Hello, I am GMing this for the first time (after not GMing for a while) so I made this as a learning/visual aid for myself; hopefully all this information is correct and this will be helpful to some people
Given that the full edition is somewhere a-year-ish away, any GM who wants to run this will likely have to make up their own moons, factions, and /or classes.
The Ashcan contains some guidelines on writing Moon Sentences, but not much about writing Factions or homebrewing classes.
If you could give one suggestion for writing Factions, what would it be?
And similarly, what advice would you give for Classes?
Just ran a one shot, and it seemed to be a hit. A great system, and tons of opportunity for wordplay. No complaints, just praise from myself and the players.
As a side note, I have a rules question: how should one handle a player's Moon Sentence if it contradicts one of the GM's hidden, as-of-yet unused moon sentence? For example, if I had a hidden moon sentence that said "The view of the heavens submits to the will of the Rabbit Lord", and a PC wants to add the sentence "The moon's are always visible".
Saying "no" to such a sentence feels a little anathema to the spirit of the game, so would the recommend ruling be that I reveal the Moon Sentence? Should it be handled just as any other conflict is, with one countering the other? What if a moon has two *fundamentally* incomparable sentences?
First: Only Moon Sentences on the sheets are actually in play, in that way. A GM cannot say 'oh, you can't put that sentence down, I have a secret one that actually contradicts it.' If you want to establish something important and big about a moon, consider putting it in play on the sheet RIGHT AWAY.
Second: You can put (seemingly) contradicting sentences on the moon sheet! The two sentences you gave do not actually contradict, in the way that the Wordwrights see the world at least. A Moon can have two sentences that come into conflict. In fact, if a player was to Act by playing their token and saying "The moons are always visible" you could *counter* that sentence with "The view of the heavens always submits to the will of the Rabbit Lord." And even if they did that to Counter one of your own Sentences, you could then reveal your Rabbit Lord sentence to actually SHOW it happen.
You know, if you were writing a Moon sheet for our own Earth, it might have both "The days are always bright' and "An eclipse always blots out the sun." Having both of those on the sheet doesn't mean the sheet is broken. It means that you have put some really fun pieces into play!
I’d love to see some example Foundation Sentences. My first thought was that these might be things like “Our story never deals with zombies” (based on a friend’s preference) but that doesn't do much to drive the overall story, which I think is your goal.
Me too! As a proud Forever-GM I absolutely love Foundation Sentences and think they're an incredible tool for immediately setting the tone and getting player buy-in even before character creation. I haven't run any Realis yet, but my North-star for them at this point is a piece of wisdom I gleaned from FatT itself: "one of the great things about TTRPGs as a medium is that you can just state your themes out loud."
For example, a campaign I'm chomping at the bit to run is going to be pitched with (some variation of) these two Foundations: "Our story always evokes Spring: a time of transformation and new beginnings," and "Our story never solves problems through violence."
inshallah my paycheck comes soon and leaves me enough to get onboard ASAP, so in love with the concept, hearing the game in the F@TT main feed has been delightful (second inshallah may i have enough income to support on patreon again soon) and the way you play with the traditional formatting of ttrpgs is deeply intriguing. my endlessly pretentious playgroup is excited to try
finally obtained it and i must say i am immensely fond of this system already. one question i do have that i couldn't find any clear indications of in the book is guidelines for designing good and interesting limitations on realized sentences--while obviously the bounds of a story will dictate it to some extent, im not sure what the expected limitations imposed on, say, a +0 sentence moving to a +1 sentence should be. how broad/strict should each new limitation be? should limitations be purely circumstantial, or is there room for narrative ones too? Could "I always kill my foes" become "When I push myself to my limits, I always kill my foes," or is that too broad for the rules of the game?
Hey there, pages 72 and 73 have guidance on Realization. I would say "When I push myself to the limits" is probably too broad, at least for my table, or at least without going in knowing that we'd really limit to "push myself to the limits" really far. A good rule of thumb for Realization is: Can it be falsified? I.e., could there be a situation where the user freely and unworriedly says "Yeah I can't use my sentence in this circumstance." If the answer is no, then it probably isn't Realized. So, if your table is really willing to judge whether you are "pushing yourself to your limits," then yeah, it probably works. But if you're just using it to characterize what the use of the sentence looks like, then no, probably not great.
I don't know if I keep skimming over it but is there minimum recommended number of players. Could it realistically work for two players to have a campaign?
A one on one game is totally doable, with the note that you'd have to make some decisions about Bonds and Band Sentences--both of which are designed to tie player characters (and their players) together. Either house rule that those can operate with NPCs or else the GM should account for the fact that the PC does not have their full toolbox available to them.
That'd be a great house rule and I'd love to hear how it works out! But as written, no. Countered Sentences are "unable to be used for the remainder of the scene." A fully character with all Countered Class Sentences must rely on Moon Sentences, Bonds, Ephemera, and, of course, their Dream to get them out of whatever scrape they've found themselves in.
Looks neat so far. I'm working to get a group to try it out. Biggest question I have is on the game setup and open knowledge on sentences.
We should make a faction (but could be a place or village) with 3 +0 people sentences, and 3 +0 place sentences, that describe how a place or faction is going to work on players in the session, and might be some sort of creative means for someone to fail upon, or for the gm to push with. A little unclear on these. Should these sentences be open knowledge for illuminating failure?
In the podcast play example, and the written game examples, it sounded like some of them were open, but I wasn't sure if that was something slowly revealed from previous sessions or if a certain amount should be broadcasted session 1.
Then come up with a bundle of npcs with 3 sentences each of various abilities that would work towards whatever goal the npcs have. Mix of skills, equipment, knowledge. These seem like they are secret until revealed.
Faction and NPC Sentences begin entirely secret, and are only revealed on use.
Moon Sentences can begin secret or public or some mix thereof, depending on PCs and their relation to the given Moon. If they're from the Moon in question, or have spent a lot of time there, they probably know the big ones. But a Moon might have some secrets (like the one about Daniley's Unyielding Engine) which they discover during play. Plus, Moons can have Sentences added on the fly by Players by spending their Tokens.
In the Podcast play example, the public Sentences reflected that the character in question had been to those places before, encountered those Factions and NPCs, etc. Also, once a Sentence is public, it is marked in public and only through play--so players should always have the ability to know if a Sentence has been Primed and could potentially be Realized the next time they come up against it.
And important note: Illuminating failure doesn't require opposition, though it can include that, if you'd like. It requires only uncertainty. (That's also true for requesting a Means from a player, you don't need to have specific opposition, you can just say 'Hey, that sounds like something that might be uncertain. Do you have a Means to point to that would make it doable for you?')
That definitely helps. I think in my first read, I had took
"Each Moon Sheet has room for 10 Sentences, but it begins empty, except for the Impulse created by the GM." literally, not thinking about prepped sentences just not being on the sheet yet, in sort of hidden state.
So, I was going to not have any moon sentences, but have local stuff as factions or a bundle of npcs. Reading the faction sentences it's clear that local stuff isn't intended there, but is instead for bigger global/interstellar powers players have less ability to write. I think I have a good understanding of them now.
Best of luck with everything. I appreciate the clarification and write up.
← Return to game
Comments
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
Hello, I am GMing this for the first time (after not GMing for a while) so I made this as a learning/visual aid for myself; hopefully all this information is correct and this will be helpful to some people
Hey Austin, two more questions:
Given that the full edition is somewhere a-year-ish away, any GM who wants to run this will likely have to make up their own moons, factions, and /or classes.
The Ashcan contains some guidelines on writing Moon Sentences, but not much about writing Factions or homebrewing classes.
If you could give one suggestion for writing Factions, what would it be?
And similarly, what advice would you give for Classes?
Would it be okay if I released a custom module for Realis based on my own setting for PWYW on itch.io?
I came here to ask exactly this! I'm curious if this would be okay as well?
There are already lots of modules out there, many of them made during the Moon Jam: https://itch.io/jam/realis-moon-jam/entries
Just ran a one shot, and it seemed to be a hit. A great system, and tons of opportunity for wordplay. No complaints, just praise from myself and the players.
As a side note, I have a rules question: how should one handle a player's Moon Sentence if it contradicts one of the GM's hidden, as-of-yet unused moon sentence? For example, if I had a hidden moon sentence that said "The view of the heavens submits to the will of the Rabbit Lord", and a PC wants to add the sentence "The moon's are always visible".
Saying "no" to such a sentence feels a little anathema to the spirit of the game, so would the recommend ruling be that I reveal the Moon Sentence? Should it be handled just as any other conflict is, with one countering the other? What if a moon has two *fundamentally* incomparable sentences?
I have two reads on this.
First: Only Moon Sentences on the sheets are actually in play, in that way. A GM cannot say 'oh, you can't put that sentence down, I have a secret one that actually contradicts it.' If you want to establish something important and big about a moon, consider putting it in play on the sheet RIGHT AWAY.
Second: You can put (seemingly) contradicting sentences on the moon sheet! The two sentences you gave do not actually contradict, in the way that the Wordwrights see the world at least. A Moon can have two sentences that come into conflict. In fact, if a player was to Act by playing their token and saying "The moons are always visible" you could *counter* that sentence with "The view of the heavens always submits to the will of the Rabbit Lord." And even if they did that to Counter one of your own Sentences, you could then reveal your Rabbit Lord sentence to actually SHOW it happen.
You know, if you were writing a Moon sheet for our own Earth, it might have both "The days are always bright' and "An eclipse always blots out the sun." Having both of those on the sheet doesn't mean the sheet is broken. It means that you have put some really fun pieces into play!
Thanks Austin, I appreciate the insight, and I appreciate you. Have an awesome day.
-signed, an internet stranger.
Any plans for a printable character sheet? Digital ones work great but aren't very good for printing.
I've made some unofficial printable sheets that I've been using in my home game, available for free here: https://lawson-coleman.itch.io/printable-character-sheets-for-realis
I’d love to see some example Foundation Sentences. My first thought was that these might be things like “Our story never deals with zombies” (based on a friend’s preference) but that doesn't do much to drive the overall story, which I think is your goal.
Me too! As a proud Forever-GM I absolutely love Foundation Sentences and think they're an incredible tool for immediately setting the tone and getting player buy-in even before character creation. I haven't run any Realis yet, but my North-star for them at this point is a piece of wisdom I gleaned from FatT itself: "one of the great things about TTRPGs as a medium is that you can just state your themes out loud."
For example, a campaign I'm chomping at the bit to run is going to be pitched with (some variation of) these two Foundations: "Our story always evokes Spring: a time of transformation and new beginnings," and "Our story never solves problems through violence."
inshallah my paycheck comes soon and leaves me enough to get onboard ASAP, so in love with the concept, hearing the game in the F@TT main feed has been delightful (second inshallah may i have enough income to support on patreon again soon) and the way you play with the traditional formatting of ttrpgs is deeply intriguing. my endlessly pretentious playgroup is excited to try
finally obtained it and i must say i am immensely fond of this system already. one question i do have that i couldn't find any clear indications of in the book is guidelines for designing good and interesting limitations on realized sentences--while obviously the bounds of a story will dictate it to some extent, im not sure what the expected limitations imposed on, say, a +0 sentence moving to a +1 sentence should be. how broad/strict should each new limitation be? should limitations be purely circumstantial, or is there room for narrative ones too? Could "I always kill my foes" become "When I push myself to my limits, I always kill my foes," or is that too broad for the rules of the game?
Hey there, pages 72 and 73 have guidance on Realization. I would say "When I push myself to the limits" is probably too broad, at least for my table, or at least without going in knowing that we'd really limit to "push myself to the limits" really far. A good rule of thumb for Realization is: Can it be falsified? I.e., could there be a situation where the user freely and unworriedly says "Yeah I can't use my sentence in this circumstance." If the answer is no, then it probably isn't Realized. So, if your table is really willing to judge whether you are "pushing yourself to your limits," then yeah, it probably works. But if you're just using it to characterize what the use of the sentence looks like, then no, probably not great.
Brain totally skipped over those pages somehow! Thanks so much, that makes a lot of sense. "Can it be falsified" made it immediately click for me.
I really appreciate the question because it led me to realizing that I should put it in those words directly in the book!
I don't know if I keep skimming over it but is there minimum recommended number of players. Could it realistically work for two players to have a campaign?
A one on one game is totally doable, with the note that you'd have to make some decisions about Bonds and Band Sentences--both of which are designed to tie player characters (and their players) together. Either house rule that those can operate with NPCs or else the GM should account for the fact that the PC does not have their full toolbox available to them.
If a sentence has been countered, and thus is rewritten in the negative, can that negative sentence be used as a means?
e.g. “I never pilot my Orphan Vessel towards trouble” being used as means for escaping a tricky situation?
That'd be a great house rule and I'd love to hear how it works out! But as written, no. Countered Sentences are "unable to be used for the remainder of the scene." A fully character with all Countered Class Sentences must rely on Moon Sentences, Bonds, Ephemera, and, of course, their Dream to get them out of whatever scrape they've found themselves in.
typo to report in the color spreads file:
p11 "writing as many Foundation Sentences as you need to feel you need to:"
probably should be either "as you need" or "as you feel you need"
(enjoying the game so much already - thank you!)
Great catch! Corrected in both the screenshot and the PDF. - Tyler
This is really exciting. Congratulations on putting it together; I just picked up a copy! Do you have any tips on finding a group to play with?
Great looking game - excited to try it! If we spot typos do you want them called out?
Yes please! You can do so here or email them to me at https://www.possibleworldsgames.com/contact
Looks neat so far. I'm working to get a group to try it out. Biggest question I have is on the game setup and open knowledge on sentences.
We should make a faction (but could be a place or village) with 3 +0 people sentences, and 3 +0 place sentences, that describe how a place or faction is going to work on players in the session, and might be some sort of creative means for someone to fail upon, or for the gm to push with. A little unclear on these. Should these sentences be open knowledge for illuminating failure?
In the podcast play example, and the written game examples, it sounded like some of them were open, but I wasn't sure if that was something slowly revealed from previous sessions or if a certain amount should be broadcasted session 1.
Then come up with a bundle of npcs with 3 sentences each of various abilities that would work towards whatever goal the npcs have. Mix of skills, equipment, knowledge. These seem like they are secret until revealed.
Thanks for sharing your work!
Thanks so much for giving it a read.
I can't speak for all GMs, but as I've played it:
Faction and NPC Sentences begin entirely secret, and are only revealed on use.
Moon Sentences can begin secret or public or some mix thereof, depending on PCs and their relation to the given Moon. If they're from the Moon in question, or have spent a lot of time there, they probably know the big ones. But a Moon might have some secrets (like the one about Daniley's Unyielding Engine) which they discover during play. Plus, Moons can have Sentences added on the fly by Players by spending their Tokens.
In the Podcast play example, the public Sentences reflected that the character in question had been to those places before, encountered those Factions and NPCs, etc. Also, once a Sentence is public, it is marked in public and only through play--so players should always have the ability to know if a Sentence has been Primed and could potentially be Realized the next time they come up against it.
And important note: Illuminating failure doesn't require opposition, though it can include that, if you'd like. It requires only uncertainty. (That's also true for requesting a Means from a player, you don't need to have specific opposition, you can just say 'Hey, that sounds like something that might be uncertain. Do you have a Means to point to that would make it doable for you?')
Hope that helps!
That definitely helps. I think in my first read, I had took
"Each Moon Sheet has room for 10 Sentences, but it begins empty, except for the Impulse created by the GM." literally, not thinking about prepped sentences just not being on the sheet yet, in sort of hidden state.
So, I was going to not have any moon sentences, but have local stuff as factions or a bundle of npcs. Reading the faction sentences it's clear that local stuff isn't intended there, but is instead for bigger global/interstellar powers players have less ability to write.
I think I have a good understanding of them now.
Best of luck with everything. I appreciate the clarification and write up.