Example of a Engle Matrix Game interest building article.

[MatrixGamer]

[Simon C]

This is a pretty good article, written in an engaging style. I like that you've included a lot of substantial information about the idea contained in your game.  It's a good idea to make your press release contain substantive information, rather than just fluff.  You might want to include more description of the actual product, in terms of what it actually contains.  At the moment it sounds like the idea is almost entirely contained in the press release. 

It is, however, an ad, and as such, is going to be viewed skeptically by most people who read it on a forum.  Don't get me wrong - this is a great press release, but I think it's maybe not appropriate for the more informal "face-to-face" marketing that works well for smaller games, and that forums are really great for.

What I think would work well is a really engaging Actual Play report in an open forum, that shows your product working well, but also highlights areas that might turn people off.  As a consumer I'm more likely to respond well to an ad if I feel its being honest about the limits of the product, and a great way to produce that feeling is to be honest about what your product doesn't do.  Don't tell people you've got the holy grail of roleplaying, because people won't believe you.

Be honest about your intentions when you post.  Say "this is a post intended to drum up interest in my new game - it uses the concept of an Engle Matrix, and I'd like to explain what that means here." This communicates that, while you're posting an ad, your intention is to inform the reader about new ideas, not to spread propaganda.

It's hard not to feel sleazy when promoting a product that will make you money.  Don't be ashamed.  You've worked hard making something that peopel will want to buy.  The people who want to buy it want good information about that product, and you're giving them that.

Good luck!

[MatrixGamer]

[Simon C]

Did this game actually happen? It reads a bit like an example of play from an RPG book, which is not the right tone.  Think about what you want to read when you read an actual play report.  For me, I want to hear a cool story, well told, and an examination of how the game's rules and the players' actions contributed towards making that story happen. 

Also, I think your explanation of how the game works is a bit unclear.  I see people asking questions, and answering them, and then there's a roll, and I'm not sure of the connection.  You need to make sure that your explanations of play are logical and step-by-step.  Try writing down the decision making process of one player for one turn, in detail. 

By doing this though they strengthen Bob/Van Helsing because he is the one they will turn to, to get fair rulings. It could lead to both vampires dying for real. Since it is just a game, it is okay to be partisan. Equilibrium emerges as people play without having to be imposed by rules.

This is an interesting idea, and I'd like to see an actual play report that shows this happening in an actual game.

[MatrixGamer]

It is very example of play like isn't it? What it is is a verbatim report of a play session. I'm used to writing process reports (something I do as a social worker) where you just say what happened. I'll need to learn more about the style of actual play reports.

It is interesting that you find the report unclear because it is literally what happens in the game. A person picks a question, answers it (ie makes an argument for what they want to have happen next), picks someone to judge it and rolls. It is mechanically very simple. The player interactions add dynamism to it but the "points of contact" of the game don't require it.

I do most of my actual play of Matrix Games in play by email games - so we have written arguments presented, referee ajudication put into a report, and side emails between players (which one player dubbed "Quibbles") The PBEMs look and play a lot like the example given above with the quibbles boiled down and inserted.

I will read more actual play posts and improve my style. I will especially look of the logic of the decision making steps. Since I just wrote down what people do - to me the logic seemed self evident. I'll need to re-think that.

It is odd, but I've encountered this type of thing for years. I made the game real simple and yet people don't see the flow of play. There must be a meta game going on here. I know that I easily see possibilities when I play and pick questions accordingly. Maybe other people don't.

Chris Engle

[komradebob]

One of the things that strikes me about MGs is that, depending on the group and the mood, they can be either very light-hearted and casual or deadly competitive and subtle. A group in the second mind-set would be a bit like having
Prof. Moriarity and Fu Manchu in your pick-up game of Diplomacy.

The thing is, I think people clue to this right away, but aren't quite sure how to react to the "What Goes Around, Comes Around" aspect of it.

This might be bettter a question for an Actual Play Post, but could you maybe tell a bit about your observations in this regard? I'd be particularly interested if you've observed a group tha had an intro game, then played a couple of more games together, so that you could relate any evolution in approach by the same group.

I'd also be interested in how folks dealt with being able to try stuff on different "scales of interest". By that I mean, how do groups react to the ability to say have one person take a turn introducing something with very broad implications, versus someone who suggests something smaller in time/space/impact on their turn?

[MatrixGamer]

Good suggestions. I'll look into that in actual play accounts. I do have 19 years of play experience with these games. It will all be memory, and thus not too precise, but it will be something.

Chris Engle

[komradebob]

I think a couple of those aspects come up in questions about MGs pretty regularly. I encourage you to post about it.