Designer's Notes

An author is often asked why their game was designed in a certain way, what choices they took and why. This page attempts to outline what decisions were that I made and how this affects the style of the game. A set of Designer's Notes, you could say.

If you read through this and realise that it sounds like a terribly poor idea, then Icar is probably not for you. For the cynical among you, treat this as a rant. For those who have played for years, consider this as the environment in which the game evolved. For budding games designers, make your own decisions for your game, but don't forget to tell everyone about your motivations! Icar was created for fun not profit. I had only seen RPGs played from afar at a local games club but had never played one himself. As the game became more widely known and played, the following goals were formed:

  1. Free
  2. High Quality
  3. Fast playing mechanics
  4. Low complexity rules specific to this game background
  5. Dramatic Combat
  6. Deep and detailed social background
  7. Totally different to any other Sci Fi Setting
  8. Far future setting with detailed technology
  9. GM tools to allow complex non-linear campaigns
  10. As few numbers on the character sheet as possible!

As the game stands, it tries to fulfil this goals but as time has passed, my view of Icar has changed too.

Reasoning

Why were the Goals formed in this way? Why should a system be created in this style? The reasons and justifications for these goals is not always simply explained. The game began purely out of ignorance, I had no experience of other system so did not know how things should work. This showed in poor early versions but has allowed the game to grow independently. Even now, I rarely pick up an RPG book I have not written.

I believe very strongly that Icar should be free (1). I have seen that there is no money to be had in the industry and it would spoil my favourite hobby if income relied upon it. I also believe that free roleplaying games be quality products (2). Normally, the distance between a quality free RPG and poor one is one of persistence. The drive to keep moving on and improving. Some believe that if you're getting something for free, then you should be just happy with what you are given. I disagree, if someone is going to give up their spare time to give you game a chance, then you should do everything in your power to make that game as good as it can be,

The game mechanics evolved haphazardly to create a system that trod the fine line between believable and quick (3). Detail and realism is all very well in modern-day systems where there is the bench mark of the outside world, but in futuristic systems it can be very difficult redefine reality and remain consistent. Thus, where realism is not possible, the next best position is fun and speed. As long as something feels about right, given the genre, it can be included. Anything that breaks the balance, or appears to make the background completely unbelievable should be removed.

Another point about mechanics is the dramatic combat (5). I wanted a quick combat system that allowed dramatic sequences (such as one would find in film and television). This is purely a matter of style and appears to suit those who have played. The mechanics are intended purely for this game area, I find single mechanic systems clunky (4).

In the early days, I was irritated when a player pointed out the origin of an idea. Quite often the alteration of the origin to fit the system was clever and was missed by the players who were hell-bent on proving the sovereignty. So I wanted to create a setting that both includes common tropes but is different to other Sci Fi (7). This is a difficult goal, as the human race can always abstract that which is different to be the same. So, given that there is a generic science fiction paradigm (faster than light space craft, etc etc), the galaxy as seen in Icar attempts to be different to any other. Any similarity is purely coincidental. These differences can be highlighted by having a a detailed background (6).

Any far future or Science Fiction setting has the difficulty of technology (8). Often the pedantic will argue that if one certain piece of technology exists, why does this other one not? A detailed technology background can soon quell these arguments or set the record straight by including the piece of technology.

As a 'career-GM', I found that the GM tools provided with other RPGs to be too tight a straight jacket for the sandbox play my group enjoyed. Campaign guides seemed to have a similar format for creating campaigns, running along a linear system of 'From A to B'. As the players of Icar aged with me, they became quite savvy at spotting the direction of a game and then worked against it. This issue required lots of ad-lib which in turn lead to an inconsistent game. So, a more complex version was created that allowed consistency, complexity and a more challenging game for the players (9).

Finally, I have a hate - bordering on the pathological - of character sheets that look like spreadsheets (10). Having boxes for numbers may be nice and efficient and may get everything on one page but is ultimately boring. Players rarely have one sheet, what with notes and doodles, so why constrain it to one? Some inventive graphics have lead to a character sheet that no-one can say is boring.