Not sure where to put this… Short-but-intense-time lurker, first-time poster… etc. And I do tend to ramble.


I'm new at this Narrativist thing - actually, I think I've always been a closet Narrativist -- but I think I want to try it out. I put in an order for Sorcerer at the FLGS, but while I wait, I was reading here, and got to thinking…

I think I could tempt my group (of casual D&Ders) into a night of creative-juices-flowing, shared-authorship fun with a Pool/Donjon hybrid. Use Donjon's sense of implied setting/premise/goal, with the rules-lite feel of The Pool. They are all gaming enthusiasts of one stripe or another, and they've followed me on a few D&D distractions in the past, but nothing quite as radical as letting players directly participate in a game. (I, not entirely knowing what I was doing, tried to do that with the last game of D&D I tried to run with them. It flopped initially, but after a few months with the characters, ended in a big moment of "now you take the wheel".)

Since I'm new to Narrativism, I was hoping one of the brighter spots here might could help me avoid walking into any gaping pits with this… here's what I'm thinking:

- The set-up will be mostly old-skool D&D: You are going to explore a dungeon. I will describe the initial dungeon set-up (the "quest").

- Players will describe their characters. Other players call out the Traits from the description, you pick a handful from these. I'm thinking of using high-roll on dice to determine who goes first (whether it's better to go first or not…?)

- Use Donjon style "I go looking for a {fact} over here, in this manner" intent descriptions, but Pool-style dicing, with a twist (did I get this from descriptions of octaNe ?) - Roll 1 "free" die, plus one for an applicable trait, plus a number of gambled dice from the pool, plus any gifts from fellow players, plus 1 or more GM dice (of a separate color). Each non-GM-die success is a "fact" that player gets to narrate into the world; each GM-die success is a "fact" that I get to narrate (presumably something antagonist to the players' interests).

- Use the "Yes, but" rule from improv/Robin Laws (http://www.dyingearth.com/pagexxaugust.htm) - players can augmnent established facts, but cannot directly negate anything.

There's some parts I'm not sure about (I see this being a big, risky experiment) but this sounds like the kind of game I'd like to be a player in, anyway. As I'm intending to GM it, I imagine my primary role being to 1) kick off the basic premise (it's a dungeon); 2) steer things back on track occasionally/potentially (if things stall out) and 3) decide to abort if no one's having any fun.

The game went well. I can post more Actual Play details later (brother-in-law getting married this weekend; very busy week) but things went really well.

The rules I ended up using are a blender of The Pool (Anti-Pool Variant), Donjon & Risus -- with a few bits from Sorcerer. I felt it was a good presentation for players used to D&D-style play (more on this soon). You can view the rules I used here: http://www.thewehners.net/joshua/my_rpg.pdf (PDF)

Please do write up the session!
If been toying with the idea of running an old school D&D module, such as 'Keep on the Borderlands' using PTA rules. Having serious Issue, and maybe a bit of humorous deconstruction.

I'd be interested to see how you went using the setting but with a very Narr ruleset.

Ashley Moore