Author's Thoughts of the Moment
Time for the long-overdue blog post!
Here's the stuff I've been considering in light of recent playtests.
The Simplification Experiment
We made the change this game to have narrators simply number their Ends and Means from one up, and to give everyone a single Plot Point. I liked the one major difference in play I observed: people sharing Plot Points among one another. When Trevor, Aleira and Moira were working to save Sergei's life, they pooled their Plot to ensure that the first Foil -- Aleira, with no Means -- could Steal the Scene from me.
I liked that because it reinforces the collaborative style of this game (as opposed to a competitive style). And I like that I got there by simplifying the pre-game prep.
Continuing along this path will involve making all costs in Potential cheaper; giving one Potential for attendance; numbering down from your Weight Limit instead of numbering up from one; offering the ability to spend Potential at game start for bonus Plot Points (at 2:1 or 3:1); and other changes to balance the new economy.
Scenarios
Perhaps it's too expensive; perhaps the option isn't visible enough; perhaps the benefit isn't compelling enough -- but in four games, nobody has purchased a Scenario yet. That gives me pause. I had pictured a different behavior.
It could be for entirely positive reasons. I designed Scenarios to address common game dysfunctions, after all: you buy one when you're bored, or when your personal plots aren't being addressed, or when the Stagehands are too wrapped up in their own stuff. If our game isn't having any of those problems, well then -- naturally nobody avails of their solution!
Cues
I'm disappointed with Cues so far. They're not doing what I want. I want them to a) help entangle people's stories in unexpected ways, and b) provide an independent-of-Stagehands measure for the important things you've done in the game. It doesn't look to me like that's happening.
I learned an interesting lesson when I accidentally stepped on a Cue Collette had put up; I never even considered that when I'm stirring the pot as a Stagehand, I should take care to avoid fulfilling Cues. Those are obviously meant for players to claim; Collette was disappointed when I took the plot in a direction that curtailed that, stepping in as the Librarian to "answer" for the bludgeoning of her "slave boy."
Tonya provided some heartfelt criticism around b). She feels like Moira is fulfilling her Ends, but she has no way to claim the mechanical awards for doing that, without engaging the Cue system -- which has for her, thus far, been irrelevant. She's done a whole lot of hardcore roleplaying, chasing her goals hard, never even going near the Cue Board. I wish I had a way to reward her for it, but I'm unwilling to step in with a declaration of "Look, I'm a Stagehand!" and bestow blessing.
I want Cues to measure progress toward your goals. I want Stagehands to have nothing to do with that measurement. I want the system to either resist collusion between players, or not be broken by it. How to do that? Design is hard!
Yes 10 points is a lot of points.. I don't know whether its prohibitive or not. (But even next game I don't think I will have enough potential to buy one all by myself.)
How much creative control are we given when we ante up points? Me and Tonya have been talking, and I hope that we will talk with Sarah beforehand about any details that we want to hammer out. But how much detail are you going to allow us give you and such?
The real question is, what makes a scenario different from one of us creating a new NPC or a new Place?(Which right now we can do for free.) Actually the creating NPC's thing right now is so very vague and bothersome in its own right. If I created said NPC am I or the Stagehands responsible for him/her?
There are two instances that I can think of where the vagueness of who is in control have clouded the game a bit.
#1 The Doctor's assistant, about 90% of the time I don't even remember that's she's supposed to be there, however she seems similar in function to Vespa's goons, who aren't really characters in themselves but means. In the Stagehands case, Sarah is constantly reminding us that her goons are with her. So in the Doctor's case is it the Stagehands or him who should be responsible in the constant reminders of his assistant being there? Also if I want to interact with her, do I intereact with a Stagehand or the Doctor/?
#2 Census created NPC's.. Okay so we create them then what? Actually I ran into this problem when I created #27, I created him and I decided I wanted to use him right away. But I had a problem, I didn't know whether I should have come to you guys to run him or whether to run him myself.(After all I know more about the character i created him.) In fact I was in a group of us PC's and asked them what I should do. At the time we decided that to solve an expiediancy problem, by having me play him for the scene.(Again reasoning that I was the one who created him.) Which worked out okay except for one big problem, Trevor ceased to exist. Okay not literally, but at the moment I played #27 he became like The Doctor's assistant. There but not really there if you get my meaning.. It also became too much like co-opting myself as a stagehand. In fact because I felt too much like i was doing something i wasn't supposed to be doing I ended the scene when i became uncomfortable with it..
This brings me to an idea, that I was mulling over, creating another NPC. A seventh daughter of a Russian Czar from back in the days before the Russian Revolution.. Obviously this is meant to bring a reaction from certain NPC's.. I am unsure as to how to implement that though.. Or to how to get the idea rolling in any direction whatsoever... (Comment this)
I like the fact that they are so expensive. I feel something that could possibly resolve an end should not be easy to obtain. I feel that you are correct in your second paragraph, and the dysfunctions the scenarios were created to solve haven't happened, at least in my opinion.
As for Cues:
My thoughts as far as point a) go lean mostly to the fact that people aren't picking up cues that don't further their own means, or they're picking cues that are easy for them to do. This doesn't mean that the cues aren't working, I think it means that the players aren't being encouraged to choose cues that would complicate things in the way you envisioned. Personally, I've decided this was a fault of me, as a player, and I will be taking more cues that don't necessarily further my ends as the game progresses. Maybe we got the wrong idea when we were told that to reap the rewards of the cue board we had to explain how each cue we chose furthered our ends? By not chosing cues that don't obviously further our ends, we haven't found how the entangling cues would further our ends...does that make sense?
As for point b), I've given long thought to my complaint. I still think its a valid complaint, but the solution is REALLY hard. If you leave it to a petition to the ST's or other characters, you get into the realm of favoratism allegations or just plain circle-jerking. If you negate the need for cues to reap the benefits of role-playing, you also enter the above mentioned realm. The fact is, players are going to have intimate, small scenes with only one or two people involved. My suggestions so far, and I'm not sure how original or workable they are, include having the Stage-hands put up cues for NPC's that have taken a huge role in plot or changing the cost of a scenario (which you have said is a viable way to conclude an end) to 15-20 points if you're not going to use cues. That way, cues become a kind of reward in themselves, as you have less cost to the completion of an end, but players with personal or individual plot still get the chance to be rewarded for role-play.
In addition to Mike's comments, I think part of it may be that we're so used to "running to an ST," that being our own ST's is very daunting. We don't want to step on the stage-hand's toes, but we don't want to do nothing, either. NEway, I'm writing this at work and should actually get back to that. Hope this helps. (Comment this)
[Quote]How much creative control are we given when we ante up points? Me and Tonya have been talking, and I hope that we will talk with Sarah beforehand about any details that we want to hammer out. But how much detail are you going to allow us give you and such? [/Quote]
Remember that a scenerio is something that fulfills an End on your character sheet. One of the key points we have in doing this, is pitting that end against another end and forcing you to choose between them. Sometimes this is possible, sometimes, we must get crafty.
[Quote]The real question is, what makes a scenario different from one of us creating a new NPC or a new Place?(Which right now we can do for free.) Actually the creating NPC's thing right now is so very vague and bothersome in its own right. If I created said NPC am I or the Stagehands responsible for him/her? [/Quote]
With the new changes in exploration and building creation, I think most of this is being solved. (we may do this for NPC creation as well, but I want to talk to Adam before going too far into the idea.
The responsibility for NPC's is something that has been giving me alot to think about lately, and I think my solution is that NPC's should NOT be controlled by the narrators unless they are on the character sheet.
What this means is that when you make an NPC, you are authorizing a stage-hand to step in at any time and play this NPC. You are giving us toys to play with, and these toys will have a mind of their own. Adam has a right to veto this idea, but I am not sure that I like the idea of narrators playing out NPC's, save for the occasional circumstance; after all, that's 'our' job.
[Quote]This brings me to an idea, that I was mulling over, creating another NPC. A seventh daughter of a Russian Czar from back in the days before the Russian Revolution.. Obviously this is meant to bring a reaction from certain NPC's.. I am unsure as to how to implement that though.. Or to how to get the idea rolling in any direction whatsoever... [/Quote]
You just did. This also brings up a good point. We try to base our stagehand NPC's based on things that we think the players want in game or will help drive interaction, or even push buttons in game. If you have an idea, just tell us about it!
(Comment this)