Historia Realis: Rome News

Hi! Lucas here.

This will be another more general dev diary.

I am currently making a lot of fast iterating on the design of Historia Realis, and as such I don’t want to ‘commit’ to those design decisions by writing about them. It somehow feels like I would be obligated to stick to a design if I share it on a dev diary, even though this is not really the case, as games change a lot, especially these days with patches and updates. However, these dev diaries are basically the only way for you to know more about how the game works, and I wouldn’t want to mislead you by saying something only to change it later.

One solution might be to write ‘design exploration’ dev diaries where I make it clear that what I’m talking about might change. I’ll try that sometime and see how it goes.

For today, though, let’s talk about the next design pillar of Historia Realis. There are 3:

• Emergent Stories
• Deep Simulation (you are here!)
  
• Historical Realism
  

Last time I covered Emergent Stories. Today is Deep Simulation day!



These are two words that I find hard to explain if I try. That said, you know exactly what I mean when I say “deep simulation”, and so it is at my own peril that I will now try to explain the concept, like trying to explain a joke. We’ll see if it’s still funny by the end.

[h2]Depth vs Complexity[/h2]

This is a common discussion when talking about depth. I’ve seen complexity described as the price you pay for getting depth. Generally, we want complexity as low as possible and depth as high as possible. This would mean that there’s a third ingredient to this formula, since they’re not an exact correlation.

So what’s the element that turns a little complexity into a lot of depth?

That’s a much harder question than it seems. I believe it’s good game design, the elusive Holy Grail. And that's a whole other thing! I don’t believe it’s worth it trying to elaborate on how to achieve that here. Theories and generalities won’t help; one can only make a good game in practice.

Stay tuned for upcoming dev diaries where I talk more about specific design implementations! I'm sure there's a Follow button somewhere.

Yes, the Romans did their exercise in the Campus Martius either naked or wearing very little!

[h2]Simulation vs Player-Centrism[/h2]
To me, a simulation game has two necessary elements:

• The representation of some aspect of reality.
  
• Interactions between elements: the representation is systemic.
  

Of course, you might argue that all games have those things. I would agree. It’s just a matter of intensity. To the degree that a game tries to be more of a representation of some aspect of reality, it is more of a simulation. And, to the degree that a game has more interactions between elements (that is, it is more systemic), it is also more of a simulation.

There are also more static, player-centric games which are still called ‘Simulations’: flight, driving and farming simulators, ‘life sims’, ‘immersive sims’ and so on. These games try to simulate an experiece from one point of view only, that of the player. The result is that, while the player might still get a very fun experience, NPCs feel very flat.

[h2]NPC Agency[/h2]

There is a critical element missing from those games: multiple sources of input. In them, the player is the only one pushing the buttons, making changes to the state of the game. The kind of simulation I like is one where even if the player is static, you still get interesting results. You could watch the simulation play out and still feel surprised, curious and engaged.

However, like many things in games, this is illusory. In a single-player game, there can be no real multiple sources of input. Luckily, we don’t need real ones. Fake ones will do: NPCs. They’re actually just yet another piece of the simulation, responding as required by the rules of the simulation. But the player’s human brain sees them as agents, as sources of input. In reality, they're just more simulation, more code, more algorithms.

But we give them life. We, as humans, can't help but look at characters in a simulation as agents. It's through this beautiful illusion that we can get immersion and personification. There's nothing special about Historia Realis in this sense, though — all games with NPC agents share this same illusion.

What I'm trying to do to make Historia Realis stand out from other games is to strengthen that illusion. To make NPCs more and more believable as 'independent' agents, even though that is an impossibility. But I believe that the player's mind is a magical place, if you feed their thoughts right. It's not so much about having 'good AI' (whatever that means) as much as creating the conditions for personification to happen.

One design choice that reinforces this is allowing NPCs to do everything the player can do.

[h2]Personification of NPCs[/h2]

Historia Realis simulates people more than anything. Their outer and inner conflicts, how they relate to others and themselves, how they grow and change. For example:

• When a character opposes you in an action (see Action System), and makes you fail, it's only natural to blame them. The game recognizes this human tendency mechanically and gives you a Grudge with the NPC. More on Grudges and Favors in a future diary!
  
• Similarly, when they help you achieve something, you might feel grateful! And the game systematizes this too, making you owe them a Favor.
  
• Characters act according to their traits, feelings, memories, etc. This gives them a consistency that makes them seem like agents or people. And, when they act contrary to those inner aspects, this is not only surprising, but recognized by the game itself, with mechanical consequences.
  

There is a lot more I could talk about, but I will leave it for next time.

[h2]Screenshots[/h2]





Check out the website where you can sign up for the alpha, or join our Discord to discuss the game and get the latest news and exclusive screenshots and progress updates! Thanks!

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2560540/Historia_Realis_Rome/

Hi! I'm Lucas, creator of Historia Realis: Rome.

Today I’m gonna talk a bit about the vision for Historia Realis. We're gonna get theoretical rather than practical, and look at the big picture. If you want to see more specifically how the game works, check out the previous dev diary about the Action System! Anyway, the game has 3 pillars that guide the design:

• Emergent Stories
• Deep Simulation
  
• Historical Realism
  

I'm going to cover them in separate diaries. Let's start with emergent stories!



This is an old dream of game designers, and I think that the industry has made amazing progress in this area. Crusader Kings, Football Manager, The Sims, Dwarf Fortress, RimWorld and many others have paved the way. I've also enjoyed a cool new take: Shadows of Forbidden Gods.

The vision for storytelling in Historia Realis is that you create your stories as you play. You may be a lawyer type in your youth, taking court cases and learning rhetoric, prosecuting corrupt governors or helping them get away with their crimes. Then, you might move on to military matters, fighting in the legions, and come back to begin your political career and climb the cursus honorum. Or you might do something very different, or you might fail in your plans and have to change course, or you might get caught up in someone else's schemes. You're writing your biography as you play, and you have limited control over it, but you always get an interesting story whether you succeed or not.

So far so good, but that's nothing too unique in terms of game design. So what's new?

The hypothesis that I’m testing with Historia Realis is that space is a constraining element when we're designing emergent storytelling. That’s why I'm disregarding the ‘world map’ at this point, even though it’s an expected feature in a game about Roman history. Rather than focus on the external space of where actions take place, I'm focusing on the internal, socio-psychological space of why people do what they do. Their relationships, wants, feelings, endeavors, personalities, etc.

I had two main inspirations for my storytelling design: Aristotle and South Park. Let’s start with the latter, because I’m sure you’re more curious about that one.

My latest painting: a Roman in his study (tablinum) reading scrolls under candlelight.

[h2]South Park creators on Storytelling[/h2]
Here’s a quote from a talk with South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone:

We found out this really simple rule that maybe you guys heard before, but it took us a long time to learn it. We can take these beats, which are basically the beats of your outline, and if the words ‘and then’ belong between those beats, you’re f*ed—basically. You’ve got something pretty boring. What should happen between every beat that you’ve written down, is either the word ‘therefore’ or ‘but’. So you come up with an idea and write ‘and this happens…and then this happens…’ no, no, no. It should be ‘this happens and therefore, this happens’. ‘But, this happens, therefore, this happens….'”

That’s a very simple rule for storytelling, yet it’s very effective. Between story beats, you need either a 'but' or a 'therefore', never an 'and then'. The word ‘but’ implies conflict and complication, while ‘therefore’ implies causality and consequence.

When you have random events popping up one after the other, what you have is an 'and then' story. And, like the South Park creators said, that’s f*ing boring. That's why Historia Realis uses the action system rather than a random event system.

[h2]Aristotle on Storytelling[/h2]
And, two thousand years earlier, Aristotle said basically the same thing. Just with less swearing:

Reversal of the Situation is a change by which the action veers round to its opposite, subject always to our rule of probability or necessity. Thus in the Oedipus, the messenger comes to cheer Oedipus and free him from his alarms about his mother, but by revealing who he is, he produces the opposite effect. (Poetics, Aristotle)

See the "but"? And “our rule of probability or necessity” is the therefore! To Aristotle, actions in a story should follow a clear causal connection, yet they’re not boring or predictable thanks to reversals and revelations. It's the same thing as above, just said in a fancier way!

Here's a quick example of how this might show in the game: you succeed in your endeavor to study law, therefore you can now prosecute a corrupt governor. You do that, but he has powerful friends, so you fail, and now he holds a grudge against you. Therefore, he accuses you of something else. And so on!

[h2]Players on Storytelling[/h2]
Another inspiration are players themselves. There are several ways in which I've enjoyed emergent storytelling in games, or seen other people do it:

• Writing AARs (After Action Reports).
  
• Making RP (roleplay) videos, or just playing as they imagine their character would act.
  
• Sharing stories of their playthrough in forums, or telling friends about them.
  
• Recording past events and their details in spreadsheets and lists.
  
• Creating stories in their minds as they play.
  

Those are all really cool!

Where does all of this show up in the design of Historia Realis? The answer is everywhere. If you’re looking for a more specific answer, you can check out the previous dev diary on the action system, and look forward to the next ones!

There are many more things to say about emergent narrative, I could go on for days. But I'll stop here for now, and possibly revisit this topic again in the future, with gameplay examples.



[h2]New Screenshots[/h2]
Nothing too fancy, just showcasing some new art! Also, both these screenshots show the system I'm currently working on: the Endeavor system. Hopefully I'll talk more about that soon in another dev diary.

You can walk around barefoot to show off how Stoic you are. Cato did it, why not you?

Here's that new painting in action. Literally!

Thanks for reading! If you'd like to get access to exclusive content or ask questions, join our Discord!

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2560540/Historia_Realis_Rome/

Hi! I'm Lucas, creator of Historia Realis: Rome.

For this relaunch of the dev diaries, I'm going to cover the core mechanic of Historia Realis: the action system, which is the beating heart of the game. It was designed to replace the usual event system in similar games.


Most strategy games use events, pop-ups that interrupt your game and ask you to make a decision. Those are alright and sometimes necessary, but there are a few problems with them:

• ːsteamthumbsdownː Randomness: They are generated through a random number generator that spawns an event just because. Also, the outcome of the event is often random; you have a % chance to succeed.
  
• ːsteamthumbsdownː Repetition: The first time you see the event, it's pretty cool. The second time, you already know the drill. By the third time and beyond, you already know the best option and auto-click it.
  
• ːsteamthumbsdownː Interruption: They stop whatever cool thing you're doing and interrupt you with something else.
  
• ːsteamthumbsdownː Isolation: They are mostly detached from each other and from other systems in the game. Event chains try to fix this, but just bring more repetition and interruption.
  

The action UI



The action system in Historia Realis is quite different. Instead of events randomly appearing, characters take actions to accomplish pretty much anything in the game. Want to learn to ride a horse? Take an action. Want to get married? Take an action. Want to become Emperor of Rome? You guessed it, take an action.

[h2]Requirements[/h2]

That doesn't mean you can do anything with a single action. Sometimes, you need a sequence of actions. That is because most actions have Requirements. So if you want to take the action of Become a Stoic Sage, you're going to need to Learn Stoicism first.

[h2]Effects[/h2]

For example, Learn Stoicism would give you the Stoic trait. That's one effect of the action, and that trait unlocks new actions because it's a requirement for other actions. However, you might get the trait in its negative form if you fail the action.

You get a Clumsy Dog if you fail to Get a Hunting Hound

Failing an action is always consequential. You "fail forward", an idea that comes from tabletop RPGs such as Apocalypse World. For example, if you fail your action to get a dog to help you with your hunting, it's not that nothing happens. You get a clumsy dog. Now you might have to put your dog down, or someone might poison your dog, or any number of things might happen. But it's not nothing. You fail forward, the state of the game changes and creates new opportunities, even in failure.

[h2]Supporters and Opposers[/h2]

How do you fail? There are two sides to any action: supporters and opposers. Supporters want the action to succeed, while opposers want the action to fail. Any action you take is socially tested; that is, you never act alone. Whatever you do, other characters will join your action supporting or opposing it, and you can support or oppose theirs too! You can always try to influence the simulation. And the outcome of your action is based on your ability to gather support and avoid opposition.

There are very impactful consequences to supporting or opposing the actions of other characters, and ways to influence the outcome of actions, but I'll leave that for a future dev diary on Favors & Grudges.

Opposing someone in an action might cause them to get a grudge against you.

[h3]In Summary[/h3]

The action system solves the problems with regular event systems in the following ways:

• ːsteamthumbsupː Less Randomness: Instead of events popping up randomly, characters take actions. Also, there are no % chances of success – actions are socially tested.
  
• ːsteamthumbsupː Less Repetition: Your decisions are never just about the action itself, not about knowing what's the best of 3 options. You have to consider many factors. Who is taking the action, you or some other character? Do you want them to succeed or not? Do you want to gain a favor by supporting them, or pick a fight by opposing? Can you make them fail without forming a grudge? Additionally, the sheer number of actions makes repetition less likely.
  
• ːsteamthumbsupː Less Interruption: You are not interrupted by actions. You see a new action show up in the list and decide whether you want to interact with it or not. No popup, no pausing.
  
• ːsteamthumbsupː Less Isolation: Actions have requirements which need to be met by taking other actions. This means actions are loosely connected: several different actions can help you fulfill the requirements for any other action. There are no pre-defined 'event chains', which means more variety. More on this in the future when I talk about content design and HistEdit, the content editor I made just for the game.
  

Thanks for reading! If you'd like to discuss this and other gameplay elements, join our Discord!

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2560540/Historia_Realis_Rome/

Woah! You can watch me make the game! Cool!