[The Gay Recruitment Squad Wants YOU!] At Spodley Grange

[Graham W]

This is the fourth playtest. The players are Malcolm, Janos and Andrew, all people I know from conventions and get on with. Oh, actually, I've just met Janos, but he seems nice.

So we start with Lines and Veils. I explain my default, "safe" preference for seductions: there's lots of innuendo (e.g. "That's an impressive truncheon"), a final come-on ("Come over here...and we'll see what pops up") and we fade to black. We never describe sex.

Malcolm objects. He doesn't want graphic sex, but he might want to describe, say, a Squad Member giving a seductee a reach-around. So we agree that: quick sexual descriptions but nothing graphic.

We play. It starts well. The game is feeling less first-drafty: less obvious problems and it's basically working, although there's definitely stuff to fix. Everyone gets into the rallying cries. And I've set the challenges at the right level: there's about the right number of failures and successes.

Baggage works well. This is a new mechanic I've added, wherein a Squad Member might have to suddenly describe his Ex appearing on the scene or his Baggage, from a previous relationship, spoiling a seduction. It's nice. It gives a subtle bit of pathos to the game, exactly as I wanted.

Halfway through the game, I start to worry whether everyone's still engaged, but I ask them and they say they're enjoying it, so probably just game designer nerves.

Problems are showing, though:

1. It's unclear whether, if a seduction fails, the player has to seduce the same guard next round.
2. Sometimes, you've got no inspiration, and can't think of anything to say in a seduction. But there's no way out, so you have to stumble on as best you can. It's a bit crap.
3. Seduction scenes can ramble on. The game works best with short, snappy seductions.
4. I've added a mechanism, Defense Mechanisms, which triggers when a seduction is failed. The idea is that the Squad Member has to roleplay the Defense Mechanism (which might be "Weeps" or "Complains about men") until he succeeds in a further seduction. It doesn't quite work, because it spoils the next seduction scene: the Squad Member can't be seductive if he's weeping.
5. There aren't enough security devices.
6. Malcolm gets to the Target too fast, triggering the endgame while everyone else is still doing seductions.
7. The endgame sucks, because I suck, and haven't thought it through properly. OK, it worked in the first playtest, but it needs work.

We work out instant solutions for 1 and 2:

1. We decide that, after failure, the Squad Member always has to seduce a different guard next turn. We call this "Shift Change". It means that, on a failed seduction, the slip of paper describing the guard is crumpled up and placed back in the pile.
2. We use my usual solution: steal a mechanic from Emily Care Boss. Specifically, we steal the Breaking The Ice mechanic where you earn a Reward Die for taking a suggestion. We decide that other players can prompt you in a seduction and, if you take the prompt, you earn their card.

For 3, it's clear we need a way of keeping seductions short. We wonder about a timer.

I've got another idea, which is stolen from the Impro game Theatresports. In Theatresports, there is a Horn Of Boredom, which is honked when a scene goes on too long or is boring. It's understood that the Horn is a safety net, not a punishment: you're rescuing the players from a bad scene, so they can do a good one later; it's a mercy killing. So Theatresports is a shotgun approach: there's lots of scenes, some work, some don't, but it's generally good because the ones which don't work are honked. That's an approach I'd like to use for Gay Recruitment Squad.

I'm thinking of having some Horn Of Boredom equivalent in Gay Recruitment Squad. If a seduction is rambling on, or is uninspired, you...I don't know...sound a horn...throw your card away...perhaps even throw your card to the player as a "just end the scene" thing. Something like that.

5, 6 and 7 are pretty much easy to fix, in different ways. My main worries are 3 and 4.

Hey, other players! Chip in if you can remember any other problems or suggest solutions. I remember we were going to number the counters: why did we want to do that again?

Hey, People Of The Internet! Suggest solutions too! If you like, read the playtest rules first.

Thanks

Graham

[andrew_kenrick]

I thought it was an interesting game, and definitely more fully formed than the first time I saw it. I'm still a little uncomfortable at times during seduction scenes, but I'll blame that on Malcolm playing hard to get as a guard.

I thought baggage and defence mechanisms worked nicely, although we never used the baggage pile. I'm not sure why though. Was the game over before we had a chance, or was there no incentive? Maybe having it as a one shot thing isn't so good - why not be able to spend them at will to help you out in future conflicts?

I agree that the balance seems to be right with regard to success and failure, although you need to be careful about the brick wall problem. ie when a conflict fails that a player doesn't end up repeating it over and over again. I think shift change will go some way to remedy this.

Security devices were woefully underused - there simply wasn't the incentive to try to get past them. Maybe consider using them in a similar way to guards, in that you have to clear a board of security devices before you can proceed. Or maybe have it so that in the endgame all security devices "lock down" an area, preventing you from using that board as an escape route?

The endgame needs changing or streamlining somehow. Could you go to some sort of abstract/quick conflict resolution for it? Maybe using your own cards that you've gathered over the game to get past guards? So you might meet a guard and cos its the end of the game you need to dispatch him quickly so play the top card of your hand and seeing if you defeat him swiftly?

The horn of boredom could work nicely. Chuck a card at the player and just shout "fade to black already!"

Weren't we going to number counters so we could work out which card went with which counter? I wonder if shift change eliminates the need for that though.

All in all a much more polished game Graham.

[Malcolm Craig]

Re: security devices

They were woefully underused and din't appear to have any real purpose in the game. If you failed to get past one, it was a kind of "Oh, ho hum, got to spend another turn trying to get past this thing" moment. However, coming up with horrible/creepy/euphemistic/disgusting security devices was great fun and I'd like to see that kept part of the game. Maybe there is some form of reward for disabling a device that you don't get as part of a seduction? Maybe you get 'kit', and skill or something? Some form of 'stuff' that would encourage you to stop and disable the devices.

Cheers
Malcolm

[Graham W]

Yes, fair criticisms.

The endgame's broken and that's where the baggage cards will get used.

Yes, security devices were rather disappointing. They're important, because they're a break from seductions. Thanks, Malcolm, will think on that.

Graham

[Malcolm Craig]

Yes, fair criticisms.

The endgame's broken and that's where the baggage cards will get used.

Yes, security devices were rather disappointing. They're important, because they're a break from seductions. Thanks, Malcolm, will think on that.

Graham

I'd like to comment (and should have done so in my initial post), that I thoroughly enjoyed playing the game. It was a fun experience form start to finish and I think that the changes you have suggested so far go quite a way to making it even more fun and engaging.

Cheers
Malcolm