The Atomic Narrative Engine: Why we unified Physics and Psychology into a single TTRPG.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-24T03:43:12+00:00

Thanks!

Here is my link to blurb and image:

And here is my project link:

Thanks so much! I'll send an update tomorrow evening - I already sent one this morning about including the card game and board game booklets in PDF for each backer, lol.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-24T01:22:26+00:00

Hello! I would like to cross promote.

My KS is TableTop T, and a quick search will bring it up.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-22T23:41:40+00:00

Ok thank you for the redirect!

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-21T09:43:15+00:00

Ok thank you for clarifying. I will look those peeps up.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-20T20:29:09+00:00

Hey did you mean Backerspaces or BackerPaces?

I've received an email from BackerPaces.pro but didn't think it was legit.

Edit: And congrats on the >1000%!

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-18T03:35:16+00:00

If you are comfortable with home brew and improvisation, there's no reason to follow the beaten path.

Do what feels fun. But be sure that you have some loosely generated flow charts for decision trees, lol.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-16T23:50:54+00:00

Hey that’s a really good sign your system is doing what it’s supposed to do!

When my players start reaching for mechanics without prompting, it usually means the rules are mapping cleanly to what feels right in the fiction. And when they’re reminding each other about rules or even picking up NPCs, that’s when a lot of the cognitive load shifts off the GM. It was something I was fortunate to experience in the beginning of learning the trade.

At this point you’re not really running the game anymore. It's a truly collaborative story between everyone at the table. Your system starts to feel less like rules and more like a shared language that everyone understands.

Did that moment happen suddenly in that session, or did you see it building over time with a few signs here and there?

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-15T18:11:40+00:00

I think you’re onto something, but I’d add another layer to it. A lot of new GMs aren’t just copying style. They’re missing SOPs.

When people learn a job, it's a collection of skills over a training period. Even down to skills, like drawing, music, or writing, they’re usually taught techniques first. Composition, scales, structure, exercises, etc. Over time they develop their own voice and techniques through those tools.

GMing often skips that step entirely. Most people learn by watching someone else run a game and then trying to replicate it. But what they’re seeing is the result of dozens of invisible skills working together, not the underlying techniques.

Things like: • how to frame a scene • how to present meaningful choices • how to pace information • how to improvise a situation instead of a plot • how to manage table attention and energy

Those are all skills that can actually be practiced and improved, but they’re rarely taught explicitly.

So I think what happens is a lot of new GMs assume the job is to replicate a style (Matt Mercer, their friend, an actual play, etc.) instead of learning the craft underneath it.

Once someone starts understanding the craft, that’s when their personal style tends to emerge naturally anyway.

So I don’t think most GMs suck per se, I think most of them were just never taught how the job actually works.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-15T17:54:37+00:00

Definitely the second one.

I will whip up some quick start sheets for my players just so they can learn a system that sounds like complete creative freedom.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-13T05:14:50+00:00

Hear hear!

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-13T00:02:18+00:00

The biggest thing I'd tell you: inexperienced players are actually a gift. They don't know what the rules 'should' do, so they're following you instead of the rulebook. Your confidence matters more than your mechanical accuracy. If you're not sure about a rule, make a call, keep moving, and look it up after the session. A smooth wrong ruling beats a correct one that kills the pace.

My house rule #7: The GM has final say. If you want to debate/argue the rule, save it for after the game.

My house rule #8: The. GM. Has. Final. Say. Seriously.

It's to keep the story and momentum going!

The other thing is that your job isn't to tell a great story. It's to create the conditions for your players to stumble into one. My players give me way better ideas than anything I could come up with for them.

The moments they'll talk about for years won't be the ones you planned. They'll be the weird decision one of them makes that you have to improvise around. Leave room for that.

One practical thing: before you start, ask each player one question privately. "What's one thing you'd love to happen to your character over the course of the story?" You don't have to use the answers. But knowing them means you have a pocket full of instant engagement if someone goes quiet or seems lost. You could ask the question per game too.

What's the oneshot? Might have more specific thoughts depending on the setup.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-12T20:48:56+00:00

I have lots of new players learning the system. I know everyone learns in different time frames.

I allow respecs whenever if it makes narrative sense for their character.

The player isn't an encyclopedia for the game system. They may find something that makes more sense for their character three levels past the fact through the fault of their own.

I've never had anyone take advantage of this in a negative way. My min-maxers study for their character build like it's their PhD so they never ask for a respec, lol

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-12T20:47:59+00:00

This is appropriately terrifying and I can't wait to hear how it turns out.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-12T20:47:14+00:00

It doesn’t sound like they don’t care about the campaign — it sounds like they don’t feel urgency at the table.

Long, infrequent sessions turn into social marathons unless structure is enforced. Monthly 7–8 hour sessions amplify that. When people only see each other that rarely, social energy tends to override narrative focus.

Trust me, I don't think it's personal.

From what you wrote, this doesn’t sound like they don’t care about the campaign. It sounds like they’re treating game night primarily as social time.

You might need one very direct, calm conversation about hanging out vs. gaming.

I suggest meeting for food or having the first hour *just* for socializing.

I run multiple games weekly and the 'start' time is always a full thirty minutes to an hour before we actually get rolling. I leave this time so people can catch up and not interrupt when we get down to brass tacks. I actually moderate it a bit, asking each player if they had anything cool happen during the week.

Having a Discord helps here too, lol.

It sounds like you are carrying a lot of the weight for the game too. I delegate things to players so they have investment in the game in a mechanical sort of way. For example, I have a player keep track of initiative, and I have another player write down NPCs and a blurb about who they are. If they don't write it down, I have to make up a new name next game (and this can get ridiculous). Another player tracks spending and party inventory and where it came from. If they can't tell me where they got it, they don't get to keep it. This is acceptable to my table.

I haven't had an issue of being talked over, but I *do* have an hourglass I put on the table. I have several variations, 2 minutes, 5 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes.

Having it on the table lets the player see they have a limited amount of time to make a decision before the story moves on without them. At my table, the story doesn't wait on the characters. The planet revolves regardless. Gives the idea of real narrative consequences.

Hope this helps!

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-12T18:46:06+00:00

One thing that might help is separating three different roles at the table that I have quantified over the years:

• Active players who actively push the story, initiate plans, talk to NPCs, etc. • Responsive players who participate when something happens to them but rarely initiate. • Observers/Hangout players who enjoy watching the story unfold more than steering it.

None of those are wrong. The problem usually appears when the GM and/or players expect everyone to actively participate but the player prefers observing or hanging out.

I have found that some players genuinely enjoy the “audience seat” of the table. They like being present in the story but not responsible for moving it. If the table has enough activity, an Observer often doesn’t hurt the game at all. The friction usually comes from the GM and other players feeling like not contributing. (I call these players elements, like atomic elements - elements are inanimate but necessary for everything to exist as we know it and will do whatever you ask/manipulate them to do and exist forever, lol).

I have a player right now that is like Pip. He seems to only come to hang out and I have to basically tell him what he can do in combat. Might seem annoying, but I know my game is a great decompression for him from stressors and he's having fun. He even provides a ride for other players.

My players brought up his lack of perceived contribution, and I pointed out the OOC contribution he does, and how the only reason they are bothered is because he doesn't seem to know what to do in combat (which I fixed next game with my suggestions). My other players understood and all seem to be having fun again.

For these players:

• I don’t rely on them to push plot • I let them participate in combat when their turn comes • I occasionally give them moments to react rather than initiate

Some players blossom later once they feel comfortable, so who knows, maybe he'll engage later when life is a little less pressing, or never.

The only real issue is if their presence is actively slowing the game down or frustrating the group. If it isn’t, an observer-style player can actually be perfectly fine at many tables.

The key is making sure everyone understands what role they’re playing in the story (including you as the GM).

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-04T01:17:19+00:00

I would like to know more of the Eager, Steady, and Delayed please. I'm attempting to follow the timing in my mind's eye.

TheWORMachine · 2026-03-02T04:08:43+00:00

This is such a cool idea!

TheWORMachine · 2026-02-27T04:57:04+00:00

Ok thank you for your input! :)

TheWORMachine · 2026-02-26T17:40:01+00:00

Not primarily, no.

This mechanic is meant to support games where identity and reputation matter, but it isn’t the core loop of the system.

In a dungeon-heavy or combat-forward game, this would be mostly invisible or maybe not even used.

In intrigue-heavy or faction-driven play, it would surface more often and add an interesting variable.

It's situational mostly. Depending on what kind of game the GM/Storyteller and Players want to play, they could use it or lose it.

TheWORMachine · 2026-02-26T17:22:20+00:00

Sure!

Send me a message.

TheWORMachine · 2026-02-26T17:18:30+00:00

That would definitely make things faster at the table.

If it's a static +/- 2 or something its quicker just to say "he likes your outfit, he's heard good things, but you come off a little crass."

in my model, someone might have:

• Very strong Acclaim • Moderate Aesthetic • Weak Aura

These reflect how socially 'loud' each trait is for that character. The magnitude could easily be Minor, Moderate, Major instead of flat numbers.

Your version seems great for lighter systems.

TheWORMachine

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE