Choosing Games at a CON

[Matt Gwinn]

In a recent thread over in Indie Game Design I asked the question "what is your ideal system?"  Ron brought up that there is no "ideal" system any more than there is an ideal woman.

This got me thinking about what makes a game fun, which then got me thinking about gaming conventions and why I never have fun playing games at them.

I came to the conclusion that it's the people you play with and their similarities/difference to your style of play that play a big part in whether you enjoy a game session.  If this is the case, shouldn't conventions be set up in a different way?  Usually, when you sign up for a game at a con you have no idea who else will be playing.  More often than not, you get stuck with a bunch players you normally wouldn't play with if they paid you.

The convention games that I've had the most fun in have been ones that involved people I already new.  Granted, due to the Forge I know a lot more gamers that I don't play with regularly, but generally speaking what's the point of going to a con if you could have done the same thing at home?

Looking through last year's GENCON book I can see things like 'difficulty' and 'level' listed for each game.  Wouldn't it be heplful if 'style' or 'GNS preference' were also stated?  I think it would make a big diffence in everyone's enjoyment level.

So, I ask.  How do you usually go about picking the games you play at a con?  How has your method changed over the years as you get more experiences with the convention scene?  Do you even preregister anymore?

,Matt G.

[jburneko]

Hello Matt,

I know EXACTLY what you're talking about.  The last con I attended was an absolute DISASTER for this very reason.  You can find my rant somewhere in Actual Play.  I believe the title was: Curse You Ron Edwards because in the post I make the point that before GNS and what not I would have simply blamed either myself or RPGs in general as simply, 'not being as fun as I think they are' but The Forge and other Theory stuff made me feel JUSTIFIED in my dissatisfaction.

The way I generally pick Con games is I simply go over the schedule and I pick the weirdest most FAR OUT unheard of game I can find.  If it  turns out to be somekind of "homebrew ultra-simulationist let's model the atomic mass of every particle in the known universe and take 30 dice rolls to decide if I have the strength to lift my arm" system well then so be it.  The point is, I find that if the game has limited appeal or is relatively unknown its more likely to be focused in SOME WAY because obviously the GM is passionate enough about this game to play it at a con.

Unfortunately, at my local con the most 'far out' game on the list is usually Changeling.  

I find that the attitude of a lot of GMs who run a more 'popular' game is that, 'Well, everyone knows this game, I don't have to prepare anything, the game should basically run itself.'  And then you end up with an unfocused mishmash of people running around some random ill defined setting/situation just 'being their characters' and occasionally rolling dice and not even neccesarily following the rules.

All, I ask from a con game is that it have focus and purpose.  I don't care if I personally enjoy that focus and purpose.  That's why I go to cons, to experience new things, even things I don't normally enjoy.  

Okay, that was a bit ranty but you have to understand that I'm like the Lone Star L.A. Con Reformist out here.

Jesse

[Noble]

Okay, that was a bit ranty but you have to understand that I'm like the Lone Star L.A. Con Reformist out here.

Jesse

Well... I'm not sure about that.  Have you looked enough?  I have a very narrativist-oriented (whether we call ourselves that or not) gaming group; I've encountered several other GMs at the local cons with similar narrativist tendencies.

We're not all the un-washed masses of Gamist Scum.

- Ian

[Ron Edwards]

Ian, please remember that no one is omniscient. Jesse doesn't know your group and cannot possibly be construed as insulting you. I agree that he was swinging wide and wild, but that is not anything that ought to worry you if he fails to connect.

Similarly, Jesse, try to keep from referring to entire metropolitan areas when you're discussing your experience with the people you've encountered.

The topic of this thread concerns choosing games at conventions, and I strongly urge everyone to return to it.

In my case, I don't choose games at conventions. I choose people. Whether they're people I was planning to meet there, or people I've just run into, no difference. Clearly, scheduled demos or games are totally off my radar screen and I have nothing to do with them, unless I were invited for some reason. Part of this perspective concerns my role-playing activity out of cons; when one plays 2-3 times a week with three different sets of people, the con is not a major opportunity to play so much as to learn (or for me specifically, to promote).

Best,
Ron

[Clinton R. Nixon]

When choosing games at conventions, I look for two things:
- Games I haven't gotten a chance to play before, and
- Good people.

I have the kind of unfortunate situation where I like to GM games with a narrativist bent, but enjoy playing lots of other games that I'd never, ever GM. So, when I go to a convention, I look for games I'd never get a chance to be in otherwise, like Adventure!, Godlike, some GURPS games (depending on genre), Star Wars, and these sorts of things.

Luckily, most conventions are small enough that I can change games during the con - once I find a GM and group that seem like a lot of fun, I'll sign up for all their stuff. This happened at my last con, where I ran into an incredible Storyteller GM.

[Jason L Blair]

At my first GenCon, my friend Mike and I flipped through the book, picked a couple games at random, and got tickets. A few of the games were really good (and one got me my first ever playtest credit) but I walked out of two of the games.

In summary, this is not a system I recommend.

What I do recommend are pick-up games. Open tables with actual gamers instead of company reps trying more to sell you on the game than help anyone have a good time. Now, this obviously doesn't work if a)there are no pick-up games or b)you want to try out a game that's yet to be released.

[Noble]

Ron - You're not aware that I've met Jesse and invited him to try my games at the local conventions and suggested other GMs he might also want to try.  For one reason or another, things simply didn't work out.  I  didn't at all feel he was insulting me merely that he's making a judgement based on his limited L.A. convention experience.  Sorry if this got off topic.

- Ian

Ian, please remember that no one is omniscient. Jesse doesn't know your group and cannot possibly be construed as insulting you. I agree that he was swinging wide and wild, but that is not anything that ought to worry you if he fails to connect.

[Ron Edwards]

Ian,

Rrrrrrreallyy ... (eyes narrowed)

I believe some private emails are now called for.

Everyone, continue with scheduled thread topic, move along, nothing to see.

Best,
Ron

[wyrdlyng]

Method used for the few GenCons I've gone to:

- Pick a game I own and  have read and still have no clue what to do with (one of those "Okay, now what?" games -- Blue Planet fell into this category for me)

- Pick game I am curious about but don't feel like shelling out the money for until I determine if it's something I might like (those "borderline" games -- like Worldtree)

- Pick a game which I like and never get to play because few if any people in my area have heard of it, much less play it (like Everway and Ironclaw)

- Pick a demo for something which looks neat (played a neat Providence game that way)

Cons to me are like going to a dealership for test drives or getting free samples at an ice cream parlor. Oh, and a chance to buy things which my local, crappy game stores tell me that their distributor has never heard of.

[Mike Holmes]

I have the fortune of having been to about a Jillion big cons. All I can say is that after twenty years of doing it, you just get a feel. Occasionally you get screwed by someone who can write a good blurb but not play at all. But a lot of times you can just tell.

And it doesn't hurt that I actually remember a lot of names from year to year. If they ran a good game, I look for them again the next year. I suppose for many that's not going to work. But if you have the chance to repeat a Con, try and think about what was good last time.

Anyhow, I find that the GMs that run demos are often very good (hey they might be the designer, or somebody who plays with a designer). But they can also be distracted, especially if the demo is done in the exhibition hall. And they may just be doing it to get in free, which really is the pits (nothing like a completely disinterested GM just running a Demo for credit).

But playing games that you haven't before to test drive them is a valid reason under any circumstance to play a game. It's one of the main functions of a Con as I see it. Just try to be sure that you'll be welcome (Demos for sure, but other GMs often hate having to explain rules; you can sometimes fake it, though).

Mike