Manifest: The First Playtest

I was originally planning on doing a few different playtests before commenting, but the first playtest was pretty definitive, and I feel good about its results.

Thanks to the efforts of “P,” “C,” “S,” and “W,”¹ I have decided which die-roll mechanic to use going forward. The winner is the third option, Pooled-Single-Number.

I’ll come up with a better name by the end of this post.

One of the good things about the playtest was that we managed to get through two rounds in 45 minutes with each mechanic. That seemed to make it clear that the three options were comparably equal in complexity — but the details were a little different. The first option, Bond-d-Tier, confused my players more than the others, and took a bit more explaining before they got the gist of it. The second ruleset, d6-Target-Number, was easier to grasp but quickly out of the running when everyone agreed with “C” when they said: “It wasn’t un-fun, but I really don’t remember much about it.”

Intangibles are funny things. “Fun” is an amorphous concept that leads us in strange directions, but the fact remains that all four of my playtesters found the third option the most “fun.” They felt excited about the system in a way they didn’t for the other two. They gave good explanations about why they liked it, but in the end those explanations matter less than the fact that they were more engaged with the third ruleset than they were with the other two.

Now, there’s a lot more to consider when it comes to developing the third ruleset, and I’ll go into that in later posts, but for now, I’d like to touch on just a few of their thoughts and get a gameplan for moving forward.

1: The Emotional Stats

In the playing of the game, the playtesters had six manifestations out at once and they almost exclusively used just one. They invested dice in actions but they always felt it was easier/better to invest as many dice as possible in one big action, rather than divide their attention between two or three. I was able to mitigate this a bit with a rule that Manifestations couldn’t use dice from their caustic emotion, but it still caused issues.

“P” liked the use of Emotional Stats in the d6-Target-Number ruleset, as it more closely tied Emotional Stats to the mechanic. In the third ruleset, they didn’t matter that much,² but even if they mattered more, I still need to find a method of tying stats closer to the system, at least in combat.

2: The Agent

One of my playtesters moved their agent to the front-line. They were killed in one turn. Another player used an item, once, mostly for a joke. The players suggested that the Agent should probably be taken out of the combat, like Pokémon.

This is great advice, because it is exactly what I don’t want. I need to find ways to make the Agent more of a useful or necessary part of the combat. Perhaps they don’t require a die to use their actions, giving them a free action; or I could introduce Dependent Manifestations — magical swords, armor, wings, etc.

3: Damage vs Utilities

My goal has always been to make direct damage a bit of a gamble, while conditions a more complex but certain effect. You might do 0 damage with an attack, but if you push a terrified Manifestation, that’s a certain 2 damage a pop. That didn’t happen in the playtest — “C” used an ability that pushed a Manifestation 5 spaces which would have done 10 damage if the Manifestation had been terrified at the time — but I also didn’t worry too much about whether the abilities I chose were effective, balanced, or actually served my purpose. I need to make sure this balance is present in later editions of this system. Speaking of abilities…

4: The Abilities

In ruleset 1, you always did damage but maybe didn’t have any SYNC. In ruleset 2, you always had SYNC, but maybe didn’t do any damage. In ruleset 3, you always did something, but you might get only POWER or SYNC.

“S” liked that you always did something, but didn’t like that there was no certainty in what kind of something. They suggested abilities with a core base effect that was then augmented through POWER and SYNC: a “deal 2+POWER damage to a target in range 3+SYNC” sort of thing. “C” suggested that there could be a method for swapping POWER and SYNC, or letting Agents choose which rolled number goes where: if they roll a high SYNC but need a high POWER, they can swap.

I like that idea, but not as a core mechanic. An item or Manifestation Passive that allows an Agent to swap is great because that is an opportunity cost: You can swap your POWER and SYNC, but you can’t carry an extra ammo clip or make your Manifestation immune to fields. That is definitely going in, but I still need to find a balance in creating the abilities so players feel “I’m always be doing something useful, but I’m not always sure what.”

5: Group Size

As suggested above, my playtesters mostly focused on one or two Manifestations. They felt that 6 was far too many, and that 3 was probably a better option. I’m fine with that, but as I’ve also mentioned before, I’d love it if having six Manifestations out at once was both a valid option and not requisite. Having the choice between one Charizard or six Pichus for a team is an interesting choice, so making sure that the system supports and balances those options should be one of my goals.

6: Tier

Ruleset 3 ignores Tier. That needs to be fixed.

Right now, the balance between Bond and Tier — that is, Manifestations that are controlled and crafty versus uncontrolled and powerful — is handled with a single number. This is a descriptor number, in that it doesn’t actually allow for Manifestations that are “better” than others. They’re all equal, all balanced. That makes for some significant limits on interesting choices. Along with this…

7: Leveling

Leveling doesn’t really exist naturally in ruleset 3. In the other rulesets, you could start with a Bond 1 Tier 1 Manifestation and decide which of the two to “level up.” In Ruleset 3, if you have a Bond 1, you automatically have a Tier 5, which means you can’t level up, you can only level aside.

That means no Charmanders, only Charizards. Not fun.

So, rather than get rid of Tier, I need to rethink it and find a place for it in the system. I already have some ideas, so next time I’d like to explore some of them and see if I can’t iron out this mess of data into a nice and clean basis for MANIFEST v0.2.

Strap yourself in, girls, it’s gonna be a ride.

(Oh, and I promised a better name for the ruleset, right? Well, I don’t know if it’s better, exactly, but it certainly flows off the tongue better: Stat-Investment. It may change later on if I decide the dice should come from a different place than stats, but it works for now.)