For those that might be interested, I wanted to point you to a thing called the E=Cube System that a board game designer friend of mine, named Eddie Rodriguez (Nightstalker Games), has developed.

It is a take on the classic 4 elements system, adding in 4 natural "forces", and the relationships and interactions between all of these items. It's a nicely fleshed-out system that may be useful for folks that are looking for a way to expand or fill-in a game design they are working on.

The E=Cube is free to use for any purpose (including commercial games) with proper attribution.

Let me know your thoughts. Also, Eddie is very approachable ... so feel free to drop him an e-mail as well.

I have a far-off light PC game that will be called "A Good Night's Leap" that will be using a modified version of this system. Figured if I could find a way to use it, it might be useful to the rest here as well.

-Matt

_________________
www.mwgames.com ... Dicey Curves, Space Mission, Jump Gate, Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess

It's very reminiscent of your Elemental Reduction game.

In the classical theory the elements were well ordered by their relative densities: earth<water<air<fire. But in E=cube they are presented as a non-transitive system.

The only elemental system I know of that is non-transitive is the chinese one:

Wood defeats Earth (trees consume soil); Earth defeats Water (soil absorbs water); Water defeats Fie (water extinguishes flame); Fire defeats Metal (furnace melts metal); Metal defeats wood (blade chops trees). But that would make an unusual cube though... more of an E=Prism.

Related to this, I did invent a new Metaphysical Elements system recently that has greater relevance with the modern world. I'll post it here when I find it.

_________________
I ain't pushing no moon buttons.

I don't know what that term means ... can you educate me?

-Matt

_________________
www.mwgames.com ... Dicey Curves, Space Mission, Jump Gate, Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess

In mathematical speak it is a system that obeys the axiom of transitivity: Given a Set S, and an ordering test ">", consider all elements A,B,C belonging to S. If A>B and B>C then A>C.

non-transitive means that there isn't a global ordering, only localised ordering. In game terms non-transitive means that there isn't a best action as all actions can be countered.

For example, Rock-Paper-Scissors is non-transitive as it has only localised ordering (Rock > Scissors). Whereas the dictionary is transitive, because there is a global ordering of words.

Non-transitivity is generally a good thing to design into a game, although most implementations of it tend to be painfully symmetric where whatever action you play, the logic looks identical, which can make a game boring. Rock-paper-scissors is symmetric. E=Cube is also quite symmetric, which is a direct consequence of it being based on a cube with diagonals.

_________________
I ain't pushing no moon buttons.

Wouldn't the design problem with a non-symmetric system be that a "best solution" would develop? If you're trying to allow for multiple paths to victory (or, at least, multiple effective play styles), wouldn't having non-symmetric interactions essentially force players toward certain play styles?

-Matt

_________________
www.mwgames.com ... Dicey Curves, Space Mission, Jump Gate, Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess

It makes things interesting, by introducing degrees of risk. eg, a high risk option with a high payoff vs a safe option with a low payoff. You may take a high risk action if you believe that nobody can counter it, because you've seen your opponents use a lot of it's counters up on other things.

In Rock-Paper-Scissors, the risk is always the same. There isn't a high risk option, or a safe option.


Another example, I remember when I was young playing a survival game. Lots of different creatures which had non-transitive relationships as predators/prey/neutral. If you played as an eagle, you were a predator to all of the rodents and snakes and insects, but it was very hard to catch food. On the other hand, playing as a mouse it was easy to get food, but you were vulnerable to a lot of predators. The gameplay was diverse as the interactions were totally unsymmetric.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Horizons_Survival

_________________
I ain't pushing no moon buttons.

I've searched all over for this, but I don't seem to have it.

I do remember it having ten elements. It wasn't designed with ten in mind, that's just how many emerged as I was working it all out.

_________________
I ain't pushing no moon buttons.

Well, ER was my attempt at playing around with what I hope to eventually have in AGNL ... but after I saw the E=Cube, it got me thinking a bit.

My system didn't have "forces" ... but it did have higher-level elements that were created by combining the "raised" versions of the basic elements.

Since the elements in AGNL lead to your character gaining some temporary powers, the forces in E=Cube give me ideas on how that could play out.

The biggest issue I have with E=Cube is simply its complexity at the higher manifestations. I think that would be difficult to present in an action/platformer type game for a player to understand, follow and build strategy on. So, I expect I'll be using a very cut-down version of the system.

-Matt

_________________
www.mwgames.com ... Dicey Curves, Space Mission, Jump Gate, Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess

I hope you find it, Jas ... I always find your work interestingly thought out.

-Matt

_________________
www.mwgames.com ... Dicey Curves, Space Mission, Jump Gate, Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess

I agree it is complex. I imagine it would take most people many hours to learn all of the entities and their relationships. Great games should take five minutes to pick up, and then a lifetime to master.



One possibility is to reduce the number of forces to two: Light and Dark.

Elements can then be found in their raw state, or bound to light forces, or bound to dark forces.

Within each binding, there could be a simple cyclic ordering:
Water > Fire > Earth > Air > Water
Dark Water > Dark Fire > Dark Earth > Dark Air > Dark Water
Light Water > Light Fire > Light Earth > Light Air > Light Water

But also, any element that are bound to Light can defeat any element that is bound to Dark. (Light defeats dark)
Similarly, Dark elements defeat Raw elements, and Raw elements defeat Light elements.


Another idea for you: The elemental system used in WoW. uses 2 sets of 4 (elements and energy forms).

Air --> Fire --> Earth --> Water --> Air
Fire <--> Mana
Earth <--> Life
Water <--> Undeath
Air <--> Shadow


Also there is a game featured on 8-bitfunding that involves combining elements. It might inspire you:
http://8bitfunding.com/project_details.php?p_id=258

_________________
I ain't pushing no moon buttons.

Hi, I'm the designer of the E=Cube and I just wanted to jump in for a moment with a couple comments. Yes, at its core, the E=cube is symmetrical but when you jump up to the advanced combinations it becomes asymmetrical. Some type combinations are much "stronger" than others. I did this so that you have options either way for your game design. Yes the E=Cube gets fairly complex as you get to the advanced manifestations but its not really designed to be memorized. Since this was originally designed for board/card games, I figure the designer should put the pertinent information right on the cards or boards, such as how I did on the game Animus (thegamecrafter.com/games/animus). I'm not a programmer so I have no idea how this would work for an electronic game. The point of the E=Cube is to get your mind thinking and to generate discussions such as this. I hope you guys enjoy it and use it to come up with some great uses!

Here you go. The earlier elements are similar (but not identical to) the classical elements, so I've written less about them. The later one's I've explained in greater detail.

1. Earth -- Represents foundation and stability.

2. Water -- Water gathers where there is earth.

3. Tree -- Represents growth and spontaneity. Plants spring up where there is water.

4. Air -- Plant respires and creates Air.

5. Animal -- Where there is air to breathe, animals can survive. This element represents the mind, and consciousness.

6. Fire -- Animal discovers Fire, and becomes elevated above other animals. Fire represents power and control. Fire is that which the mind seeks. Fire can be either tame or unleashed into something devastating. The mind too can be tame or devastating in how it uses the power it wields.

7. Metal -- The furnace can smelt Metal, and metal can be made into tools and machinery. As the metal is refined by the smith, the skill of the smith also becomes refined and honed. Metal represents this skillful mastery, art and craft and creativity.

8. Crystal -- Beyond the art of the smith we have the image of the wizard holding his gem encrusted scepter, staring enigmatically into his crystal ball. Crystals and gemstones are rare and unusual things: beautiful, curious, perfect, unworldly even, much like the arcane intellect of the wizard himself. Crystal represents all that is arcane: the science through which advanced materials can be engineered; the processes we can solve and improve by juggling information and running algorithms; or the knowledge and understanding through which we transcend our limitations.

9. Chaos -- With the knowledge and understanding of Crystal, we gain the means to transcend our limitations. We widen our horizons and go forth into new worlds. Chaos represents mobility and expanses, the vastness of the unknown, the frontiers which baffle us, and the mysteries that confuse and torment us. In some ways, we can think of Chaos like separation and distance: the difference between here and there, the difference between present and the future, and the difference between the known and the unknown. As we "advance" ourselves, we endevour to reduce this sense of separation, so making it easier to move from here to there.

10. Null -- As we reduce this sense of separation closer and closer to zero, we engage in a nullification process, where aspects of our lives become lost. Null represents the scales of balance, and the equivalency of loss and gain: We solve a mystery, and the mystery loses it's magic. We complete a rewarding challenging task, but sadly don't have it to do anymore. We create faster travel and we lose the experience of the journey, as well as it making the world seem smaller. So for all our efforts, Chaos only gives way to Null. Null is our ultimate nemesis, and also our wisest teacher.

_________________
I ain't pushing no moon buttons.

Good to see you here, Eddie.


Thanks for pointing this out. I haven't studied the advanced forms enough to pick up on this. I need to step through those more closely.

-Matt

_________________
www.mwgames.com ... Dicey Curves, Space Mission, Jump Gate, Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess

Very cool, and nicely detailed.

-Matt

_________________
www.mwgames.com ... Dicey Curves, Space Mission, Jump Gate, Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess

@Matt, in the E=Cube you can see that the different type combinations have been given "Manifest Levels". This is a clue to how "powerful" each on is. A Manifest Level of 1 is much "weaker" than a Manifest Level 5. This is directly related to the "Laws" outlined in the E=Cube document. A Manifest level of 1 has 3 weaknesses; compare that to a Manifest Level 5 that only has 1 weakness. These were not created arbitrarily. If you follow the E=Cube Laws, you can see how they were shaped.

I've read through the docs on these and it seems pretty cool. I don't understand the reasoning behind many of the weaknesses and resistances though. Many just seem arbitrary. Maybe it's just the naming that's throwing me off. Why would a black hole be weak against water and lifeforce for example?

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Yes, some of the names of the combined types don't make perfect physical sense. The names of the combined types were given arbitrarily, that is why I state in the document that you are free to alter the names as you see fit. However, the strengths and weaknesses of each one are NOT arbitrary. Those came about as a result of the E=Cube "Laws". These Laws are what make the E=Cube work. The Laws are the only part of the E=Cube that should not be altered because each of the types follow these Laws. If you want to verify this, pick a type and compare it to the Laws. Then it should be clear why they are the way they are.

The strengths and weaknesses of the black hole are determined from the strengths and weaknesses of the element/force that makes up the black hole.

But I had the same thoughts as you Machaira when I read through the pdf.

If the strengths and weaknesses of the elements/forces made greater sense, then the strengths and weaknesses of the hybrids may have made greater sense too.

It feels as if the designers focused mostly on the cube structure and arrow logic, with the hybrids and their relationships being calculated after that cube structure had been decided. It doesn't feel as though creating meaningful relationships between the hybrids was considered during the initial design.

_________________
I ain't pushing no moon buttons.

That was my thought as well. Why is water strong against dark energy? Why is lifeforce strong against wind? it just seems arbitrary. The idea is cool, but the implementation seems lacking.

_________________
Bored? Head on over to my blog and see what I'm up to.

Microsoft XNA MVP

Yes, you are right, the hybrid types were calculated after the basic structure was created. Again, the names of the hybrid types were also added after the fact. I would love more input on more appropriate names for them. As to the question of why Water is strong vs Dark Energy, the answer is Water is weak to Wind which is related to Dark Energy. Its kind of a mini cycle that occurs within the E=Cube between the Elements and Forces. Wind beats Water, but Water can beat Wind's related type of Dark Energy. Its important to remember that they are not all "Elements". Each Element has a Force that is is related to. Wind [E] relates to Dark Energy [F] (gaseous/no substance), Earth [E] relates to Gravity [F] (solid or related to solids), Fire [E] is related to Electromagnetism [F] (Plasma) and Water [E] is related to Lifeforce [F] (liquid/chemical). Hope that clears things up a bit. Its still a work in progress.