[Doctor Chaos] May 2013 Playtest

[Jesse Burneko]

Howdy,

So there's a chance I might be playing Doctor Chaos this weekend.  In the text it says 3 to 6 players.  However, in a group of 3 players that means in any given episode, one player is Doctor Chaos, one player is a Superhero, and one player is the Lesser Villain.  I realize however, that the rules for Developed Superheroes become irrelevant because there will never be any other heroes to team up with.

Has anyone played Doctor Chaos with just 3 people?  Is the real minimum four players?

Thanks.

Jesse

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Jesse,

My playtests have all been with more than three people, some of them more like seven or eight.

I don't know if the game is functional with three. You're right that with only one superhero in play at any given moment (there could be more than one in the story, but only one in play), those rules wouldn't apply and I don't think it would be much fun. Maybe if you had to, the better thing to do is jettison the lesser villain. Granted, that is the most interesting character, but not unless the heroes are getting developed and unified enough in the first place.

I think the textual details of just what happens to winners and losers across all the types of characters are still in disarray. Feel free to come up with whatever in-play solution works for you and let me know. Also, I think it would be a good idea to run a search at the Forge (pre- and post-2008) to see if any of those discussions provide solutions; I'm pretty sure I made some decisions in those threads which aren't in the text you have. I don't have time this very minute to hunt the threads for links, but I'll get to it when I can.

Best, Ron

[Ron Edwards]

Should have been quicker about that: all the Doctor Chaos links are available at the relevant page at the Adept site.
Best, Ron

[Jesse Burneko]

Hello,

So, I did end up playing Doctor Chaos this weekend.  I had four players total so my concern about 3 players wasn't an issue.  This was my second time playing the game.

The big thing I noticed was that in BOTH games I played we hit that rule where Doctor Chaos's previously checked Conditions become unchecked and both times there was an immediate drop off in engagement and desire to play further.  It's like there's this high reaction to, "Oh my god, I just beat Doctor Chaos!" immediately followed by, "Wait that means we have to play longer?!  And through stuff we already did *again*?"

There's something about the game that feels like you're supposed to be able to play the whole thing in one sitting.  Maybe that's a false impression and the game actually works better across 2-4 sessions.  I spent a little time discussing that sudden drop off in engagement and everyone agreed that it felt like an act break in a longer game.  It's like they were okay with the idea that this moment represented the end of a six-issue arc and that continued play represented Doctor Chaos coming back for a second run at his plan.  But that also came with a sense of, "So we should play again next week."  Not so let's play that right now.

Also the sort of big rules hiccup for this run concerned the eligibility of superheroes for development.  My reading of the text was like this:

If Doctor Chaos beats a superhero with Gin that superhero is GONE no development.  There is no coming back for development.
If Doctor Chaos beats a superhero without GIN then that superhero is eligible for development so long as its a different player who brings him back.

In Episode 3 we had kind of a miracle occur.  We had a brand new superhero beat Doctor Chaos with Gin.  And we had a brand new superhero beat the Lesser Villain without Gin.  And I suddenly realized I had no idea how I would treat these guys in terms of development.  Can they come back but not be developed?  Are they one shot heroes momentarily glorious but never to be seen again?

I reviewed my previous play test post and I see I had a similar issue back then about what happens when the Lesser Villain defeats a superhero and whether or not he's eligible for development.  And this time I was further confused in that I was unsure that if a hero was not eligible for development could he even return into play AT ALL?

It seems to me the game needs a clearer defeat/development rule matrix.

Otherwise the game was the same crazy zany fun it was last time with more or less the same hiccups.  Confusion over how superheros can be replayed vs be developed and that very palpable drop off in commitment after the first time Doctor Chaos is defeated.

Jesse

[Ron Edwards]

So it's time to print out a new copy and mark it up! My current thoughts are ...

1. Refurbish a Condition thoroughly when it gets unchecked - something else has to be done, probably related to that original goal but maybe not if it makes more sense to do something new. (For example, vennnnnnngeance upon the foilers of the previous Condition comes to mind.) Maybe that will keep the Plan from becoming stale. I need to think more carefully about this whole issue, though, because clearly the tension between playing Doctor Chaos victoriously and beating him heroically is the point - and should be deliciously heightened at this point rather than bottoming out, however briefly.

2. I think a hero can become eligible for Development if he or she is defeated by any villain. More fun that way, as well as rules-consistent.

3. I think an un-Developed hero who beats a villain (any villain) might also become eligible for Development. This really opens it up, but if I'm not mistaken, playtesting is just not generating enough Development. And that leaves the choice between one-scene wonder and forged-through-fire totally up to the players, for that character.

4. Originally, I'd thought that being Ginned by Doctor Chaos didn't wipe a hero off the face of the game, just kept him or her from Development at that particular time, but I can see the logic of having only the Developed ones stick around. Still, maybe that should be a player-choice issue as in #3, and still subject to the different-player rule, so player A can't just keep bringing back Upchuck Man every damn turn.

[Ron Edwards]

So! What was Doctor Chaos like this time, and tell us about the heroes - especially the two Instant Wonders from that particular sequence.

Send me the playtesters' names by email if you don't include them in the reply.

Best, Ron

[Jesse Burneko]

The players: Me, Gretchen Losh, Hamish Cameron & Wes Otis.

We played with a woman Doctor Chaos who had a very 80s Grace Jones kind of feel to her; cold regal facial features, white power suit, a multi-tonal voice.  Her primary style was Technology with a bit of elemental control because she could act as power source, as well as a memory unit/CPU system for computers.  Her plan was to kind of become a mother figure for the whole world.  After she controlled the global media system she sent messages that basically said, "Don't panic, you will be cared for."

Wes was playing the Lesser Villain and was very happy that the No Cheese rule didn't apply to him.  He went with kind of a wimpy dude named The Wizard who wanted to bring back the elves to the mundane world. 

Superheroes:

Episode 1:
  The Raven - Kind of batman clone but Raven themed rather than bat themed.  There were a lot of feathers and bird call devices.
  The Hammersmith - A brawny unsubtle type wielding duel sledgehammers with various effects.

Episode 2:
  Peek-A-Boo: Heavily inspired by the weeping angles from Doctor Who, this being of living stone could zap people back in time with a touch.
  The <Something> Knight: A modern day knight with an electric lance.

Episode 3:
  Og, The Word Speaker, A caveman wielding various dinosaur weapons.  (Og came about because the Lesser Villain was trapped in the stone age after a run in with Peek-A-Boo).
  Major Guns - The Punisher meets the most hard core marine you can imagine.

In Episode 3 Og beat the Lesser Villain after The Wizard had decided to call his mom for help.  And Major Guns beat Doctor Chaos with Gin after skillfully evading several technological traps on the way into her lair.

And that's where we stopped.  It's important to note that the only reason superheroes didn't repeat was because Doctor Chaos won both Episode 1 and 2 with Gin and I interpreted "Dismissive Defeat" perhaps too strictly in that it meant those heroes couldn't come back, not just "couldn't be developed".

Jesse

[Ron Edwards]

OK, I think I got it.

1. Any hero may return. You might think, by the way, that this means a dismissive victory cannot be fatal, but we all know how that goes ... The rule for don't play the same hero twice in a row holds at all times.

2. A hero who meets either of these criteria from a prior Episode may, should he or she return, be developed and enjoy the change in mechanics: (i) beaten by Doctor Chaos without Gin (I now call this "shattered" throughout the text), or (ii) defeated any villain. My other suggestion was not very smart so ignore that.

3. After an Episode, the Portrait Moment matters greatly, and it's here that the Issues are introduced and dramatized (they are not fixed at the start of play any more either). If Conditions were delayed or un-checked, this moment also should include the altered Plan. Remember, the altered Plan can still work.

4. I've altered the terminology for the outcomes for a given Condition: beaten is what you do to Doctor Chaos in that Episode, and depending on how, the Condition is either delayed and moved to the bottom of the list, or failed and crossed off the list. I need to come up with a better way to say that you don't just do a delayed Condition over later, it can be changed quite a bit to keep things from getting boring.

5. When and if Doctor Chaos has two Conditions left, play has pretty much reached its tipping-point. First, if they're sequentially beaten (even without Gin), then he loses. Second, if one is failed, then he loses. I suppose it can go on forever with win-lose-win-lose as long as there's no Gin for the heroes. I don't think that'll be a problem though.

The whole unchecking thing ... see, you only do that when a Condition is failed, so the list really does change, it's not just about "doing it all over again." I have to find a way to say that to players just right.

Best, Ron
editing this in: I just updated the playtest document included in the page link above.

[Ron Edwards]

I think I found the solution!

The whole point is getting to the three-Condition stage. Then, every Gin has a game-changing consequence. If Doctor Chaos either checks off or failed (crosses off) a Condition, then the game goes into near sudden-death. Otherwise, the result is a delay, which doesn't lose any gained Conditions, but permits the heroes more scope for Development.

So obviously - the starting and only number of Conditions, ever, is three.

Two more things will help with this. First, I need to write a very punchy and informative summary of how Conditions relate to the outcome of the game. That way no one is surprised. For example, in your game, Jesse, I'm pretty sure no one understood that crossing off that Condition took the heroes a serious collective step toward winning the game. With three Conditions, explaining that and seeing that it's really a consequence will be much easier and more fun to do.

Second, I need to explain what un-checking a Condition does - it shouldn't mean "doing it over" totally literally; obviously the previous gain is established in the fiction. It should mean that something needs re-adjusting or fixing up in that gain. And related to this, that having a given number of Conditions does not mean "play N rounds and it's over."

In your game, what this would have meant is that Doctor Chaos was truly thwarted from victory in the third round, has lost the opportunity to fulfill that Condition forever, and is now facing necessary tweaks in her previous gains. Note that with two remaining Conditions, the following may occur: (i) Doctor Chaos wins two in a row, Gin or no Gin, and that's the end; (ii) Doctor Chaos is beaten by Gin, in which case failed Conditions outnumber current ones, and that's the end; Doctor Chaos loses two in a row, without Gin, and that's the end. I'[m pretty sure that if you were playing with three Conditions to start, and that if your players understood that they were one Gin away from winning the whole game, enthusiasm wouldn't have dropped off like that.

It's possible that win-lose-win-lose without Gin could occur forever, but since I've consistently seen turnaround events occur in the third round (with or without them in other rounds), I'm pretty sure that the Development rules + any growing sympathy for Doctor Chaos (and to win when playing him or her) will punch in hard at that point.

Best, Ron

SUMMARY

3 Conditions, 1-2-3.

'   Doctor Chaos wins three in a row with or without Gin, then he wins, game over.
'   Doctor Chaos gets the first delayed (beaten without Gin), so it's 2-3-1 now, and keeps getting them delayed ... if that happens three times in a row, then he loses, game over.
'   Doctor Chaos fails a Condition, beaten with Gin, so now there are two (unchecked) Conditions left.
o   If he fails one more (beaten with Gin), he loses, game over.
o   If he loses two in a row (without Gin), he loses, game over.
o   If he wins two in a row, with or without Gin, he wins, game over.

Whether at three Conditions or two, there exists the possibility of alternate winning/losing without Gin indefinitely, which does mean repeatedly delaying un-checked Conditions forever. But I'd prefer to keep that there as a 'background effect' from which to strategize, and in faith that no actual game will ever go that way for long. At least until playtesting shows me otherwise.

I have now re-written and re-tuned the text to a crucial degree. I'll make it available after I get a chance to update the electronic file.
(Done - RE)

Best, Ron

[Ron Edwards]

All right, I had about ten epiphanies about this game. The draft I have now looks like a pre-production document, not notes-for-playtesting, and when I get it all edited right, I'll post it at the Adept site with a link here.

First, based on this thread, the rules finally snapped into place for me such that my playtesting questions are no longer about little details and concern real things about the game as a whole. Second, I figured out what the game should look like and feel like in physical terms, during play, especially what components should be sitting on the table; this has led to a significant re-organization of the text. Third, I had a really good idea for a Kickstart for this thing, at least as a basis for public discussion and probably thorough dissection.

Physical design
I've thought a little bit about how the rules are read and used. I've just re-tooled the text into one basic book + three specialized pamphlets for the three kinds of players -- and "pamphlet" is only a few pictures away from being that wonderful thing called a comic book.

Right now, for playtesting purposes, it's just text. But ultimately, what aspects of the rules would do better as comics? I did like the comics sections of the With Great Power rules, juxtaposing players and fiction.in a manner consistent with the ordinary text.

Whatever way I go with that, I'm seeing the game as one book, three usable rules pamphlets (Doctor Chaos player, heroes player, lesser villain player), a deck of playing cards for Doctor Chaos, a deck of playing cards with customized hero images, a Doctor Chaos icon/figure, a Lesser Villain icon/figure, counters which indicate "who's on who" for a given round,* another set for tracking/checking Conditions -- it's getting pretty Narrattiva pretty fast. How far do I want to go with this? A boxed set would work. But maybe a magazine-style comic with auxiliary downloaded materials, or auxiliary physical pack, would work better.

* This turns out to be easy! Just have two individually colored counters for each player, and you put them with players of villain characters you're currently targeting this episode. There you go!
Play/concept procedures
The design-of-play is currently very "Ron 2005" -- one basic mechanic, no canonical content, scratch paper, lots of improvisational content, multiple-player creative input -- the same period which produced It Was a Mutual Decision and Doctor Chaos' non-identical twin, The People's Hero. Contrast this phase with S/Lay with Me (2009) and the three religion games (2010-2011), which are very carefully tuned in terms of (i) what's fixed, (ii) what's chosen from a fixed list, (iii) what's required but creatively customized/specified, and (iv) what's totally made up.

Should Doctor Chaos undergo a face-lift using my later design sensibilities? One of my great joys in playing the game is its wide-open creativity, but the fact is, not everyone is either aesthetically knowledgeable enough or right on my wavelength about the material. S/Lay w/Me benefits greatly from various content which in some cases fixes immense amounts of fiction into place.

OK, Doctor Chaos the character still needs to be a topic-driven, wide-open group creation. People seem to get it, it's a hell of a lot of fun, and no other game allows anything at all like it. That's an original feature. A sheet to fill in seems like a great idea. Some kind of Hero Machine on-line feature seems like an even better one. (especially awesome if they could provide a specialized version)

The new superheroes could very well be based on images straight off the numbered faces of the cards from the superhero deck, flippin' them up as you go. It's fun to make them up, that's true, but people sometimes flail or fall a bit too hard into parody, which isn't the direction I want the game to go. 52 images is a lot, but not impossible.

The lesser villain -- now that's a good question. Should it be wide-open per required component as with Doctor Chaos? Should it be fixed in any way? I think it would work better as a set of list items to choose, and only a couple of things which are personally customized, along the lines of S/Lay w/Me. For right now, I'll keep it at "make it all up" but later work will probably refine that.

I'm getting pretty excited about this.

Best, Ron

[Jesse Burneko]

Hey Ron,

I unfortunately, don't have much to say beyond, "Wow!  This all sounds really neat!"

For what it's worth, I've been excited by the concept since you first talked about it back in 2005.  When you released the play test draft I made a point of playing it at the next convenient moment.

Since then I've wanted to get back to it again with the hopes that if I kept playing it and writing about it that you'd be inspired to finish it.  Well, one of my friends recently started a local monthly game day that has proven a very useful space for playing some of the stranger things in my collection.  Well, in May I was all, "Ooooo!  Ooooo!  Doctor Chaos!  Doctor Chaos!".

I'm glad you're excited about the game again.  I really do think it's very neat.

Jesse

[Ron Edwards]

... with the hopes that if I kept playing it and writing about it that you'd be inspired to finish it.

That's exactly what's happened. The Sorcerer books are in the very last stages of physical file production prior to going to the printer, Shahida is now in layout, and I'm looking over all my projects to decide what to finish next. They break out as follows.

1. I have some cool things to work on and playtest in the solid early stages, especially Amerikkka, which has performed surprisingly well in the most alpha-stage playtests. Long-term in-development things like this also include the religion games.

2. I have some ideas about promotion for existing games, which I'm talking about more in the Kickstart threads. I'll probably start with another Sorcerer Kickstart and if it works, making it regular, with Trollbabe and Spione next up for sure. I definitely don't want to launch into these until the current Sorcerer one is done, fulfilled, finished, awarded, and at the risk of repeating myself, totally over.

3. I have a couple of biggish projects to work on which are extremely well-developed in draft but behind in terms of raw playtesting. Doctor Chaos is one, my dream project of Heartbreaker Redemption (which will have to include some other game designers if I can convince them) is another, and a cool, very weird hack of The Shadow of Yesterday is another. It is very unusual for me to have worked on texts this much before the game itself gets playtested into shape much better than these have been. It's a direct result of simply not playing enough for the past year and a half. The good news is that I've finally managed to secure two (2) nights of the week for absolutely nothing but, and I plan to use them like an inflatable sex-toy as soon as this quarter's over (one more week to go).

Given that #3 is clearly the category I can put the most "get this done" attention into anyway, you've boosted Doctor Chaos onto the front burner. Another round of re-write will generate what I think will be a really kickin' playtest package. Tomorrow I'll polish and post my initial idea here for a playtest-centered Kickstart project.

Best, Ron