One idea that's been bugging me recently is that of setting a game in the murky world of corporate RPG design.

I'm thinking of something like this: the PCs are a project team working on a once-popular RPG. The RPG is waning in popularity and the players are responsible for ekeing the last few sales from a declining product line. They're all completely talentless - accountants, marketeers and burnt-out authors - and they compete against each other to avoid getting the sack.

(I should probably point out now that the game-within-a-game is a fictional RPG, not based on any real-life RPG. The players would collaboratively decide on a suitably amusing theme for the RPG.)

So my first question is: has anything similar been done? Or can you recommend any independent RPGs with a similar element of self-parody? Any suggestions of reading material are welcome. (From what I've heard of Kill Puppies For Satan, that sounds like an excellent place to start)

And a quick mechanics question. Given the corporate theme of the game, coins would be a very satisfying way of resolving conflicts. At first I thought of tossing coins, but then I wondered about spinning them. Spinning coins would not only give a random element, but a time limit - players could be required to narrate their action in the time that the coin takes to spin.

So again...is coin-spinning a well-known technique? If so, which games use it?

Thanks in advance for any help you can give.

Hi Graham and welcome to the Forge!

This sort of reminds me of InSpectres, which is definitely humorous in tone and about a startup franchise office.

It also reminds me a little of something I did called Cube Farm:  http://www.meekmok.com/sassy/games/cube_farm/index.html

I've never heard of coin spinning and it is an interesting idea.  Constraining the narration may put players who don't do well under pressure at a disadvantage - whether that is a bug or feature is up to you.

--Jason

The coin spinning sounds fun! However, it should probably be tied to narration in stressful situations. Perhaps every time you have to pitch the game to someone, or tell your boss why you shouldn't get the sack, you can spin a number of coins and talk until they're all down. And if you want competition, let other players spin coins at yours to stop them while you're talking :)

Are the players competing as well? Because it can easily draw away from focus on the parody, if that's what you want to focus on.

Very useful so far. Thanks.

Callan, yes, I'd like the players to compete. How does that detract from the parody element? - I think I understand what you mean, but I'm hoping you'll explain more.

Here's a quick initial idea of how a coin spinning mechanic could work. When a player wants to define the conflict is in the scene, they start a coin spinning. While the coin spins, they narrate in a way that makes it clear what they want the conflict to be.

Which needs an example, I think...

Player 1 (whose character is David): After the meeting, David finds you at the watercooler.

Player 2 (whose character is Susie): OK. I'm crying because everyone tore my work apart at the meeting.

Player 1: Sure. So David smiles sympathetically and puts a hand on your shoulder...

(Player 1 begins a coin spinning, signifying he wants to control what the conflict is in this scene)

...and says: you're burnt out. You can't see the wood for the trees. You need a break. I know this hotel in Norfolk...why don't you come for the weekend?

So here it's clear that David wants to persuade Susie to go away with him for the weekend. And Player 1 is bidding to make that the conflict in the scene.

But then Player 2 can make the conflict about something else. To do this, she starts spinning her own coin, after Player 1 has finished speaking, but before his coin has stopped spinning.

(Player 2 starts a coin spinning)

Player 2: Susie starts to cry on your shoulder. She says: I'd like to, but I keep thinking about that bastard in the meeting. Isn't there something we can do? Can't we get him sacked?

And so Susie wants to persuade David to sack "the bastard in the meeting". And Player 2 is bidding for that to be the conflict.

And this can go on until the conflict is decided (when one of the players can't think of anything to say - very likely, since it's against the clock - or they run out of coins, etc, etc).

When it's decided what the conflict is, there'll be some sort of dice roll, and perhaps a dice could be added to each player's roll for each head that was "spun" in the conflict.

Something like that, anyway. I'm interested to see if it's possible to make something like this work - and make it fun - so do feel free tear the idea apart.

How about they must call the result, and if they miss call, the way they controlled the situation can go wrong. That way, though they have a time limit and control, there still is the element of chaos. I've done dice spinning games, but coin spinning would last long and be better.

I like this idea. Perhaps if they don't complete their narration in the space of time alloted by spinning the coin, then somebody else gets to finish it off, or anything else that was going to happen would screw up or something. Maybe this could be influenced by the side that the coin lands on. Heads means something positive happens, tails means something negative, and somebody else narrates it instead. That way when you elect to spin a coin to define the conflict, there is an element of risk and reward.

This looks cool very cool. I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

Kirk

Graham,

I've never heard of this coin-spinning mechanic. It sounds like it could be very fun. Very vanilla Narr.

I'm not sure how the mechanic lends itself to support your theme, however.  Why does the game have to be specifically about RPG publishing? Couldn't it just as well be about any corporate creative product, like B-movies or second-stage rock acts?

I'd be tempted to just spoof conventional game mechanics for this... something involving a buckets-of-dice approach, get stupid pervy high points of contact.

Interesting. OK.

FzGhoul, the idea of calling heads or tails is an interesting one. It gives the illusion that the player has some control, but actually, of course, it's still a completely random 50/50 chance. It makes no difference mechanically whether the player calls or whether we just say that "Heads" is success and "Tails" failure.

Larry, you're right, it doesn't necessarily have to be about RPGs. It could be about any set of burnt-out, useless creative people working on a project.

The thematic connection, I think, is to do with being creative against a deadline. Which is both the theme of the game and what the players have to do when they narrate against a spinning coin.

Reading back the mechanic I wrote before, I think it's too complex. The two things I do like about it are: the idea that spinning a coin ends the scene; and the idea of players competing for control over the end of the scene by spinning coins one after the other.

So let me just jot down a quick alternative mechanic.

The players play the scene as before. When a player spins a coin, that signifies that the scene is ending. Anything that the player narrates during that spin of the coin is automatically successful: the gunshot hits home, the girl is seduced, the board is persuaded.

There's one exception: if another player begins spinning a coin before your coin has stopped spinning, they have stolen the end of the scene from you. They start narrating: and now anything they narrate is automatically successful.

You can always steal it back by spinning another coin. But you have a limited number of coins and, when you spin them, you lose them.

The scene ends when the last coin stops spinning.

Whether that coin falls heads or tails dictates how the next scene starts. Heads means that the "automatically successful" action had good consequences: you seduce the girl and she falls in love with you. Tails means that the action had bad consequences: you seduce the girl and wake up the next morning with her nail-scissors at your throat.

...and of course the last bit is basically Kirk's idea.

And that's a simpler mechanic and I like it a lot better.

I like it! Its just about the perfect combination between chaos and control in mechanics. Now get out and make a game around it! The mechanics are broad enough to encompass just about any sort of conflict. The only potential problem I can see arising is deciding who really gets the narration when they spin the coins ("No I spun it next!"), so you may want to include some rules for dealing with when people are allowed to start spinning. Try using a mechanic based on the card game Snap or something like that. The first person to have their hand on the coin when it stops spinning gets to narrate next perhaps. Hectic, I know, but there are some cool games out there that are designed like that with even stranger mechanics (Fastlane for one).

Other than that, what you have already has some interesting tactical potential when bidding for credibility in the game.

Looking good,
Kirk

Graham wrote:
The thematic connection, I think, is to do with being creative against a deadline. Which is both the theme of the game and what the players have to do when they narrate against a spinning coin.

This could work with anything with a deadline! From the terrifying depths of RPG publishing to getting to school on time!

Yay!

Kirk

Graham wrote: The players play the scene as before. When a player spins a coin, that signifies that the scene is ending. Anything that the player narrates during that spin of the coin is automatically successful: the gunshot hits home, the girl is seduced, the board is persuaded.

There's one exception: if another player begins spinning a coin before your coin has stopped spinning, they have stolen the end of the scene from you. They start narrating: and now anything they narrate is automatically successful.

GB wrote: This sounds very interesting. It looks like Dogs has got to you.

GB wrote: Does the second coin being spun negate the success of the first player's narration?

GB wrote: If nobody challenges your narration, can you stop the coin, so you don't have to wait until it stops on it's own?

GB wrote: If you don't spin your coin very hard, you can get a quick shot in with little time for anyone to react. Is this allowed?

GB wrote: Finally, there's a little trick with coin-spinning, if you incline the coin before you spin it, you can choose the outcome.