Preparation Advice Sought

[Eric.Brennan]

[Marco]

Hi Eric,

Sounds very cool: I like the setting a lot. I have two possibly relevant suggestions ... here they are.

1. Find out what the player's personal take on their probable, eventual, degeneration is--this could be done 'subtly' in game even (they meet an old friend whom they admired for his courage and virtue--but he has now become a blood drinking predator--against everything he stood for: how do they react?)

My idea would be to a) present the theme in some concrete manner early on (although not necessarily in a way that forces them to act on it) and then b) run scenarios that head in that direction as you see fit.

Alternatively you could just ask them to write three sentences about degeneration on their character sheets (give them a little more to go on--say ask them to write one sentence for their character about 'corruption', 'addiction,' etc ... the results could be used to get everyone in the right frame of mind.

2.If you want to try a gimmick, you can secretly pre-arrange with a player to have their character undergo tragic degeneration (possibly coming back later as a villain). In a game I ran long ago (it was a post-plague super-hero universe where the supers where hunted and killed by the governement) I had a player take a pre-made character into the first session ... and then killed the character off! (he had his real character ready to go after a dramatic death scene and pretending to be pissed off). It was quite a shock to the other players and established tone right away. I'm not saying it was the greatest idea ever--but it did set tone and mood right away.

Perhaps a player could be give a pre-vampire drug addict--someone already on a serious downward spiral ... and some dramatic notes to take the plunge as soon as possible. If its done properly dramatically it could be a lot of fun for everyone (especially the audience). The idea would be to do this quickly so that the player could get to their actual character--but the one time I tried it, it worked :smile:

-Marco

[Mike Holmes]

Hi Eric,

Welcome. How long a lurker? If we started slinging around jargon, would you be comfortable with that? Or would you prefer we stick with generic phraseology?

Mike

[erithromycin]

It does sound very cool. One thing that might be nice though, is to show the rewards of inhumanity. One thing consistent about a lot of noir is that the really big figures are corrupt, evil, even, and nothing can touch them. Look at the mob, the government. Bad deeds are all around, and temptation is everywhere. (Think of the D*rk S*d*) THere are ways to reflect this, but if you're interested in this sort of concept what I'm going to suggest is that you come up with an idea and bring it back. I've seen it done, and done it, in a few ways now, but I'm intrigued to see how someone else would handle it.

That's if'n you wanted to.

One thing though. If you are going to be running WoD history [I'll avoid using the word metaplot], I strongly suggest that you either a) change enough that your players don't try to use it against you [the horror! the horror!] or b) keep an eagle eye peeled for abuse of knowledge. Unless, of course, either of these things appeals to you. It's your game, after all.

McCarthyism and vampires though. That would be neat.

[Eric.Brennan]

I'll respond to everything at once while I figure out the forums...

Marco wrote:
Alternatively you could just ask them to write three sentences about degeneration on their character sheets (give them a little more to go on--say ask them to write one sentence for their character about 'corruption', 'addiction,' etc ... the results could be used to get everyone in the right frame of mind.
--------------------------

I like this idea--I'm going to have them fill out a sheet before hand, and doing an exercise like this on it will guarantee that I know what /they/ think of disintegration.

                     
Mike Holmes wrote:

Welcome. How long a lurker? If we started slinging around jargon, would you be comfortable with that? Or would you prefer we stick with generic phraseology?
-------------------

I've surfed the forums about weekly for the last four months.  The Actual Play section has attracted most of my attention.  I'd love to have everything genericized and then linked with the local jargon, so I can learn what's what.  

 
erithromycin wrote:
It does sound very cool. One thing that might be nice though, is to show the rewards of inhumanity. One thing consistent about a lot of noir is that the really big figures are corrupt, evil, even, and nothing can touch them. Look at the mob, the government. Bad deeds are all around, and temptation is everywhere. (Think of the D*rk S*d*) THere are ways to reflect this, but if you're interested in this sort of concept what I'm going to suggest is that you come up with an idea and bring it back. I've seen it done, and done it, in a few ways now, but I'm intrigued to see how someone else would handle it.
--------------------------

I was thinking already about something along those lines.  My plan is to have a vampire-hunter in somebody's background--essentially someone who's a victim of one of the PCs.  I want him to be competent, obsessive--the kind of guy a PC would play.  Somebody the PCs almost root for.  

And then I want him to fail.  Not just fail, but fail miserably.  I don't want him to even get close to the PCs.  I want the PC's patrons (the whole L.A. machine that exists in the '50s that these Vampires are hidden within) to take care of him.  The hunter gets rousted by cops, he loses his job, he starts drinking, he loses his home, he gets framed for a crime.  If he goes to a PC's home he gets arrested for trespassing.  I want the Machine, as I've started referring to the crime-Hollywood-Government-Kindred connection, to shut this guy down until he's a pathetic, harmless wretch.  I want the PCs to see what they've done to him by allowing the Machine to protect them.  Heck, if this guy is to be redeemed, I want the PCs to do it in a grand act of self-destruction.  

I figure the real threat to the PCs won't be this hero, but maybe cops on the Special Unit who've been under the Prince's thumb.  I want to emphasize that in this kind of world, there's no real threat from good, just from your "allies."  


He also wrote:
One thing though. If you are going to be running WoD history [I'll avoid using the word metaplot], I strongly suggest that you either a) change enough that your players don't try to use it against you [the horror! the horror!] or b) keep an eagle eye peeled for abuse of knowledge. Unless, of course, either of these things appeals to you. It's your game, after all.
-----------------------------------
The other "groups," such as Lupines, Wraiths and Mages have all been changed to make the game more interesting and more of a surprise--my Werewolves are literal Skinwalkers who don the skin of a beast they've killed, while my mages are essentially the thaumaturgists and obsessives out of Unknown Armies, or insane cultists out of CoC.

Thanks for all of the comments!
--Eric

[Paul Czege]

Hey Eric,

I'd love to have everything genericized and then linked with the local jargon...

I'm going to have to run it past the Local Jargon Committee for a vote. It's not currently allowed. I think the rationale is that the resulting lucidity tends to undermine future jargon production, and we've really been struggling to meet our quotas. I'll let you know how it goes.

Paul

[Mike Holmes]

I've surfed the forums about weekly for the last four months.  The Actual Play section has attracted most of my attention.  I'd love to have everything genericized and then linked with the local jargon, so I can learn what's what.  

Oh, sure, have your cake and eat it too. :wink:

OK, the main question is, of course, what mode do you and your players prefer to play in. This refers to GNS and the three modes of play entailed therein. There is quite a bit of discussion as to what the three modes are exzctly, but they are sorta obvious when looked at from abroad.

Essentially it involves how players make decisions in play. Usually in regard to their characters.

Gamism is making decisions based on which will help their characters overcome the obstacles posed by the game.

Simulationism is making decisions based on which seems to be the most "realistic" given the game world, setting, etc. Note that realistic in a Kung Fu action film might mean doing tripple backflips over your foe. Very relative. True "realism" is a subset of Simulationism.

Narrativism is making decisions based on which is most likely to create good plot, and story overall.

I use a stupid little example all the time. Take a player who's character is a knight and deciding at the start of a game what weapon he will wield. The player who prefers Gamism will likely find the weapon that does the most damage, or otherwise makes their character most effective. The player who prefers Simulationism will consider what knights of the realm use regularly and use that because it makes game-world sense that he would. The player who prefers Narrativism will most likely select a weapon that has some significance like that of his father as that makes for good story.

Note that in all three cases the sword chosen might be essentially the same. This will be true occasionally and at other times impossible, but the question is why the player made the decision. To that extent certain system designs and campaign designs (what we're trying to help you with here) will be better suited to certain styles of play.

So, it's my opinion, and that of others here that if you can determine which of these routs you'd like to focus on(given your likes and those of your players) the better we can help. The reason for this is that it is also believed by many that you can't do all three things at once, most specifically that a design cannot cater well to all three.

For example, the first thing that we'd tell you is that you are using a fairly Simulationist system to run your game. If that corresponds to your goal, then great. If not, then there's a lot of work to be done there.

Make any sense? There are a number of good essays that are linked to around here that can explain a lot more of this theory in detail.

Mike

[Ranko]

[erithromycin]

I like 'The Machine' a lot. Thing is, it's perhaps a mite unsubtle. Don't destroy the hunter. Don't, in fact, have a hunter. Instead, encourage the PCs to talk to their sires. Something I've done in my most recent game was to have a stock of older characters who were clan heads, who embraced characters who were still human. See who these people are, and who'd want them. Encourage them to sort out their problems by asking 'daddy'. Have some of them cut free from their surroundings link by link. Enmesh some in trouble and have their sire embrace them out. Play the game with them. Toy with them. Then?

Then let them start playing the game themselves...

Want revenge? Here's a guy we know. What does he do? Nothing. What? What does he know? What we tell him. What do we tell him? That X is a member of his communist cell. What'll that do? Nothing. So why do it? Because Y here's going to be arrested for murder tomorrow. Why? Because mommy feels like having some fun. Now run along dear.

Corrupt them enough for them to get a taste. THen watch.

And wear a suit. Track down a hat as well. Don't get to carried away though. A mate of mine pistolwhipped someone.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello, and welcome, Eric!

I agree with Ranko, most especially because he is bringing in personalities and relationships as the central "hook" for players' interest. There are some pretty high-payoff threads about that here and there on the Forge.

Best,
Ron

[Eric.Brennan]

[Ben Morgan]

ben@ad1066.com
    http://www.ad1066.com
      "Thank You, Amazing Kreskin"
              -- Dot, *Animaniacs*

[ This Message was edited by: Amazing Kreskin on 2001-12-16 21:30 ]

[Tor Erickson]

	Logged