[Guilt & Frustration[/url][/b] Ronnies feedback

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Considering that Peter Nordstrand has already started a good thread about Guilt and Frustration in [Guilt and Frustration], I figured I'd support that practice and write its feedback up next. So much for the "in order of submission" idea.

Here are the notes, with any luck in coherent speech.

1. There's hatred aplenty, but the game is weak on "girlfriend" - it's not a central conflict or concept, just one of many and by the examples/references, not even a very important one.

This point is finer-grained, but it's related - the characteristics are very detailed, perhaps unnecessarily so. You already have some serious nuances about the character going on with the relationships, and with three characteristics, each with several traits, you're approaching HeroQuest-level complexity concerning what are, after all, secondary features. This level of detail wouldn't work for me (way too much start-up work, e.g.) unless multiple protagonists were involved.

Here's a thought which is more pertinent to the contest than to how the game might eventually be developed: I think it ought to be about two guys and one girlfriend. See the focus suddenly resolve? And the potential Passions come into the picture? Well, if not, that's what I see, anyway.

2. I really, really like the definition of Expectations as the protagonist's perception of what others expect of him, or see him as. It seems very powerful as a door to generating a Passion later in play. Now, since without the possibilty of generating a Passion, the game would be a horrible hamster-wheel of awfulness, and the advice to make a sympathetic character would be inapplicable, I was getting really interested. The whole game was gelling in my mind as I went ...

3. But then I got confused by the explanations of how play is actually conducted. The example on page 4 doesn't work for me at all. For one thing, in The Pool, traits add dice not bonuses to dice values, so that bit confused me a little. More importantly, do NPCs have characteristics and traits? The example talks about the character's mother rolling as if she were using the protagonist rules, and that confused me a lot.

Overall, I think that rolling as written would have high, laborious handling time, although playtesting might prove me wrong. There's a lot of emphasis on how rolls affect new rolls (boy, you are a Sorcerer and HeroQuest player, aren't you?), but I think the rules could use more text on the basic effect of a given roll, in the fictional events. The current example of Effect focuses mostly on the mechanics, not on the presentation of what happens to Josh.

4. What I was most interested in was how #2 above fit into the procedures of play, and unfortunately, the example of Sublimation completely fell apart for me. If generating a Passion is supposed to be the escape from the horrible cycle of pain/frustration, then the character needs to be potentially healing and transcending, not reaching some blah-boring compromise, such as the one given in the example.

Minor point about that: the term seems weird and off-base for me. Technically, sublimating is what the character is doing without a Passion, transferring his frustration into pain for himself and others. It seems to me that getting a Passion "cures" the sublimation-behavior.

5. Putting all of the above points together, I found myself asking, until what point (in the story) would we play? How long? Why? Is it a matter of discovering an emergent climactic moment regarding a Passion? That's where I fail to see the connections among Currency, Situation, and Rewards.

I'd sure like to see Guilt & Frustration (possibly renamed, if some of the points above are accepted?) published as a companion to Breaking the Ice. It shares some very fine features and turns up the cathartic bile a little. I think it was the most completely-realized of the entries that emphasized this approach.

Peter, what do you think? Does this post help with some of my admittedly strange language in the Results thread?

Best,
Ron

[Peter Nordstrand]

Cheers,

Thank you for the feedback. It contains many good points, and also a couple of suggestions I would have never thought of myself. I am most grateful.

There's hatred aplenty, but the game is weak on "girlfriend" - it's not a central conflict or concept, just one of many and by the examples/references, not even a very important one.

You are right about that. Relationships are important in the game, but not necessarily the four "core" ones that I mention. The individual relationships can easily be substituted if the players want.

This point is finer-grained, but it's related - the characteristics are very detailed, perhaps unnecessarily so. You already have some serious nuances about the character going on with the relationships, and with three characteristics, each with several traits, you're approaching HeroQuest-level complexity concerning what are, after all, secondary features. This level of detail wouldn't work for me (way too much start-up work, e.g.) unless multiple protagonists were involved.

One thing is clear: Guilt & Frustration is poorly written. In several instances I meant one thing, and you (and others) read something completely different into it. This is an important lesson. I will try to clarify things below by explaing what I intended to say, but failed to communicate in the rules. This is not me being defensive or anything, I just hope somebody will find my clarfications useful and/or interesting.

Characteristics ... I know what I wrote, but this is what I meant ...

You get three (3) characteristics. Period. Not "each with several traits". Check out Josh McIntyre on page 9. He's got three characteristics: Lawyer 10, Guitarist 5, and Prevaricate 15. Nothing more. No HeroQuest level of complexity. Just those three. Full stop. Nothing more. No secondary features or anything.

Here's a thought which is more pertinent to the contest than to how the game might eventually be developed: I think it ought to be about two guys and one girlfriend. See the focus suddenly resolve? And the potential Passions come into the picture? Well, if not, that's what I see, anyway.

Yes, I can see how that focuses the game. And it does need some kind of direction. We'll see what I decide to do. Thanx for the advice.

But then I got confused by the explanations of how play is actually conducted. The example on page 4 doesn't work for me at all. For one thing, in The Pool, traits add dice not bonuses to dice values, so that bit confused me a little. More importantly, do NPCs have characteristics and traits? The example talks about the character's mother rolling as if she were using the protagonist rules, and that confused me a lot.

Again, I find it really useful to discover how badly I've been communicating my ideas. If you are interested, here we go.

Those book symbols that I included in the document are not rules or examples or anything. They are just notes. Don't ask. Take a big black felt-tip pen and cross over every paragraph that begins with a book symbol. Please forget that you ever saw them.

NPCs can have characteristics (nothing else), if the GM wishes. See page 8. To put it differently: the GM is free to assign suitable bonuses when rolling for NPCs. It is really the same thing.

Overall, I think that rolling as written would have high, laborious handling time, although playtesting might prove me wrong.

Conflict Resolution ... I know what I wrote, but this is what I meant ...

The rolling works like this: The player rolls d20. The opponent rolls d20. Highest roll wins. End of story. There is no ardous handling time. Highest roll wins. Yes, that is really it.

Okay. Okay. Yes, both rolls are modified with bonuses and penalties. Common bonuses and penalties: Characteristics, Desires, Expectations, and Hatred. Now, honestly, that's it.

There's a lot of emphasis on how rolls affect new rolls (boy, you are a Sorcerer and HeroQuest player, aren't you?), but I think the rules could use more text on the basic effect of a given roll, in the fictional events. The current example of Effect focuses mostly on the mechanics, not on the presentation of what happens to Josh.

I agree that Effect needs to be explained and expanded. Thanx. BTW, the game is definitely a Sorcerer rip-off. Probably in more ways than you noticed.

What I was most interested in was how #2 above fit into the procedures of play, and unfortunately, the example of Sublimation completely fell apart for me. If generating a Passion is supposed to be the escape from the horrible cycle of pain/frustration, then the character needs to be potentially healing and transcending, not reaching some blah-boring compromise, such as the one given in the example.

Good point.

Putting all of the above points together, I found myself asking, until what point (in the story) would we play? How long? Why?

As I see it, this is the principal part of your criticism. Nothing is more important. Unfortunately, I've been asking myself the very same things recently. I'll have to figure it out. Thank you for emphasizing it.

Does this post help with some of my admittedly strange language in the Results thread?

Oh, I had no problem understanding what you said about "my category" of games. It was an obscure reference in regards to the runners up that I didn't understand. :-)

Again, your feedback has been most helpful. Thank you.

/Peter