Started by Ron Edwards, January 08, 2011, 10:35:19 PM
Quote from: Ron Edwards on January 09, 2011, 07:50:56 AM3 Regarding chess, I'm more and more coming to think that winning the chess game cannot be a first priority of using the mechanics. My big question remains for Rudy, but that's the way I'm leaning at the moment. If that's the way to go, then the question concerns what value is added by trying to win the chess game at all, and to see whether that can be a fruitful, reinforcing part of the system. For example, Dust Devils uses poker hand comparison very effectively and totally in line with the priorities of the game as a whole. But you don't play poker as a subset feature of playing Dust Devils. Poker is invoked - and again, very well, specifically in contrast to the wretched and distorted attempt to do the same thing in Deadlands - but it is not employed. A person who loves playing poker will not like playing Dust Devils, or rather, will find that his or her expertise and sophistication with poker is not relevant to enjoying Dust Devils. I'm thinking that something like this may do well for Death's Head. Best, Ron
Quote from: Ron Edwards on January 08, 2011, 10:35:19 PMUm, one thingThe text says you don't have to be good at chess. Rudy, are you sure? Why not? 'Cause as far as I can tell you are in fact trying for checkmate.Let me develop that a little more. I'm curious as to whether the strategic element of which piece to move operates (i) as a fruitful motor for the aesthetic element of what you'd very much like your character to do, or (ii) at cross-purposes to it. What do you do if the best chess move immediately available and the action you are simply dying to take do not match? I'm pretty sure I'm correct in saying that one's goal as a player is not first and foremost to beat the GM at the chess game - but it does enter into the picture. The issue is whether it's a supportive entry in terms of the stated (and otherwise gorgeously supported) goals of play.
QuoteMinor pointsI suggest that you provide a more specific playlist or genre recommendation for the music. It's an important part of the design and for once I don't think it should be too customizable. And as a related point, I say go for using a real concentration camp as much as possible, with the GM doing the necessary research as pre-game prep. I guess it's gotta be fictional so that the camp's liquidation by the SS-TV can be included, but otherwise, it's way too late for distancing, man; that horse left the barn two-thirds down the first page.I suggest revisiting and renaming the steps of play. Although it's true that the first looks like character creation and the last looks like epilogue, I kept getting tripped up about the phases. I suggest that it's all "play," and that the interrogation is phase 1, the pre-horde part is phase 2, the horde part is phase 3, and the Epilogue is phase 4. A minor thing perhaps, but I really didn't grasp the rules until I went back and wrote these in on the text.
QuoteWhy doesn't the shooting in the example activate the King instead? Does the player have a choice of which pieces to move, if an action seems to activate multiple traits?
QuoteWhat if the piece your action activates is unable to move (e.g. the King or a Rook in the first move of the game)? Are you barred from narrating such actions?
QuoteThat business about "lose narrative control" regarding the King and Queen – does this mean you cannot use those traits? How does that relate to what you can and cannot announce as an action? Does that loss apply to all players the way that losses of other pieces apparently do?
QuoteIs there some way to avoid the checkmate rules from undercutting the established content? I guess I'm saying that I don't see any reason for a given play-experience to end without the hordes step. If we have all this great input during the interrogation scene, in which the claim that the prisoners turned into zombies is most likely met with baffled outrage by the interrogators, and we have that shocking and wonderful final question waiting for us in the epilogue ... then what do we do with a checkmate before the hordes get going? A totally mundane story now? Wait a minute, isn't that totally obviating not only the utterly disturbing and engaging horror that brought us here, but also the most important question of the whole game?
QuoteJust to toss an idea out, why not examine the number of pieces taken during the chess game rather than examining whether or not one player has achieved checkmate. I.E., rather than playing for checkmate you're just playing for strait-up kills. All the normal rules of movement would apply (perhaps except those involving the King's movents while in check/check-mate). This way, you could still advance the game but not be so focussed on winning the chess portion. Do you think that might be workable?
Quote from: Bret Gillan on January 10, 2011, 11:32:15 PMThe only obstacle to play for me is the music. Perhaps in a playtest it wouldn't be as unwieldy as I imagine, but I'm thinking of bathroom breaks, out of character kibitzing, and answering the door when the pizza arrives - do I have to pause the music each time? Do I really have to dig out a boom box or whatever to play the game? etc.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on January 13, 2011, 11:08:23 AMWilliam, another point - I have no idea what a "thematic WWII ballad" might be. Can you provide some recommendations for what you had in mind for play?Also, to my astonishment, if you run a Google search on "heavy metal ride of the valkyries," you find someone called the Great Kat, and um, well, check it out for yourself. The Ride of the Valkyries may be too merged with "Kill da Wabbit" in my mind, but regardless I am finding the Wagner's War album quite horrifying but also very tempting for my - admittedly definitely not ballad-ic - notions about playing Death's Head.Best, Ron