[Six Bullets] Blood Shot Eyes - Conception playtest

[andrew_kenrick]

list]
[li]Nimrod Jones played Shotgun Steve, publican of the Shotgun pub and ringleader of the villains.[/li]

Graham Walmsley played Sgt Bill Davis, a corrupt cop, days away from retirement.

<

Peter played Michael Carter, a smartly dressed hitman.

Scott Dorward played Eddie the Weasel, whose name said it all.

I played Jimmy the Knees, a low-ranking hardman enforcer.

And Rich Stokes played Martin, the protagonist. Someone (I think Graham) remarked that Martin was a very middleclass English name, which we all seized upon as an interesting twist.

[li]Graham Walmsley played Sgt Bill Davis, a corrupt cop, days away from retirement.[/li]
[li]Peter played Michael Carter, a smartly dressed hitman.[/li]
[li]Scott Dorward played Eddie the Weasel, whose name said it all.[/li]
[li]I played Jimmy the Knees, a low-ranking hardman enforcer.[/li]
[li]And Rich Stokes played Martin, the protagonist. Someone (I think Graham) remarked that Martin was a very middleclass English name, which we all seized upon as an interesting twist.[/li]

[andrew_kenrick]

[andrew_kenrick]

[andrew_kenrick]

[andrew_kenrick]

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Andrew!

Congratulations on the great playtest!

I make no claims to being the right guy or to having the right answers, but for what it's worth, here are my thoughts on your questions.

1. How many dice is too many? Is there such a thing as a game requiring too many dice?

I don't really know if there's an answer for that. Some people used to bring up to 20d6 apiece to our old Champions games. How many did you end up using for this particular session?

2. Narration rights were fairly vague. The antagonist set the scene and assigned roles, but once the game got going people just stepped in and narrated as appropriate. Do you think this vagueness will be a problem?

I think it's fine. Some games really need narration to be designated, and others have enough internal structure for the narration to be left ad lib. I think that you should say it's ad lib, though.

Quote

Quote

5. The revelation map worked well and provided a nice focus, but we also found ourselves adding other things to it like the odd note, or attributes created for a scene. Do you think this will prove too much of a distraction?

Hey, that sounds like a gift from the gods to me. Put it in as a rule! "Feel free to add the odd note or scene attributes right onto the map." Everybody wins.

Quote

	Logged

[Graham W]

Thanks Andrew, that was fun.

1. How many dice is too many? Is there such a thing as a game requiring too many dice?

My instinct is to say no. But we used loads, didn't we? Six per player plus about twelve for the protagonist plus about twenty that we put it because we kept replenishing the dice pool in the centre. Oh, plus some to associate with motifs like Dark Alley.

It's something to keep an eye on, although once the fan mail system gets sorted, the problem might go away.

2. Narration rights were fairly vague. The antagonist set the scene and assigned roles, but once the game got going people just stepped in and narrated as appropriate. Do you think this vagueness will be a problem?

That's funny. I don't remember it like that. I remember that the narration went broadly like this:

1. The Protagonist says what he's doing
2. One of the antagonist players (either a mook or the main villain for the scene) narrates a conflict at some point ("I swing the sledgehammer")
3. The conflict's resolved.
4. Whoever wins the conflict narrates how it ends.
5. Go back to step 1.

Now, within this, we kept making suggestions - "Oh! How about the object's a tape?" - and it was a bit more blurred when two mooks were attacking. But I thought it was fairly clear who was allowed to narrate.

Quote

Quote

5. The revelation map worked well and provided a nice focus, but we also found ourselves adding other things to it like the odd note, or attributes created for a scene. Do you think this will prove too much of a distraction?

I was a bit confused about the revelation map. I wasn't sure whether it was just for revelations ("Steve is going bankrupt!") or for things to clarify later ("There's a guitar and it's significant") or for general things (like the classical guitar soundtrack I added, which I'm not sure was a good idea). I think it's important it includes things to clarify later, but I'm not sure about notes.

Quote

	Logged

[andrew_kenrick]

1. How many dice is too many? Is there such a thing as a game requiring too many dice?

I don't really know if there's an answer for that. Some people used to bring up to 20d6 apiece to our old Champions games. How many did you end up using for this particular session?

As Graham says, about 6 apiece for attributes etc (and the protag had 6 more for v-dice), then 15-20 in the middle of the table for using as fan mail and describing the scene. To be honest, it's not really an issue - you never roll more than 4 or 5 at a time so if dice were short you could cope. It's just I use the dice as physical tokens, actual dice representing actual attributes or whatever. There are no doubt other ways you could handle it, but I quite like big piles of dice!

Quote from: Ron Edwards on February 05, 2007, 02:46:22 PM

Quote from: Ron Edwards on February 05, 2007, 02:46:22 PM

5. The revelation map worked well and provided a nice focus, but we also found ourselves adding other things to it like the odd note, or attributes created for a scene. Do you think this will prove too much of a distraction?

Hey, that sounds like a gift from the gods to me. Put it in as a rule! "Feel free to add the odd note or scene attributes right onto the map." Everybody wins.

It seemed like the natural place to put them, so I think I will.

Quote from: Ron Edwards on February 05, 2007, 02:46:22 PM

	Logged

Andrew Kenrick
www.steampowerpublishing.com
Dead of Night - a pocket sized game of b-movie and slasher horror

[andrew_kenrick]

Thanks Andrew, that was fun.

Thanks Graham - I was really nervous about running it and glad people had fun.

1. How many dice is too many? Is there such a thing as a game requiring too many dice?

My instinct is to say no. But we used loads, didn't we? Six per player plus about twelve for the protagonist plus about twenty that we put it because we kept replenishing the dice pool in the centre. Oh, plus some to associate with motifs like Dark Alley.

Yeh, we did use a fair few! I don't think it's really a problem, but worth considering. Should the dice used for setting the chapter out and the dice used for fan mail be one and the same?

2. Narration rights were fairly vague. The antagonist set the scene and assigned roles, but once the game got going people just stepped in and narrated as appropriate. Do you think this vagueness will be a problem?

That's funny. I don't remember it like that. I remember that the narration went broadly like this:

1. The Protagonist says what he's doing
2. One of the antagonist players (either a mook or the main villain for the scene) narrates a conflict at some point ("I swing the sledgehammer")
3. The conflict's resolved.
4. Whoever wins the conflict narrates how it ends.
5. Go back to step 1.

Now, within this, we kept making suggestions - "Oh! How about the object's a tape?" - and it was a bit more blurred when two mooks were attacking. But I thought it was fairly clear who was allowed to narrate.

Except the conflict wasn't always resolved by that point, especially if the antagonist won! I remember some of the hero vs mook fights went on for quite a few conflicts. But, at least in my opinion, this never seemed to be a problem.

Quote from: Graham Walmsley on February 05, 2007, 11:16:47 PM

Quote from: Graham Walmsley on February 05, 2007, 11:16:47 PM

I was a bit confused about the revelation map. I wasn't sure whether it was just for revelations ("Steve is going bankrupt!") or for things to clarify later ("There's a guitar and it's significant") or for general things (like the classical guitar soundtrack I added, which I'm not sure was a good idea). I think it's important it includes things to clarify later, but I'm not sure about notes.

I went into the game intending it to just be for revelations, but as the game went on it seemed natural to put other things on it. Did it become clearer as the game went on? Did you think it was a problem for the rev-map to have all these things on it? Does what a revelation is exactly need to be defined?

Quote from: Graham Walmsley on February 05, 2007, 11:16:47 PM

	Logged

Andrew Kenrick
www.steampowerpublishing.com
Dead of Night - a pocket sized game of b-movie and slasher horror

[Geoff Hall]

Okay, seeing as you appear to be ignoring me on the CE forum I'll repost my responses here :p

1. How many dice is too many? Is there such a thing as a game requiring too many dice?

1. I don't think so; just look at the popularity of Exalted, a game that often requires individual characters to roll dice pools of 30+ d10's.

2. Narration rights were fairly vague. The antagonist set the scene and assigned roles, but once the game got going people just stepped in and narrated as appropriate. Do you think this vagueness will be a problem?

2. I think that it will depend on the group. You were blessed with a cool group of people for your playtest who have a good chunk of experience playing indie games and rolling with the whole player narration angle. Of course I would have to imagine that the same would be true for most people who would be likely to pick up Six Bullets in the first place so there's some mitigation right there. Still, it might be worth trying out a more structured format for determining narration rights in your next playtest, see how it flows. If it doesn't work you can always switch back to 'whoever seems best placed to narrate does so.'

Quote from: andrew_kenrick on February 05, 2007, 02:02:42 PM

Quote from: andrew_kenrick on February 05, 2007, 02:02:42 PM

5. The revelation map worked well and provided a nice focus, but we also found ourselves adding other things to it like the odd note, or attributes created for a scene. Do you think this will prove too much of a distraction?

5. It could although, having never seen it in action, I don't really feel qualified to comment! Still, using the map for things other than the revelations could certainly serve to dilute its presence and focus somewhat. Maybe require notes to be made in standard roleplaying format? I.e. on a bit of paper in front of the relevant player? Of course if groups want to use it to make notes and find it convenient they will and, again, that's not a bad thing.  I wouldn't put a rule about it myself, let groups do what they think works best for them.

Quote from: andrew_kenrick on February 05, 2007, 02:02:42 PM

	Logged

Live Journal: http://dread-fuzzy.livejournal.com/

[Graham W]

Yeh, we did use a fair few! I don't think it's really a problem, but worth considering. Should the dice used for setting the chapter out and the dice used for fan mail be one and the same?

So, if I'm setting out a scene, I dole out some of the fan mail dice? That's not bad. Sure.

Except the conflict wasn't always resolved by that point, especially if the antagonist won! I remember some of the hero vs mook fights went on for quite a few conflicts.

Oh, I see: the immediate conflict was resolved ("Does the crowbar hit his kneecaps?"), but the wider conflict ("Does the mook get taken down?") could sometimes be left open. That's true. I thought that worked well and I'm rather glad we didn't go into stake-setting: "My goal is break your kneecaps!". The Vengeance dice gave a nice intuitive guide as to how serious the results were for the loser.

I went into the game intending it to just be for revelations, but as the game went on it seemed natural to put other things on it. Did it become clearer as the game went on? Did you think it was a problem for the rev-map to have all these things on it? Does what a revelation is exactly need to be defined?

I'd prefer it clarified one way or the other: either a focussed Revelation Map, where we write plot facts we've established; or a more general Map, where we can write anything that we think helps (e.g. the soundtrack thing). I quite like that it should be focussed, actually, but I haven't thought it through in detail.

I'm a little worried about just letting people narrate a revelation at any time, as then you have the question about who decides if it's valid or not? At least with a conflict, you can have that decision fall to the winner.

Yes, I can see that. I guess I was imagining that there'd always have to be group consensus to add something: I ask "How about there was a packet in the guitar" and everyone goes "Sure".

Do you think it needed a reward system at all? This was the first time it's had one at all, and I thought it worked quite well, but was fairly ad hoc and haphazard.

You know, I'm not sure it does. But if you like it, of course, then stick with it. But it's something to keep an eye on.

Graham

[Rich Stokes]

Andrew,

The first thing I have to say is that I really, really enjoyed that playtest.  I'd deliberately avoided learning too much about the game and it's system before coming down to conception to make the playtest more interesting.

Before I look at your questions too deeply, I'll list some thoughts about the game:

The system seemed to work, but I couldn't help feeling that things were a bit "wooly" here and there.  For example, everyone got an extra d6 every time I won a conflict.  These dice were be kept in a pool along with the 6 I started with and could either be spent 1:1 on any roll or used to add traits to my character.  Dice "used" just to add to a roll are lost, but dice converted into traits stick around while that trait sticks around.  I started off by creating the trait "Revolver" for 2 dice for example.  The problem is that I can't see why I would want to just spend dice and lose them.  Why not just create a new trait with them?  Either way I lose the die from my pool, but by creating a new trait I might get to use that die again later.

I think the whole "adding a revelation to the map" thing works superbly, but with the caveat that there was this big pause whenever it came up.  What happened was there was this really intense, bloody violence with a wicked-cool fast paced narrative.  Then dice are rolled, which takes next to no time and the outcome is also narrated as really fast paced.  Then there was this choice: Take an extra die or add an extra attribute to yourself or someone else, then add something to the revelation map.  So often during the playtest, there was this pause in the narrative where people thought about what to add to the revelation map if they didn't have anything in mind.

I was thinking about how to overcome this and still remain pretty flexible.  The best solution I could come up with looked something like:

The winner of the conflict gets an extra die from somewhere.
They can immediately spend it to either:

a) Create a new attribute for a character (their own or someone else's as long as that new attribute makes sense in context of the conflict and it's narrative)*.  When creating an attribute in this way, players can spend other dice from their pool as well.**

b) Add a revelation to the map or create an attribute on the map ***.

This way, I think there's a reasonable limit to the revelations (as in, you can only create one if you win a conflict) but nobody ever feels like they have to create something when they don't have any ideas to hand.

I think the "Blood in your eyes" motif came about pretty organically.  I'd hate to try and force that, but at the same time, I think that the idea of a motif worked very well.  I think that a mention of a motif is a good idea, but trying to force it is going to lead to a lot of pauses as people try to think of ways that work and after a while it'll get kinda tedious (I mean, how many times can someone get shot/stabbed in the eye before it becomes boring?)

Dishing out the dice at the start of the scene worked very well indeed, but there needs to be a bit more guidance for how many dice there are and how they get distributed.  Even if it's a case of "here are 2 dice per player, distribute them as you see fit, but make sure everyone gets at least 1".  Also, what exactly do these mooks get?  Do they just get 2 dice or whatever to use in all the conflicts they are involved in, (so one might look like "DI Cutter: 2d") or do they have specific traits? (DI Cutter: Police Brutality - 1d, Bolt Croppers - 1d)

So, I want to see:

1) A good reason to spend dice directly from my pool.  This might be as simple as saying you can only create attributes at certain points.

2) A more structured way of resolving the rewards for winning a conflict

3) Tightening up on the way the "extras" were created and worked

[Rich Stokes]

As for your specific questions:

1) There's no such thing as too many dice.  You're using d6s and only really expecting there to be about 15 per player abs max.  No problem.

2) The vague narration worked very well, but I have a feeling that you'll find it wasn't all that vague really.  I rather think that there were rules to what we were doing, I just don't really know what they were.  I think this is something that needs close attention in the next playtest.  There was the "Start with a conflict, winner narrates the outcome", but then who sets up the next conflict?  We started off by going around the table, but then it was just someone's idea and I think it went from there.  It certyainly felt a lot more structured to me.

3) I say let the violence motifs just crop up organically.

4) I think the bite sized conflicts worked rather well, but I can see the need for certain scenes not to just be "Kill the boss and his mooks as graphically as possible".  I had a great time with the 2 scenes we played, but I can see that getting boring if all the scenes followed the same format.  I don't think they would have, but there might need to be some guidance or mechanic for that.

5) Adding all kinds of funky stuff really worked for me.  I like that.

6) I suggested earlier that you can maybe spend dice when you come up with a revelation.

7) I didn't really dwell much on the reward mechanic.  I was busy killing people with massive vengeance!

[andrew_kenrick]

Ok, lots of things to reply to, so one at a time:

Geoff: yeh, I'm not sure dice is really a problem. As I said to Ron, I think any problems arise from me using them as counters and tokens, which can easily be rectified. Having said that, of all the die types, d6s are the least likely to be in short supply.

I agree with you about the short bloody vignettes and conflicts - yes, that is what the game is all about, although it's not all of what it's about. I definitely see the potential for more talky scenes, and although that never really came into this playtest, it has done in previous ones. Some games will end up very fast paced and bloody, others less so.

I think I'm leaning towards loose guidelines for narration and conflicts, with slightly firmer guidelines for revelations. And a limit for the reward dice sounds sensible too, ensuring that they are actually valuable.

Graham: I agree about setting stakes for the conflict. To be honest, it worked well from my pov, so I just need to find a way to channel that back into the game! I think specifying fairly broad stakes ("I shoot the mook" "I hit him with the crowbar") works well, but stating that there is the possibility that the outcome of this conflict will not be final, that it can and should be taken further.

Yes, I agree that the rev-map needs tightening up as to what it is used for exactly. Whilst I don't want it to turn into a general space for notes, and want it to remain focused on the revelations, I think using it for notes and attributes is handy, so I'm in two minds.

As for narrating a revelation, I think we got lucky about narrating them - they always fitted the plot nicely. I've certainly encountered some problems with previous playtests where the players disagreed, and we ended up dicing off for it, which didn't really satisfy anyone. I like to think that the new rules avoid that situation, but I'll keep an eye on it. For now I'd like a mechanic to stay.

The reward system is one of the newest additions, so it's definitely on probation until it proves itself!

[andrew_kenrick]

The system seemed to work, but I couldn't help feeling that things were a bit "wooly" here and there.  For example, everyone got an extra d6 every time I won a conflict.  These dice were be kept in a pool along with the 6 I started with and could either be spent 1:1 on any roll or used to add traits to my character.  Dice "used" just to add to a roll are lost, but dice converted into traits stick around while that trait sticks around.  I started off by creating the trait "Revolver" for 2 dice for example.  The problem is that I can't see why I would want to just spend dice and lose them.  Why not just create a new trait with them?  Either way I lose the die from my pool, but by creating a new trait I might get to use that die again later.

Yes, things were a little wooly in places! Much of the game was written down, but things like vengeance dice got thrown in as we started the game - I had taken them out of the current rules, but had a change of heart at the last minute. I'm glad I threw them back in!

I added the "spare dice" that could be thrown in and discarded because in previous playtests most players ended up with 2 or 3 dice worth of traits and the rest never got used, so it's a way to make them all useful! I thought it might help swing things in favour of a player who really wanted to win a conflict too, without resorting to throwing every trait they had into a conflict. It's a valid question though, and not one I really have an answer too. What do you think?

I think the whole "adding a revelation to the map" thing works superbly, but with the caveat that there was this big pause whenever it came up.  What happened was there was this really intense, bloody violence with a wicked-cool fast paced narrative.  Then dice are rolled, which takes next to no time and the outcome is also narrated as really fast paced.  Then there was this choice: Take an extra die or add an extra attribute to yourself or someone else, then add something to the revelation map.  So often during the playtest, there was this pause in the narrative where people thought about what to add to the revelation map if they didn't have anything in mind.

Actually I think more often than a pause, we just found ourselves skipping over it to keep up with the pace. And if we're regularly skipping a step of the mechanics then I think there's something "up" with those mechanics.

I was thinking about how to overcome this and still remain pretty flexible.  The best solution I could come up with looked something like:

The winner of the conflict gets an extra die from somewhere.
They can immediately spend it to either:

a) Create a new attribute for a character (their own or someone else's as long as that new attribute makes sense in context of the conflict and it's narrative)*.  When creating an attribute in this way, players can spend other dice from their pool as well.**

b) Add a revelation to the map or create an attribute on the map ***.

This way, I think there's a reasonable limit to the revelations (as in, you can only create one if you win a conflict) but nobody ever feels like they have to create something when they don't have any ideas to hand.

Did you mean to refer to something with the asterisks? I think this idea has potential. Perhaps you could just grab a different colour die whenever you win a conflict, and at a suitable point or pause in the narration you can spend them to make an attribute or narrate a narration? Perhaps this could be how reward dice get used?

I think the "Blood in your eyes" motif came about pretty organically.  I'd hate to try and force that, but at the same time, I think that the idea of a motif worked very well.  I think that a mention of a motif is a good idea, but trying to force it is going to lead to a lot of pauses as people try to think of ways that work and after a while it'll get kinda tedious (I mean, how many times can someone get shot/stabbed in the eye before it becomes boring?)

Yeh, I think I'm decided on this one - connect vdice to motifs explicitly when talking about vdice, but don't force them or define them upfront. Have them emerge organically as and when appropriate.

Dishing out the dice at the start of the scene worked very well indeed, but there needs to be a bit more guidance for how many dice there are and how they get distributed.  Even if it's a case of "here are 2 dice per player, distribute them as you see fit, but make sure everyone gets at least 1".  Also, what exactly do these mooks get?  Do they just get 2 dice or whatever to use in all the conflicts they are involved in, (so one might look like "DI Cutter: 2d") or do they have specific traits? (DI Cutter: Police Brutality - 1d, Bolt Croppers - 1d)

Again, the idea transmuted in play. I think both are valid - both DI Cutter 2d or Police Brutality 2d work for me. What I had intended is for them to work like a player's regular dice, so that they'd have to spend them on making traits for the mook, but I think that's a little unnecessary considering how long a mook generally survives.

I also wondered whether these scene dice should just be added to a player's regular pool, and then he makes his mooks out of that, but I think that encourages people to just hoard dice for when it's their go.