[Go Play Peoria][Dirty Secrets] A simple plan….
GreatWolf:
Quote from: Ron Edwards on February 29, 2008, 01:42:46 PM
Who can blame her?
I was playing something else at another table, and some of the dialogue floated over every so often. After a bit, I was wondering, "What, all the characters have the same name?", and "Isn't there more than one character in Dirty Secrets?" Only afterwards did I discover your rhyming scheme. That's actually why I came up and asked what happened during the game.
Best, Ron
I don't think that it was even intentional. Juan was generated during setup, while Ron was created in play. Though, come to think of it, Dave named them both. But, unless he 'fesses up, I'm going to say that this was an odd example of the serendipity that I find so enjoyable about roleplaying in general and Dirty Secrets in particular.
Nev the Deranged:
Quote from: GreatWolf on February 29, 2008, 07:51:35 AM
And, what do you mean about "takes a hammer to the subtext of several scenes that came before that revelation"? As in, "completely destroyed"? Or as in "completely twisted into a shape due to this perspective"?
The second one.
Re: Ron / Juan, I didn't name Juan, I don't think. And if I did, I had no plans for any name confusion. The Conseula confusion thing was totally a spur of the moment stroke of genius.
Tim C Koppang:
Taking the conversation in an entirely different direction, I wanted to talk about the bit of flailing that we all seemed to experience at the beginning of the game. I was totally amazed that the entire story came together at the end, and I'm not even sure when we reached the tipping point that moved us from from 'aimless wandering' to 'driven crime story'. But I do know that, as we began to play, two things happened:
First, Seth explained how, as a player, it was best to have a working theory of the crime. With that theory in mind, he told us that we should attempt to narrate towards that end, and allow the dynamic nature of the group to complicate things. Complications are often introduced because different players will have different and completing theories of what happened.
On a similar note, the key for me was when Seth mentioned that, as a novella length game, we needed to introduce two new crimes before concluding. I almost immediately narrated Sarah's murder. While the scene was initially awkward (my bad), the introduction of another crime really jump-started play for me. Suddenly I wasn't trying to slowly investigate, but rather I was just trying to keep up with the whirlwind of crime as it unfolded.
Second, Dirty Secrets has a tremendous tipping point. When we first began, we had a whole lot of mystery, and nothing to go on. We slowly added to the pot, and eventually the game simply bubbled over with no signs of stopping. It takes a bit of patience, but knowing what I know now, I wonder if I wouldn't enjoy the game more because I'd know what was coming.
GreatWolf:
Hey Tim.
Sorry I haven't gotten back to this thread over the last couple of days. Been sick and not really up for much writing.
But, yeah, what you're describing is the way that Dirty Secrets normally plays. Ron talks about the first session of Sorcerer being slow, for similar reasons. You need to allow enough time for stuff to accumulate. Little details, comments, things like that, which are mostly disposable, occasionally turn out to be significant. This is a big reason for the Investigator's Notebook and the Notes sections on the Characters.
It's also why I advise against learning to play with a Short Story. There's not as much time available in a Short Story to simply wander, making stuff up. As a result, the outcome can be less than satisfying.
That's all well and good, but now, as I'm thinking about our game, I'm realizing that I should have explained some of these things better and that, if I had, it might have smoothed out the experience a bit. Normally, when I'm teaching a game, I develop a teaching outline in my head of how to present the various concepts of the game. I haven't really taught Dirty Secrets that much, though, so I haven't developed my teaching outline.
So, fellow thread participants, what sorts of things would you have found helpful to have known at the beginning of the game? I'm thinking here both of mechanical things (e.g. Jurisdiction) and techniques (e.g. make up lots of stuff early in the game). This way, I can improve my teaching skills and, perhaps, come to understand my game better.
Thanks!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page