Hook Us Fast
Apr. 25th, 2006 09:55 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
drcpunk.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
labcatsSo, 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![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
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
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.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-04-28 02:43 pm (UTC)On the one hand, Indie game designers are very generous with their time, and generally extremely willing to answer questions. And, often, people compile, well, Talmuds. I see a few problems with this.
1. Acessibility. Can a gamer get to it? That is, does the Talmud for Game X exist? Is it online? How does a gamer learn about it? Currently, I can't access your Talmud, correct? You're still working on it. Is it something I can print out or put on a pda? Is it easy to use while playing the game?
2. Utility. This overlaps with #1 above. If I have to search the web for the one site or the one forum where my question is answered, then I'm going to have a hard time using the Talmud for Game X while playing it. Also, is the Talmud complete enough? Is it well organized? Doyle's got a good site for Sorcerer, but it doesn't usually have the information I'm actually looking for. Nev's constantly updating his Quick Reference, but there too, he doesn't tend to have the answer to the question that came up mid-session. Do I know where to look for my answer in the Talmud? This one overlaps with #1. There is a wealth of material in various Forge threads on Sorcerer, but finding the one thread one needs is a challenge, and, again, less likely to help during a session.
3. Effort. So, back to my original point. I'm playing this new game. I'm hitting problems comprehending the rules. Do I want to spend the effort hunting down the Talmud and finding the answers I need? How often do I need to use the Talmud?
4. Dang, it, the game should be complete. Despite my admiration for generous, patient authors trying to help people who play their games, despite my admiration for generous, patient gamers creating and releasing Talmuds (is that the correct plural form?), I don't like the pattern of sloppiness this can create -- and has created.
So, yes, I'm looking forward to the Talmud, and yes, I understand that no author can think of everything. And, yes, I want to play Dogs. But, I hope that the Talmud gets compiled into a new edition of the game.