So i managed to get a first draft of Trust and Betrayal hammered out. You can find the draft here if you are interested (and i hope you are).

There are a couple of reasons for my making it available at this early stage of development:

1. With the recent thread about writing over in the Publishing forum i thought it might be somewhat beneficial to put an actual early draft of text up for critique. What is done right? What needs improvement? Does the organizational structure seem sound? Are things fully explained before more advanced concepts are discussed?

2. I am really, really excited about this game. I have a somewhat selfish motive of getting other people excited too. I have found that a little "Hey, that sounds really fun!" can provide a lot of motivation. So, would anyone else be interesting in playing this game?

3. This is a significatn departure from anything i have ever done before in terms of play or design. Are there potential play issues that i, in my ignorance, have overlooked? Does anyone have any tips about how to handle a game with so little constraint?

So, take a look and let me know what you think. Feel free to rip into me, but try not to be too harsh, please :)

Thanks for your time, i hope i have not wasted it.

Thomas

Thomas,

What you have looks like a great start. I like your use of "coins" to balance story control (ala Universalis). You realize, of course, that while your first inclination was to create a GM-less game, that introducing a Framer for each scene has re-introduced a GM role, albeit one that moves from player to player on a scene-by-scene basis. That's not a bad thing. I just wanted to point it out.

This game strikes me as one that needs a little stronger reward system in order to drive the story forward. Yes, if you tell the Betrayer that he is supposed to Betray the Betrayed in the second act, then that will happen. To some degree. But, you could probably make that betrayal more poignant if you built up to it with a strong reward system.

Just as an example, suppose you provided an additional coin pool from which players could earn coins. In the first scene, the Betrayer and the Betrayed would both earn coins every time they introduced story elements that built a trusting relationship. "Bill, I've got to tell someone....I'm....gay", "...and...I love you", "Oh, Doug, I LOVE YOU TOO!", "That's awesome, Bill. Could you hold onto this 20 carat diamond ring for me for a few days? It's an old family heirloom". Each of these would earn the player a coin. The Supporting Cast player, meanwhile, would earn coins for introducing story elements that presented reasons for the Betrayer to betray the Betrayed. "Melinda, your old high school sweetheart, just showed up on your doorstep driving a jaguar. It seems she wants to get back together with you.", "You just received a letter from the bank. You have 1 week to come up with $5000 or they will foreclose on your house".

In the second act, the Betrayed and Supporting Cast would continue to earn coins for introducing similar elements. However, the Betrayer can earn coins for only one action. In that single action, he earns one coin for every previously established story element that is betrayed or broken by the act. "I give Melinda the diamond ring and ask her to marry me."

I'm not sure what you'd do in the third act right now, since it is so open ended. Perhaps you can have a number of options to address different potential outcomes. For example, set up the rewards to encourage the players to re-establish the broken trust.

John, you have an excellent point regarding reward systems. While i do like your suggestion my current thinking regarding design is that you can not earn more coins through play. The reason for this is to hard code a game time limit. Without playtesting i can not know for sure, but it is my hope that with only 15 coins per Act that each Act will take less than one hour to complete. This allows you to play a three Act game in three hours.

Since i do not want to dynamically increase the number of coins in play i am somewhat at a loss regarding a reward system. I recognize that as it stands the system is entirely dependent upon social contract that everyone will work together on the story.

One thing i really wanted to do with this game is develop something that is easy to teach and play in one sitting. This is something that is common with designer board games (Settlers of Catan comes to mind). You can explain the rules, sit down, and play with a total newbie and they can grasp what is going on with little trouble.

That said i would love to develop some sort of reward system for those who drive the story in the direction of the Theme, but i am at a loss when it comes to actually rewarding players. What can i reward them with other than a kind of call to Step On Up tendencies to create a good story.

Thomas

Keep score.

No, seriously... give them the opportunity to spend their coins in efforts that earn points toward long-term victory in the game, then total them at the end and declare a winner. I find people respond very well to that.

Also, the structure of your game makes it intrinsically interesting. The Betrayer should accumulate more points in the second act than anyone, presumably enough to carry them into a commanding lead. Their goal is to so widen that lead that the Betrayed cannot manage to close the gap, no matter how spectacular and well-plotted their vengeance or forgiveness turns out to be.

It also gives you a good structure to create meaningful and fun roles for the "supporting character", which is (if I may say so) a little short on concrete goals that they can pursue. They will have a good opportunity to pursue a "slow and steady" strategy... getting more points than the betrayed in the second act, and more points than the betrayer in the third.

Keep score? What a good idea! Now the question arises: Who determines whether something is worth points? Leaving it to group consensus generates a horrible conflict of interest, and i am not sure that i can generate a set of rules that is comprehensive enough for scoring such an open-ended game... That said, if i can overcome those problems then i think a scoring system may be just the thing...

Thomas