Council of Sens (1141) Game Design Project

1. Game Narrative

1.1. Debate 1

1.1.1. Debate2?

1.1.1.1. Debate 3?

1.1.1.1.1. ...

1.2. What topic should this be about?

1.3. Pregame game?

1.3.1. Council of Soissons (1121): Peter's first heresy trial

1.3.1.1. gets people familiar with debate structure

1.3.1.2. reward for heresy conviction is one more player for anti-Abelard side

1.3.1.3. reward for acquittal is one more character for pro-abelard side (who?)

1.3.1.4. or is the reward more influence points, or more reputation points?

1.3.2. Bernard's trip to Paris to preach to students

1.3.3. students debating at Paris?

1.3.3.1. an introduction to scholastic thinking (new school)?

1.3.3.2. vs. Hugh of Saint Victor (old school)

1.4. What should be the part of each 'game day'?

1.4.1. Discussion/debate

1.4.1.1. how are councils historically run?

1.4.1.1.1. Based on vote

1.4.1.1.2. based on consensus

1.4.1.1.3. based on presiders role?

1.4.1.1.4. how much influence do outsiders (nobles?) have?

1.4.2. Actions

1.4.2.1. Accusations of sins

1.4.2.2. Excommunications??

1.4.2.3. Other actions?

2. Game Mechanics: these must teach as much as the content

2.1. Voting

2.1.1. Varied voting strength

2.1.1.1. Can buy votes of NPCs?

2.1.1.2. Nobles have no vote but influence points to spend

2.1.1.3. or what about Reputation? BC and PA are celebrities, thus, how do we measure (quantify) their fame/ reputation?

2.2. Eliminating

2.2.1. Accusations of Sin?

2.2.1.1. Clear by Argument

2.2.1.1.1. Would require formal accusation at end of class, and allowed to respond next class

2.2.1.2. Clear by Oath?

2.2.2. Unrest risk

2.3. Debate format

2.3.1. Do we structure these as scholastic debates or do we have a different debate structure for every debate?

2.3.1.1. Epic rap battle between BC and PA

2.4. Rewarding?

2.4.1. Increase in Influence points

2.4.2. Reputation Points

2.4.2.1. Could Influence or Reputation points (fame) be spent on causing unrest in particular people's diocese/ cities/ counties?

2.4.3. Increase in Victory points

2.4.4. Inspiration points (DnD style rewards for extra research, cool actions)

2.5. randomness?

2.5.1. Do we need to incorporate some randomness (action cards) to mix up/ move along the narrative?

2.6. rumours

2.6.1. How to make rumour more of a game dynamic?

2.6.1.1. rumours as assignment option for all characters?

3. Risk

3.1. How to measure/ gamefy risk

3.2. What are reprocussions for taking a 'risky move'? How is this defined?

3.2.1. Is this a secret mechanic that the GM knows the details of, but the players are not clear about (as with assassination in the Inv. Cont. game)

3.3. UNREST

3.3.1. individual unrest that distract someone from voting (eliminate their participation for one vote)

3.3.2. General unrest (if people take too many wrong actions- abuse power, move too quickly then everyone suffers the consequence_

3.3.2.1. Would this change debates - if general unrest is declared then, debate on main question stops and players must spend one day atoning (if the council is imagined as a march toward Abelard's conviction, perhaps there would be a time component of it - that if all parts of the heresy trial are not complete then he goes free?)

3.3.3. stability gauge?

4. Intellectual Debates

4.1. Trinity

4.2. Sin

4.3. Consent

4.4. God as Love

5. Factions

5.1. Starting Factions

5.1.1. intellectual centres

5.1.1.1. Schools

5.1.1.1.1. Intellectual Learning (Jaeger)

5.1.1.2. monasteries

5.1.1.2.1. Charismatic Learning (Jaeger)

5.1.2. exegetical/ hermeneutical groups

5.1.2.1. Brian Stock's "textual communities"

5.1.3. clergy/monks vs. lay

5.2. Informal Factions

5.2.1. friendship network

5.2.2. aristocratic patronage networks

5.2.2.1. Which "faction" has secular support? How does preservation of the status quo align with geopolitical concerns?

5.2.3. status quo vs rebel

5.2.4. orthodox vs heretic

5.2.5. gender (more women needed?)

5.3. Should factions be equal

5.3.1. Why?

5.3.1.1. for fairness

5.3.1.2. so everyone thinks they can win

5.3.1.3. so people don't get fed-up/ despair

5.3.2. Why not?

5.3.2.1. If not, what are the mechanisms by which students can still win? Or win votes to their side?

5.3.2.2. what kind of reactions (random or formal) might sway a character from one faction to another

5.3.2.3. The Council was originally stacked against PA originally....

5.4. How many formal factions should there be?

6. Stages

6.1. Sketch timeline/roles

6.1.1. Identify Learning Goals

6.1.1.1. Develop Game Schedule

6.1.1.1.1. Develop Factions

7. work roles

7.1. Character Designers

7.1.1. Research background of character

7.1.2. Identify relationships with other characters (informal alliances hardcoded on character sheet) Enemies vs allies

7.1.2.1. Who hates who?

7.1.2.2. Who loves who?

7.1.3. identify motivations for characters

7.1.3.1. Create moral framework for character creation (e.g. DnD 5e) to allow players to connect more/ feel more sense of creation.

7.1.3.2. IMPERATIVES

7.1.3.2.1. E.g. If X bribes you, you need to call them out...

7.1.3.3. For "stock" characters (bishop of X about whom little historical variation is known) provide 3 variants?

7.1.3.3.1. thereby giving players more control over interpreting character

7.1.4. propose faction alignment of this and other characters

7.1.4.1. specify friends and enemies to allow more flexibility to faction organization

7.1.4.2. create way to communicate degree of adherence (1-5 loyalty scale) from zealot (will never budge) to flexible (will change to achieve goals)

7.1.5. propose possible missions/ goals for character

7.1.5.1. assign Victory Points for objectives

7.1.5.1.1. Assign secret VP for taking actions which show "deep engagement" (research).

7.1.5.1.2. Assign different value of VPs for degree of risk

7.1.6. Do we need to add more characters to the existing list? (We don't need to research them, just proposing them is useful)

7.1.6.1. Burghers or members of Reims/ Poitiers commune

7.1.6.2. Add other characters to add different voices

7.1.6.2.1. women

7.1.6.2.2. non-Christian

7.1.6.3. Others?

7.1.7. Outline and rank degree of involvement for characters

7.1.8. Assignments: make more choice (pick 2 of 4 options). Mixing creative and scholarly.

7.2. Game Designers

7.2.1. thinks about how to make game fun

7.2.2. draft rules for winning

7.2.3. in consultation with CDs create individual character missions/ goals (link to game)

7.2.4. Play different games to get feel for game dynamics (regular appointment with other members of team?

7.3. Researchers

7.3.1. ensure trustworthiness of accounts

7.3.2. reviewing bibliography/ translations

7.3.3. identify timeline/ context information (draft opening description)

7.3.4. identify key primary source extracts to be read by students (or identify ones that need to be translated).

7.4. Project Managers

7.4.1. Editors

7.4.1.1. create standards for template

7.4.1.2. make templates for character sheets

7.4.1.3. review initial drafts of character sheets

7.4.1.4. review game play proposals

7.4.2. keep people on track

7.4.3. help co-ordinate work

7.4.4. update task lists/ revise task schedules as needed

8. Central Theme

8.1. Heresy

8.1.1. Is Abelard the Heretic

8.1.2. Is Abelard not the heretic

8.2. Intellectual History

8.2.1. Does Scholasticism win?

8.2.2. Does monastic theology win

8.3. Church Organization

8.3.1. Does Church status quo win

8.4. Papacy

8.4.1. Does the papacy get to overrule local decision?

8.4.1.1. i.e. can Abelard appeal to the pope?

8.4.2. Is the judgement of local bishops supreme?

8.5. Social Order

8.5.1. Status quo social order

8.5.2. New forms of social order (communes, etc)

8.6. Or (new) calls for Reform win

8.6.1. secret heretic?

8.6.1.1. Petrobrussian bishop

8.6.1.1.1. (I suggest Petrobrussian because formal Catharism does not seem to make its way to France by 1141).

8.6.1.2. Arnold of Brescia (secret rabblerouser)

9. Do we design this for in person or online.

9.1. In person

9.1.1. Pros

9.1.2. Cons

9.2. Online

9.2.1. Pros

9.2.2. Cons

10. Characters and Factions