The rules should support gamist play, with emphasis on political and social challenges, with some amount of resource and responsibility management as well.

The game should support a variety of different settings, such as Modern, Renaissance Italy, Hanseatic League, or even Stone-Age Tribal, as well as any number of fictitious settings of any technological or social level of complexity.

The game rules should support long-term progressive campaign-style play, allowing for growth and development of characters and their power base, and providing for balanced opportunities of play for all players. As such, while the game does not need to cater to a player character party style of play, it is also not meant to support player-vs-player win-lose competition.

The mechanics of Project Senate are not meant to model the complete layout of the political human being, nor all possible outcomes of all possible actions. It’s been said that, in a political environment, anyone can accomplish anything, provided they are willing to pay the price. As such, at any given time, success or failure for a player character should be measured not by whether they actually perform a given task, but rather, by how much they have actually gained or lost by it.

Game Structure

Player Roles

Project Senate is organized much like a traditional RPG, in that it separates one player from the rest, assigning to her the duties of Game Master. Generally, the Game Master is responsible for managing the world and providing the challenge framework.

The rest of the players are the Character Players, or simply, the Players. Each of these takes on one character, namely their Player Character. Generally, the Players are responsible for managing their characters’ reactions and initiatives, within the tenets of the game world setting and the provided challenge framework.

The scope and limitations of each role are detailed below.

Character Players And Player Characters

A Player is responsible for the actions and reactions of his Character, including their thoughts, emotions, likes and dislikes, and even general physical condition. As such, and because the Player Characters are central to the game, the Players are largely responsible for driving the story, within the framework provided by the Game Master.

Generally, a Player has no say in the actions or attitudes of any other characters, including Player Characters of other Players, and other non-player characters. However, within the scope of the conflict resolution system, Players are sometimes allowed to dictate the attitudes and desires of non-player characters with whom they are interacting at the moment.

Finally, Players are expected to cooperate with the Game Master, at her request and subject to her fiat, in providing descriptions of the physical, social or cultural environment, especially with regard to such details as may be irrelevant to the particular challenges at hand, but vital for maintaining the continuity of the game world fabric.

The Game Master And The Challenge Framework

The Game Master is responsible for managing the world, providing the Player Characters with an in-game context in which to act and interact. She is free to ask the Players for assistance in building and describing the game world, but she is final judge and master of what is or is not included.

She is also responsible for building and managing the challenge framework, and delivering it to the Player Characters through in-game events and the actions and attitudes of non-player characters, while maintaining the logic and causality of those actions and attitudes.

The challenge framework consists of the set of in-game circumstances, relationships and events that delivers political, social and personal challenges to the Players, which they may overcome through the actions and attitudes of their Characters. Furthermore, a good challenge framework should also provide a context for Player‑generated self‑challenges or even cross‑challenges.

Whenever possible, the game master should limit the opportunities for negative- or zero-sum player-vs-player conflict in the challenge framework. Because this is not always possible without undue game world manipulation or breaks in continuity or causality, she is expected to use the framework to provide an out for the involved players, namely by adding external factors to the conflict which break the zero sum.

Outside the game world, the Game Master is responsible for managing Player Character protagonism, defined as the importance that each Character has to the story at any given moment. It is her job to ensure that all players are presented with equal challenge opportunities as the game progresses, and to allot screen time to each player, proportional to his demand of it.

Finally, the Game Master is responsible for managing the application of the game rules, and for interpreting and arbitrating the results of the conflict resolution system.

Elements Of The Game World

The game world consists of nothing more than the setting and the characters that dwell therein.

Defining The Setting

Project Senate supports a great variety of settings, imaginary or real, from stone-age tribal societies to the modern day corporate world, including ancient Rome, classic Greece, renaissance Italy, and the German Hanseatic League.

The chosen setting should provide opportunities for creating characters appropriate to the game. These characters are the movers and shakers of the game world, though they do not necessarily represent the top of the power pyramid.

The setting definition is tied to Project Senate mechanics by specifying the following details:

· The nature of each resource

· Challenge classes and their meaning

· Passage of time

See the section below on defining a challenge for definitions of the challenge classes.

Defining Resources

Challenge and goal resolution in Project Senate revolves around management of these resources:

· Wealth

· Manpower

· Clout

· Reputation

Each resource ranges from zero to an arbitrarily high amount. Whenever a character finds himself reaching zero in more than one resource, that character is out of the game. This could be either because the character is bankrupt, cast out, or otherwise banished, because he has been assassinated, killed in battle or otherwise expired, or even because he retired, sold his assets and moved to a beach-side resort.

The exact nature of each resource is setting-specific. However, the following loose definitions will probably always apply:

Wealth

Wealth is, basically, money. Material resources such as ores, foodstuffs, or even real-estate are also included. Human resources are specifically excluded. It should be noted that wealth does no actually represent money itself, but rather, natural ability to generate money.

Manpower

Manpower is the amount and quality of hirelings available to the character. This includes any non-descript assistants, organized military forces, and any and all persons whose obedience or cooperation can be taken for granted.

Clout

Clout is a measure of the character’s global importance. While not equivalent, it is tightly connected to the character’s political rank or social station.

Reputation

Reputation is a measure of the reliability, trustworthiness and general likeability of the character. In certain circumstances, it can also be treated as a measure of the character’s fame and renown, or even his success track record.

Passage Of Time

Passage of time in a given setting is marked by the occurrence of a periodic event. In settings where things take a long time to do, this periodic event might take a few years to occur. In more frantic settings, this event might happen several times a year.

The passage of time is directly tied to the Character evolution mechanics, as detailed below, in the section on Character Improvement.

Directly tied to the passage of time are the basic timing units of Project Senate, namely the basic interval and the incremental interval. Most actions and events in the game will take whole multiples of the basic interval. Extremely fast and/or successful events will take one incremental interval instead.

Game Setting Example: Ancient Rome

In the time of the ancient Roman Republic, senators and consuls vied for power and influence both overtly and covertly. From hollow rhetoric to outright murder, it was all they could do to maintain their status while increasing their wealth and their power base.

Characters in this setting could be the senators themselves or their direct aides, or perhaps military generals making a bid for political power, or even the imperial throne.

Wealth consists mainly of estates like vineyards and farms, although large quantities of gold and jewelry can always come in handy. Manpower in large quantities is usually only available through access to the legions of the Roman Army. Clout is quite directly a measure of independent political power and is usually the ultimate goal for any self-respecting senator. Reputation is a measure of respectability, social propriety and ultimately, the appearance that associating with the character is probably a good thing.

Military conflicts will probably involve barbarians and clashing legions. Political conflicts will deal with the senate, province governors and rival generals. Commercial conflicts might revolve around foreign or inter-province trade. Personal conflicts will be tied to love affairs, seduction games and behind-the-scenes intrigue.

The passage of time is tied to the Games, an athletic competition that occurs every four years. The basic interval is two weeks. The incremental interval is three days.

Game Setting Example: SuperCorp

In the future, the world will be in the hands of a few mega-corporations, warring between themselves for resources and market share, and writing their own laws. These corporations, much like any other large human organization, suffer heavily from infighting and politicking, the elimination of which would constitute a drastic, if utopian, competitive advantage.

Characters in this setting would likely be top ranking officers in one or a number of rival corporations, nominally performing their duties, all the while striving for promotions and pay raises.

Wealth comes in two forms, either the character’s personal fortune or his departmental budget. Manpower is the straightforward application of the masses of underpaid, overworked wage slaves that work for the character’s department. Clout is quite simply the character’s rank in the corporation, and it could also be tied to each corp’s relative power. Reputation is the character’s perceived loyalty to the company.

Military conflicts will be hostile takeovers, industrial espionage and other black ops. Political conflicts will involve promotions, prestige appointments and the relationships in the executive committee. Commercial conflicts will deal with the day-to-day operations of the corporation and its businesses. Personal conflicts will subsume everything that is not directly tied to the corporation.

The passage of time is tied to the quarterly reports, occurring once every three months. The basic interval is one day. The incremental interval is six hours.

Defining Challenges

Throughout life, people, whether VIPs, grunts or in between, are faced with a number of challenges. However, for the purposes of Project Senate, the only challenges of interest are those that put the Character at stake, by affecting either the Character’s resource pool or the Character’s relationships.

Some challenges carry with them positive consequences for success while others imply negative consequences for failure. Some challenges may carry both sorts of consequences. Also, sometimes, challenges will have a time limit, a deadline by which the challenge must be addressed. For details on the type of challenges that Project Senate handles, see the chapter on Reward and Character Development below.

Challenges fall into the following classes:

· Military / Foreign Policy

· Political / Domestic Policy

· Commercial / Business Initiatives

· Personal / Behind-The-Scenes

These classes are strongly tied to the source of the challenge, rather than to the resources used to handle it. For instance, barbarians posed to invade falls clearly into the military class, but it might be handled with manpower and clout to organize a defense, or reputation and wealth to bribe them to go away.

Challenges in the game are naturally divided into three groups:

· Opportunities – Chances for a Character to gain something positive

· Dangers – Possibilities for a Character to avoid something negative

· Crises – A combination of the other two

Opportunity Examples

General Caius Gallus commands a legion responsible for keeping the order in Rome. he gets word that the Republic is planning a new invasion. It occurs to him that if he plays his cards right, he be appointed to lead the operation. The Game Master informs the general’s Player that he stands to gain 1 point of Manpower if he is appointed for the invasion and 1 point of Reputation if he is successful. Being appointed is a political challenge. Winning the invasion is a military challenge.

Mister Abrams is vice-president of marketing of SuperCorp. A small company is about to launch a competitor to one of SuperCorp’s more outdated products. If Mister Abrams plays his cards right, he’ll be able to have SuperCorp buy this company, which will necessarily increase his department’s headcount and budget. The Game Master informs the marketing executive’s Player that, if successful, he stands to gain 2 points of Wealth and 1 of Manpower. This is a commercial challenge.

Danger Examples

A young and charismatic centurion has obtained significant victories in campaigns abroad. As part of his promotion to general, he has requested to be stationed in Rome, to perhaps take over part of the divisions defending the city. Unless general Gallus can avoid this, his legion stands to lose a great deal of manpower and some availability. This is a political challenge.

The CEO’s nephew is at it again, and this time, there is a dead body in the scene. Mister Abrams finds himself in a predicament. Unless he can disassociate himself, he stands to lose at least 3 points of Reputation. And unless he can clear the nephew’s name, the nephew will lose most of his clout and availability. Both of these are personal challenges.

Crisis Examples

Rome is under attack and general Gallus’s estates are directly threatened. As things stand, the general could lose as much as 3 points of Wealth. If he can deal with the situation successfully, however, his Reputation will increase by at least 2 points and he might even be granted a promotion, for an extra point of Clout. This is a military challenge.

SuperCorp is about to launch a new division and they are looking for someone to run it. The CEO is considering Mister Abrams. It would be a step down for him, but if he could put a puppet at the head of the new division, he would stand to gain access to a great deal of new resources. If Mister Abrams is appointed, he will lose a great deal of Wealth, Clout and Reputation. If he puts someone else there, he stands to gain a new relationship with positive Manpower and Clout and negative Wealth. This is a political challenge.

Defining A Character

A Player Character is defined by who he knows, what he’s good at, and what resources he can bring to bear on any given problem.

Aptitudes

Characters will have an aptitude for each of the four challenge classes listed above:

· Military / Foreign

· Political / Domestic

· Commercial / Business

· Personal / Behind-The-Scenes

These aptitudes vary from -9 to an arbitrarily high value, and they directly affect the value of the resources involved in addressing challenges, as detailed in the section on achieving goals below.

Resources

Characters will have access to their own pool of resources, for each of the resource types listed above:

· Wealth

· Manpower

· Clout

· Reputation

Relationships

Characters have relationships to other characters, typically non-player characters, or to groups of characters. Each relationship is defined by the following set of parameters:

· Attachment

· Alignment

· Availability

· Background

· Resource mix

These parameters are, again, loosely defined as follows:

Attachment

Attachment measures how much the counterpart likes or dislikes your character. This can range from high positive values for a strong affection to high negative values for a deep dislike or resentment.

Alignment

Alignment measures whether the counterpart’s interests and circles of influence are the same as your character’s. Again, this number can be either strongly positive or strongly negative.

Availability

Availability measures your character’s ability to access and deal successfully with the counterpart. This includes factors as diverse as physical proximity, possible language barriers, cultural factors, and even the actual inertial mass of the counterpart. Availability will generally be positive, and while zero means literally no availability, a negative value can signal a situation where a number of hurdles have to be overcome before the counterpart can even be contacted.

Background

Background measures the amount of common history you share with the counterpart. Background is always positive and never decreases.

Resource Mix

Finally, a relationship’s resource mix determines the counterpart’s ability to directly affect your resources. Resource sources will have a positive value, whereas resource sinks will have a negative value. The resource mix is inherent to the counterpart itself, and will usually not vary even if the nature of the relationship changes, although it may vary during the natural course of play.

Fig. 1 – A relationship block in the character sheet

Relationship Levels

The absolute level of a relationship measures its contribution to the character’s power base and is determined by adding together all of its parameters. The relative level of a relationship measures its importance to the character and is determined by adding together the absolute values of all of its parameters.

What Does All This Mean

Relationship Parameters

A highly personal relationship, such as a close friend or relative, or a loved one, can be modeled by a high attachment and possibly a high background. Availability will probably be a direct factor of distance at any given time. Alignment can vary widely, as can the resource mix.

A relationship with an enemy or opponent will be signaled by either a strongly negative attachment or a strongly negative alignment, and very probably a very low or even negative availability. Background will depend on accreted relationship history, and the resource mix will probably be either negative or simply irrelevant.

A purely professional relationship will probably be based on moderately high alignment and high availability, whereas background and attachment can be virtually any value. The resource mix will generally be positive overall, although the details may vary.

A relationship of convenience will either be based on very high availability or a highly positive resource mix. Attachment and alignment will probably both be very close to a neutral zero, whereas background can be arbitrarily high or low.

A relationship of habit can be modeled by a high background and at least moderately high availability, a low attachment and low or even negative alignment, with a resource mix probably, though not necessarily, close to neutral.

A relationship with a group of people or any collective entity in general can cover much the same spectrum as a relationship with an individual. On average, it will have a lower availability, and the resource mix, whether positive or negative, will have a higher magnitude.

Resource Mix Examples

General Gallus’s appointed post affords him a comfortable political position, and what’s more, a high readiness fighting force, ready to intervene at a moment’s notice. Of course, this war machine is not without its costs, which the general is expected to address. The legion is a clout and manpower source and a wealth sink.

The general’s personal friend, Senator Gracchus, is a wealthy and respected man, a patron of the arts and one of Rome’s most accomplished statesmen. General Gallus has profited greatly from his relationship with the senator, borrowing from him respectability and social access that does not always come easy for a military man. Conversely, the senator has taken his own profit from the relationship, as the general and his legion have kept the senator’s enemies in check. The senator is a reputation source and a manpower sink.

Mister Abrams went to school with the nephew of SuperCorp’s CEO. The young man’s bombastic night life and peculiar sexual habits bring in no end of trouble. Of course, the nephew stands to inherit a large share of the corporation, and so Mister Abrams is willing to provide the occasional excuse and take on part of the embarrassment, in order to profit from the nephew’s friendship and influence. The nephew is a clout source and a reputation sink.

Mister Williamson is SuperCorp’s CFO and Mister Abram’s nemesis. His interventions at SuperCorp’s executive meetings continually undermine the importance of the marketing department. Unfortunately for Mister Abrams, Mister Williamson is responsible for his department’s budget. The CFO is a wealth source and a clout sink.

Game Play

Building The Setting

As mentioned above, before actual play can begin, one game session should be devoted to developing the setting and the characters. Building the setting for Project Senate lays the ground work for providing in-game explanations for the various quantities that the game manipulates, and it builds the foundation on top of which the Game Master will build the challenge framework.

Building the setting is done in a series of steps:

· Defining the basics

· Establishing the major entities

· Defining social and political ranks and stations

· Defining the resources

· Defining the challenge classes

· Marking the passage of time

Defining The Basics

Most role players have an understanding of the concept of setting. In Project Senate, that understanding corresponds to the basics. These are such general details as:

· Is this a real-world or fictitious setting

· Is this a modern, historical, or futuristic setting

· What is the general technological level of the setting

· What is the general sociological level of the setting

Sometimes, a couple of words are enough to mostly define the basics of the setting. Ancient Rome is a good example. Most of the time, however, more context is needed. Even Ancient Rome doesn’t say everything. Is this Rome before or after it became an Empire? Before or after Pax Romana?

Either way, everyone at the table should have a shared solid grasp of the game world they will be playing in.

Establishing The Major Entities

These are the entities, be they organizations or individuals, which are important in the game world, whether because they hold power or because they are major general sources of resources. In Ancient Rome, for instance, this will probably be the Senate, the Emperor and the Roman Army.

Some of these entities will not be available for the character to form relationships with. For instance, the Game Master can rule that a relationship with the emperor is assumed for all the characters, but the emperor should never become a source (or sink) of resources, and so, he is off-limits.

Defining Social And Political Ranks And Stations

Political ranks and social stations define what constitutes power in the game world. This is the definition of the circles from which the player characters will arise. Again, using Ancient Rome as an example, this is equivalent to establishing the internal hierarchy in the Senate, the military chain of command, and what it means to be a patrician.

Because Project Senate is about actual power, whatever form it may take, Players may also wish to define what the power circles are with regard to the underworld. While organized crime was probably not a big phenomenon in Ancient Rome, many a ruthless man rose to prominence through slave trade, piracy, smuggling and bribes.

Defining The Resources

Whenever Players talk about Wealth, Manpower, Clout and Reputation, Characters use more specific terms. The actual meaning of each resource varies according to the setting. Though this meaning is not likely to have a mechanical impact, establishing it is of vital importance to defining the game world.

Because a Character’s resource pool determines not only how much of each resource the Character has, but also, that Character’s ability to regenerate that resource, each resource should be defined not only according to what it means but also according to how it is generated and how it is generally used.

Defining The Challenge Classes

Like resources, challenge classes will vary in meaning according to the setting. It should be noted, however, that no link between each challenge class and each resource is assumed to exist.

Challenge classes do have a direct correspondence to the Characters’ aptitudes, in that each Character’s use of resources on a given challenge will be strengthened or weakened, according to the corresponding Character aptitude. As such, defining the challenge classes is equivalent to defining the meaning of each aptitude.

Marking The Passage Of Time

The final step in defining the setting is establishing the periodic event that will correspond to the passage of time, and which will govern the use of the aptitude evolution mechanic. This event should be spaced in time according to the natural rhythm of life in the chosen setting. For instance, in a futuristic setting, where technology can basically put anything anywhere it’s needed, whenever it’s needed, this event should be fairly frequent, occurring perhaps as often as every quarter. In an ancient setting, where things take forever to move into place and where campaigns are measured in years, not days, this event should be fairly sparse, occurring perhaps as rarely as once every four or five years.

Once the passage of time interval is established, the basic time interval can be determined. It should equal roughly 1/100^th of the passage of time interval, rounded off to whatever unit the group will find practical to work with. The incremental time interval should be some fraction of the basic interval, no smaller than one fifth and no larger than one half, again rounded off to whatever unit the group will find practical to work with.

Building A Character

A new Character begins play at a relatively high power level in the game world, but with plenty of room for improvement and expansion of his power base.

Building a new character is done in a series of steps:

· Character concept

· Relationships

· Shared relationships

· Initial resources

· Initial aptitudes

· Fleshing out the concept

Character Concept

Character concept is nothing more than answering the question “who am I” in no more than one or two sentences.

Some players like to write a full-fledged history of their character before answering their question, while others are satisfied with answering “I’m a power dude”. Regardless of personal taste, by the end of this step, players should know enough about their characters to be able to specify their relationships.

Relationships

Characters begin play with one high-level relationship, three mid-level relationships and five low-level relationships. One mid- and two low-level relationships should be with a collective entity.

Low-level relationships have levels between 1 and 3. Mid-level relationships have levels between 4 and 6. High-level relationships have levels between 7 and 10. The sum total of all relationship levels for a starting character is 30.

During this step, players should leave a number of low- and mid-level relationships undefined. The actual number of undefined relationships should be between one and four, and it should not exceed the number of other Character Players at the table.

Building a relationship is a straightforward process of naming the counterpart, describing the nature of the relationship, and distributing the level among the various relationship parameters, within the following limits:

· Background cannot be negative

· Availability has a lower cap at 2

· All other values have a lower cap at -5

Relationships with collective entities have the following limits:

· Background cannot be negative

· Availability has a lower cap at 0

· Resource mix values have a lower cap at -6 and cannot take the values of ±1 or ±2

· All other values have a lower cap at -5

Shared Relationships

Characters should make their character sheets available to each other at this point, in order to define those relationships they left undefined in the previous step.

In order to define a shared relationship, a player should follow the following steps and limits:

· Copy the name and the resource mix

· Describe the nature of the relationship, which may be entirely unrelated to the nature of the source relationship

· Assign a level and specify the remaining relationship parameters

· Background cannot be negative

· Availability cannot be negative for individuals and is capped at -1 for collective entities

· Attachment and alignment are capped at -3

During the course of play, a shared relationship’s resource mix parameters may vary. These variations should automatically propagate to all other versions of the counterpart on the other Characters’ sheets. The other relationship parameters, however, are individual for each Character, and changes to those do not propagate.

It should be noted that it is quite possible that two Players have independently chosen relationships with what is patently the same entity. This shouldn’t be considered a shared relationship. The Game Master should work together with the Players to determine how the different aspects of that entity gave rise to the different relationships, thus creating an in-game rationale for the different numbers. Because these are not actual shared relationships, changes to the numbers in one Player’s character sheet never propagate to the other Players.

Initial Resources

Players should calculate the initial value for each resource by adding together the various contributions from each relationship.

If necessary, players should adjust the character’s relationships in order to make sure that each resource is valued at zero, at the least.

Once everything has been adjusted, players should add 1 to each resource.

Initial Aptitudes

Players determine their Characters’ initial aptitudes via the following procedures:

· Business aptitude begins at -5. All other aptitudes begin at -3.

· Increase the Military / Foreign aptitude by the sum of all the Alignment parameters.

· Increase the Political / Domestic aptitude by the sum of all the Attachment parameters.

· Increase the Commercial aptitude by the sum of all the Availability parameters.

· Increase the Personal aptitude by the sum of all the Background parameters.

After determining the initial values, each Character should make one unmodified roll for each aptitude using the aptitude evolution mechanic, as detailed below in the chapter on character development.

Fleshing Out The Concept

This is the final stage of the character creation process. During this stage, players should calculate the relative level of each relationship, and answer whatever questions remain to be answered about their characters, using the numbers in the relationship boxes as a guide.

Some players like to detail as much as they can about their character before they begin play, while others like to define and develop their character during play. Though this matter is largely left to personal taste, players should at least strive to answer any specific questions that the Game Master may want to ask them about their characters and relationships.

Game Mechanics

Project Senate game mechanics cover the following major areas:

· Achieving goals

· Conducting negotiations

All these mechanics hinge on a basic dice rolling mechanic.

A note on rounding: all values round nearest. Exact 0.5 fractions round up.

Dice Rolls

Project Senate uses percentile dice and a results chart to generate a bell-curve-like open-ended result, as follows:

Fig. 2 – Dice Rolls Results Chart

For example, if the dice come up 76, the final result will be +3; if the dice come up 93 and the reroll comes up 63, the final result will be +6+4 = +10; if the dice come up 12, the reroll comes up 98 and the second reroll comes up 20, the final result will be -6-9-0 = -15.

Achieving Goals

Resources and their usage is the core of Project Senate, as Characters achieve their goals through the commitment and expenditure of those resources. The goal achievement process is as follows:

· Intent, challenge class and strategy

· Resource budgeting

· Strategy timing

· Resource tapping and commitment

· Resolution and paying the price

· Calculating preparation and execution time

· Collecting the reward

Intent, Challenge Class and Strategy

As Characters come across various challenges, two things must happen before these challenges become goals:

· The Game Master must assign a challenge class

· The Player must come up with a strategy to address the challenge

The challenge class is directly tied to the source of the challenge. Challenges involving conflict between major entities such as foreign countries, rival armies and competing corporations are military. Challenges dealing with the Character’s position or the positions of NPCs are political. Challenges dealing with trades, sales or acquisitions are commercial. Challenges involving behind-the-scenes situations are personal.

When presented with the challenge, Players must come up with a strategy to address it. This strategy, in effect, becomes a statement of intent for the Character, his plan of action for dealing with the problem

Resource Budgeting

As Players advance possible resolution strategies, the Game Master will assign a resource budget and time cost for each strategy. Resources are assumed to be renewable, which means these costs are met by committing them, rather than actually expending them.

A resource budget consists of the following items:

· A list of necessary resources, divided into primary resources and buy-in resources

· The minimum required amount for each resource

· The estimated required amount for each primary resource; buy-in resources have no estimated amount

The difference between primary and buy-in resources is further detailed in the section on Resource Tapping and Commitment below.

Generally, it is recommended that budgets include exactly two resources, at least one of which should be a primary resource. Very simple ideas or intermediate goals might require only one buy-in resource, whereas elaborate plans or major achievements might require three primary resources. Budgets that involve all four resources, in any combination, should be reserved for extremely rare campaign altering events.

Budgeting a goal is the major process through which the Game Master can balance the game challenges with the Characters’ capacities. It is also her primary mechanism for exposing the inner fabric of the game world, by signaling clever plans with low budgets and blocking idiotic ramblings with high budgets.

Furthermore, it should also be noted that budgeting is tied to the Players’ plan, not to the problem itself. When building the challenge framework, Game Masters should avoid preconceived notions of how much overcoming a certain challenge will cost. Similarly, the Game Master should not connect the resources in the budget with the challenge class.

Strategy Timing

Strategy timing is the process of assigning an execution calendar to a strategy. An execution calendar consists of two time intervals, namely the preparation time and the execution time. These times should be given in whole multiples of the basic interval. Strategies without buy-in resources must have a preparation time of either zero or one incremental interval.

Preparation time is the time that must elapse between resource commitment and actual goal resolution. It models the time it takes to maneuver committed resources into place. Execution time is a measure of the interval between goal resolution and the moment when committed resources become available again. It represents a combination of the time it takes to actually execute the strategy and the time it takes to replenish any actual resource losses or expenditures.

Care must be taken in assigning time costs in the presence of any challenge deadlines. If the budget is too steep and the deadline is too tight, actual success or failure could become more dependent on the final dice roll than on the Player’s strategy, so this device should be reserved for major challenges along the campaign.

Regardless of all other considerations, assigning strategy timings is heavily dependant on the chosen period for the passage of time event. Project Senate is designed to have Characters face in the vicinity of 12 challenges per time period. To allow for simultaneous challenges, a good rule of thumb should be to have normal strategies take about 15% of the allotted period, in a combination of preparation and execution times.

Resource Tapping And Commitment

In trying to meet the budget for a goal, Players have two ways of tapping resources, namely, their own resource pool and their relationships’ resource mix parameters. Players are free to commit their own uncommitted resources to anything at any time, but accessing their relationships’ resources requires conducting negotiations with those relationships, as outlined below.

Players don’t need to actually commit their own resources to a problem until the resolution phase. However, resources procured from relationships are committed from the time the negotiation is successfully concluded until after the resolution phase.

The effectiveness of all committed resources varies with the Character’s aptitude with the challenge class. Effective resources are equal to original committed resources, increased by 10% for each point of the Character’s aptitude, and similarly decreased for a negative aptitude.

Players can commit any amount of each buy-in resource, as long as the effective amount for each is the same whole multiple of the budgeted amount. This is the preparation multiple, and it directly affects strategy preparation time, as indicated in the section on execution time below.

Players can commit any amount of each primary resource as long as the effective amount for each meets or exceeds the minimum amount. The resource for which the difference between the effective amount and the estimated amount is lowest becomes the driver resource, and that difference becomes a modifier to the goal resolution dice roll.

Resolution And Paying The Price

Players can enter the resolution phase any time they want, provided they have effectively committed at least the minimum required resources. Preparation time counts from the moment that players enter the resolution phase. From this moment on, no more resources may be committed to the problem. The actual preparation time depends on the level of committed buy-in resources, as detailed in the next section.

The actual goal achievement resolution will occur after the preparation time has elapsed. It consists of rolling the dice, then adding the result to the difference between the effective committed amount of the driver resource and the estimated amount in the budget. A non-negative final value is a success. A negative value is a failure.

Success often comes with its own price. Players can increase the result by burning, or permanently spending, committed primary resources, either from the Character’s resource pool or from the resource mix of involved relationships. Burning resources from a relationship’s resource mix has consequences. See the section below on Paying The Price in Conducting Negotiations for details. Additionally, Players cannot burn more a larger resource total from any one relationship than the total they burn from their own pools, nor can they burn more resources from any one relationship than the resources they originally committed from that relationship.

Players must propose to burn the same quantity for all primary resources. The modifier to the dice roll is equal to that quantity, increased by 10% for each point of the Character’s aptitude, and similarly decreased for a negative aptitude. There is no effect for burning buy-in resources. The actual amount of each resource burned is limited to the original amount committed for each resource.

If the original modified dice roll was negative, Players can only burn resources if they burn enough to reach a non‑negative result.

Calculating Preparation And Execution Time

If the strategy preparation time was zero, the actual preparation time is also zero. Otherwise, the actual preparation time equals the estimated preparation time, divided by the preparation multiple, as detailed in the section on resource tapping and commitment above, then rounded to the nearest whole multiple of the basic interval. Treat results of zero as one incremental interval.

The actual execution time depends on the original resolution result and the final result. Regardless of success or failure, committed resources become available again only after the execution time has elapsed.

If the Player did not modify the result by permanently spending resources, the actual execution time is equal to the estimated time, divided by 1 plus 1/10 of the absolute value of the result.

If the Player modified a negative result, increase the estimated execution time by 10% times the absolute value of original result, and then divide it by 1 plus 1/10 of the final result.

If the Player modified an originally positive result, simply divide the estimated execution time by 1 plus 1/10 of the final result.

As before, round the result to the nearest whole multiple of the basic interval and treat results of zero as one incremental interval.

Naturally, if there was a time limit to begin with, success is dependent on actual execution time elapsing before the challenge deadline.

Collecting The Reward

Collecting the reward assumes that the Player achieved success during resolution. Positive consequences for this success can be accrued either immediately after resolution, after the actual execution time elapses or at any predetermined point in time, as determined by the Game Master.

Negative consequences of failure for a challenge are immediately averted as soon as success is achieved, provided that any deadline had not yet expired. The Game Master is free to continue to withhold any information regarding any actual deadline until such a time as success is readily apparent for the Players, in order to foster a sense of suspense.

Conducting Negotiations

Conducting negotiations is the process through which a character accesses his relationships, most likely for the purpose of tapping into their resource mix.

It consists of the following steps:

· Contacting The Counterpart

· Presenting The Case

· Trading Favors

· Making Counter-Offers

· Timing The Negotiation

· Paying The Price

Conducting negotiations in Project Senate uses a modified Fortune-In-The-Middle resolution, governed by the following sequence:

· Intent: The Player declares his intention and frames the nature of his efforts.

· Initiation: The dice are rolled and the result is determined.

· Execution: The Player has the opportunity to either decline the action or alter the result through resource commitment.

· Effect: The Game Master describes the final outcome.

The costs and exact consequences of resource commitment vary according to what is being attempted, but in the general, the following principles apply:

· Players can commit any number of different resources at any stage of the negotiation.

· Players can commit resources from their own pool or from the resource mix of relationships with which they have successfully conducted negotiations.

· The Actual Investment Value for each resource committed is calculated by subtracting the corresponding relationship resource mix parameter from the value originally committed, down to a minimum of zero and up to a maximum of twice the amount initially invested.

· Subject to the limitations outlined above in the section on Resolution and Paying the Price in the chapter on Achieving Goals, Players can burn resources to affect the negotiation outcome. Burning one point of a resource is exactly equivalent to committing two points of a resource

· Players cannot commit resources for which the corresponding parameter is exactly zero.

· Once committed, resources become unavailable until such a time as the purpose of the negotiation is achieved. Players can release the resources ahead of time, but this, in effect, aborts the negotiation.

Contacting The Counterpart

The procedure for contacting a relationship counterpart is as follows:

· Intent: The Player states the manner and reason for contacting the counterpart. The Player is under no obligation to have his Character be truthful about the reason. However, the Player must state which challenge he is working towards when negotiating.

· Initiation: The player rolls the dice and adds the relationship Availability. The result is the Initial Contact Value.

· Execution: The Final Contact Value equals the Initial Contact Value plus the Actual Investment Value of any resources committed for the purpose of contacting, plus a special bonus equal to the number of different resources committed for the purpose of contacting.

· Effect: A non-negative Final Contact Value means contact has been made. If the Player declines the contact, the Game Master describes the reason why the attempt failed. Otherwise, she describes the manner in which it succeeded.

It should be noted that successful contact may or may not result in direct or even indirect conversation with the counterpart. For instance, contact with a hostile counterpart might mean that the Player has acquired leverage over that counterpart which might be used without them ever suspecting the Player’s Character is the one behind the scenes.

Presenting The Case

There are generally three factors why a counterpart would accept to aid the Character:

· Because they like the Character, i.e. Attachment

· Because they think what the Character wants is a good idea, i.e. Alignment

· For reasons tied to the past, such as simply old times’ sake or even being blackmailed, i.e. Background

Usually, these factors determine not only a yes or no answer, but also, and more importantly, what the counterpart asks for in return, if anything. One and only one of these factors will be used to determine the final outcome. Which parameter is used depends on how the Character chooses to present the case.

The procedure for presenting the case to a counterpart is as follows:

· Intent: The Player states what he wants from the counterpart and how he is presenting his case.

· Initiation: The player rolls the dice and adds the selected relationship parameter and the relationship’s lowest non-resource-mix parameter, which may or may not be the same. If the selected relationship parameter is Background, ignore any negative parameter in determining the lowest value. Further, subtract one for every resource asked for beyond the first.

· Execution: Resources committed or burned during this phase are directly related to whether the counterpart asks for anything in return.

· Effect: Once the negotiation is completed, the counterpart will make their positive resource mix parameters available to the character, up to a maximum of the final result.

Trading Favors

If the Player committed resources to bump the result, the counterpart will ask for a return favor from the Character. Providing this return favor becomes the justification for the resources committed by the Player, and the Character is assumed to have achieved it before the counterpart released the resources the Player needs.

The Game Master should use this device to further characterize the nature of the relationship between the Character and the counterpart. For instance, openly hostile counterparts may demand favors that are, in fact, totally opposed to what the character is trying to achieve. Keep in mind, however, that the actual request should be strongly tied to the announced resource commitment.

If the Player achieved success and did not commit or burn resources to bump the result, the counterpart may still ask for a return favor, in the form of a promised favor. This should be considered an integral part of the challenge framework and treated as a goal unto itself.

The development and successful conclusion of the current negotiation is not contingent upon execution of this promised favor. However, the Character is assumed to have promised to do it, or at least, to look into it. In other words, this return favor becomes a new challenge, either an Opportunity to develop the relationship, or a Danger of having it deteriorate, depending on the original negotiation roll.

Making Counter-Offers

If the Player so desires, he may present counter-offers to replace the original result. The procedure for doing so is roughly the same as for presenting the case, with the following differences:

· Players cannot present a counter-offer along the same angle as an offer already on the table. In effect, this limits a negotiation to one original offer and two counter-offers.

· Once a Player rolls dice for a counter-offer, any rolls made for the original negotiation or any previous counter‑offer expires and becomes unavailable.

As before, the Player is free to decline the result of the counter-offer and either advance a new counter-offer, provided any are still available, or abort the negotiation altogether.

Timing The Negotiation

Timing the negotiation is the process of determining how long the initial contact will take, and also how long the counterpart will take to make the resources available once the negotiation is completed successfully. Negotiations take place over the course of a multiple of the basic time interval. This multiple depends on the Initial Contact Value and the Final Contact Value, according to the following table:

Fig. 3 – Timing Negotiations

In this table, the value “Inc” means one incremental interval and the value “0” means immediately.

If the angle selected was Attachment, add 4 to the Final Contact Value, for timing purposes only.

Paying The Price

Paying the price refers to updating the relationship parameters at the successful conclusion of a negotiation. Paying the price applies only if the deal goes through.

Negotiation can result in growth for the relationship, but it can also strain it. The actual consequences vary according to the angle the Player chose for presenting the case and the current value of the various relationship parameters. They also depend on whether the original dice roll was positive or negative and on whether resources were committed by the Player or not. The parameter which applies is the one actually used in an agreed negotiation, regardless of whether it was the original offer or a subsequent counter-offer.

Consequences are divided into positive, which apply only if the original roll was positive, negative, which apply only if the original roll was negative, and neutral, which always apply.

If the Player chose to go with Attachment, apply the following modifications:

· Negative: If Attachment is higher than or equal to Alignment, decrease Attachment by 1

· Neutral: If the Player committed resources, decrease Attachment by 1

· Positive: If Attachment is lower than Alignment, increase Attachment by 1

· Positive: Increase Background by 1

If the Player chose to go with Alignment, apply the following modifications:

· Negative: If Alignment is higher than or equal to Attachment, decrease Alignment by 1

· Positive: Increase Background by 1

If the Player chose to go with Background, apply the following modifications:

· Negative: If Background is higher than or equal to Attachment, decrease Attachment by 1

· Negative: If Background is higher than or equal to Alignment, decrease Alignment by 1

· Negative: Decrease Availability by 1

· Neutral: If resources were committed, decrease Alignment and Attachment by 1

Furthermore, if the Player burned resources during the negotiation, either for contacting or for actually negotiating, increase the corresponding resource mix parameter by 1.

Lastly, there is a subsequent price to be paid if the Player buys success in a goal by permanently expending resources from the relationship’s resource mix. For each point of resource reduction, decrease a point from Attachment, Alignment or Availability, at the Player’s choice. Also, remember to propagate changes to a shared relationship’s resource mix.

Player Interaction

There are a number of circumstances where Players may need to interact with each other:

· Because one Player may want or need the help of other Players in addressing a certain challenge

· Because several Players may simultaneously need the resources of a shared relationship

· Because Players may be working on congruent goals

· Because Players may be working on opposing goals

· Because a Player wants to collect on a broken promise

Player Cooperation

When addressing a goal, Players may ask for other Players’ cooperation in the form of access to their resource pool. Unless the other Player has his own related goal to work on, this cooperation is strictly voluntary and comes with no implicit reward and no cost other than the fact that those resources will be committed to the asking Player’s goal, and thus unavailable to the cooperating Player until released.

Because Players are sole masters of their Characters’ needs, wants and likes, negotiations between Players are generally unregulated. Trades between Players are limited to the swapping of favors or promises, however. Characters may not transfer resources between each other in any sort of permanent fashion, nor may they gain any sort of permanent direct access to other Characters’ relationships, except as noted in the chapter on Character Development below.

Promises and deals are made between Characters, not Players. Making promises to other Characters is real in the game world. As such, the involved Players should make sure that the Game Master is in the know on any deals that are made.

When permanently spending resources to buy success in a goal, Players are not allowed to expend from other Characters’ resource pools.

Shared Relationships

A shared relationship cannot make resources from their resource mix available to more than one Character at a time. As such, a Player who needs to access resources from a busy shared relationship has no recourse but to ask the first Player to release those resources. As before, Players are free to negotiate among themselves, limited to the swapping of promises and favors.

It may also happen that two Players try to negotiate with a shared relationship at the same time. If the Players involved do not come to an agreement in which one of them backs off, and assuming both achieve success in their negotiations, the relationship will cede their resources to the Player that achieved the greatest success.

Because this affects Player commitment of resources, a detailed order for resolving the phases of each negotiation needs to be enforced. One of the Players must present his case first, including any counter-offers and determination, though not resolution, of return favors. The following factors, in order, should be used to determine which:

· The Player with the lowest final Contact Value

· The Player whose relationship has the least Availability

· The Player whose relationship has the lowest absolute level

· Any Player randomly determined

Because this order affects Player commitment of resources during contact, one of the Players must make his contact attempt first. The following guidelines should be used to determine which:

· If the Game Master can comfortably establish an in-game chronological order for the contact attempts, the Player who initiated his contact first should resolve it first.

· If the Game Master can comfortably establish that both Players had equal access to screen time, the Player who spoke last should resolve first.

· If the Game Master feels that either of these guidelines would unduly favor one of the Characters, she is free to impose anti-screen-hogging and make a random determination for the order of resolution.

· If one of the Players has already resolved his contact phase, that result stands regardless of any other considerations.

Obviously, the Players are free to tap different resources from a relationship without conflict.

Congruent Goals

At the request of all involved Players, the Game Master may treat several Characters’ goals as congruent, provided this makes sense for the challenges in question. This has the following consequences:

· Players can now pool all their available resources, whether from their pool or from successful negotiations, and apply them to the various budgets at will.

· Goals must be resolved simultaneously, meaning that resources committed to one goal are not available to other for the other goals.

· Permanent resource spending for each goal can still only be applied to each Player’s available resources.

· Success for each goal is dependant on success for all other goals. Congruency is an all-or-nothing deal.

· Rewards for achieving the goals now apply to all the Characters involved, though similar rewards do not stack.

· Any Player may bail out of congruency at any time, but this implies immediate goal failure for the bailing Character. Remaining Players may continue to work congruently without penalty.

In effect, what this means is that congruent goals are harder to achieve because of the extra resolutions involved, but they provide more degrees of freedom because of resource pooling, and they are also proportionately more profitable.

In building the challenge framework, the Game Master may decide to present a challenge for a group of Characters to undertake. Treat Characters working on the same challenge as if they are working on their own separate challenge, except that all those challenges are automatically congruent.

Opposing Goals

While the Game Master should avoid aiming for these situations, it may happen that Players find themselves working at cross purposes. Again, Players may have their Characters negotiate with each other freely in order to defuse the situation themselves.

Resolution of Player-vs-Player conflict is heavily dependent on the specific details of the conflict, so the Game Master will have to exercise some judgment. A few possibilities follow:

· In racing-type conflicts, the Player that achieves success first, in effect, shuts out the other Players.

· In best-candidate-type conflicts, the Player that achieves the highest final resolution value wins. The Game Master should enforce event chronology tightly in these situations.

· In zero-sum conflicts, if a Player fails his resolution, he may grant automatic success to another Player.

Other possibilities exist, which the Game Master will have to resolve according to the specifics of the situation. Mainly, she should be alert for opportunities to transform the goals into opportunity for cooperation, although such outs should not be overly contrived as to break game world continuity and consistency.

Broken Promises

Just because a Character makes a promise to another Player’s Character, this does not mean that the Player will keep it. However, breaking promises is likely to bring consequences to the Character.

Whenever the Game Master judges that a Character is taking too long to fulfill a promise, she may commit a point of Reputation from the Character’s resource pool. This point will automatically be added to the budget for the promise fulfilling goal and will be released upon resolution of that goal.

If the Character continues to take too long to fulfill a promise, the Game Master may convert the penalty into a permanent loss of Reputation. In effect, this releases the character from the promise.

Application of these penalties is subject to the following guidelines:

· The Player should be given ample warning that his time is running out

· The Player should be given some leeway in the order in which he addresses his commitments

If the Player makes an honest attempt at delivering and fails, this does not get him off the hook. A bad rep for being a deal breaker is no different from a bad rep for being incompetent, whether deserved or not. Life is not fair. Of course, it may happen that the price of fulfilling a promise is higher than the one point of Reputation, in which case, the Player is simply faced with the choice of which hit to take.

Character Development And Evolution

Character development in Project Senate is directly tied to achieving goals. As Characters maneuver to obtain their objectives, presumably, these objectives bring with them tangible rewards in terms of wealth and manpower, reputation and clout. The Game Master’s ultimate purpose in building the challenge framework is to provide the Players with opportunities to use their resources and relationships in order to achieve these goals and improve their characters.

There are three major ways in which a Project Senate Character can improve:

· Increasing the resource pool

· Developing existing relationships

· Consolidating new relationships

In addition, there are specific evolution mechanics for the Character’s aptitudes.

Aptitude Evolution

Aptitude evolution is tied to the passage of time. Every time the defining periodic event occurs, players roll the dice on the dice rolling table for each aptitude, modified by the number of times they used this aptitude during the past period, according to the following table:

Fig. 4 – Aptitude Evolution Modifiers

Apply the final result as follows:

· If the final result is lower than the current aptitude by at least 4, subtract 1 from the aptitude, down to a minimum of -9.

· If the final result is higher than the current aptitude by at least 4, add 1 to the aptitude

· If the difference between the final result is and the current aptitude is 3 or less, there is no change

Acquiring New Relationships

A new relationship brings to a Character a new source of challenges and goals, and it affords him more degrees of freedom in dealing with those challenges. As such, allowing a Character to gain a new relationship is a good way for the Game Master to reward the Player for good in-game play.

The process for gaining a new relationship depends on whether the counterpart is an individual or a collective entity.

For individuals, all that is necessary is an opportunity for the Character to meet or be introduced to the counterpart. In the Game Master’s judgment, the Character must have had a reasonable chance to understand what this individual might do for him, thus granting the Player ability to negotiate for the corresponding resource mix.

For collective entities, the process of gaining access to their resource mix is significantly more complex, probably involving a whole separate challenge.

Determining the initial relationship parameters is done as follows:

· Make an unmodified roll on the dice rolling chart for the initial value of Attachment

· Make an unmodified roll on the dice rolling chart for the initial value of Alignment

· Availability begins at 1 if either Attachment or Alignment are higher than zero, and it begins at zero otherwise

· Background always begins at zero

Determining the initial resource mix depends on the source of the new relationship. There are two possibilities:

· Another Character’s relationships, not yet shared between the two

· A new entity altogether

In the first case, simply copy the resource mix parameters from the existing relationship. Should more than one version of the counterpart be available to the Character, the Game Master chooses which one to use. Again, care must be taken to propagate future changes to the relationship’s resource mix to all versions of the relationship counterpart.

In the second case, it is the Game Master’s job to design the new relationship according to the role she sees the counterpart playing in the challenge framework.

Game Master Guidelines

Generating Challenges

While no guidelines can be given to generate the particulars of each challenge, the Game Master should take care to maintain fairness and play balance. As such, she should pay close attention to the timing of each challenge, as well as to the mix of opportunities, dangers and crises presented to each Character.

Timing The Challenge

Each Character should be thrown a challenge about once every 8 basic periods.

The campaign should generally start right after the passage of time event. To determine when the first challenge is going to hit, roll the dice on the dice rolling table for each Character, adding 8 to the result. Treat modified results of zero as one incremental interval, and modified negative results as immediate.

To determine when the next challenge is going to hit, repeat the above procedure, counting the time from when the previous challenge was announced.

Deciding on the details of each challenge can be delayed for as long as the Game Master wishes, up to the moment when it actually comes up, at which time said details should be announced to the Player.

Typing The Challenge

To determine the type of each challenge, roll twice on the dice rolling table and consult the following charts:

Fig. 5 – Challenge Types

Challenges start out as regular challenges. If the challenge target comes up special, either upgrade it to a major challenge or involve another Character, then repeat the second roll. If the result comes up special again, keep involving new Characters until you run out. If all the Characters are already involved and the challenge is already major, it may be time for the drastic challenge in the campaign. If it’s not, ignore all the rolls on target chart, trim the challenge down to the original Character, downgrade it to regular again and start over.

If the challenge target comes up relationship, the Game Master can either choose a relationship that feels appropriate, or select one based on the actual roll. If the roll was 1, choose the relationship with the highest relative level; if it was 2, choose the second; etc… If you run out of relationships, start over from the highest one.

Also, challenges that affect a relationship can affect the resource mix, the functional parameters or both. Roll again on the target chart. Treat resource pool results as resource mix, relationship results as functional parameters, and special results as both.

Strategy Timing And Resource Budgeting Guidelines

Attributing a resource budget and determining strategy timing are the bulk of the GM’s work during the session. As such, she may find the following guidelines helpful.

Determine The Level Of The Challenge

The level of the challenge is a good basis to start. There are four different levels:

· Level 4 - Drastic

· Level 3 - Major

· Level 2 - Regular

· Level 1 - Minor

Drastic challenges are campaign altering events, occurring about once or perhaps twice throughout the whole of a Character’s career. Stakes for drastic challenges might include the elimination of entire relationships, brutal restructuring of a Character’s circle of influence, or even loss of the Character itself. Strategies for dealing with drastic challenges should include all four resources, one of which should be a buy-in resource.

Major challenges are typically the result of long-running conflicts within the game world. Stakes for major challenges include changes of more than 20% of a Character’s total resource pool, changes of more than 10% of a Character’s total resource pool applied to a relationship’s resource mix parameters, or changes of more than five points to a relationship’s functional parameters. Strategies for dealing with major challenges should include three resources, one of which should be a buy-in resource. It is recommended that each Character face about one challenge per passage of time, and it should not be their first challenge of the period.

Minor challenges are intermediate endeavors, the stuff of everyday life. A Project Senate Character is assumed to face many minor challenges from day to day, though only a few of them will actually be interesting enough to handle mechanically. Stakes for minor challenges should be limited to one point, either in the Character’s resource pool or in any relationship parameter. Strategies for dealing with a minor challenge should be limited to one buy-in resource. Promised favors and Player-initiated challenges will typically be minor challenges, although this is by no means binding.

Regular challenges are everything else. As noted earlier, strategies for dealing with regular challenges should include exactly two resources, one primary and one buy-in. It is recommended that each Character face an average of ten to twelve regular challenges per passage of time.

Determine The Base Budget

The base total budget should be around 25% of the Character’s total resource pool, multiplied by the level of the budget. This total should be divided among the various resources involved, depending on the nature of the strategy presented by the Player. A good starting point is to give each primary resource two shares and each buy-in resource one share, divide this total by these shares, and then tweak the results according to any apparent bias in the strategy towards one resource or another.

Once the estimated amount for each primary resource is thus determined, decide on a required minimum amount, which should be somewhere between half the estimated amount and twice the level of the challenge.

Determine The Appropriateness Of The Strategy

Each presented strategy should be assigned to one of the following three rough categories:

· Clever

· Acceptable

· Far-fetched

A clever strategy is one that seems particularly elegant or creative, one which, in the Game Master’s opinion, addresses the challenge in a particularly fitting manner. A clever strategy can be rewarded in one or more of the following ways:

· by lowering the total budget to 20% or even 15% of the Character’s resource pool times the challenge level

· by cutting required amounts for one or more buy-in resources in half

· by demoting one primary resource to a buy-in resource, keeping the required amount and discarding the estimated amount

· by affecting strategy timing, as indicated below

A far-fetched strategy is the opposite of a clever strategy, either because it is not immediately obvious that success will necessarily solve the problem, or because it would obviously be much too difficult to implement given the constraints of the game world. A far-fetched strategy can be signaled in one or more of the following ways:

· by increasing the total budget to 30% or more of the Character’s resource pool times the challenge level

· by increasing required amounts for one or more buy-in resources by 50%

· by promoting a buy-in resource to a primary resource, keeping the required amount and setting the new estimated amount at twice the required value

· by affecting strategy timing, as indicated below

An acceptable strategy simply is one for which neither of the two conditions above apply. However, modifications to the budget are still possible, as per the guidelines in the next section.

Select The Resources

Selecting the resources for the budget is heavily dependant on the strategy presented by the Player. However, the following particular situations should be noted:

· Eggs in one basket

· Multi-stepped approaches

· Immediate actions

Eggs-in-one-basket strategies are strategies heavily dependant on one single action or contingency. Basically, if the Player is saying his Character is just going to do this one thing and all will be well, he’s putting all his eggs in one basket. If the Game Master is having trouble identifying and/or justifying all the different resources called for by the challenge level, the presented strategy is probably a good candidate for an eggs-in-one-basket approach. To handle this type of strategy, simply combine two or more primary resources into one, adding together the required and estimated amounts. Promote buy-in resources to primary resources to do this, if necessary. Minor challenges are never eligible for this approach.

Multi-stepped approaches are strategies where the Player identifies separate clearly sequential steps to address the challenge, as opposed to simply separate actions. If the Game Master can clearly and immediately see a need for more resources than the ones called for by the level of the challenge because of all the various actions, the presented strategy is probably a good candidate for a multi-stepped approach. To handle this type of strategy, increase the number of buy-in resources without increasing the total required amount.

Immediate actions are strategies that can be implemented immediately, which intuitively would seem to need no preparation time. To handle immediate actions, eliminate all buy-in resources, distributing their required amounts by the estimated amounts of remaining primary resources. If no primary resources would remain, promote one of the buy-in resources to primary beforehand.

Determine The Timing

The base strategy timing should be around 8 basic periods, multiplied by the level of the challenge, and roughly divided into one-third preparation and two-thirds execution. Once this is determined, apply the following modifications, in order:

· If there are no buy-in resources, reduce the preparation time to 0 basic periods

· If there are large distances involved, increase preparation time by 5 to 10 basic periods

· Reduce the execution time by 3 to 5 basic periods or eggs-in-one-basket strategies

· Add 3 to 5 basic periods to the execution time of multi-stepped approaches

· Subtract a combined total 0 to 3 basic periods from the preparation and execution times of clever strategies

· Add a combined total of 0 to 3 basic periods to the preparation and execution times of far-fetched strategies

The estimated execution time has a lower limit of 1 basic period. The estimated preparation time has a lower limit of 1 incremental period if the strategy has any buy-in resources, and a lower limit of zero otherwise.