中文版本（繁體中文)：按此閱讀
中文版本（简体中文)：按此阅读
One of the decisions I made relatively early in developing A.R.C.H. was that I wanted the setting to be system-neutral.
I’ve written before about how I ended up making that choice. But choosing to make A.R.C.H. system-neutral has consequences beyond simply leaving out game mechanics.
It also affects how I design the missions themselves.
If a mission is written for a specific RPG system, I can build around the assumptions of that system. I can refer to its skills, character abilities, combat rules, investigation mechanics and other tools that I know the GM will have available.
A.R.C.H. can’t do that.
Instead, I have to ask a more fundamental question:
What does an A.R.C.H. mission actually need to provide if I don’t know what system the GM is going to use?
The answer has led me towards a deliberately lean mission structure.
Designing Without a System
A system-neutral mission can’t rely on a particular set of mechanics to carry part of the design.
For example, I can’t assume that every GM will have the same way of handling investigation.
One system might have specific investigation skills.
Another might use a more narrative approach.
Another might have mechanics for gathering clues.
Some groups might barely use mechanics for investigation at all.
The same applies to character abilities, combat and other parts of play.
If I build the mission around those assumptions, then it isn’t really system-neutral anymore.
So rather than trying to anticipate every possible system, I decided to focus on the parts of the mission that should remain useful regardless of the system being used.
That means the mission needs to establish the situation, provide an investigative structure and define what needs to be dealt with.
How the GM actually handles those things is left to them.
A.R.C.H. Has a Lean Mission Structure
This is why the mission template for A.R.C.H. is relatively simple.
At its core, an A.R.C.H. mission consists of three things:
Deployment Scene → Investigation Triad → Resolution
That’s it.
There is considerably more information behind an actual mission, of course. But these three elements form the basic structure that I want the mission itself to provide.
The Deployment Scene establishes how the Protectors enter the situation.
The Investigation Triad provides the core investigative structure, giving the Protectors the major things they need to uncover or understand as the investigation progresses.
The Resolution establishes what the Protectors ultimately need to deal with once they understand the situation.
The mission doesn’t need to tell the GM exactly how to get from one stage to the next.
That is where the chosen RPG system and the table come in.
Why Not Put Everything Into the Mission?
This is also why the A.R.C.H. mission template doesn’t try to contain every possible piece of information that a GM might need.
A mission can have clues.
It can have NPCs.
It can have factions.
It can have consequences.
All of these things can be important to running an investigation.
But they aren’t necessarily part of the mission’s fundamental structure.
I think there’s an important distinction between structure and content here.
The Investigation Triad tells me what the investigation needs to establish.
The individual clues are the material through which the GM can allow the players to discover those things.
Likewise, NPCs and factions can provide information, motivations, obstacles or competing interests within the investigation, but they are supporting elements rather than another structural component of every mission.
This distinction became particularly useful when I developed the GM Training Kit.
Rather than making every A.R.C.H. mission carry all of the guidance a GM might need to design and run an investigation, I could keep the missions focused and put the broader GM guidance somewhere specifically designed for it.
The result is a mission that is relatively compact while still giving the GM a solid investigative framework to work from.
What I Leave to the Table
The lean structure also reflects something I consider important about system-neutral design.
I’m not trying to tell the GM exactly how an A.R.C.H. investigation should feel at the table.
A GM running A.R.C.H. with one RPG system may handle a clue very differently from a GM using another system.
One GM might have players roll to discover information.
Another might simply give them the information when they ask the right question.
Another might make the discovery dependent on roleplaying.
All of those approaches can work.
The mission provides the situation and the investigative structure.
The GM decides how that structure interacts with the system they are using.
And then the players decide what they actually do.
This is one of the trade-offs of system-neutral design. I give up some control over exactly how the mission is experienced in exchange for making it possible for different groups to bring their own systems and play styles to A.R.C.H.
For me, that’s a worthwhile trade.
The Trade-Off of System-Neutrality
Of course, there is a trade-off.
A system-specific adventure can be much more detailed about mechanics.
It can tell you which skill to use, what difficulty to set, what character abilities might apply and how particular situations should be resolved.
A.R.C.H. doesn’t do that.
Instead, it gives the GM a situation that can be adapted to the system they already know.
That means the GM has more work to do in some areas.
But it also means that the mission isn’t locked into one particular way of playing.
For me, that is the point.
I don’t want A.R.C.H. to tell you what RPG you should be playing.
I don’t even want it to tell you exactly how your table should experience an A.R.C.H. investigation.
I want to give you a historical anomaly, an investigation and a situation that your group can make its own.
System-neutrality is what makes that possible.
And the lean mission structure is one of the ways that design choice shows up in the finished product.
P.S. If you enjoy reading about the various aspects of how I design A.R.C.H., you can subscribe to my newsletter via the Home Page for occasional updates from Moonlake’s Studio.
Leave a Reply