I recently finished running another large PBP faction game and I’m largely satisfied with the outcome and how this format has been performing. Now that other people are starting to pick it up, I figured it might be handy to codify it and compile my insights thus far.
Introduction
Freeform Faction Roleplay (FFR) is a really simplistic design and running style. It’s core premise is to “play the world” and make decisions as if you really were in command of a faction, rather than minmaxing numbers.
I wanted to design something (that I’m still iterating on) that would fulfil the following goals:
- Focus on roleplay, diplomacy and warfare, while avoiding complex mathematics, rolls that don’t do anything, and other ways of wasting time.
- Make gameplay and fiction as tightly connected as possible; make rules as simple and as possible.
- Provide a way for people from all around the world to engage in one game across different timezones.
- Get a steady beat, so it doesn’t peter out like most PBP games
- Communicate a setting in a concise, functional manner.
- Provide a sort of arena for various stories, represented by different factions, to play out, interact, and wage war.
- Provide a framework that would encompass both large scale faction play as well as personal conflicts.
Originally this format was inspired by the Matrix games as well as the Dark World Domains game John Gaptooth ran a while ago for me and a number of others.
Core Rules & Precepts
Here are some basic precepts and rules for how I run and how it differs from some other forms of play one can find out there.
Actions defined by tokens - factions are given a number of tokens each turn (usually 1-3), which can be spent on actions. These represent resources, army involvement, supplies, production and all the complex things you’d need to handle in a strategy game. Abbreviating all these matters in this way can help focus on making genuine decisions and roleplay, rather than seeking out the most mathematically efficient strategy, and eases the pain of running on the side of the referee.
Tokens are affected by the fiction - for example when a faction is largely hit by an event, or starts largely losing in a theatre of war, they might suffer a reduction in tokens; likewise looting, making profitable trades and appeasing your gods may increase tokens.
For example, a large faction, like the Empire of Babylon, would start off with 3 Tokens. This enables them to do as many as 3 actions every turn, or 2/1 action, using more tokens, and thus being more effective. Most of the time I haven’t seen players take more than 3 actions.
Actions are resolved by taking these measures into account:
- How many tokens were spent
- What kind of resources/units were engaged in the action
- How likely the positive outcome is, considering all the variables the referee has access to.
POV Characters - players get a single character, usually the faction leader, that is their Point-of-View character. They receive the reports, represent the faction in diplomacy, and issue orders. This makes the player not just a floating cloud casting orders into aether, but rather a living being that can talk to people, fight, and if things go wrong - die.
Players can obviously use other characters loyal to them (like emissaries, generals, etc.) wherever the POV character can’t be, but the purpose of this principle is to give a more personal take on faction management.
Events and Conflicts - factions face a number of conflicts: tensions between various subfactions they’re comprised of, issues with vital NPCs, and events that require decisive action. Some of those might be caused by other players, or used to their advantage.
Resolving events and conflicts helps the player define their faction better, earning allies or enemies in the process.Very often said events are resolved by means of in-character roleplay - largely conversations - or broad decisions about who to support or what to do about something.
Major NPCs - NPCs represent factions, subfactions and independent actors. The purpose of having an NPC leader or representative is to give a more personal feel to interacting with a faction, a unit or an army. Likewise, individual NPCs may have their own views, morals, personality and the like, which the player must manage in order to gain their support.
Kriegsspiel-style Battles - in order to minimize the amount of necessary posts, battles are resolved thus:
- Involved players decide on their orders; allied factions can discuss those amongst themselves.
- Orders are given. They can be as detailed or as simple as the player wants them to be.
- The referee might ask some clarifications, like “Does this unit fight until broken, or will they retreat when they start losing?” etc.
- Orders are resolved by the referee up until something unexpected happens, a good middle point occurs, or the battle ends.
- If the battle hasn’t ended, the players can adjust their orders or submit new ones, after which those are also resolved.
Units - Freeform Faction Roleplay differs from Kriegsspiel in how it handles units:
- You do not command individual units, like squadrons, battalions, etc. for most of the game (you can split them up during a battle though).
- Units are generally not described by numbers, but by their fictional features, and tags.
There are a couple of types of tags:
- Number - group, army, horde (can be granularized more by adding more tiers)
- Weaponry - melee, ranged, versatile
- Mounted or not (also can be used for flying mounts)
- Special tags, which denote the unit’s special abilities
- Damage can also be applied as tags - cursed, wounded, exhausted, broken, etc.
Here’s an example of a unit:
Wraiths, brought back from the afterlife into eternal service of Death, they have light bodies of dark smoke, and can only interact with the world through their silvery gloves; they use silvery longswords for combat.
- group (a number tag), melee (attack type), inhumanly fast, unbeatable in single combat by any human, blade can hurt spirits
So, rather than say “I move 3 Wraiths, 2 units of guards, and 5 units of Lancers to engage in Endor” you would say, “I use 2 tokens to engage Endor’s troops, using the Wraiths, Guards and Lancers.”
That way, when Endor player says “I use 1 token to defend using Guards and Golems”, the rough measure of power involved is measured by tokens.
Obviously in-fiction matters like “Golems are made out of sheer metal and wraiths have only sharp blades against them” can be crucial to resolution. Naturally, when designing and “balancing” a setting for this kind of game, such matters should be taken into account as well.
What Freeform Faction Roleplay is not?
Let’s do a little bit of negative philosophy here, by highlighting the differences I see between what I do and what folks at other communities do.
Matrix - these games quite often play out as collaborative storytelling mediated by the referee. They require the players to be something like coauthors of the presented setting, and for them to have near-perfect knowledge to the point of affecting enemy actions (with counterarguments for example) that their units have no idea about.
FFR, on the other hand, is meant to emphasize immersion, roleplay and exploration. The players don’t know the whole setting, they can discover new things or have events happen in fog of war that they'll learn of later.
Kriegsspiel - Kriegsspiel is a wargame at most tables. It might have elements of roleplay or diplomacy, but those are usually pushed aside in favour of focus on combat and unit movements.
FFR has elements of Kriegsspiel pertaining to warfare, but its core selling point is that it’s a roleplay game and not chiefly a wargame.
Dice-Based - FFR strives to push randomness over to player input, and grant players agency by limiting mechanical factors and systems that take it away.
Conclusion
FFR is, as stated prior, freeform, and generally none of the rules are set in stone so long as the idea of generally rules-light game is upheld. Feel free to make your own spin on these principles and join us over at the Discord.
