[Sorcerer] Our second session

[Lisa Padol]

I have no doubts you can play it and run it and enjoy it.  Many other folks do.

I have no doubt that I can play it and enjoy it.

It just seems to me that, as your players have clearly stated and are trying to defend with greater and greater vigor, it's not the kind of game that does what they want it to do.

I'd be curious to see if someone more familiar with the game could run a Sorcerer game that they'd enjoy, but not really worrying about it.

Do you have another group you can recruit for Sorcerer?

Not really, but not an issue for running demos. Knowing what I'm doing is the big issue there.

-Lisa

[Julian]

Lisa,

Based on these two quotes:

"Every time you have to roll, it's a big context switch from "playing the game" to "fussing with the dice"." and "Not so much -- it's still a counter-immersive process."

I have doubts as to whether this is a viable game for your group.

I have no doubts you can play it and run it and enjoy it.  Many other folks do.  It just seems to me that, as your players have clearly stated and are trying to defend with greater and greater vigor, it's not the kind of game that does what they want it to do.

My opinion is that it's failing to do what _it_ wants to do. The concept is being betrayed by the mechanics.

The die mechanism isn't a killer on its own. Combined with the rest of the systemic weaknesses (which are fixable), it's problematic. Combined with the rulebook, which isn't very well organized or written, it's grating.

[Lisa Padol]

Bret, I'm interested in:
       Fixing the ambiguities we ran into and putting the clarifications somewhere more easily findable.
       Fixing the systemic problems in Sorceror and putting the fixes where someone else can see it, so the system is less of a barrier.
       Maybe pulling the coolest parts of the system out and repuposing another system around them that has a better feel for the group.

For that last, Sorcerer has been an influence on my gming for years before I ran my first session. Cool stuff that can get pulled includes not just Kickers and Bangs, but also R-maps. The idea of what a failure or a fumble should mean (okay, that's from one of the supplements) definitely improved my gming.

-Lisa

[coffeestain]

My opinion is that it's failing to do what _it_ wants to do. The concept is being betrayed by the mechanics.

The die mechanism isn't a killer on its own. Combined with the rest of the systemic weaknesses (which are fixable), it's problematic. Combined with the rulebook, which isn't very well organized or written, it's grating.

Julian,

The writing and organization of the rulebook seems to be a common complaint.  However, I think you'll find a great body of evidence and opinion to the contrary regarding the game not achieving its design goals.

Anyhow, it's a bold statement to make after having played the game a few times and perhaps not completely correctly.  I imagine Ron will address your concerns when he returns from wherever it is that he is.

Regards,

Daniel

[Darren Hill]

Rafial's quick guide to judging Sorcerer dice probabilities is spot on. Like Ralph, I get more impressed with this dice mechanic every day. Every dice pool system should be replaced with it!

For those who find it hard to read dice quickly, get in the habit of following these steps.
(This is difficulty to explain, but it's very easy to do.)

1) Compare the highest single die on each side.
 *  If they are equal, discard (physically set them aside) and repeat.
2) Now, you know the winner.
3) The winner now checks how many of his dice exceed the loser's highest remain die.
* This is how many successes he has.

So, he's an example.
Elric rolls 6 dice, and gets 10, 10, 8, 5, 3, 2
Yrkoon rolls 5 dice, and gets 10, 5, 3, 2, 1

Step 1: check highest dice and discard if equal. That leaves
Elric: 10, 8, 5, 3, 2
Yrkoon: 5, 3, 2, 1

Step 2: we now know Elric has won.

Step 3, Elric now checks how many of his dice beat Yrkoon's highest die, which is a 5. Two of his dice, the 10 and 8 beat it, so he has two successes.

So in answer to an original quote:

"I still don't know what happens with 10/9/8 v 10/1/1" - you should now be able to see the 10/9/8 roll has gained two successes. The tens are discarded, and the 9 and 8 both beat the next highest die, the 1's.

Hope this helps.

[rafial]

Just so Julian doesn't feel totally alone, I'll say that I also have been rather dissatisified with Sorcerer itself actual play, and find its dice mechanic to be a weakness.  However, as Lisa pointed out above, the book is a goldmine of techniques that can inform and improve play in other systems.

[Eero Tuovinen]

From my experiences with the Forge I'm 80% confident that Ron would thank us if we just let this rest and waited for him to come back from Germany. That, and it also seems to me that we've hashed out most of the topic already, apart from the rules questions. My experiences with the complex conflict system and the sorcery mechanics are very different from yours (indeed, I find the combat system of Sorcerer hands down the single best one from 'the 90s and one of the best ever), so either you have some rules misunderstanding going on, or the group overall dislikes the kind of game Sorcerer is. If the former, we need Ron or somebody with the rulebook to pinpoint the problem, if the latter, well, then there's nothing anybody can do about it.

Regardless, I suggest self-moderation in the form of stopping the carousel for now. Really, this isn't going anywhere.

[Julian]

My experiences with the complex conflict system and the sorcery mechanics are very different from yours (indeed, I find the combat system of Sorcerer hands down the single best one from 'the 90s and one of the best ever), so either you have some rules misunderstanding going on, or the group overall dislikes the kind of game Sorcerer is.

I'm not sure what you mean by "dislikes the kind of game Sorcerer is."  The game is not tightly bound to the die mechanic, and we all seem to be enjoying it except for our issues with the rules.