Hey,

Some of you might remember that a few months ago I released a version of my game, Scarlet Wake, for play-test. I received a bunch of responses and suggestions, and I have finally managed to implement all of them into a revision and completion of the play-test rulebook. This is now the official release of the Scarlet Wake play-test, coinciding with an actual complete website.

For those of you who haven't heard of Scarlet Wake yet, here's a rundown:

Scarlet Wake is game about pain, hate, and bloody revenge. With a strong focus on tactics, gambling, and inter-player competition, Scarlet Wake asks “Are you cool enough to be even cooler?” In Scarlet Wake, your character truly is limited only by your imagination.

The game is intended to be played over several nights, as player’s characters work towards killing those who have wronged them, and all who stand in their way. The game ends when all players have killed all those on their kill-list. Scarlet Wake was designed to work with between 3 and 6 players, but 4 players works the best. All players have their own characters, and all players are involved at all times.

The rulebook includes everything you will need to play. The rulebook will take you through creating your character, planning the challenges he/she will face, how to kill and do other stuff, how to improve your character, and how to make life harder for the other players, while keeping the game fun for all involved.

Things that I think are good about Scarlet Wake, which set it apart from other games (and are all good reasons why you should download it):
--Binds (which are totally awesome)
--Everything you need for an entire game is written on your character sheet.
--The advancement mechanics encourage variety of play.
--Deceptively strategic and tactical. Looks way simpler than it is.
--Intense competition with no hostility or hard feelings, 100% gauranteed!
--Rules covering all levels of playing, from organizing a game, to seeing who kicks who how hard.
--Highly structured GM-less play.
--Extremely adaptable rules, allowing a huge variety of interpretations to suit your needs. Creative Freedom!
--Almost 100% genre-free, meaning you can play Scarlet Wake with zombie cops, vampire kings, angelic avengers, assassins, mages, or housewives without having to change a single rule. MORE creative freedom!!!
--Everything.
--It looks pretty.

So in short, the current SW rulebook is now available for download and play-testing. You should grab it here. There is one character sheet provided at the back of the rulebook, but you can dowload an individual character sheet here.

You can also now visit the Scarlet Wake website and the forums.

Thanks,
-Ben

(I've also posted this in the Connections forum. I think it really needs to be in both, as a general notification here and an open call for play-testers in Connections, but if you disagree Ron, feel free to moderate (I know you will feel free anyway ;) ))

P.S. I accept links to reviews as bribes for free copies of the published rulebook :)

All right! I'm downloading it now!

One other point that I think makes Scarlet Wake stand out (other than its general awesome-ness) is that you don't need a GM. I know, that's not unique, but I still think it's cool, especially for a game like this -- everybody's got something to do, all the time.

Hey, that is one nice-looking PDF. Just the right length to digest for playtesting, great art, spiffy graphics without being a pain, all sorts of atmosphere.

I mean, I'll playtest anything that's readable (and have, including out-of-date word-processing crap documents), but it is pretty nice to have this to play with.

Best,
Ron

Nice-looking PDF, indeed, Ben. It's so nice I only have nitpicks. Do you want feedback on the design and graphics, too, or just the game system?

I agree, it's a nice looking PDF, Ben! I'll be pushing my group to play test this weekend as much as I can.

Heheh, awesome! John, all comments are greatly appreciated, so I'd love to hear any feedback you have about any parts of the game. Whilst feedback from now on won't make it into the free play-test, it certainly will make it into the finished game. Feel free to give me feedback in this post, at my forum, or by emailing me.

If you do actually play it, I'd like to know your name and the names of the other players in your group so I can add them to the credits. Emailing me your names is probably the best way so that I can't lose them.

Thanks!
-Ben

Spelling error on page 24. left column, second paragraph. The word "subsequenst" should be "subsequent".

Suggestion for better phrasing on page 24, left column, third paragraph from bottom, change: " "host" player " to "host".

Wrong double quote marks on page 7, right column, bottom half of page. The closing double quote marks look exactly like opening double quote marks. (Also on page 15, left column, text ending: "A Bind in a Box".)

Page 9, right column, starting with "*Hint: ", the marking seems to indicate that this paragraph is a foot note, yet it really is part of the text. I'd remove the asterisk ("*").

Wow! Thanks Andrew!

I've fixed all those problems and uploaded the fixed pdf. I read through it twice to check for spelling problems before I originally posted it, but I guess my eyes aren't nearly as keen as yours. How the hell you managed to pick up that quote thing, and in multiple places too... simply amazing! I guess editors really are good for something after all :P

Again, thanks.
-Ben

Hey Ben,

The titling and headers look great.¹ And the artwork too! But is the font for the rules text supposed to be Courier? If not, you have a font embedding issue with the pdf.

Paul

¹ Is that the S. John Ross font, Nicotine Stains?

Hey Paul,

Thanks. Yeah, the text font is meant to be courier. My original font had loads of atmosphere and looked really awesome, but it was apparently too hard to read. I wanted a sort of grungy typewriter look, but for readability, I had to settle for courier as the closest thing. Thanks for bringing that up though, cos now I know that it is working properly for other people :)

Also, the headers and logo are using a free font called "Sabotage", by Adam Roe.

Now I have to hunt down a font called Nicotine Stains...

Is everyone understanding the rules clearly?

Thanks,
-Ben

Ravien wrote:
Now I have to hunt down a font called Nicotine Stains...

Very nice. Assorted thoughts:

1) You're very generous to include me in the acknowledgments. Thanks. I'm kinda surprised anything I said was all that useful, but I'm flattered.

2) Very first page: "Thanks to the Forge and all it's members" -- should be "its." (No apostrophe = adjective; apostrophe = verb).

3) The Bind example still includes the slightly creepy "tied up naked" bit. BUT as I said to you a while back, you could either (a) cut it and keep the tone "generic action" or (b) darken the tone overall and embrace the often-disturbing nature of many of your sources. From the awesome and upsetting Example of Play, I'd say you've chosen path (b). Go for it.

Thanks for that link Andrew. It actually contained a few decent fonts that weren't in my 2500+ font collection!

Sydney,
1: Don't be so modest! If I remember correctly, you were the inspiration for the whole boss-sharing idea! I can't in good conscience let that go unacredited.

2: Doh! Oh well. I guess it'll have to stay (not worth a re-print and re-uploading for).

3: Yeah, I actually read over your pm a few times and I did try to think of a new example, but at that stage I was example-exhausted, and couldn't think up anything. But yeah, in the end I decided to really give it a darker theme, partially because it will have more impact on people and thus be more memorable, and also because I think it does a better job of exemplifying the theme of the game. After all, the name Scarlet Wake implies the blood left in your passing.

But I'm pretty sure most people will be able to read the rules, think "woah, that's a bit creepy", and then realise that they can completely avoid that level of darkness and stick with wire-fu action or whatever they please. I'm just reminding them that disturbing can be cool too.

That's my plan at least. Hopefully the creepy bits don't have a negative effect on perceptions of it. But then again, "can't please everyone." :)

Thanks,
-Ben

Ravien wrote: ...you were the inspiration for the whole boss-sharing idea...

Ravien wrote: ...in the end I decided to really give it a darker theme....they can completely avoid that level of darkness and stick with wire-fu action or whatever they please....

Sydney Freedberg wrote: So does this mean that Scarlet Wake is at least potentially a Christian RPG?

Just wondering, is this the new and updated version that I have been waiting for or is it just the same one that we were discussing on the Scarlet Wake playtest forum? I sort of remember the discussions running a bit dry there after a while. I'll have to playtest this again during the holidays, maybe getting an ongoing campaign. (not now, I have exams in two days).

Also, I just want to say, the system as it is already is easily one of the slickest and easily understandable yet also one of the most powerful. As you said, without changing a single rule you have almost unlimited creative freedom. As an example of the freedom allowed:

In the vein of Brian Jaques' Redwall books my brother has made a psychotic anthromorphic badger with a massive butterfly edged sword, while I have made a character similar to a cross between Kain (in the Legacy of Kain computer games, just think an anti-hero out for blood) and one of the three musketeers. All I need now is to get some of my friends over and we can start up a crazy cross-dimensional blood fest!

One suggestion that I do have is that you change the rules to place shared bosses on whatever level you require. As it is you can only have a shared level 5 boss if you have 5 players sharing that boss. It would be nice to be able to place the bosses wherever you like no matter how many players you have.

Bring it on.

Kirk

Hey Kirk,

Yeah, this is the new shiny improved updated version with cupholders. It's the complete play-test version, and the next "update" will be the release of the final game. Which makes it very important that any and all bugs/quirks/inconsistencies/ambiguities get ironed out. Perhaps you have brought up one I haven't seen before:

One suggestion that I do have is that you change the rules to place shared bosses on whatever level you require. As it is you can only have a shared level 5 boss if you have 5 players sharing that boss. It would be nice to be able to place the bosses wherever you like no matter how many players you have.

And I can definitely see a character hewing her way through scores of peons, boss after boss up the ladder, until she finally faces the person behind all her misery... and realizes she can either unleash her wrath to kill both him and something essential in herself, or let him go, let her anger go, and save herself. {EDIT: Actually, just killing the guy is almost anti-climactic; the climax of a story should be when a character changes, not when she keeps on doing the same thing only more so.} "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who tresspass against us" -- what people often forget is that Part 1 of this prayer can only be granted if we perform Part 2.

[Mind boggles audibly]

Holy ...

So does this mean that Scarlet Wake is at least potentially a Christian RPG?

Cool. As I said I'll play it during the holidays. I would absolutely LOVE to sit down and chew through this game, but it will have to sit on my hard drive for a moment (I have exams starting tomorrow <sheepish grin>).

I'll try to pick up everything I can when I do playtest and will have more than one sission. I'll also send the playtest version to a bunch of my friends for them to read over and see what they think. Otherwise, aside from maybe a couple of confusions with the wording, grammatical or formatting errors (if the previous version is anything to go by) there shouldn't be any problems with the rules (it was damn near perfect).

...For starters, you could simply use avant-garde timelines and have the death of the Sexy Beast PC occur after that PC's player has completed their List, in-game, but treating them as a Boss for the fight (or if you are game, treating both PCs as Bosses), by replacing their Fuel with Karma.

There's no doubt a few other workarounds you could use, but in the default basic assumptions of the rules, the short answer would be "nothing would explicitly prevent you from doing this, but it will take a bit of creativity".

Interesting idea though. I'd like to see how you choose to pursue it.

Ravien wrote: Suddenly, I'm intensely interested in reading about any play-test experiences you have with SW. :)

Reading this game made me want a bumpersticker that says:

"Scarlet Wake: When you really must kill every muther****er in the room."

Or maybe:

"Scarlet Wake: When you have a sudden urge to kill every muther****er in the room!"

I'd buy that bumper sticker (along with "Horn broken, watch for finger" and "Keep honking I'm reloading").

Just printed it off and reading through the rules (I found some spare time, hence this post).

Kirk

Alright, here is my official analysis, as written while I read through it.

Awesome art, the layout is fantastic. The elegant simplicity of the character sheet is amazing, not at all daunting (compared to the average D&D character sheet which most players will be familiar with). In character traits just say that you set it as # etc. Don't talk about increasing from the beginning, it is just confusing. Instead of "Once a trait has been increased to 1, it cannot be reduced below 1 from then on." Try "After you have added to your traits in character creation, they cannot be reduced below 1." I was confused when you wrote that, I was thinking "What the, you can't reduce when you increase? Huh?". "Chase them into the pits of hell in order to wear their skin as a hat." I like that. It would be nice to have examples of some of few occasions when honour does not apply. Sorry my mistake I saw where you put the honour stuff. The optional rules are presented well I think (I'm glad you introduced the "Troubleshooting Rule", I think it would go a long way to encouraging groups to increase their narration quality). I question the organisation of the examples. Are you sure you want them all in one place?