Beyond the Mirror, a sci-fi game on memories and humanity -in development
Rafu:
Hello there.
I was a playtester for BtM both in December and last week. First thing: I'm impressed at how much the game has grown and improved in relatively little time. Less than six months ago, it was a bunch of great ideas failing to coalesce together. A week ago, it was sleek and played like a "finished" game, so that I submit it only needs some tweaking right now, as opposed to any major reworks.
A disclaimer, though: I haven't played through a full game. In December, I couldn't because the structure was pretty rough and it ground to a halt. But when we playtested last week, I think we could have played the game to its end and I was a little disappointed we didn't, 'cause I was powerfully engaged with both the fiction and the characters.
A WARNING WORD: RIGHT AFTER WRITING BUT BEFORE SUBMITTING MY POST, I LEARNED FROM TAZIO THAT THE MOST CURRENT RULES HAVE CHANGED SINCE LAST WEEK. I'm still posting this because, who knows, it may still be useful to point out something or whatever. Anyway, in the last version I tried, the difficulty target for rolls was = 2+Blur; I now learn that it's currently tied to Focus, instead.
A problem I felt last time, though, is with the dice-rolling method employed. To be clear: I don't think it suffers of excessive handling time — au contraire, it's PTA-grade fast or even faster.
Instead, I felt like luck had an excessive impact: when you roll high on your d6, you're safe. Yes, you can choose to invest "excess" points into Focus tokens and/or dodging Blur tokens or to get faster progress toward your Goal, but you do this from a position of psychological safety (yawn!), plus the optimal spending strategy is easily figured out: prioritize not acquiring Blur in order to keep roll difficulty low, always, grow Focus up first until you max it out or get close, then start pursuing your Goal — and playing any other way is like deliberately shooting yourself, so not fun. Likewise, on low d6 rolls, you're going to drop away from your Goal 1 step, but otherwise you juggle your dice optimally to minimize your losses, again either doing what's safest or shooting yourself very deliberately. In the end, there are surprisingly few hard-felt choices in this game of hard-felt choices. :(
I'm pretty sure it's just a mathematical glitch, though, while I feel like the procedural structure of the game is rock-solid.
Off the top of my head, right after the playtest session, I cobbled together an alternate dice-rolling/resolution system which may help with this, but I don't warrant anything.
Tazio Bettin:
Aaand... there comes Rafu, pointing the exact problem with the best clarity possible.
Thanks, friend. Your description, apart from being impossibly kind and encouraging, strikes the problem at its very core.
The game should be about the hard choice. Do I keep my humanity but risk my goal or do I pursue my goal risking my humanity?
Right now, it's too chance oriented.
But I wouldn't want the game to be completely without it.
I would like to take Gun Thief by Joe McDaldno as an example. Beyond the Mirror might be like that. Just make the choice and narrate. No dice, no random factor at all. Which is brilliant, but isn't exactly what I want in Beyond the Mirror. The suggestion you made during the last playtest is intriguing. Rafu would you please talk about it here, when you have the time? It was your suggestion after all.
Thanks again!
Rafu:
Tazio, what I suggested at the time was an implementation of an "Otherkind dice" system.
Specifically, it was:
Light player rolls 6dF (and no d6s or anything else)."+"s become Light player's own dice to place (see below), "-"s become Darkness player's, blanks are discarded.Players take turns placing their dice over three "columns": Focus, Blur and Success.Note: since they "take turns", initiative is important. Maybe tie that to current Blur vs. Focus totals?
Focus: by default, a conflict generates 0 focus, unless "+"s are placed here. Number of "+"s in column minus number of "-"s in column equals Focus tokens generated, 0 minimum (conflict cannot result in lost Focus).Blur: by default, each conflict generates 1 Blur token (I suggest physical token is placed in column). 1 more token for each "-" Darkness player puts in this column, minus number of "+"s Light player allocates here (which can result in 0 Blur taken, but can't result in diminished Blur).Success: sum up "+"s and "-"s in column algebraically. Positive sum means Light succeeds at their intent/stated outcome in conflict, negative sum means they fail. Goal score is increased/diminished by the whole sum representing long term progress toward goal (or straying away from it). Note: lots of thing could be made to happen on a 0 sum or "tied" result.
I admit this system still involves manipulating dice with no immediate fictional outcome, but with just 6dF I purport the handling time is negligible. Compared to the d6+dFs method, I expect this one to decrease the impact of randomness and accentuate the feeling one is making choices.
Tazio Bettin:
Quote from: Rafu on May 16, 2011, 02:41:15 PM
I admit this system still involves manipulating dice with no immediate fictional outcome, but with just 6dF I purport the handling time is negligible. Compared to the d6+dFs method, I expect this one to decrease the impact of randomness and accentuate the feeling one is making choices.
Unless one narrates after every dice is placed?
The resolution might go as far as covering the entire scene. Like in: the Light rolls before she frames the scene, then each plus or minus place equals to a turn of events in the game's fiction. That'd stretch things a whole load, and I don't know if it'd work but maybe it's worth trying and playtesting it.
The resolution mechanic you suggest indeed does decrease the random factor significantly, and enhance the hard choice logic. I need to try it. Thank you for suggesting it. I was so caught in designing a mechanic that be original that I lost sight of the whole purpose.
Which does not mind that if I find a balance in the dF+d6 mechanic I won't use it... :)
davide.losito:
Oh, so this mechanic idea was yours ^^ nice to know :)
What I added tonight in the "suggest" list was... to add in a piece of narration with each die placing, maybe tuned to the chose column.
Which Tazio just pointed out while I was posting...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page