Hook Us Fast
Apr. 25th, 2006 09:55 pmSo, I bring back a load of indie rpgs from a convention, and I'd like to try a bunch with my local gaming group. This often doesn't happen, and when it does, it often peters out sadly.
After some thought, I have concluded that it is not because my local gaming group is intrinsically flawed. The people I play with have, by and large, compatible styles, and want enough of the same things. The people I play with, by and large, as the same as the people I socialize with.
I have a pretty smart bunch of friends, and they also have a fairly high tolerance for crunch, rules hacking, rules reading, and generally paying attention to the rules of a game. So, I am reasonably convinced that, if my fellow players tell me en masse that a rule is vague and fuzzy, they are not being astoundingly clueless.
We do, however, have limited free time. We also want our games to be fun for us. These two factors mean we won't leap to try every new game. Still, there are enough games with a good enough rep that enough of us are willing, nay, eager, to give them a go. We've tried My Life With Master, Primetime Adventures, and Sorcerer, as well as a bit of noodling with Dogs in the Vineyard and Capes, and a session of the alpha release of With Great Power.
The results have been, at best, mixed. Now, sometimes, it's a matter of what we want vs what the game provides. Sometimes, in our not so humble opinion, a given game isn't as good as it's cracked up to be. But, sometimes, there's a game that I think could work if we put more time into trying it. Makes sense, right? You don't get good at something overnight, do you?
But, we don't want to. Under the best of circumstances, a game is likely to get one shot. If it doesn't work out, well, life's too short, and there are games that do work for us.
Oh, I still think Primetime Adventure has potential, and I do hope
agrumer gets off his duff and runs a game of Dogs in the Vineyard. We may well play The Shab al-Hiri Roach. I've run multiple sessions of a Sorcerer game, and I do hope to run Polaris. But, in general, if it doesn't work well the first time, there's not going to be a second time. It's like a book where, if the author doesn't hook me from the get go, I want to go on to the next one.
I don't want to hear that I need a new bunch of players. I don't want to hear that I'm not hip enough to get it. If the author can't communicate clearly enough that we get it the first time, that is the author's problem.
After some thought, I have concluded that it is not because my local gaming group is intrinsically flawed. The people I play with have, by and large, compatible styles, and want enough of the same things. The people I play with, by and large, as the same as the people I socialize with.
I have a pretty smart bunch of friends, and they also have a fairly high tolerance for crunch, rules hacking, rules reading, and generally paying attention to the rules of a game. So, I am reasonably convinced that, if my fellow players tell me en masse that a rule is vague and fuzzy, they are not being astoundingly clueless.
We do, however, have limited free time. We also want our games to be fun for us. These two factors mean we won't leap to try every new game. Still, there are enough games with a good enough rep that enough of us are willing, nay, eager, to give them a go. We've tried My Life With Master, Primetime Adventures, and Sorcerer, as well as a bit of noodling with Dogs in the Vineyard and Capes, and a session of the alpha release of With Great Power.
The results have been, at best, mixed. Now, sometimes, it's a matter of what we want vs what the game provides. Sometimes, in our not so humble opinion, a given game isn't as good as it's cracked up to be. But, sometimes, there's a game that I think could work if we put more time into trying it. Makes sense, right? You don't get good at something overnight, do you?
But, we don't want to. Under the best of circumstances, a game is likely to get one shot. If it doesn't work out, well, life's too short, and there are games that do work for us.
Oh, I still think Primetime Adventure has potential, and I do hope
I don't want to hear that I need a new bunch of players. I don't want to hear that I'm not hip enough to get it. If the author can't communicate clearly enough that we get it the first time, that is the author's problem.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-26 01:40 pm (UTC)With a lot of the new crop of indie-games, it seems to me that this isn't the only potential problem. The genre-focus is set so tightly that, unless you really want to be playing twisted, ugly servants of a mad scientist, or vigilant soldiers of a proud God, etc, then the game isn't going to hook you either. This is all very well, I suppose: there's no point in making you eat apples if you don't like them.
But I think there's still something to be said for games that focus less tightly on their genre, and instead provide you with a wider and more flexible palette.
No surprise, I suppose, that most of my gaming experience has been forged by HERO. 8/
Indeed
Date: 2006-04-26 03:24 pm (UTC)Not -all- the indie games are tight-focus -- Sorceror's "focus" is "you've all made some kind of double-edged bargain. Go." Whereas PTA's is even looser. But he Forge development structure very much tends to a "design what matters" process that goes very narrow and then focuses the design details around it, whereas most of us (the gamers, that is) don't really want to be told what matters so much as given a way to decide what we -want- to make matter in a game.
That said...Hero doesn't grab me mostly because of those 2 hour tactical combats. :)
Re: Indeed
Date: 2006-04-27 01:44 am (UTC)Re: Indeed
Date: 2006-04-27 05:00 pm (UTC)The first was one of Palladium's games, I think Beyond the Supernatural. There was some stat I couldn't figure out how to generate.
The second was HeroQuest. I so, so, so wanted to love that game. I can't stay awake when I try to read it.
Again, not talking about flavor, mood, setting, or anything like that. I'm talking about comprehending the rules.
Re: Indeed
Date: 2006-04-27 05:01 pm (UTC)Re: Indeed
Date: 2006-04-27 05:44 pm (UTC)I've developed the habit of visiting my "My LJ" page first, because that forces me to log in.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-26 04:58 pm (UTC)My problem with My Life with Master isn't the limited storyline -- there's a surprising amount of flex in it, and I rather like the idea of playing a mad scientist's minion. My problem is that it feels to me too much like a board game and not enough like a roleplying game. Clearly, other people don't have this problem, and I have less of a problem with the idea of my playing it than with the idea of my gming it. I'd play it again at a convention, in theory -- in practice, there are enough other things competing with it that limited time is a factor.
Dogs in the Vineyard strikes me as extremely flexible if one is willing to go outside the genre, something the author has been very encouraging about. Jedi, samurai, Norse warriors -- a lot of that's been done. But yes, the Mormon setting has turned people off. Interestingly,
Polaris is definitely limited as far as genre and story go, and very up front about that. I still really want to play it, and I still think that one could have fun twisting it into something the author doesn't intend for it to be, but that's a separate topic.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-26 05:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-02 01:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-03 11:39 pm (UTC)For Polaris, I think you can extract the resolution mechanics. What you have are mechanics for a particular tragic arc, but, after a demo, Stephen, Rich, and I were speculating about turning it into a fall and rise arc, or more general collaborative storytelling. Ben made it quite clear that this was not what he had in mind, and I would want to play the basic game as writ before tinkering, but I think it could be done. Whether you'd want to call the end result Polaris or not is another question.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-26 07:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-04-26 06:58 pm (UTC)Lots of people use Sorcerer for things other than sorcery. I've seen some cool ports of Dogs in the Vineyard to play Star Wars Jedi. Not a lot of work to do that.
The Shadow of Yesterday is basically just a generic fantasy RPG with a basic setting that you can replace with your own. FATE is a very generic game with no setting supplied and it's pretty easy to make that your own.
Certain games like My Life with Master and The Mountain Witch are definitely aiming for a specific type of play and won't easily be ported to other genres or styles. But don't totally give indie games a miss cuz there are some gems there that can be repurposed if you want.
And nothing I'm saying invalidates