[Kagematsu] The playtest questions in the book

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Danielle,

I went through the design questions in the Kagematsu book, and decided to start a new thread. Here are my thoughts based on our game and on subsequent reading.

1. I really like the background information. It's both inspiring and quick.

2. We had a real mix of successes and failures throughout play. I know every game of Kagematsu is going to be really different in content, but it looks as if the numbers are solid.

3. We used and loved the Desperation rules. I think they make the game, actually.

4. I'd like to revisit our discussion of ties between rolls. My current thinking is that (a) the Betrayal concept is excellent and (b) it should not be linked to ties, but prompted by something else. I suggest that ties be treated as a failure for the woman, i.e., she has to beat Kagematsu's roll, not just match it.

5. Regarding publishability, I think the game needs a stronger focus on the larger story-arc: the Threat to the village (in fact I suggest a list to choose from or even roll on!), the use of the Confrontation and Conclusion rules. The mechanics issues I'll be most focused on in later playtesting are (a) the rather brutal Hope-rules during the Confrontation and (b) the Looming Shadow, which for some reason didn't get happen or get recognized in our game.

6. I suggest that tied rolls during the Confrontation be treated as I describe above: they're not "ties," they're just failures like any other.

I would also be interested in your thoughts on what the eventual physical design might be.

Best, Ron

[Danielle Lewon]

The Confrontation rules is the only part of the game that has gone through multiple changes over the years. If you remember the game we played two (three?) GenCons ago, everyone ended up with a big pile of opposing pool dice, like 20 or so, and each townswoman player described a scene of Kagematsu's interaction with the threat. It was a little awkward. The Confrontation rule is the part that I'm least wedded to and wouldn't mind a shake up.

It is not called Betrayal in the book, it is Disregard. Betrayal is overt harm and Disregard is like ignore or neglect. I want it to be subtle. Thanks for liking the rule but I don't know about changing its circumstance too much. Right now I might change the rule so it only comes into play if there is some stored Hope and the player does not want to lose it and see where that goes through more playtesting.

The Looming Shadow rule does need to be integrated in more and I am considering how to do so. In the Games on Demand game on Saturday, I added it on the first rolled double six, then someone rolled threes sixes in three desperation rolls. In our game maybe we forgot, I'm not sure. With it being a short game I don't want to inject it too much, but it does add to the story. The Saturday game's threat was a ghost and it was very nicely defined by those 2 scenes.

As for the other questions: 1- Thanks!  2- I was surprised at the number of failures, I have never played a game with so many.  3- Desperations, yeah they are great and one of the best early additions Renee wrote.

Paul and I will be attending a local con in a couple of months and I am hoping to get a good number of games in. I should think about the Confrontation rule and try out a few alternatives.