During the creative process of Orc-Astra, I got puzzled. Gear and stuff, why are they so essential to a game? Why track them? Why don't just keep them in the narrative space?

(Originally posted on Substack, moving it over here. It's a longer read.)

While it's only another roleplaying game both for you and me, I thought Orc-Astra really taught me things. This is a game about orcs (surprise!) who form vaudeville troupes. Yeah, pretty niche, I know. But the game is really about being an outsider. Being bullied. Being an extrovert.

Also, it’s a Powered by the Apocalypse game, and this engine is really demanding. The moves, the playbooks, all have to fit in very tightly to the texture of the fiction you’re about to tell, and besides the sheer need for more text, it really teaches you to think in systems.

Now one system that bugged me for a while, and for Orc-Astra I had to have a fix was Gear.

So why gear?

Because for some reason gamers find it important to track it. I’m not sure why. When you wield a sword, you can slash things for sure. When you carry a library of books, you can research lore. When you’re dressed in full armor, helmet and shield, you’re unharmable. Right? But if I’m honest, I don’t care. I tell you why.

The Conversation

Me Asking: “Is it interesting to track gear?”
Me Answering: “No.”
“Is any and all type of gear available for PCs?”
“No.”
“Who decides what is available?”
“The MC, but all players can suggest and chip in. Ultimately, if plausible in fiction there’s no reason not to have access to something.”

(Probably at this point some of you cry out “GM fiat!” but let’s get back to that later.)

Me Asking: “When is it interesting to check gear even if it is not interesting to track it?”
Me Answering: “In situations where you want to hide them, or if a PC is encumbered.”
“What interesting things does it cause if it can’t be hidden?”
“Attention, conspicuousness, suspicion.”
“What interesting thing does encumbrance cause?”
“Slowness. As much as it’s interesting at all.”

(So this is where it gets messy in terms of how to express the level of suspicion and burden in the game. Should they be a currency? It’ll come up.)

Me Asking: “Can anyone reduce suspicion, or it’s a specific skill?”
Me Answering: “Anyone can. Maybe some better.”
“Can anyone mitigate slowness, or is it a specific skill?”
“Nobody can. Or maybe some can, very few.”
“What interesting thing can come out from this in game play?”
“Disadvantage or retaliation.”

(I really wanted to have a SYSTEM at this point, but then…)

Me Asking: “Can that be done without tracking?”
Me Answering: “Surely.”
“What prompts that then if not mechanics?”
“PC–MC conversation.”

Case closed? Hell, no. But the thought process explained to me that narrative positioning will be more important than tracking some currency.

The Iterations

First, I wanted to lift the mechanics from Blades in the Dark.

You have access to any item that would reasonably be available to you. You don’t need to select specific items now. What you have access to mostly depends on where you are, and the MC will tell you the limitations of the location.

During play, you may say that your Trouper has an item on hand by writing it on your Path sheet. Your load will determine your obviousness and influence your movement.
1–3 items: You’re lightly loaded and raise no suspicions.
4–5 items: You look like someone ready to rock. Expect some attention.
6+ items: You’re overburdened. Get hindrance on moves requiring movement. You also stand out, being very visibly geared up for a gig.

I thought I was smart. “Maximise work not done,” for one: why create something new when it’s already out there. Then, as John Harper is someone I really look up to, so borrowing something from him felt great. (It always does, by the way. All art is recycling, and placing a precious little bit from someone you admire into your own build is a very satisfying feeling. It’s hommage. Respect. Relation.) But then I realized that Blades is completely different a game from Orc-Astra. It’s about scoundrels on missions while I’m creating something for performers on gigs. Blades have predefined lists for each playbook. I couldn’t be bothered to make a specific inventory for potential items for each Path, because it doesn’t matter. They can all have trombones and sabers and torches for all I care. As long as they have an idea how to create a stage act from it.

But I also had a tangent towards Metacurrency Land.

Some items will count as 2 for load (think heavy weaponry or massive equipment). Some tiny or disposable items (pencils, keys, a torch) don’t count toward your load. The MC will advise what counts for either type.

You can reduce Gear by …
... Dropping an item. It’s left behind, lost, and obtaining it again will require trouble.
... Handing an item to someone else. They must mark 1 Gear in their inventory.
... Sacrificing a piece of equipment to get advantage. Describe how you smash it like it was your last shot, as fiction allows. If you decide that you hold on to your spoiled gear piece, it’s useless until repaired, refilled, or rewired in play, and still counts against your Gear.

You see, once you start counting Gear, you start thinking of “tiny” and “massive” items, counting half and double, and so on. It’s endless. And, if you ask me, it’s pointless. I know there’s a whole playstyle dedicated to counting items and carefully describing wounds. I just cannot go that way. It kills fiction for me. I’d rather wave the whole thing off saying “you have what makes sense, and they function as it makes sense.” 

But then again, GM fiat, right? Because who decides what makes sense? I get reminded all the time that there are tables where people actively disagree on what they can do with a lance. Sure you can pierce a bear with it. But from what distance? How many limbs do you need to make it work? What power or strength is required? There are tables where you would want to try things even if the GM disagrees. Now, the other problem is the GM “ruling.” Yes, they are the referee, and they should be equipped and trusted to make the right decisions. But what does “equipped” mean? Should I carefully write up what I think makes sense?

This led me to the next version. My visit to the Realm of Tags. One of the best gimmicks of PbtA.

Small or disposable items don’t count, unless you have loads of them. (Instruments: flute, harmonica, ocarina, jaw harp, whistle, triangle. Tools: lockpicks, spyglass, compass, chalk, string, lighter, mask. Weapons: knife, sling, blowgun, pistol.)
Distinct items are harder to conceal and carry continuously along with others. (Instruments: concertina, banjo, fiddle, lyra, trumpet, clarinet, guitar, bagpipes, accordion. Tools: grappling hook, voice recorder, radio, drawing set, extra outfit, light armor. Weapons: saber, axe, hammer, pepperbox, bow, crossbow, rifle, shotgun.)
Massive items draw focus and pull weight. It’s impossible to hide them. (Instruments: drums, double bass, tuba, harp. Tools: tent, automaton arm, ink and press kit, phonograph box, full armor. Weapons: greatsword, battleaxe, lance, pike, machine gun, bazooka.)

I mean, tags are crazy good. You define the capabilities of your gear with simple, evocative words like “reload” or “dragonbane” to tell their limits or extras. I really felt at that point that this will be what will solve my issue. 

Three simple words, and I’m done. Tiny? Doesn’t count. Distinct? You get noticed. Massive? You are slowed down. 

Easy. Done. Only it isn’t. Because a) you need to have a list to illustrate what you call “distinct,” and b) you still have a metric somewhere that is affected. It suggests that there are levels of concealability and encumbrance. And I don’t want it. And I don’t want to having to have descriptions like this: “THINGS’ DESCRIPTIVE TAGS. Weapons’ and gear’s descriptive tags fall into 3 categories. First, the plain mechanical; second, constraints on when the characters can use them; third, cues recommending something for you to say about them.” This is a quote from Apocalypse World, the third most important RPG book on my list. Vincent Baker is even higher on my appreciation list than John Harper. But still. No complicated subsystems like that, please. Orc-Astra is not about Gear. It’s about scorned outcasts who dance, rage, and defy their fate. Why would I want my players to have a conversation about the tags of a flute or a tent? Why not have a conversation about what does items mean in the fiction?

The Narrative

And this is where I feel arrived. The conversation that focuses on the thoughts and expressions about stuff. What does it do? Can it do that? Why can it be difficult to hide it? Does it have distinctive features, size, smell, shape? Or weight? So it’s hard to carry, right?

It looks like this in the current version.

Only track gear that’s important dramatically. Your tools of trade can be distinct and heavy, but you’re accustomed to carry them, and they’re part of your attire. Feel free to wave off anything that you don’t want to bother with. The goal is not accuracy, but highlighting the stuff that’s interesting in play. You may also discard items retroactively to make room for new reveals.

Some conspicuous and massive items might influence your noticeability and load, while the sum total visibility and weight of your items might also matter, at the moment when you announce a new one.

Some items are distinct. Sometimes, the MC may ask you to mark obvious on your sheet. It may influence social interactions. For example, if you say, “I pick up the dead guy’s rifle,” the MC may reply, “great, but you might be spotted if you carry it around.” If your answer is, “sure, no problem,” the MC may respond, “okay, mark obvious on your sheet.”

Some items are massive. Besides obvious, you might have to also mark burdened on your sheet. It may influence quick movements. For example, you’d declare, “I don't go anywhere without my harp!” The MC says, “hilarious, love that, but it's bulky, you know that, right?” You say, “of course, but I'm not planning to run around with it.” The MC responds, “I guess so, but if you do, you’ll be burdened. Mark it on your sheet, please.”

Both marks allow the MC to apply advantage or hindrance whenever relevant.

So, as you can see, Gear can magically appear with the PCs, which is exactly how I want it. “I think I should have a pocket knife.” Why the hell not? Would it be interesting though if you didn’t have it? Hm. “How do you have it, again?” And then the players discuss a fictional position, a retroactive imagination about whether or not it’s possible and relevant to have that knife. That’s where I’m keen to go. Not what a knife is capable of, really. Because it can cut an apple, carve a tree, or harm a person. It cannot cook a meal, and it’s barely useful for fixing an engine. Applications still can be discussed. And that’s fine. If it matters in fiction, do that. But there are only two tags that count in the rules: obvious and burdened. They are not gear tags though. They are tags the PCs get. And they only matter when it matters. They can get you hindered, abut also give you advantage. This is the spirit of Orc-Astra.