Sorcerer by Gaslight: Once More With Premise

[JamesDJIII]

With a great deal of excitement, I managed to wrangle 2 players (Tim and Carl) for a character and pre-game discussion for Sorcerer this Sunday. I invited the players out of the regular gaming group based on my perception that they would find Sorcerer fun and interesting.

We met at a piblic place, a local Borders and sat right in the "cafe." First, we played a rousing game of Chrononauts to break the ice. Then, it was all Sorcerer.

Couple of important points I made while we disussed things:

Sorcerer was not like Hero, in that the goals of play supported are about all of making a story, together, as opposed to simulating a "reality" or making a level playing field.[/list:u]

PCs don't have to be related or even know each other. There is no "party" to be concerned about.[/list:u]

Sorcerer works best when it's played against a Premise - a question or assumption that we all feel strongly about one way or another.[/list:u]

Carl expressed concern about the mode of play. He stated misgivings about the fact that I, as a GM, would not have a pre-plotted story for them to explore. He pointed out that any time a GM in our group failed follow the tried and true methods of gaming ("Here's a story, these are hooks, place lips upon them, etc.") the play ended up confused and not fun.

I tried to reassure him that in Sorcerer the difference was that the players are expected and supported as active protagnoists, and that the Kickers are "what's happening."

[Edited because I hit "submit" instead of "preview".]

Last time I "ran" Sorcerer, it wa purely as a test to see if online gaming was good. And it was! This time I wanted a real attempt at trying out the Big N type of play.

They both opted for the "gaslight" feel of 1890's England - just like the online game we tried out.

We talked about Premise some. I explained that Premise is the antecedant to Theme, and that actual play was the response to Premise, one way or another. I suggested that there was no right or wrong way to consider Premise in play - that the response we generated would be Ok as long as we were having fun.

The Premise we tried to tackle was, as Carl put it, the Emporer's Proverb: "Are the people you rule over/have responsibility for subjects or stepping stones?"

It seemed like thi s definition could lead to scenarios where someone would be forced to make concurrent Humanity checks for both gain

and loss. Example, someone reasons that by torturing an anarchist to make them spill their plans for bombing Parliament they save lives. On the one hand the person being tortured is someone in your power - are you being deliberatley cruel in this act? But what about the lives of those who you are trying to save from the bomb? We didn't come to a consensus.

We also left off the specifics of sorcerery and the general conditions for making Humanity checks for loss/gain. Carl generated a corrupt, cynical (-2 Price!) landed Lord with Lore 4 and Will 4.  He's also a coven leader - although the people who he "leads" are generally clueless followers of the faux-sorcerery of Allister Crowley's ilk. Tim created a maimed ex-military man now in the Diplomatic service of the government (basically a "spy"), and recently rejected his coven to strike out on his own.

Any comments or questions?

[Ron Edwards]

Nifty!

But (in line with my comments in Doyce's Actual Play thread) I think you'd do well to drop the abstract discussion of Premise instantly. You'll note that such a thing plays no role at all in the rulebooks - it's to be arrived at through customizing Humanity, customizing sorcerous rituals, customizing demons, and customizing descriptors.

... and it worries me slightly that you seem to have done little of these very important things.

Best,
Ron

[JamesDJIII]

Ron,

I'm having a difficult time processing just how this whole thing is supposed to work. If you could shed some light in this direction, I'd appreciate it.

If we arrive at Premise without directly discussing it, then I take it that the Premise we get is one that is undirected? Did I get that? If we take the time to customize all that needs to be customized, how does that create the Premise?

This is a concept I'm not grokking.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi James,

If we take the time to customize all that needs to be customized, how does that create the Premise?

This is a concept I'm not grokking.

It just works, man. It really does. Do these in any order you'd like, based on the enthusiasm of the moment.

1. Come up with an overall look & feel - you did this already with the "gaslight" stuff.

2. Come up with a look & feel for sorcerous rituals. Everyone should have a solid image of what their character really did to bind that demon they have.

3. Get a nice look & feel for demons (how they act, how you'll play them, what kinds of awful things happen, etc); this doesn't have to be all that strong among the players, but you as GM should be champing at the bit to play demons as NPCs.

4. Have a neat list of descriptors to choose from that fits very well with both #1 and #2, and don't forget Cover.

5. Consider what you, as GM, will levy Humanity checks and award Humanity gain rolls for. You don't have to have any big debate or analysis about this - in fact, I strongly recommend not doing so. Just consider it, as GM, and tell'em what you come up with. Give an example or two. If they have any feedback or provide an example of their own, then let'em know what you think. That's all. It's not supposed to be a big debate or analysis!

Hint (and in your case, this is not a hint, it's a decree) - keep it simple. "Don't be a dick" is really all you need as a mental guideline for Humanity, and all you need to do is stick to it and not rationalize characters out of having to make rolls during play.

6. Make sure the Kickers are inspiring to you, as GM. You know how in traditional play, the players look at what the GM is handing them as set-up and setting material, and guidelines for their characters? All the pressure is on the GM to inspire the players, right? If it works, you play, if you don't, it fizzles.

Well, in Sorcerer, it's the other way around. You have to get juiced by their Kickers; it's on them, not you. Take the extra step to get juiced in this fashion, even if they hand you fairly bland stuff. But if it's really bland in a typical-gamer way (and believe me, you'll know it when you see it), then demand a bit more.

Again, keep it simple. "A guy tried to kill me with an axe today" is an excellent Kicker. All it has to do is get your GM-y flow going.

Trust me - it works. Do all this and you have Premise, without ever using the word or without ever saying, in serious tones, "Now look here, our goal is to construct Theme," or any such thing.

In the last major game of Sorcerer I played, one player asked, "How do we win?" I responded, "By having every major studio come to us, begging to produce the sequel." That is all you need for people to construct Theme.

Best,
Ron

[JamesDJIII]

In a word: *click*

This is exciting. Like deciding to go rafting backwards down a class III+. I have NO IDEA what this really looks like. Ron is sorta sitting up front, looking down the river and yelling "WHOOOOOOOOOOOO! YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! C'mon! Row! Harder! Left! Don't think about it! Feel the water! WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"

And I'm sittin' there, trying to like mad to paddle UP the river. Except now I've let myself really feel that first drop, we're moving faster, and the roar is getting really loud. Did I tighten my helmet enough?

Ok, ok, ok. This sounds workable.

Side note: I think many of us trying out the river are intimidated as all get out. Man, we're sick and tired of the bus tour up the ravine, you know, Todd's Bus Tour. It's a fine ride, sometimes it's downright joyous to experience, but you can hear the water and see the people having fun. And you know that there's a new experience that may be just what you are looking for.

I can see that my problem is that I've never gamed this way before. It's hard for me to differentiate between "This is New" and "This Part is Just like the Old Part."

Ron, thanks!

[Doyce]

I was going to try to post suggestions about how to ignore the premise and still get it by simply defining the rest of the things that need to be defined in Sorcerer.

Then of course Ron beat me to it and did so brilliantly.  I still want to help you out a bit, but how can I possibly take this any further?

How about examples from the games I've run?

1. Come up with an overall look & feel.

In Bibliophage, I went with Ivy-league university and a nasty, business-closing blizzard to increase the sense of isolation and solitude.  Sorcerer and Sword load things in differently, and some of those settings can really get people's juices flowing -- Clicking Sands did that for one of my groups, and the set up for Grade School Sorcerers has attracted everyone I've mentioned it to.

2. Come up with a look & feel for sorcerous rituals. Everyone should have a solid image of what their character really did to bind that demon they have.

In this, I think I failed when it comes to the Bibliophage game.  That was my first game, it was sort of started off-the-cuff, and as a result the sorcerous rituals have remained somewhat nebulous, vaguely Ninth Gate, foggy background things -- people consequently have a hell of a time coming up with dice boosts during their rituals.   Conversely, the "Crayon Pentagrams"-style of Grade School sorcerers has resulted in some very vibrant and interesting ritual scenes, created by some of the exact same players.

3. Get a nice look & feel for demons (how they act, how you'll play them, what kinds of awful things happen, etc); this doesn't have to be all that strong among the players, but you as GM should be champing at the bit to play demons as NPCs.

I think this is another place that we left things a little too vague with Bibliophage -- the demons vary wildly in tone and style and appearance, and that's due largely to a lack of unifying theme.  The Clicking Sands game conversely had a very unified feel to it (lots of lost tech and AI cybernetics), and so did Grimm Therapy (where the un-kind Fair Folk provided an excellent template).

4. Have a neat list of descriptors to choose from that fits very well with both #1 and #2, and don't forget Cover.

We used the 'default' descriptors for Bibliophage, which worked simply because it was really a 'standard' Sorcerer game.  That said, I think that a good, evocative list of descriptors goes almost as far as a good Setting description to really spark a player's imagination -- a good list of descriptors should start giving people ideas for different characters -- in the Grimm Therapy game, I had some players agonizing over two or three different character concepts, simply because there were so many descriptors they wanted to play with.  The &Sword supplement provides great evocative descriptors, and I remember thinking that the "Inside" supplement that Clinton wrote for Daedalus had a really nice set as well.

5. Consider what you, as GM, will levy Humanity checks and award Humanity gain rolls for.

This usually boils down to "All of the rituals that result in Humanity checks in Sorcerer, plus these other non-sorcerous things..."  Lots of folks make that part of the "Humanity" write-up for the one-sheet description for their game.

"Don't be a dick" is really all you need as a mental guideline for Humanity.

Heh.  I don't know if Ron meant that as a guide to the GM making the ruling or the characters deciding what to do in a certain situation, but I have to say that the simple version of 'when to call for a Humanity check in Bibliophage' amounts to almost exactly that.

6. Make sure the Kickers are inspiring to you, as GM.

Apparently I have a facial expression that I make when someone's kicker isn't knocking my socks off.

I've made a point to discuss Kicker's openly with the group whenever the player's comfortable with doing so -- I want that thought process to be out in public so that everyone can see examples of what we're aiming for and also see that not everyone's going to come up with a rockin' Kicker on the first try and that it's okay to have some GM input and suggestions from other players -- one of the best Kickers I've gotten for a character recently was basically built as a team effort by everyone playing.  (Which had a side benefit in that everyone playing then had a personal interest in that character's story and seeing how that Kicker would be resolved.)

At the same time, I've had other players tell me "This is my kicker -- it's a little plain or vague, but feel free to tie in into the rest of the story and spike it  how you like -- I just thought the basic idea would be cool..."  which tells me (a) they want some GM input/spice (b) the basic idea for their kicker is the general direction they want to go.

-----

Hopefully none of this contradicts what Ron said, as I think it's a nearly perfect "Sorcerer Campaign Prep" checklist all by itself (and obviously clicked for you :) -- I thought some examples from games you've read about here might help put it in context:   "Oh, so when Doyce and his guys went down this river backwards and they talked about such-and-such happening, it was because they did THIS.  Ahhhh."[/quote]

[JamesDJIII]

Doyce said:

Hopefully none of this contradicts what Ron said, as I think it's a nearly perfect "Sorcerer Campaign Prep" checklist all by itself (and obviously clicked for you :) -- I thought some examples from games you've read about here might help put it in context: "Oh, so when Doyce and his guys went down this river backwards and they talked about such-and-such happening, it was because they did THIS. Ahhhh."

I see people who have done this before as turned around and using the water as opposed to going backwards and experiencing all the hard munching that rocks and a river can give you. I get tons of mileage out of reading how other people play their games.

Next, we'll work on the cusotmization, and work hard at nailing down what's what in the game. I'll report on that later in this forum. After that, new reports will appear in Actual Play.

Thanks all!