[Dreamscape] Dissect this game

[ExternalStudiosLLC]

So I came up with this game system one day in the shower. I became fond of it, and called it Dreamscape. Before I knew what was happening, some people got together, drew the art, edited the text, and played it, and played it, and played it. To make a long story short, the small initial print run of this game is now starting to enjoy something of a warm reception. And our motley crew is hard at work trying to figure out what will make the second print run good enough to take the world by storm.

This is where you come in. I want you to really, I mean, really sink your teeth into this game. Rip it to shreds. Go nuts. Let me know what's got the potential to make it the Best Game Evar, but why, if I don't listen to you, it's going to be an utterly unspeakable failure. I'm going to summarize the rules for the game below for you to dissect. Dreamscape is, in a nutshell, a card game. Although at the heart of the game is pure strategy, there are a lot of roleplaying elements, and you will find that the rules are considerably flexible.

What do you need to play? Your 200 card starter set. Exactly one standard coin, with two sides. Up to 7 friends. One of the players, preferably whoever owns the set, becomes the Deck Keeper. The Deck Keeper is to our game what a Dungeon Master is to AD&D; he draws the cards, reads the important text, makes decisions for the monsters. Arbitrarily decides if your character's latest stunt won't fly. At the beginning of each game, the Deck Keeper builds a map out of connecting map cards. A map is made out of Halls, Forks, and five Dead Ends. Those will become very important later on. The players pick Dreamer cards (there's 16 in a starter set, a decent variety.) Dreamer cards are named things such as "Shadow Tracker," or "Seeker Paladin," or "Vagrant Monk." Archetype, then class. Dreamers have two stats: Hit Points and Attack Points. They may also have Specials, which are abilities usable a given number of times per battle, Reactions, which are Specials that can be used in response to a hostile action, and Passive Abilities, which are Specials that are always "on." Dreamers also have Assists. These are specials so powerful, that they just can't be performed alone. Usually, an assist will call for a certain archetype to be present. The Shadow Tracker's Shadow Snare Assist, for instance, requires a Vagrant -- any kind of Vagrant -- to be in the party. Dreamers can be equipped with 2 items, by default, at Level 1. Item cards also have two stats: Tokens, and Limit. Tokens are durability; use them all up and your item is scrap. Limit is how many tokens a player can chose to use during a turn of battle. Weapons tend to grant you bonus damage when you use tokens, armors reduce damage taken in a similar manner, potions can heal you or grant an effect for a number of turns, and so on. Additionally, items can grant you specials, reactions, or passive abilities of their own. By cleverly combining the effects granted by items with his or her own abilities, a Dreamer can unleash some truly devastating attacks.

Unless you're the Deck Keeper, this is essentially all you need to know to play.

At this point, the Deck Keeper would draw a quest, and read it out loud. This quest corresponds with a dead end on the map, but only the Deck Keeper knows which dead end it is. This dead end will be home to some remarkably tough monster and his friends. Winning that battle allows the party to collect a big reward and level up. The Dreamers wander through the map. The Deck Keeper turns the map cards over, reading the text that describes each room, as the Dreamers walk through it. What exactly happens in each room is up to the Deck Keeper and the event deck. A card could be drawn that signifies a trap, a treasure, a gruesome battle, or some other event entirely... And so it goes. Groups that prefer a role-playing experience can talk among themselves, scour rooms for clues, quibble over which way to go. Basically, anything that you would do in an ordinary tabletop game. More strategy-oriented groups will waste no time in getting to the battles and then meticulously pour over the cards, trying to decide how to take out the enemies in the best way humanly possible, making the most of each special, item, and assist. Both of these are perfectly valid ways to play Dreamscape. A more comprehensive version of the rules can be found here: Dreamscape Rulebook. That's the game, in a nutshell. Have at it.

I do have a few copies of the game that I'd like to send out for free to anyone interested in writing a review. Since supplies are limited, preference will be given to those who include a link to a previous review authored by them, and published by any reputable website or magazine that deals with gaming. So if you've found the summary of the rules intriguing and want to try picking Dreamscape apart with your gaming group, send an email to myatskar@externalstudios.com and let me know.

Thanks!

[xenopulse]

First, I really like straight-forward Gamist designs. This one sounds like it has potential.  Here are some questions and comments on your overview:

a) "[The GM] [a]rbitrarily decides if your character's latest stunt won't fly."
This might be a dealbreaker, and probably the worst thing you can do to a game like this.  Maybe it just needs clarification, but in my mind, if the game is to work well, there should be no GM fiat.  The cards and rules and coin tosses should determine how actions turn out.  Giving arbitrary power to the GM can truly spoil the fun.  Plus, the GM will only be able to truly and without social repercussions focus on providing the best adversity if he has no arbitrary powers, but clearly delineated abilities.

b) Is there a way to preserve characters between games?  I could see this going either way.  Preserving characters makes it more RPG-esque and provides continuity, but might break the game after a while if the characters get stronger while the cards with challenges remain the same.

c) Is there a way to make this GM-less?  That would kick ass; collaborative play against the deck.

[ExternalStudiosLLC]

xenopulse -- glad you find the design appealing! Let me see if I can address your questions.

a) "[The GM] [a]rbitrarily decides if your character's latest stunt won't fly." This might be a dealbreaker, and probably the worst thing you can do to a game like this.

Ack! That would be an artifact of an earlier incarnation of this post. We do not encourage the Deck Keeper to forbid any action that the rules will allow. We do, however, encourage the Deck Keeper to balance the game a bit on the fly. For instance, the number of monsters in most battles scales relative to the number of players -- but a new group could still find the numbers overwhelming, while a seasoned group of "power gamers" could find that it isn't very challenging anymore. The Deck Keeper could easily adjust the number of monsters in an encounter to make the battles a bit more fair.

b) Is there a way to preserve characters between games? I could see this going either way. Preserving characters makes it more RPG-esque and provides continuity, but might break the game after a while if the characters get stronger while the cards with challenges remain the same.

After players complete a quest, they effectively level up and end a session. By default, the adjusted stats are written down for next session. While it is true that a higher level party will not have trouble with the typical session played straight from the starter set, we are currently working on expansions with higher-level content.

c) Is there a way to make this GM-less? That would kick ass; collaborative play against the deck.

That's a terrific idea, and I'll definitely give it some thought! However, it might be a bit difficult to execute, since monsters have abilities that are every bit as complex as those of players, and ideally, need someone to run them... I could see how an optional list that briefly describes a monster's favored tactic might solve that problem, though.

Thanks for the feedback!

Edit: Looks like I forgot to link to the PDF version of the rulebook! It's a bit more detailed than the summary I've posted here. They can be found at this URL: http://externalstudios.com/dreamscape/freebies/dreamscape-alpha-rules.pdf

[xenopulse]

We do not encourage the Deck Keeper to forbid any action that the rules will allow.

Make that "do not allow the Deck Keeper" and you're good in my book :)

The Deck Keeper could easily adjust the number of monsters in an encounter to make the battles a bit more fair.

This is a tough one.  One thing that has plagued games like D&D from the start is that the GM is responsible for balance.  It's the GM's fault if the challenges are too hard or too easy, and that's a difficult and potentially frustrating path to walk.  Maybe you can have little lists or tables that show something like "total party level 5: 3 orges; total party level 6: 4 ogres."  

Trust me on this one.  The less balancing resonsibility the GM has, the more gleefully s/he can focus on providing fun challenges to the players without holding back.  I understand if that's difficult to implement with cards, however.

it is true that a higher level party will not have trouble with the typical session played straight from the starter set, we are currently working on expansions with higher-level content.

That's good business sense at work :)

[zobmie]

i want to play this game. Badly. Hurry up and finish so i can buy it.

[ExternalStudiosLLC]

xenopulse --

This is a tough one. One thing that has plagued games like D&D from the start is that the GM is responsible for balance. It's the GM's fault if the challenges are too hard or too easy, and that's a difficult and potentially frustrating path to walk. Maybe you can have little lists or tables that show something like "total party level 5: 3 orges; total party level 6: 4 ogres."

Agreed. We're trying to reach a point where the game can balance itself. The way in which battles are balanced in the Alpha edition is remarkably similar to what you suggested. Most battles call for a number of monster cards equal to the size of the party +/- 1 or 2.  That works 90% of the time, but it's nice to give the Deck Keeper the option to adjust it for a party that has an unusual style of gameplay.

zobmie --

i want to play this game. Badly. Hurry up and finish so i can buy it.

Then you'll be glad to know that you can already order an Alpha copy in our online store! A starter set includes 200 cards (including 5 quests) and feeds 2-8 players. At $12.95, we think it's well worth your dirty blood money. ;)

[Simon Kamber]

That works 90% of the time, but it's nice to give the Deck Keeper the option to adjust it for a party that has an unusual style of gameplay.

How about leaving it to the group, rather than the Deck Keeper? That way, it's possible for the group to decide to change the difficulty of the challenges, but you're not giving the whole responsibility for balance to one player.

[ExternalStudiosLLC]

xect --

How about leaving it to the group, rather than the Deck Keeper? That way, it's possible for the group to decide to change the difficulty of the challenges, but you're not giving the whole responsibility for balance to one player.

An interesting idea... However, I think that in order for a group to really enjoy an adventure, you have to limit their control of it somewhat. It could work if the group got to decide the overall difficulty of the adventure before each session, as opposed to being able to tweak the difficulty on the fly like the Deck Keeper might. A "hard" adventure could mean that every time a battle happens an additional monster card is drawn, and every time the party receives loot, they get one less item as long as it doesn't reduce the number of items to zero.  Conversely, an "easy" adventure could offer more items and less baddies to fight.  If nothing else, I'll probably make that an optional rule. Thanks for the feedback!

[Sydney Freedberg]

A "hard" adventure could mean that every time a battle happens an additional monster card is drawn, and every time the party receives loot, they get one less item as long as it doesn't reduce the number of items to zero.  Conversely, an "easy" adventure could offer more items and less baddies to fight.

Consider inverting that:

For every level of "easy" you choose, you get -1 monster to fight, but also -1 treasure if you win.
For every level of "hard," you get +1 monster, but also +1 treasure.

That means difficulty level is not simply a matter of the players rating how hard a slog they want, but a rational cost:benefit decision and -- just as important -- an emotional "so are you up to the big leagues now?" challenge.

[ExternalStudiosLLC]

Sydney -- good call!

[Simon Kamber]

That would also make it possible to actually scale the game to the level of the group as they progress. So, they're tougher now, they can take higher difficulties, kill more monsters and take more stuff.

[ExternalStudiosLLC]

Just a thought:

Another possible solution to balancing the difficulty of the game may be simply putting more powerful monsters in the deck. Each monster has a gold value -- this is the ammount of gold the party can loot from it after the battle. It could also be used as a point value to keep track of how difficult the typical encounter tends to be. A 10,000 gold deck might be easy, a 20,000 gold deck might be medium, etc.