[Universalis] A fantasy epic in 3 hours (or How I took the Gloves off)

[hix]

[Simon C]

Hey! It's cool to hear about Universalis, and it's cool to hear from another indie gamer with a New Zealand connection (if I read the link in your footer correctly).  It seems like I'm discovering all these amazing gaming communities only after I leave the country. 

I'm really interested in how the late stage of the game works out in Universalis.  I've heard a lot about the early game, building the components of the setting, but what about the later game, when a lot of the key factors are decided, and it becomes a much more traditional sort of game? How do really tightly focused scenes, say, a conflict between two characters, play out? Can you give a description of such a conflict?  This is a bit of a selfish question - I'm interested becasue I haven't played Universalis and I want to know how the system works in actual play.  Maybe we can tie this in to your question - how do the rules drive conflict? - what are the consequences of conflict between characters?

[Valamir]

This is me doing a happy dance.

I love gloves off Uni..."Hell no, and here's a bunch of Coins to tell you exactly how much I really don't like that..." :-)

[Yokiboy]

Hello Hix,

Great post, you really make me wish I owned Universalis! We have the need for some pick-up play coming up, and Universalis seems to do that galantly.

So, I guess I'm not sure what my focus is for this thread: Conflict is good. There are some games out there that encourage it (like Capes, from what I can tell). How about this as a starting point - what are some ways of encouraging people to engage in conflict?

In my experience, I think the best ways to get people to engage in conflict is by starting them out with games such as Dogs in the Vineyard and Polaris, where conflicts are explicitly between players, not characters. That is, if your character has a conflict with my character, but we both want your character to succeed as players, then that's not a conflict. However, if you want to do something with your character in the game that I object to, then we turn to the game's conflict resolution mechanic and let it sort things out for us.

For me it basically comes down to Vincent's words of wisdom; "Say 'Yes' or roll the dice."

We used to have trouble with players deliberately avoiding potential conflicts, but this was after years of dysfunctional roleplaying. Now, after an 8-session Dogs in the Vineyard campaign, some Primetime Adventures, The Riddle of Steel, InSpectres, and even Dead of Night, we all fully trust each other and everyone singles in on conflict at all times. It is just great!

TTFN,

Yoki

[TonyLB]

Another thing that helps conflict is to make sure everybody at the table understands that getting into a conflict with someone is a way to help them and to help yourself.

When it's seen as a zero-sum game (i.e. if you win the conflict then you disempower your opponent) or a negative sum game (the only way to win is not to play) then conflicts are only a means to an end, and a sub-optimal means at that.

When conflicts are positive-sum game (the group as a whole wins a little any time a conflict comes up) then finding things to meaningfully conflict about becomes more of an end in itself.

Does that make any sense?

[Yokiboy]

Does that make any sense?

Hell yes! You could almost hear the audible click, when that fact was understood by the players in my old gaming group, after a couple sessions of Dogs in the Vineyard. Now we fully trust each other, and everyone understands that when someone picks a conflict with you, it is actually a thumbs up that you're helping make the story better (sort of like Fan Mail in PTA).

TTFN,

Yoki