idea...

[Jack Spencer Jr]

There a certain style of play that's been receiving less and less attention these days, solo play.

There are plenty of doomsayers out there who believe computer games are killing RPGs.  We know better, but solo games seem to be the only real casualty.

However, I still think there is some life left in the concept.  In no way has the format been completely mined out.

True it isn't as satisfying as a full session, but solo games aren't ment to be a substitue for a full session.

So, lets see if there's any interest here on the Forge, maybe start a discussion and brainstorm.

[Dav]

Pblock:

While I may have some reservations as to the overall Tri-Stat System, check-out "Ghost Dog" by Guardians of Order.  The game actually states that it is *very* compatible with a solo run.  I very much agree with their statement.

Anyway, just a note.

Dav

[Nathan]

(Are we talking about solo adventures, or like GM and one player?)

I can honestly say that solo adventures kept me going when I started D&D. I so loved it - so I would play those solo adventures over and over in the first Red book n stuff. It was pretty cool stuff.. and I think it is a shame that companies have left that idea. Certainly, solo games can leave a lot to be desired, but if one of the problems of our industry is finding people to game with, then solo games can fill that little niche.

But then again, I don't know... Here is what is good about solo play:
->You can do it by yourself, whenever...
->Like reading a book, you can put it down or pick it back up whenever ya want to.
->Easiest way to teach rules - can introduce you to rules at a slow pace and let you use them after you learn them
->Great for beginners, especially late grade school ages (4th, 5th, 6th graders)
->Great way to combine terrible fiction and a rpg

Heh, I remember that most solo adventures, while playable, were never the marvel of fiction or anything. I don't think they have to be, to be entertaining.

But the idea hasn't been mined really... What else could we do with it?

I also remember  a weird game that was part solo adventure -  It was two books = one person was a druid, the other was a wizard... and they both played solo, possibly against each other, but could interact. It was weird.

Thanks,
Nathan

[archangel_2]

In my local gaming store, about 2 weeks ago, a guy was looking at a few 3E D&D Modules to send to a friend of his over in Korea - poor guy was bored to tears and asked for SOMETHING gaming related to be sent over to him, if only to read it before coming back to the States. Anyway, what the guy was really after was some solo books that he could play without anyone, since he couldn't even find one other person interested in RPGs to do a one on one game! The closest to be found were just a bunch of modules, designed for multiple players.

Ever since then, I've been thinking about 'em, and I must say that I would really like to see something that fills this void in the industry. So what does everyone have in mind concerning this area? I'm MOST interested in a brainstorm session on the subject!

Daniel

[Jack Spencer Jr]

three responses already.  I'll take that as a sign of some interest.  I'll offer some thoughts.

First of all, and this goes along with Ron's System Does Matter essay although I realised this before I read SDM, is that most of the solo games I have seen are essentially lite-RPGs.  Fighting Fantasy, Lone Wolf, gad! Slews of others usually have a stripped-down version of D&D as the system.

What solo games need is a system that works best with solo play.  Giving you the tools you need to play solo while not giving you anything you don't need or will get in your way.

Oddly enough, one of the better series in this respect are the AD&D solo Gamebooks AKA Super Endless Quests.  Odd because of the general vibe I get about TSR's abilities as a game design house yet they put out one of the more forward-thinking solo series.  Talent is where you find it.

How it worked is simple.  In combat you are given a target number on 2d6.  If you missed, you took the damage described and rolled again.  Yes the monster automatically hit you back.  If you made the roll, you were instructed to turn to a passage where you read a prose description of how the battle went.

This made comabts a bit more interesting than the typical I roll to hit, he rolls to hit, repeat format of other solos.  This format may work in group play, but by yourself it can be mind-numbingly tedious.

This is the sort of thinking we need to be using, I think.  Not that the AD&D books were perfect, mind you, but they went in a direction that was worth exploring more.

Obviously, such games would have a more gamist bend that group games since it is just one person against the canned adventure.  To keep it interesting, it would probably have to be gamist, perhaps with some narrativist for flavoring.  Simulationism I believe would be hard to duplicate in such a format, but then someone is liable to prove me wrong.

Of course, we aren't limited to gamebooks, either.  GW put out a solo boardgame (I think it was a board game) called Chainsaw Warrior.  So we can come up with board, card, CCG, dice games, etc.

Chances are we'll brainstorm here a bit and then go our separate ways and develop our own separate game.

Huzzah!

[Jared A. Sorensen]

Dumb idea #423: roll over the page number on d%.  

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

I was a big fan of the Fighting Fantasy series, which was composed of a bunch of little paperbacks and one great digest-sized, four-book series. Anyone remember these? The system was called "Sorcery!" and had a VERY interesting magic system, as well as a "clash" combat system rather than a hit/hit one. The titles were The Shamutanti Hills, Khare: Cityport of Traps, The Seven Serpents, and The Crown of Kings.

I also thought a lot of the Tunnels & Trolls solo material was worth owning. Sewer of Oblivion, Sea of Mystery, Chateau d'Yvoire ... I still pick'em up when I see'em. Oh yes, and the two Deathtest dungeon-crawls and Grailquest for The Fantasy Trip; the latter was especially good.

[Side note: there are two Steve Jacksons. One did the Fighting Fantasy stuff with a guy named Ian Livingstone; the other is, well, Steve Jackson, who did The Fantasy Trip as well as another thing or two.]

However ... and this is a big however ... I *hated* actually playing any of these, mainly because they were designed back in the day when "whoops, you're dead" was a damn likely outcome, but also because I would often find a given NPC or situation more interesting than the options permitted me to check out.

What I liked was the STRUCTURE of the adventures, and the way that (in the titles I mentioned) one's personal decisions often had ethical weight. I spent a lot of time mulling over the material and wondering how group play could yield the kind of personal story, like that found in Grailquest or Sea of Mystery, without railroading like a fiend to do it.

Best,
Ron

[Jason L Blair]

Well, ya did it, Ron.

You opened the Fighting Fantasy floodgates. Now I'll be thinking about those all week.

Gawd, they ruled.

Sword of the Samurai was my favorite but they all rocked so hard.

[Mytholder]

Hands up anyone who solved the uber-puzzle in "Rebel Planet"? I know I couldn't.

And Jason - everyone knows the best one was the one where you're a monster, and can't control yourself for the first few dozen entries.

However...I really think these books are pretty much dead. Text adventures do everything they do and more.

[Jack Spencer Jr]

Ron Edwards wrote:

[Side note: there are two Steve Jacksons. One did the Fighting Fantasy stuff with a guy named Ian Livingstone; the other is, well, Steve Jackson, who did The Fantasy Trip as well as another thing or two.]

[Side-side note:  Steve Jackson UK (as I often see him refered to as) is behind the company that brought us Black & White (Lion's ...something.  I forget.
Ian Livingstone was CEO or president of Eidos Entertainment, hence why they put out Ian Livingstone's Deathtrap Dungeon computer/Playstation game based to some extent, I assume, on the FF book of the same name.]

Ron also wrote

However ... and this is a big however ... I *hated* actually playing any of these, mainly because they were designed back in the day when "whoops, you're dead" was a damn likely outcome, but also because I would often find a given NPC or situation more interesting than the options permitted me to check out.

That's understandable since it's pretty true.  Hence why I brought the subject up, to try and do something with the format.

I have most of the games you've mentioned.  Collecting solo games are sorta a hobby of mine.  Also, apparently Fighting Fantasy was eventually expanded to a full RPG.  Go fig.

I'm also a member of a Tunnels & Trolls club over on Yahoo.  I have most of the solos but rarely try to play since the "whoops you're dead" thing tends to happen in the first paragraph.

Mytholder wrote:

However...I really think these books are pretty much dead. Text adventures do everything they do and more.

With one major difference.  You need a computer to run text adventures.  If the solo is available on-line only you may need a computer to get it, but you won't need a computer to run it.

This is what I'm after, anyway.  Something that can give you a role-playing "fix," as it were, without requiring a computer or a group.

Whatever aspect of role-playing captured by the indivdual game may vary.  It'd be interesting to see how some of use stretch this concept.

[Mithras]

Although I played Fighting Fantasy in the mid-80s, my favourite books were the Lone Wolf Series (Gary Chalk, Joe Dever) and I ran through the series in 1989-90 when I'd already done alot of roleplaying. They were great because 1) they were a series and talents and even objects you picked up could used in later books, 2) You increased in ability, 3) I loved to explore, and Magnamund was an explorers world - not just some re-hashed D&D fantasy. It really had a feeling of it's own, and it felt a little 16thC to me.

Now if someone would get their arse in gear and publish a Magnamund RPG I'd buy it!

[Jamie Thomas Durbin]

Ahhh... Someone was actually seriously considering doing Magnamund for D20 on the Homebrew forum there, but I think that idea eventually died down... But to do a freeware Magnamund RPG, it would be extremely simple...

Ingredients:
All the Lone Wolf Books (including the fiction)
A good system (essential)
Imagination (essential)
Joe Dever's Blessing (not essential, but generally a *good* thing...)

Piece of urine, so to speak!

[Jack Spencer Jr]

For those interested in Lone Wolf, the series is being converted to html at this site.

http://www.lw-oasis.org/aon/

AFAIK it's completely legal, they say they have Dever's permission and the proper rights/permission to do this.

Long Live Lone Lolf...I mean Wolf.

bloody illiteration

[James V. West]

On 2001-07-10 15:48, Jared A. Sorensen wrote:
Dumb idea #423: roll over the page number on d%.  

But if the level of difficulty got higher as the book progressed..........

Nahhhh.

JVW

[Loryndalar]

I was just wondering if a way of doing solo play that gets around the 'you're dead' response, is one that basically allows you to choose, as and however you like, where it is you go in terms of the story. It will never tell you you've died, or killed the opponant or whatever, all the game does is tell you the (narrativist) ways your character grows. What you do with such gifts is up to you.

I have a feeling this makes no sense...  : /

*g*

Bye!
Paul.
- I'm new here!  :smile:  -