*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 18, 2014, 12:48:05 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4283 Members Latest Member: - otto Most online today: 58 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Author Topic: When Heroes Fail  (Read 3262 times)
Blake Hutchins
Member

Posts: 614


« Reply #15 on: February 23, 2002, 03:50:03 PM »

Hi howdy,

I was the one -- I think -- who cast the MoV and MoD in terms of conflict resolution v. conflict complication several moons ago.  My experience with The Pool (using the MoD rules) remains one of the most illuminating RP experiences of my life.  I'm itching to play TQB and take it a step further, as I love the refinements James has added to the rules.

I'm leery of piling further qualifications on monologues of either stripe, as I think it really does come down to player trust.  Let the players pick their pacing and leave the direction of their monologues to them.  In my experience with my X-Games guys, they took the story in a dramatically different direction than I'd imagined.  We only played the one session.  With further play, I'm sure we'd refine our use of the rules.  As it was, they interpreted MoV's as critical successes and MoD's as botches, but in post-game discussion, they allowed that they simply weren't familiar with how to use the incredibly powerful tool The Pool just dropped in their laps.  I wasn't sure how to react at times, either, as the players in tandem narrated a lot more of the story than I did, because we went for a lot of Trait rolls.  I will say the players seemed to have a lot more fun with MoD's.  Those results require a bit more creative agility than the MoV's, since you're adding complications to the current situation.

I think the comment that it's a story game really hits the mark.  The Pool and TQB facilitate story development in a decentralized framework, with many authors.  That's as it should be.  I'd let groups decide whether to shift GM/Narrators, as that seems to be more of a group call.  The game gives plenty of directorial power to the players as is, and very elegantly, I might add.

Best,

Blake
Logged
James V. West
Member

Posts: 567


WWW
« Reply #16 on: February 23, 2002, 06:43:34 PM »

Hey

Well, looks like next Sunday I get to blow the dust out of the engine again. This time will be my first "official" full-blown TQB playtesting session. I've played the game using The Pool's rules, but I haven't had the chance yet to play a real game with TQB's rules.

All this talk of Monologues has me excited about presenting the concept to a group at the local comic/gaming shop, Collector Comics. I've found a cool contact in the bunch (played a weird-ass improv rpg with him about 7 years ago) and he's gathering a few of the best eggs from the basket. When the shop closes, we're hitting the backroom table for a night of Beasting.

So again, thanks for prodding my brain into thinking about this stuff. There's no finer test than explaining it to people who have never heard of narrativist games in the first place. Wish me luck.
Logged

Christopher Kubasik
Member

Posts: 1153


« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2002, 06:45:26 PM »

Good luck.
Logged

"Can't we for once just do what we're supposed to do -- and then stop?
Lemonhead, The Shield
James V. West
Member

Posts: 567


WWW
« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2002, 07:07:06 PM »

Quote from: Blake Hutchins

I was the one -- I think -- who cast the MoV and MoD in terms of conflict resolution v. conflict complication several moons ago.


Yes, I think you were. Thanks!

Quote

My experience with The Pool (using the MoD rules) remains one of the most illuminating RP experiences of my life.  I'm itching to play TQB and take it a step further, as I love the refinements James has added to the rules.


Coolness.

Quote

I'm leery of piling further qualifications on monologues of either stripe, as I think it really does come down to player trust.  Let the players pick their pacing and leave the direction of their monologues to them.


I agree. The simpler, the better. The brainstorming I've done with the basic system isn't meant to be applied to either of the two games. Essentially, I'm playing with the ideas of risk and narrative control using pool mechanics. There are just so many different applications and I like thinking about them :-).
Logged

Blake Hutchins
Member

Posts: 614


« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2002, 03:24:47 PM »

Thanks, James.  I wasn't trolling for kudos, simply pointing out that I'd been thinking about the conflict resolution/complication stuff for awhile.  That dichotomy mirrors how one handles scene construction in fiction writing, actually, almost in a scene/sequel or action/reaction kind of way.

Y'know, there's nothing wrong with offering players some plug-in suggestions on how they might modify their game's MoD and MoV rules.  Some groups might want more structure and, well, rules-encoded guidance, than others.  That way your brainstorming permutations isn't wasted time, but you keep the core rules simple and uncontaminated.

My nickel for the day.  Good luck on your playtest.  I look forward to seeing the results.

Best,

Blake
Logged
James V. West
Member

Posts: 567


WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2002, 06:36:43 PM »

Ah yes, this is very true Blake. I've been really seeing the benefit of offering alternative rules uses but I'm also wary of muddying the system. I like clear, precise rules with none of this "if the rules don't work for you, just toss em out" crap.

Anyway, alternate approaches to Monologues would probably be a cool thing to explore in the text.
Logged

Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!