2 player Universalis?

[Sovem]

Is it possible to play Universalis, as written, with only two people? I tried it once, but it seemed that between two people, there just weren't enough coins to get the story moving in any significant way. Would bumping the number of coins up solve the problem? Has anyone played Universalis one on one?

[Aaron Smith]

I've done it, but it requires a few changes to the basic setup. First of all, you're right. The suggested coin base and amount of refresh works much better with 4-5 players than it does with any lower number. With 2 players only, you would probably want to consider doubling or even tripling all the given amounts. Say 40 coins as a start amount, and 12 coins per every refresh.

I've also done a variant based on Univeralis on a IM system, which doesn't use coins at all, but rather 'turns' as a unit of currency. It's only loosely based on the full rules of Universalis, but it seems to flow smoothly for cooperative IM storytelling.

You start with the people involved, and you take turns adding elements to the set. If you want to protest something, you can make a bid of 'turns' against it. That is, how many turns you forfit in order to deny the addition of the element you don't like.

[Valamir]

Universalis was originally playtested via chat room with 2 players and the first round of in person playtests also featured 2 players (myself and Mike).  Granted the goals of a playtest game are pretty different from the goals of actual real play, but functionally the game worked quite well.

Altering the refresh rate and starting Wealth are certainly some obvious possibilities and the game encourages you to set levels that accomodate your play style.

I'm going to offer an alternative suggestion.  Try driving towards Complications.  Complications can turn into Coin making machines and in my experience the Coin refresh serves more as a safety net so people who overspent have a chance to get back in the game than as a primary source of income. 

It seems pretty common among many regular players of the game to steer away from Complications.  I hear of entire game sessions being played where there is only 1 or 2 Complications the whole night.  That's certainly a viable way to play, but my preference is Complicate Big - Complicate Often.  If I don't have at least 1 Complication per scene (and sometimes more than one) I kind of wonder what was the point of that scene...why have a scene if there isn't enough meat there to drive towards a Complication people would find interesting.  That's not a rule or a requirement by any means...just my preferred way to play.  In fact the "Mini Scene" rules I wrote specifically for those times when you need to get some information dumped into the SIS but don't want a full blown Complication out of it.  Mike and I have each played entire sessions that more or less boiled down to 1 long extended Complication (sometimes nested inside other Complications). 

I often feel that this is quite different from the way Uni is being played out in the world.

In any event driving towards Complications accomplish a few things in a two player game.  It provides a source of Coins that doesn't involve altering the Refresh rate.  And it serves to throw a creative springboard in the game.  Complications make great creative springboards in all play, but in a two player game especially that extra oomph comes in handy.  Just like running out of physical resources players in two player games can also run low on creative resources.

So when the other player's narration is becoming a bit blah...figure out a way to turn it into a Complication.  Who or what would want things to turn out differently...bring 'em in.  The quest to find justification to bring in Traits or create new Traits will often get the juices flowing (as well as the Coins) and provide a lot of spin off material for future scenes.

[Tony Irwin]

Hi Sovem,

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=8638.0

That's a link to a thread where someone asked a simillar question - there's a few (maybe three or four) links to write ups of two player games of Universalis.

Hope that helps! I'd love to see you do a write up here of the two player game you tried so that we can all compare notes. I think the fact that it doesn't need a GM makes Universalis a very appealling game for small groups of people. It would be good to thrash out lots of real life examples and advice for how it can produce reliable fun for just a pair of players.

Tony

[Sovem]

Thanks guys! I appreciate all the help. And I definately understand about the Complications bit... I try to drive towards Complications, but I'm not very good at it yet. I've only played twice, though.

The first time was the 2 player I mentioned. It was really just trying to test run the rules, and it didn't go beyond one scene. It was my fault for not following the cardinal advice of not going along with Tenents you don't like just to make someone else happy, but it took me forever to convince my wife to play and I wanted to make sure she was interested.

Our main problem, I think, was that we were probably playing it too strict; paying coins for everything, even things that should have been Color. After playing with some more people and reading lots of threads and playtests, I think I'd be ready to try it again. But I wanted to ask here, first, if there was any specific advice for the 2 player games. Thanks!

John

[Robotech_Master]

And when you're having a hard time finding a rationale for a complication, just consider the words of Raymond Chandler:

Undoubtedly the stories about them [hard-boiled detectives] had a fantastic element. Such things happened, but not so rapidly, nor to so close-knit a group of people, nor within so narrow a frame of logic. This was inevitable because the demand was for constant action; if you stopped to think you were lost. When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.

    * Introduction to The Simple Art of Murder (short story collection, 1950)

Just have someone come through the door with a gun, and worry about who and why later.

[Mike Holmes]

Yeah, the Chandler thing works particularly well in Universalis. Consider that if you're the sole GM in a game, you can still make this work all on your own. In Universalis you have at least one other player who may take a hand in making it up.

(Hmm. Has anyone ever proposed solo Universalis?)

Anyhow, that said, four brains is twice two. That is, in fact it is less work to play with more players. So what you're noting is far from uncommon. Two is doable, just more effort than four.

Note that there's a fast point of diminishing returns. After about six players, you'll find that your contributions are diluted too much to be as fun.

As I've said before, I think the optimal play group size is four. Then five, then three, then two, then six and going down going up. (Again not considering solo play).

Mike