Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by jburneko, March 25, 2003, 02:12:55 PM
Quote from: jburnekoHello All,So, in a bold move I signed up to run the Deathwish varient rules for Dust Devil at upcoming con in May. I was a little nervous because I've never run either version of the game. However, yesterday an opportunity presented itself. A friend from out of town, who used to play with us, was visiting. So, I ran my con scenario last night instead of the usual game.
Quote1) Players will get "stuck" in a scene. That is, someone will initiate a conflict. The mechanics will be applied but then whoever narrates simply doesn't reveal enough to move the story along. Gentle poking and proding helps but I ALWAYS encounter this problem. The result is that the players will sort of spend a long time in a single scene going around in circles with these sort of strange incremental conflicts and never really providing any push to keep things going. In InSpectres the team will earn 90% of their franchise dice in the opening scene and in Deathwish a lot of people were getting massive Difficulty early on.
Quote2) Pacing. This sort of follows from #1. My players don't seem to process the metagame cues to bring the game towards resolution. My InSpectres games always seem to just stop suddenly. Player's just build and build and build and build and then go, "Oh we have enough dice to finish the game." Roll, "Oh, I got a six, story over." In Deathwish the players knew it was a single session game and some of the players even had attributes go to zero but none of them ever brought the game closer to resolution. Even once the sharred narration was producing more managable results, they just avoided using the abilities that had gone to zero and just kept building on the situation with their narrative power.
QuoteIf there's one thing I've learned about my group it's that I've got to be the sole purveyor of Situation otherwise things get a little out of control. They either go nowhere or they get silly. I will admit that I've never played more than a single session of sharred narrative system before and things were looking up near the end of session. Perhaps if things had gone on for 3 or 4 session they would get the hang of it and it would smooth out.
QuoteSystem Issues:1) I found it very difficult to figure out how to apply the Deathwish. I don't know whether the slightly different Devil in the core Dust Devil games would be any easier. I think, in general, things just didn't get personal enough with the characters. Again, this maybe something that smooths over in multi-session play.
Quote2) Difficulty. I remember reading a more thurough example of this somewhere but the core book isn't very clear about how Difficulty works in a multi-participant conflict. So Players A, B, C and D are all in a conflict. Let's say Player A wins with a full house but Player D has high card. Now, that's five points of difficulty to let's say Wits and Cool.I KNOW the player receving the difficulty gets to decide how many go to Wits and how many go to Cool. Player D then gets to say what that means. However, who recieves the difficulty and how much?Do, player's B, C and D ALL get five points to either Wits or Cool? Are the five points destributed between the three players? If so, who decides that distribution? Can player D absolve himself of Difficulty since he won Narration? I'm not entirely sure.
Quote3) Gadgets. Gadgets replace Traits in the core rules. However, Traits are inseperable from the character. Gadgets can be passed around and used to aid and influence others. Sometimes it was clear that there were two types of conflicts going on but there were too many times where really someone wanted to use their Gadget simply to "aid" the primary person in the conflict rather than involve themselves in a seperate sub-conflict of their own. Since this was a varriant rule, I simply allow the player to apply his two card gadget bonus to another player's hand.
QuoteThe one thing the mechanics are really good at teaching you is the difference between meaningful and trivial conflict. Because if you apply task-level resolution thinking to the game the Difficulty will hose you. I'd like to play more of this game just for that practice alone.
Quote from: Matt SnyderOn Fleming vs. Clancy angles -- how did you describe the game to your players, and do you have any idea why they took the different approaches?