Beyond the Mirror, a sci-fi game on memories and humanity -in development
Tazio Bettin:
My current game designing effort, Beyond the Mirror, is a roleplaying game set in a dystopian post-war period whose aim is to explore characters' memories in order to find out whether they are humans or replicants (or, as I call them in the game, synthetics). It is a masterless game for two to four players.
You create your character's most defining memory, describing it as if it were an instant photo seen from the outside. During play you gain solaces which define it and progressively tie it to your character's personal goal, and scars which put the memory in doubt. As soon as you reach a certain number of scars or solaces, your character is finally revealed as a human or synth.
The identity of each character is gradually discovered through the resolution mechanics. The aim of the game is to put players in the position of having to choose between risking their characters' humanity in order to gain what they want, or sacrificing progress their own goals in order not to wake up and discover themselves to be artificial creatures with fake memories.
Of course the game is heavily inspired by Philip K. Dick's "Do Androids dream of Electric Sheep?" and the movie "Blade Runner".
The full text is available for playtest here: http://www.mediafire.com/?7h46adc7rjulaac
and here is the character sheet: http://www.mediafire.com/?sz2c1b8xs811hv7
Right now I am facing a dilemma.
The resolution mechanics work decently enough, but at the current stage I have many doubts.
The game, as many pointed out (including Ben Lehman, whom I thank for being my first playtester and for all the kind advice he gave me), is heavily oriented towards author stance. I am afraid that this may result in players caring little for their characters.
I must admit, I am totally ignorant of theory, I only read the glossary and those articles written by Ron which I could find, but I come from a background where theory discussion tends to be misleading and often comfusing (I'm from Italy, which Ron knows very well I think).
I would be very grateful if anyone were interested in reading, or even playtesting the game and let me know their opinions on the game.
My goal is to create a very visceral gaming experience. So any insight would be very welcome.
Thank you for your kind attention and patience.
Paul Czege:
Wait...you're two hours from Bertinoro and you didn't bring this to InterNosCon for playtesting? Why is it that the only playtesting of unpublished games at InterNosCon was by the Americans who'd flown 7200 km to be there? I'd have loved the chance to playtest this.
Paul
Tazio Bettin:
I would have loved to come there, Paul, and have a chance to meet you as I met Ron last year... but InternosCON has been growing in price every year, and this year it was way too expensive for me... but if you have a chance to check this game, I would really love to hear your thoughts!
Ben Lehman:
There's nothing particularly worrisome about author stance, as a design principle. It just means you have to adjust your expectations about where to target rewards and punishments: a good thing happening to a character isn't necessarily a reward; a bad thing isn't necessarily a punishment. But lots of good games encourage author stance w/o too much difficulties. Like Sorcerer and Polaris and Dogs in the Vineyard.
yrs--
--Ben
Paul Czege:
Tazio,
What were the Questions mechanics that you eliminated? (You mention them in the "note on this playtest rule set".)
Paul
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page