I stayed up way too late sending James pictures of birthday cakes thinking about the game and what’s working and what isn’t. Also wondering if I’d been tricking myself into thinking any of the games had really worked as well as I imagined (more on that later). It was one of those kind of nights.
Here are some of the thoughts in my head. No particular order.
I want to repeat my apology to Mike for stepping on what he was saying and not giving him enough time.
I want to apologize to Dave for knowing he had stuff he really wanted to do and making him wait until literally everyone else had, at the least, right of first refusal.
I want to apologize to James for not really understanding his new move - I missed most of the conversation you guys had about what the two moves did together because I was still trying to get family stuff sorted and help Kaylee organize her thoughts around her due-2nd-day-of-school essay, and it led to some wrongness later, and that’s on me. Maybe I shouldn’t have done the game last night? Maybe. Hardly matters except as a data point now.
Chain-lightning round.
I like this game. I’d like to keep playing it, though I’m not going to do that as a solo exercise, so it might be out of my hands.
I’m still figuring out where its strengths and weaknesses are.
I’ve talked at length about weaknesses in the design. I haven’t said much about the strengths, but they’re there.
It’s a weird hybrid of indie story-games(1), pbta, fate, and trad RPGs. I still like it.
(1: I’m defining story-games, here, as ‘games where the main point is tell a story, irrespective of ttrpg expectations’ - see For the Queen, Fiasco, Bluebeard’s Bride, et cetera)
I need to remember and/or recognize where the game is pbta, where it’s trad, where it’s story-game, and where it’s fate. Mostly recognize, because I haven’t recognized that previously.
If the game’s going to work, especially in a game that’s so close to GM-less or GM-ful or whatever this is, everyone needs to recognize those things. It’s fine to say “follow the fiction”, but that’s not the only expectation in this game, because it’s not just that kind of game, right? It’s inaccurate (I think) to say it’s the thing you can do and everything else will work - in fact I think there’s times when the game momentum breaks down when it’s all that’s considered.
(It is accurate to say player-buy-in will help paper over or ignore a number of faults, but that’s not the same thing as ‘follow the fiction’. Sometimes player buy in, in FELLOWSHIP specifically, is “I’m not going to think too hard about this and just play to the tropes, even if I’m not personally fictionally tied in very hard right now.” I think. IMO. IMHO. YMMV. OVIM.)
I mean. Yeah. It’s good to have personal ties to a scene, if they’re there. That’s best. But sometimes the point of the game is just to be a TTRPG and hit the bad guy, y’know? There’s a cave troll, it wants to kill you. Kill it back. The end.
Slowing down now.
I’m thinking about this because of the scene last night. Wynn was socketed into the scene… great. Ann was socketed into Wynn and Rowan’s well-being.
Rowan and Virens weren’t, for different reasons? I mean, I tried to say “Dude these are two members of the group that dropped an island on your friends. Express your displeasure.” I guess I thought it was sufficient. I made an assumptions there? Or I just wasn’t direct enough.
Side note: I really really thought I’d picked out NPCs that would give everyone someone to care about. Leaders of the group that killed Virens’s friend. A harbinger for Rowan. The last of Wynn’s people. Looters preying on the good people (both groups being mostly human) for Ann. A fast talker, dumb mooks, and an arrogant prick for Carabas to tweak.
And yeah, they’ve got these abilities that make it hard to one-shot them. Maybe you’re not sure what options you have that’ll work. Okay. Ask? I mean, just ask? Or use a bunch of asking-the-GM moves? Or create lore so you can do stuff? Or, again, just ask? I’m not sure why we didn’t just ask.
I mean, I can read back through threads and NOW I can see (or imagine I see) a subtle ask in “well knowing this guys stats, I can’t do anything to him” but… I mean, IF that was asking, it was too subtle for me to catch it, by at least half.
That the setup fell dead with ~40% of the group still has me scratching my head a little. I was not prepared for “what’s my motivation in this scene”, I guess because (a) I thought it was obvious and (b) barring that, it’s 2 sessions into the game and maybe just hit the fucking cave troll and kick the tires on your guy? (See also: Masks sessions 1-3.)
Meanwhile, Carabas, who’s personal motivation was “I want to tweak this arrogant wizard,” and kind of ended there (AFAIK), and really that’s just an expression of Dave going “I just wanna play my dude.” That’s a straightforward kind of traditional TTRPG ‘motivation’, and it works because of the game’s soup kitchen dna has pieces that respond well to that.
“I’m going to wait and see what the people who this scene is actually about are going to do,” left me just working my mouth like a dying fish. I mean, the scene was meant to be about everyone. You guys are the fellowship - those are the bad guys. Hit the cave troll?
Talk to the cave troll? Taunt the cave troll? Recruit the cave troll? Something.
Yes, follow the fiction. Sometimes.
60% of the time?
Maybe 80% of the time later into the game? Point is, there are big pieces of the game - THIS game, in particular - where the game sort of assumes ‘there are zombies. the players will fight them, because they’re zombies. the end.’
As an example of my own flummoxed-ness. I really, really wasn’t expecting Bill to have nothing he wanted to try when a previous post of his was like a YouTube on “Sixteen Ways to Gut a General.”
I was tired at the end, but before the break-down I thought the game had 80% worked, just been too goddamn slow. Adjust that to 60% in hindsight I guess. I dunno.
Comparisons
I don’t buy “we’ve got no inherent reasons to fight these guys” as a strictly pbta problem or limitation or requirement or whatever. I don’t even…
I mean, I dropped a complete stranger into your news interview in session 1 of Masks and we spent the next three weeks beating four colors of hell into her and Troll. There’s no background there. It’s a supers fight - your motivation and connection is “imma punch the cave Troll.” It worked. It was PBTA.
But… didn’t work here. Didn’t feel like enough? Not sure why. Not sure what the difference is. Different genre expectations? I do not know.
Looping back to 'wondering if any of these games have actually worked’
I think I’m pretty good at doing games, I guess.
No, actually I definitely think that (whether or not it’s true), because late last night was a long dark stroll through “what if that’s complete horseshit?” and it sucked a bit. I definitely think that, because rattling that support beam in my psyche was pretty destabilizing. Ipso facto.
Being clear: I’m not looking for reassurance on this. I will recap supporting points for ‘maybe it is never working well.’
- Star Wars bounced through three different game systems and constant system hacks even on the one that ‘worked’ to keep it running, and even then had me fielding disgruntled PMs throughout.
- Masks was great, except it was also low-grade unhappy PMs throughout, so.
- S&V didn’t work at all.
- Yesterday.
So I dunno. Maybe it’s never worked as well as I thought.
Or, in the case of Masks, success is largely laid at the feet of the character buy in and investment, which has carried the game’s onward for a least six months past its technical end, last time I checked, without my input, and possibly for the better. Who can say.
If any of this seems like shoutyness, please imagine me shouting at the heavens, not people.
I dunno. Maybe Monday nights are bad? The energy level is bad? It doesn’t feel like we’re half so engaged then as the middle of the week, on the forum.
I dunno.
That’s the eighth time I’ve written that, so I think it’s time to stop.