defeats them. But the revelation of these abilities mark him as a Firebender, an enemy more reviled than the brigands, and the family casts him out.

I’m also seeing Risks as able to be introduced on the fly. Maybe some will even be mandatory and enforced. For example, the samurai has decided to make a public example of dragging a shopkeeper out into the street and decapitating him. This could be turned into an Action scene, and the player would be forced to take on extra risk dice, representing the undeniable fact that while the shopkeeper will be pretty much helpless, killing him in such a way would quite likely make the rest of the village hate you, if not downright hostile.

Grabs:

I want to implement a system of trait-like Tags in this game. Here’s what I’m thinking, by way of a situational example:

A character is trying to get into a special party of the town’s Elite Rich Citizens, so he can meet an elusive princess who is in town. Due to his somewhat dissheveled appearance and lack of invitation, however, the GM says that he is stopped at the gate by the doorman and refused entrance. The GM says, he will have to find another way in, but the player stops him. “Actually, no. See, I am currently walking with my sword at my belt, and my sword is both Glorious, Famous, and Ancestral.” (referring to his sword’s tags) “The doorman recognizes this weapon and apologizes profusely for such a slight against it’s famed carrier, letting me in after much kow-towing.”

Another example, from another player:

“As we roll into town, the windows on many of the nearer-to-the-road buildings rattle and in some cases even shatter, when my Loud bike roars past.”

In these examples, the players have taken active authority to directly modify the scene, without necessity of GM prompting, by calling upon desctiptive Tags on their characters. I’ve played in others games where players will be faced with a situation, and then come up with a sudden idea, such as “Yeah, but can’t I maybe possibly use my magic rope to climb that impossible cliff?”

See, I don’t like those kinds of questions, because it’s the player asking the GM for permission to do something cool, for fear that their visions of awesome might clash or something. As if! In H66, I want the players to be encouraged to just come out and say “Actually, this is how it happened” without fear of conflict, because those Narrative Tags tell them to.

I’m seeing these tags on everything: bikes, weapons, backgrounds, missions, places, NPCs, and more. A character might begin the game with a good half-dozen of them or more. NPCs and towns might in fact be little more than lists of tags and their relationships to one another.

Mechanically, tags could be used in Broad scenes as narrative “trumps” which allow their users to take uncontested authority to modify the moment of the game, or add elements to the situation beyond what the GM has established. Two tags used in opposition of each other could cancel each other out.

I’m planning on calling these “Grabs“. On the character sheet they are there to grab the attention of the player, and compel him to then grab the reins of the moment and add some flair. While these “Grabs” are provided by your character’s external affectations (Role, Weapon Style, and Bike), they aren’t limited to those devices in implementation. The subjects of that trinity are treated like integral extensions of the character himself, and as such all benefits and hindrances from them apply directly to the character.

In other words, when you choose The Bow as your weapon, you are not just picking a weapon for your guy to wield and accessorize. You are saying “I am the warrior who follows the way of the bow, and these are the trappings of that lifestyle.” Your weapon, your bike, and your role in the group aren’t just gear to be traded and inventories, but actual character traits and qualities of style and personality.