[Into the Mystic] A first Playtest

[Kat Miller]

Friday night I held the first Into the Mystic Playtest.  We played with Carl, his fiancé Adrian, Our good Friend Michele, my husband Michael and Myself.  Carl, Michele and Michael all have some Everway experience through my needs to playtest past Everway events.  Michele has probably played the most Everway and Adrian has never played Everway.

I handed out the sheets, and let them look through an to select cards.  Perhaps there was too much selection.  Adrian found this process overwhelming.  However she confessed many times that she always has a problem making a character.  Michael was the first finished.

They had to select cards to create their character with plus one card for another player plus one card for me. 

Into the Mystic doesn't dwell on the possibility of different worlds, everyone knows there are far away places.  The enchanted mist called the Mystic touches all places and all times.  The players can decide how their homeland feels about the mystic, but everyone KNOWS about it.  The Mystic comes and changes things.  Sometimes it takes things and PEOPLE away and sometimes it deposits those things and people in a new place.

I explained to them the Mystic often visited places of great suffering.  And then would select people and things to alleviate the suffering.  They were all making Mystic Chosen, so they needed to think about what qualities they had that would cause them to be selected by the Mystic.  The card they give me is their own personal link to whatever is the problem with the land.   The card they hand each other is that "6 degree" of separation link. 

"I don't know you, but I once raised a Tiger in my palace." "I know that Tiger, he ate my brother!"

Since Adrian had a hard time Michael gave her a card.  In which he lost his Kingship in a court ordered duel.  He had been King for 4 days.   He named his player Honor Oath-Breaker.

That's when I realized that I hadn't told them that they could name their characters ANYthing, not just nouns and adjectives.

Honor Oathbreaker was a braggart of a Prince doomed to break three vows to friends and family.  At the start of the game he had already broken two.  His final oath was to protect a certain young minstrel, and then he gave me the minstrel's card.

Carl went with a mage, who could see luck and shift it from one thing to another.  He also gave Adrian a card (who was still stumped).  The card he gave me was that there was a magical surprise behind the problem that summoned them that he would recognize while still being surprised by it.  The Card he gave Adrian was about seeing her fortune tied to a greater force.

Michele created a tattooed Rune Mage who could shift forms.  She decided that she had come from Mikes Kingdom of 4 days but was a peasant.  She handed Mike a card, from a time when her and her brother we unjustly accused and imprisoned (Mikes first vow was to clean up corruption and free the people.  Michele then gave me her brother now older.

We stopped to help Adrian out.  She still hadn't chosen any cards.  But even without it, she had two cards to work from, she knew at one time she had seen the fall of a King and that she had had her fortune read by Carl and had a Greater Power watching over her.  There was a lot of Blocking going on at this point.  From my vantage point this was more of a Social Contract issue than a flaw in the game.  After some quality attention, Adrian was settled with a Thief who had stolen an object from a god who wanted it back, the object didn't want to be found yet and could posses Hannah, (Adrian's character).  There was a Prophecy about this event, but she didn't know what it meant.

She did not give a card to me and did not give a card to anyone else.  I did not push this.

Fate cards.  At first Mike was the only one that took fate cards.  Then we did a sample for everyone to see how the card worked.  I explained that when I use the mystic Deck I will always be reading in favor of the Problem, rather than the Players.  The Fate deck allows them to soften the blow, they can't take away anything I've said, but they can modify it. 

Think sleeping beauty:  I, the bad fairy say "she will prick her finger and die!"  You, the last good fairy play your card and say  "oh, she won't be really DEAD, she'll just appear to be dead, to all that see her...for the next um 100 years."

Also the Fate card can be used to enhance what a player wants to do but normally couldn't.

Suddenly everyone wanted a Fate card.

The Land and its problem I made up after the players made their characters because the Problem is a reflection of the Players who are a solution to that problem. 

I started them out on the path outside the city.  It was obvious to the Mages that something was draining the land, and warping nature.

Looking at the players I need a problem that A King's Blood, Runes, A Prophecy, and Luck .  Entangled in this Problem was Valdar's Surprise, Lilly's Brother, and Honor's minstrel.

It looked to me that someone from Valdar's Order should be shifting the Luck of this Land to amass great fortune and power.  Lilly's Brother would be needed to forge the runes to lock fortune away from people.  Honors Minstrel would be needed to distract the false king from looking into the suffering of his own people.  These runes would only hold fast to the land with the blood of Mystic Chosen, who was also a King.  Hannah's possession would bring this to life.  Honors Blood would wash away the damage.

Everything the Players decide to do should have some importance in discovering the nature of the problem.  Thus they pass a farm, it is no coincidence that the farmer knows something. 

The Farmer and his family were generous with their meager fair, knowing Mystic Chosen to be great heroes.  Valdar decided to seek out the largest glow of luck and snap a little of it off for the family.

This went directly against the desire of the problem to mass fortune and power, so I flipped from the Mystic deck.  The Sun reversed came up – Exposure.  I decided that There was no problem in Valdar giving these people good fortune, but in doing so The "Surprise" knew another luck mage was in the area.

Most outstanding incident of the night involved Vader trying to protect the false king, and Honor, discovering his minstrel love has been made a slave trying to kill the king.
Honors elements were higher so normally he would have been able to just charge and kill the guy, but Carl played his Fate card enabling Valdar to shift Honor's luck to miss killing the king.

It was the last thing we did that evening.

After Talk.  

Carl liked the changes.  It still had an Everway feel he thought.  He was concerned that there would be o method of advancement in this game and he realized during play since I was always reading against the players, that the Fate cards are really important and should be more accessible to the players.

Adrian liked the Game it was different.  She'd have wanted to play again.

Michele liked the Fate cards.  She really liked giving players a card in character creation, forging a common ground between players was a great thing.  That PCs also had a direct link to the problem was also nice.

I can't remember who but a suggestion was made that there would be a pool of Fate cards, one per player on the table that anyone could use. 

I had a problem with "the problem" so Michele, Michael and I discussed this after the game.  Michele suggested Malady, since the Players are a reflection and the cure. 

We all agreed that my character sheets were just Everway sheets with the word Everway crossed off.  The Elemental wheel had to go.  Michael suggested using the four corners of the sheet.  Michele and I were both thinking compass rose since things get lost in the mystic.
Then Michael blew my mind by saying forget the sheet let the art cards BE the character sheet.  No Elements just cards.

I hated the idea, which meant there was something that evoked emotion and I should think it over.  The elements are really the last hold ever from Everway that I have and I liked not having to think about task-oriented things.  Mike's mind-blowing suggestion is that the art cards will take care of the task oriented things.  This cards shows I'm a king so anything king oriented, leading people, reading maps, making speeches, I should be able to do.

I now need a new playtest, to try out the innovations from the old playtest.

[David "Czar Fnord" Artman]

The elements are really the last hold ever from Everway that I have and I liked not having to think about task-oriented things.  Mike’s mind-blowing suggestion is that the art cards will take care of the task oriented things.  This cards shows I’m a king so anything king oriented, leading people, reading maps, making speeches, I should be able to do.

Out of curiosity... does Mike's proposed approach rankle because it remove quantifiers? Do quantifiers matter, or is your game more like Amber in that an "authority" on some aspect of the game (your example: Kingness) always trumps?

[Kat Miller]

Out of curiosity... does Mike's proposed approach rankle because it remove quantifiers? Do quantifiers matter, or is your game more like Amber in that an "authority" on some aspect of the game (your example: Kingness) always trumps?

I'm not sure what you mean by quantifiers.  What I like about the elements is that the elements make it clear what a player can do without having to look anything up.  Can I swim across the river?  I have a water rank of 3, That means I can swim as well as the average person.  the average person could swim across this river, so then i can swim across the river.

The trouble I have without the Elements is this.  can I swim across the river?  Well, I have a King card, and I have a Man on Horseback card and I have a magic sword  wielded by glowing green skinned people card.  I can do kingly things, but that not really going to answer the swim idea.  But the horseback card shows that I'm athletic. and athletic person could swim across the river so i can swim across the river.

The what happens when another player wants to swim across and it becomes important as to who gets there first.  With the elements this is a simple matter.  Without the elements its fuzzy.

BUT

There are the fate cards.  Player one can tap (trademark) draw on the athletics of his horseback card to swim the river.
Player two has no cards that suggest he can swim the river, but he does have a fate card.  the 8 of Branches (wands)  with the meaning Advancement.  He plays his fate card and describes that despite Player One's athletics, His character hit an swift current which pulled him into the lead.

Because of the Fate cards I'm not so worried about the fuzziness surrounding the characters actual abilities.

Also Because the players all all Mystic Chosen to cure the Malady, There should be no blocking of their efforts.  If their art card implies they can do something they can do it.  If what they want to do challenges the Malady then the GM flips a Mystic card and tries to prevent them from succeeding.  Fate Cards trump, Implied abilities from art cards.  If two player bothuse fate cards then the Malady decides who wins because conflict between the PC's makes the Malady stronger.

Does this answer?

[mneme]

I'm not sure -- I think it's useful to have a baseline for karma resolution (which helps figure out when to include fortune/drama (do you have drama?  or is it all fortune and karma?), and when to just go with the karma flow).

That said, I like the idea of dropping the elements and making the cards central.  Why not do both -- have quantifiers associated with the cards, and a baseline for what a "normal" person can do.  Ideally, this would involve the possibility of negative quantifiers.

Frex, if the baseline is 0 (0 is something a normal person can do with another normal person), with 5 points to drop on attributes, you might have:

King on a horse: 3
Pool with a sword in it: 5
Tree with a serpent in it about to drop on a little girl: 2
Woman with two black knives: -5

So you'd be better than average at koah or tree things, way better than average if it involved "pool with a sword" type things, average at most everything else...unless it involved the woman with two black knives (and what she represented), in which case you'd be way worse than average.

[Kat Miller]

Hi Josh,

I kinda like this,

have quantifiers associated with the cards, and a baseline for what a "normal" person can do.  Ideally, this would involve the possibility of negative quantifiers.

We are looking at having 3 aspects and a draw back for each card.

Like the king on horse might be
Kingly things,
Athletic things,
Horsemanship,
Impatience.

thus you can automatically succeed when doing things that draw on those aspects.
Dropping the elements would remove Karma.

I do not really have Drama in the Eway sense.  If the player wants to do something and it does not directly challenge the Malady then the player succeeds as long as the player would be capable of doing it. 

I have fortune but with restrictions.  The Gm only uses the Mystic deck when the Players are doing something that threatens the Malady. 

[mneme]

Hmm.  So you have up to 9 traits and three flaws (with restrictions that they have to be appropraite to the cards in question)?

Can you leave them undefined until you're inspired by the narrative?

(I have this image of leaving flaws undefined...allowing the player (or the GM?) to define them when it feels appropriate).

I take it only the Heroes get these traits?  How is the difficulty of tasks determined assuming it isn't going directly against the Malady?

[David "Czar Fnord" Artman]

Does this answer?

Yes, it clarifies that you primarily use interpretations and, thus, you do not need to quantify those interpretations--in fact, adding a quantifier to what you are doing simply makes for a form of regress. After all, if someone is already applying interpretation and argument to make a claim of capability using the card images (a form of fiat: "communal fiat," maybe?) then there is no reason to step back a level and make a quantifier which requires some target value comparison--and more fiat (the target number, this time, rather than the interpretation).

Sounds good to me. No need inject numbers (and, more so, several varied numbers associated with elements) to quantify a character when so much of the character's raw efficacy is handled by consensus based on card interpretation.

David

[Kat Miller]

Can you leave them undefined until you're inspired by the narrative?

(I have this image of leaving flaws undefined...allowing the player (or the GM?) to define them when it feels appropriate).

I take it only the Heroes get these traits?  How is the difficulty of tasks determined assuming it isn't going directly against the Malady?

Yes, you can leave them undefined until you start using them.

Doing a Task that utilizes and aspect of a art card that does not challenge the Malady = Success
Doing a Task that does not utilize an art card but does utilize a Fate card = Success
Doing a task that does not utilize an art card or a fate card and does not challenge the Malady = Failure.

avoiding the
Player: "I wanna fly."
GM: "Which art card are you using for that?"
Player: "None."
GM: "Fate Cards?"
Player:"None."
GM: "Are you trying to find a clue to the Malady in the sky? "
Player: "I don't care about the Malady.  i just wanna see if I can fly, can I fly?"
GM: "No"

[No need inject numbers (and, more so, several varied numbers associated with elements) to quantify a character when so much of the character's raw efficacy is handled by consensus based on card interpretation.

I can't wait till my next play test to see how it handles without the elements. 
-kat

[mneme]

How do you know something's a task?

How do you differentiate between:

I want to walk to town.
I want to fly to town.
I want to walk into town impressively.
I want to walk into town wearing expensive clothes.
I want to talk to the nice lady with the blue hair.
I want to buy a peanut.
I want to buy a a four-mast ship.
I want to get out of bed. (yeah, I had to put that one in)
I want to get out of bed on time to make the audience with the prince.
etc?

[Kat Miller]

How do you know something's a task?

Some of it is consensus.  Some of it is Common Sense.  Some of it is Social Contracty Stuff.

Some players will want to press boundaries and ague the "taskiness" of certain things.
If you have an Art Card that implies your Pcs ability to do something you can do it.
If you have to argue why you should be able to do a thing despite a lack of art card, use a Fate card and do the thing.
If you don't want to use your fate card for it, then you can't do the thing.

I want to walk to town.
I want to fly to town.
I want to walk into town impressively.
I want to walk into town wearing expensive clothes.
I want to talk to the nice lady with the blue hair.
I want to buy a peanut.
I want to buy a a four-mast ship.
I want to get out of bed. (yeah, I had to put that one in)
I want to get out of bed on time to make the audience with the prince.
etc?

I'm not so sure what the point of the list is.
Some of them are obvious- walking to town, buying a Peanut, getting out of bed. 
I don't know if you want to call it consensus or commonsense but these things aren't really worth game time to address.  You merely do them.

Some of these things : walking impressively, buying a four mast ship, getting up in time for audience with prince,
If you are doing these things, without trying to discover the nature of the Malady, then either you have a card that empowers you to do these things (art or Fate) or you don't.  If you are trying to do impressive things, gaining attention and spotlight time, that's fine, use your cards.  If you don't have it in the cards then you can't do them.

If a player wants to argue about a task that he obviously doesn't have an art card for, and he doesn't want to or can't use a fate card, this to me, is a social contract issue.

-kat

[mneme]

That's cool -- I was trying to hit three point -- "it's obviously not a task", "it's obviously a task" and "it's basically color."  Saying it's basically consensus/social contract stuff (where if anyone thinks it's a task, it's a task) is cool, I was just trying to figure out when you're making that judgement.

It looks to me like it ends up being "if anyone wants to argue it, it goes to the cards/malady/conflict resolution; if not, it automatically succeeds".

Where do the player's boundaries end?  Can they narrate things outside their characters (either in very conflicty "I try to find someone who has seen <The Malady> in action" or more mundanely, "I go to the inn I usually stay with in this town.").  Is this also basically social contracty stuff?