[Capes] Takes Some Getting Used To

[Vaxalon]

Okay, let's say I want nuclear holocaust.  I mean, who wouldn't?

I try to do it, and you block me.  I've just learned something about my future opportunities:  You think that if I blow up the world, you won't find that fun.  If you don't find it fun, I won't profit from it, win or lose.

So tell me, why would I try again?  Only if I were either (a) convinced that I know what you'll like better than you do or (b) I want it so much that I don't care if I lose tons of resources because you dislike it so much.

Honestly, I think both of those are valid reasons to override your disagreement, if I really feel them.  What do you think?

Your response assumes that each player values what each players want, and/or values story tokens and inspirations.  I don't think either of those is necessarily true.

The player may, instead, value his ability to control the SIS.  

Consider the following strategy for playing Capes; call it "bystander king".

Whenever it's time to frame in a character for a particular conflict, I pick a harmless bystander that, to the extent that I'm able, won't engage anyone's imagination.

When I take my turns, I use them to play conflicts.  Every time.  Some will generate interest (and therefore debt, and therefore story tokens for me) but that's secondary.  The players in the game MUST address them, at least as an aside, because the scene cannot end until they're all off the table.  Any story tokens I get go right into more conflicts.

What do you think would happen to a game, if I were to play this way?

[John Harper]

What do you think would happen to a game, if I were to play this way?

I know what would happen in my game. I would ask you, as politely as possible, why you were playing Capes with us. Maybe your answer would help us understand what you were doing and even get behind it. Or maybe your answer would help us end your involvement with the game.

But this kind of "non-play" can't be ignored just because it's allowed in the rules. If we play football, and everytime I pass you the ball you throw it into the stands, then we need to have a talk. You're not "breaking the rules" but you sure ain't playin' football, either.

I played a game of Universalis like this once. Every single thing this one guy said got challenged. But did he back off? Not at all. He got weirder, and more disruptive. And we challenged. And we challenged. Until he was out of coins. He did not come back for a second session.

Game systems are imbedded in the Social Contract, right? We have to at least have a functional one before we can game together. Part of that contract is "we are all playing this game" and "this is what this game is..."

Capes is a game of superheoic action and melodrama, and you're playing bystanders with uninteresting conflicts? Wha?

[Sydney Freedberg]

What John said.

Yeah, the "bystander king" (or the "throw the ball out of bounds king") could happen. In theory. But, dude: Actual Play. I know Capes is new, so there's not been much time for people to break it, but has anyone ever seen "bystander king"? Until we do, I'm not gonna worry very hard about his being theoretically possible.

[Vaxalon]

Playing roleplaying games boils down, often, to one thing; making meaningful contributions to the SIS.

The word "meaningful" is important here.

What is meaningful is different, for different people.

Robin Laws breaks them down into six types (the seventh being one where participating in the game is NOT, in fact, based on making contributions to the SIS).

Powergamer: I want to see my character get more powerful.
Buttkicker: I want vicarious blood thrill.
Specialist: I want to be a ninja/witch/whatever.
Storyteller: I want to see drama unfold.
Tactician: I want to puzzle my way through difficult encounters
Method Actor: I want to think the way my character thinks.

Social: I want to hang out with my buddies, and they like roleplaying games.

I've already stated why Capes is a problem for Powergamers.

Capes is good for buttkickers.   You can get tons and tons of gore, if you want.  Thing is, though, you gotta lose to be effective... and that's something of a turnoff for buttkickers.  They don't mind losing occasionally, but getting beat down on a regular basis is going to make them dissatisfied.

Specialists are very well off in Capes.  Any specialty you want, it's there.  Go for it!

Storytellers are going to have a tough time.  Since they don't have complete control over what their character says or does, it's hard for them to engineer a story for their characters... they have to get buy-in from the other players, which they're not used to having to get.  Let's assume, though, that once they get the idea, it'll work for them.

Tacticians are going to LOVE Capes, when they first see it, but for some the interest will wane once they realize that they can't really maneuver for advantage.  In addition to being a powergamer, I also do tactician sometimes; "Bystander King" is an attempt to engage that part of my gamer interest.  While that kind of play might accomplish MY goals, it might get me asked to leave the table.

Method Actors will hate Capes, because they aren't alone in their characters heads.  Even if "Spotlight Characters" is in force, other people are going to be narrating things he does or says, and that is pretty much assuredly not going to be 100% in line with what HE thinks his characters will be thinking.

Social gamers will like Capes, but then they like anything that you can just sit down and play.

So tallying up:

Yay for the specialists, most storytellers, some buttkickers and some tacticians.  Social gamers you can ignore, because, well, what ELSE can you do?  They'll find another mode sooner or later.  

Having seen Tony play only once, this is a guess, but I believe that Tony's strongest preferences lie in storyteller and tactician.

Everyone else will have to either shift the game to enable the style of play they like (most aren't willing to do this, though I am), suppress their preferences and play a different style (not everyone is capable of this, I know I'm not) or just not play.

Now take your favorite game.  Look at the six main styles of play, and check them off; see how many of them the game (as written) can reasonably accomodate, and which it actively supports.

I would say that Dungeons and Dragons, given a reasonable play group, accomodates all six, and actively supports powergamer, buttkicker, specialist and tactician.

[Vaxalon]

What John said.
Actual Play. I know Capes is new, so there's not been much time for people to break it, but has anyone ever seen "bystander king"? Until we do, I'm not gonna worry very hard about his being theoretically possible.

I fully intend on trying it, and seeing if it gives me what I want out of a roleplaying game.

[TonyLB]

Okay, a question specifically for Fred.  Remember the session that started this thread?  The one with the Hulk and the East River, and Kosmic Ray and all that?

Given all the discussions that have happened since:  Do you see the events of the game in the same way as when you started?  Or has this changed what you think happened, and why?

[Vaxalon]

Yes, my opinion of that play session has changed.

Here's what I've learned...

It was fun... That's pretty hard to change retroactively, isn't it?

But I don't really want to play Kozmik Ray anymore.  He's had his time in the sun, now he's boring.  He can't grow in capes, he can't accumulate anything interesting on him... next time I'll play someone else.

[TonyLB]

Okay.  Do you still feel (in retrospect) that you were in imminent danger of the game falling apart if people narrated too far?

[Vaxalon]

No, not imminent, but eventual.

[TonyLB]

Oooh... cagey.

Eventually, how and why?

[Vaxalon]

Okay, first let's talk about what "falling apart" means.

I'm not talking about people shouting at each other over the game table.

I'm talking more along the lines of alienating someone so that they don't want to come back.  That's what happens, generally speaking, when you go too far.  

I still feel that without a little more authority in the game, at some point someone's going to narrate something that another player is going to find gamebreaking.

I came real close to that point when the person playing the Hulk narrated knocking over a series of buildings like dominoes in order to get at Trump Tower.  I bulled through it for the sake of finishing the game, but my enjoyment level took a dip at that point.  It was all so absurd.

[James_Nostack]

I still feel that without a little more authority in the game, at some point someone's going to narrate something that another player is going to find gamebreaking... I came real close to that point when the person playing the Hulk narrated knocking over a series of buildings like dominoes in order to get at Trump Tower... It was all so absurd.

In my defense: I was playing a monosyllabic green monster with tattered purple pants, fighting someone in spandex tights who can't spell Cosmic correctly, while a pimp-bot argued with Donald Trump.  We may have different thresholds for absurdity :)    

(That smiley isn't meant to overlook the fact that Vax raises a serious issue: what do you do when players have different notions of what's absurd?  it seems like unless you're playing with mind-readers, the Comics Code is going to get absurdly long.)

For the record: I also picked up a gasoline tanker truck, and put enough backspin on that sucker to bounce it off another building to get a bankshot on the Trump Tower.

Vaxalon is right: these were silly moments, but as far as I can tell this kind of you-can't-stop-me-from-saying-it, over-the-top narration is the main thing Capes has going for it.  As a player, I feel like undoing somebody's narration in the reaction phase is bad narratively and simulationally.  At the same time, anything that's important to me as a player has to be a Goal... and even if I win it can be undone immediately.  The only thing that's left to enjoy are those visceral moments of widescreen superheroic craziness.

This thread has gone on so long that I no longer know where any of the issues stand.  I think we've talked it to death.  I'm gonna start a new thread in the Muse of Fire forum, called: "What Should I Take Pride In?" because it's an important question for me.

[Vaxalon]

I agree.  I am willing to put this one to rest.