[Lacuna Part 1] "Nine gram medal"

[nilsderondeau]

Okay, I'm sold. Want want want want.

But: should I rush out and buy the current version or wait for the new-and-improved version? (And, uh, no, as much as I love to support Indie games, I don't think I'm going to buy both).

Hmm.  Mee tooo, but I bit before Jared's last post.  But am undeterred in trying to set up the agenda for a PBEM. (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=232645)

[Jared A. Sorensen]

Okay, I'm sold. Want want want want.

But: should I rush out and buy the current version or wait for the new-and-improved version? (And, uh, no, as much as I love to support Indie games, I don't think I'm going to buy both).

The new version will replace the old one, which means it's still $5 and existing owners get the new version for free.

The print version of second attempt is going to have artwork and be available as a perfect-bound paperback.

[drozdal]

Perhaps Thor and Dro would like to add feedback as well?
Or perhaps I should have started a new thread...
-Luke

Ok - here is how i felt about the game. First of all I think Second Attempt is much "easier on the players" than Part 1 was, mainly because You can always chose to re-roll the failed tests (driving your heart rate up, but hey that's the necessary sacrifice you have to deal with if you want to succeed). Our first Lacuna game was plagued with failed rolls that forced us to eject from the Blue City before we were able to complete mission now we have the choice. One thing that bothered me was getting equipment (and later using it) with Access rolls. Some stuff can be used right away after you rolled your Access (like fake ID badges, search warrants, cars etc.), but on the other hand getting a gun from mission controll, and later using it would require two rolls. I have mixed feelings about that, on one side it feels "right", but on the other that's two rolls to get the effect instead of one. So was it player's fault that he choose this piece of equipment to accomplish his goal, i do not know, but if he rolled a success it just do not feel right to force him to roll again in the same conflict.

[Thor Olavsrud]

Which brings me to my next point. During character creation, we players got nearly no input into our characters. The one point Jared allowed was to increase one stat and subsequently decrease another. Allowing me this input allowed me to invest in the game and to have a sense of self in the game. With the options before me, I decided I wanted to play a predator -- a creature of Instinct -- an homme dur. Instinct to Proficient, Talent to Deficient.

Dro upped his Access to Proficient, Force to Deficient.
Thor kept everything at Nominal.

Dro and I were more forceful with our characters in play. Thor followed our lead. Thor will have to say why that was, I can only speculate.

I was watching both of you and knew you were making use of the option. I decided not to do so in order to see what the difference was. Also, I was waiting for the Ibuprofen to kick in, so I wasn't incredibly focused at the moment and was content to let you lead, especially as it was your first outing.

The result, I think, was that my character felt much more like a blank slate than your characters felt to you. In the end, you used your high rating in Instinct to really define your character by his actions. I stumbled around a bit more trying to find how I wanted to define my character.

Now that I think about it though, your first two establishing actions -- giving weight to the bell hop by tipping him and bringing in your Gitane cigarettes -- were both accomplished by Access rather than Instinct. It was only in your interactions with the girl and the cop that you used Instinct. Or am I misremembering?

It was only at the end, when I made an Access roll to draw a gun in response to a perceived threat (knowing full well that the gun wouldn't be useful), that the character started to crystalize. Jared asked me what type of gun I was drawing. I turned to Luke and said, "you worship Greg's Guns Guns Guns; what's the weapon of a 1940s-era G-man?" To which Luke replied, " Colt M1911-A1, .45 caliber."

Done. I had noted the emotional quirk "obsessively neat" during character creation, and combined with G-man, I imagined a sort of Eliot Ness-type, by-the-book guy. That made for some fun conversations with the very laid-back Control Jared had selected. It happened rather late in our hour-long session, so I didn't have a lot of time to run with it, or confront Luke with his off-the-wall, procedure-be-damned guy.

[nilsderondeau]

Which brings me to my next point. During character creation, we players got nearly no input into our characters. The one point Jared allowed was to increase one stat and subsequently decrease another. Allowing me this input allowed me to invest in the game and to have a sense of self in the game. With the options before me, I decided I wanted to play a predator -- a creature of Instinct -- an homme dur. Instinct to Proficient, Talent to Deficient.
...After play, Jared professed he was pissed at me due to the way I played the character -- because I had a particular concept and image of self and used it to shape The City. He then proposed removing the ability for the players to choose to modify their stats. I was shocked. I would have had no investment in my character whatsoever.

This above lends alot of insight into the setting.  Ron mentioned himself how the characters were complete ciphers.  Yet Ron's players seemed to have more background prepared, have secret information, etc.  Care to comment, Ron?

[timfire]

Ron mentioned himself how the characters were complete ciphers.  Yet Ron's players seemed to have more background prepared, have secret information, etc.  Care to comment, Ron?

Ron's in Germany, so I'm not sure if he will respond or not, but I was one of his players in that game. Previous to us getting together, Ron pre-made 6 charracters---3 males and 3 females---and simply had us pick which ones we wanted. We had no input at all, though we got to pick which finished character we liked the best. The "secret info" was simply stuff Ron got from Jared's website, based on who was our character's mentor (I assume) and how well our "pre-mission" access roll went. As  far as our backgrounds were concerned, Ron created all of our backgrounds. Sexton's (my character's) background, I'm sure, was created pre-play as it was communicated to me during the first session. I would be interested to know if all of the PC's backgrounds were generated pre-play, or if he tweaked them between sessions for the other players. I guess we'll have to wait for him to get back to hear.

Actually, now that I think about it, I was the only player to learn about my background early on. Julie never found out what her character's true background was, Tod and Maura only discovered their's during the last session.

[jrs]

I enjoyed the fact that Coleman's background was not known.  The only thing that Ron described was that one NPC considered it worse than any other agent's.  I got the distinct impression during play that Ron did not have anything specific in mind and that I could have made the background more explicit if I had wanted to. 

I was definitely going with a "don't look back" philosophy for that character.

Julie

[Paul Czege]

Another observation of Luke: I use random reward systems a lot. Whoodathunkit?

Intermittent (but not inconsistent) rewards are more psychologically powerful than consistent rewards. Ron could probably cite a rat study.

Paul

[Larry L.]

Ron,
Thanks a whole bunch for AP on Lacuna. Really.

Paul,
I think you are thinking about B.F. Skinner.

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

I didn't make up much if any back-story for the characters, but rather inferred them and improvised a little, based on how you guys played them. Given, of course, what is explicit in the rules about all player-characters' backgrounds. Tim, you played Sexton as you did, hence I came up with what kind of things he "must" have done prior to his first Blue City experience, pre-play.

Damn this European keyboard is tricky - I'll explain more when I can type without confusing my fingers.

Best,
Ron

[Danny_K]

Ron: thanks for posting this.  Lacuna is a very interesting game under the scrim of mystification.  I'm hoping to play this on RPG.Net now. 

By the way, here's a nice summary of Skinnerian Operant Conditioning -- essential reading for anyone trying to raise a child, train a dog, or design a game:
http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Intermittent_reinforcement