Hello,

I discovered the hard way in 2002 and 2003 that Sorcerer gets under-sold and under-mentioned at the Forge booth. Much in the same way that people will cite someone who's paraphrasing me, but not me, they'll enthuse about games that are heavily influenced by Sorcerer, but not Sorcerer. I think it's kind of assumed that the game must be "all set" and doesn't need any special attention at the con. So last year, I instituted "Sorcerer day," in which I just ran my own game's demos all day long. I'll post my "other demos at the booth" thread soon, so you can judge whether this is karmically kosher.*

I'd been having a tough time coming up with a demo for this year. 2002 was In Utero, 2003 was a good Demon Cops run ... but this time, it needed to be Sorcerer & Sword. And I was stumped. The highly individualized heroes for that supplement are simply anti-demo; for the GM to make them up, he is automatically losing what makes them interesting. And the scenario/situation prep rules are just not possible in 15 minutes. I called up Paul and was bitching about this, and he suggested something he'd been doing with My Life with Master - one protagonist, run by several people sequentially. Huh! I said. Let me try that.

I did make up the group protagonist, Zhanna, and I tried to pass ownership of her over to the players with my setting-opener. I'm thinking of a Russian setting, but northern on the Baltic coast - lots of pine trees, mists, wolves, and the ocean freezes in winter. I checked at this point to see if everyone nods. Amazingly, every time, they do, looking excited. Apparently more people know what the Baltic coast is then they used to, ten years ago. The people are culturally Russian (as Americans see them), but ethnically more Scandinavian rather than Slavic. Everyone nods again, this time with a kind of dreamy look stealing over them. Every single demo. This is our character, Zhanna. Of course, being a little what-can-you-do here, she's nineteen, with platinum blonde hair, with one lock hanging down over one eye. See these descriptors? They instigate conflict ... It was astounding. Everyone instantly latched onto Zhanna in a fashion that I'm more used to seeing when playing Trollbabe.

Zhanna: Stamina 4 unnatural/arcane regimen, Will 4 aristocratic, Lore 3 changeling, Past 4 baron's daughter, Price -1 unlucky in love, Humanity 3 (traded for the increased Stamina)
Telltale: talks about dreams as if they were real; Kicker: she's one day away from her arranged marriage

All this stuff worked together nicely: raised by the Old Ones, recently returned to the expectations of being a baron's daughter, spooky and witchy, aristocratic attitude (carefully clarified to be "the cat who walks by herself" rather than just a spoiled brat), and so on. The chart on the back, which I showed off carefully, included the Grey Wolf (the ship she's on), Captain Zhenko (her father's privateer), the family sword (which she brought back from the Old Ones), and her fiance, Prince Alexandr.

[oops, forgot - editing in her demon. Vodnvoi, Stam 5, Will 6, Lore 6, Power 6; Inconspicuous, appears as freezing mist (Telltale), with eyeballs floating in it, Desire for Ruin and Need for hot/angry emotion. Abilities include Special Damage, Vitality, and Perceive Dreams (all conferred to Zhanna), and Hold and Command Arctic Beasts for itself. Awesome demon.]

The only scene-starters I used were (1) the sinister Captain Zhenko giving her a very pointed "This is not the story of You" speech in private, and (2) Prince Alexandr showing up unexpectedly before they pulled into the port, and turning out to be a kind of fun-loving, happy guy. About two-thirds to three-quarters of the demos didn't even get to scene #2; I only went there if #1 finished pretty quickly and/or dismissively.

Boy did Sorcerer Rorschach kick in. In some demos, Zhanna killed or subjugated Zhenko. In others, she bypassed him and entered into serious issues with the prince. In one (my favorite), the players keyed into the "unlucky in love" idea and decided she wanted Zhenko and stood up the prince! (he was eaten by leopard seals, as I recall) But no matter what, Zhanna took life instantly, and that leopard-look appeared frequently. It really paid off with the Humanity checks that nearly invariably showed up at the end - people seemed to like paying the price for her dark side as much as they liked indulging it for a bit. Nearly all my demos included women and they seemed especially engaged at this point. Meg, I'd greatly appreciate your comments about playing the demo, as I don't think you'd played Sorcerer before.

It's also interesting that my original plan was to follow Paul's model of having people play her sequentially, but as it turned out, they typically either played her all together, purely communally, or hopped around in a kind of "you haven't said anything for a few minutes, you do it" way every couple of actions. I let each group figure that on its own, or prompted someone who was quiet if they all seemed stuck for a moment. It's given me some serious food for thought about multiple-players, solo-protagonist play in Sorcerer, and I'll post more about that in the Adept Press forum.

As I'd hoped, the game generated great sales for all three supplements, as it was primarily Sorcerer & Sword, demonstrated strong potential for Humanity checks (hence Soul), and was chock-full of gender dynamics both at the table and in the game-space, hence Sex. I was low on core books (my printer got delayed) and they sold out by the end of Saturday, so these sales were pretty necessary.

The demos almost always went too damn long, as usual; I'm my own worst advisee about this. However, I think I can be forgiven slightly regarding the people who had been stood up by two scheduled demo games and (as I see it) were owed a bang-up scenario.

Best,
Ron

* I have just learned that I have lived almost 41 years wanting to use this phrase, without realizing it.

How, do you think, did Paul's solution solve the problem. That is, if the problem was not getting to make up a character, then how does having lots of people play one pre-gen solve this problem? If it's about the players bringing different POVs to how the charcter should be played, then why wouldn't that work with a bunch of characters?

Mike

Ron Edwards wrote: The demos almost always went too damn long...

That was a bizarre pair of replies.

Mike, the problem with Sorcerer demos is it's hard to show how the resolution and reward systems are tied together across several versions of the effect happening at once. This way, they only have one version to watch/use, and so the connections among several aspects of the rules are easy to demonstrate with only one Bang, or maximally two. I haven't the faintest idea what you're asking. I'll guess - something about the personal nature of a Sorc & Sword hero? Well, in this case, I was able to generate their ownership by having them enjoy one another's use of the same character. Kind of a democratic solution: three of them > one of me, in terms of character ownership. It worked really well.

Sydney, I was consistently one of the bad people who demo'd too long. I got better at shortening it as time went by, but as I said in another thread, at least a couple demos were actually substitutions for a scheduled game which had not been attended by the GM - so these guys were owed a real dunk in the horse-trough, not just a taste.

I'd appreciate some feedback from people who played in the demos.

Best,
Ron

Lisa and I played in one of Ron's demos.  I'm afraid I just can't remember the name of the girl that played with us, which is a shame 'cuz we shared a shuttle from the hotel at least once.

I think the ownership of the PC wasn't there and I don't think that it's loss was an issue.  I fully enjoyed the idea of sharing a protagonist as part of both the short demo at the booth and at the after-hours game.  And I think it was for the same reason.  In both situations I'd occationally feel pressured to act when I was blanking out.  When I blanked out for a moment and everyone was waiting on our PC to act I could just pass the buck onto someone else.  Also, when I had a good idea for an action on the part of the PC I could really just shout it out, cuz if it was really good there was no hesitation on the part of the other players, they'd just accept it.

I think the technique is a good example of getting the fluff out of the way (like player attachment to the character) and getting onto what really needs to be demonstrated in that precious short amount of time.  Like the action-reward mechanisms.

I think that Ron's description of the lock of platnum blond hair falling in her face is the same thing as Tony's spread V For Victory sign when playing Capes.  Both provide an instant emotional reaction to the character.  And that tiny little bit of emotial reaction is the drop of fuel it took to get us rolling and to keep us  interested right to the end.

-Eric

Ron, you said that the problem was that for the GM to make up the characters was to lose what makes the characters interesting (to the players, I assume). So, yes, it's about the personal nature, as you put it. And the democracy response does answer that question.

But it would seem that Eric thinks that the ownership wasn't there. If I were to hazard a guess, what I'm thinking is that what happens is that instead of becoming personally invested, the players get a good demonstration as audience, and can feel from that what it would be like to have their own such character. As you point out, this method really makes the logistics of running the demo easier. All players are always involved directly to the point they want to be, and, as you say, they get to see more of the one character unfolding in the fifteen minutes.

On another point, I'd like to propose that, perhaps, fifteen minutes is just not long enough for a whole RPG demo. I, too, always run long. I think almost everyone who's demo is other than something like Luke's simple combat demo is just going to have to run a little longer to show the mechanics of the game off. Especially if you consider sitting down, getting dice out, shaking hands, introductions, after play wrap up questions, or any of that stuff. If you don't want to do it looking like a madman, then admin alone takes up maybe five minutes of the time. To say nothing of interruptions that might occur. Basically I think that in 25 minutes or so, you can get in a 15 minute demo that has everything you need. Because it's not a lack of motivation that's keeping these demos all running a tad long. I think that without being really drastic, you just need another ten minutes.

Now, if this is something you realize, and the 15 minute goal is just there to try to keep things as absolutely short as possible, well, I understand. But my point is that I don't think we have to beat ourselves up when the demo runs a bit longer. Whether or not the players "deserve" it or not.

Mike

Hello,

Mike, I know Eric says he felt no ownership, but frankly, that statement is bizarre. Eric, everything else in your post attests to exactly the ownership I'm talking about. I think maybe you're misunderstanding what I mean by the term: if you are referring to exclusive ownership, then we are not talking about the same things.

You said that when you blanked for a bit, then someone else would pick up the slack. Now, when you felt like contributing, did you get shut out? My perception of the demo was no, you didn't - you just hopped back in. That's what I'm calling ownership.

Please bear in mind that I am not talking about our Embassy Suites game. Not one bit, not for one tiny bit, in this thread. That'll be a thread of its own and perhaps a rather drastic one. This one is specifically about the Zhanna demo.

This thread is actually pissing me off substantially. I'm trying to have a conversation and it seems as if every third sentence is about what was meant by X and what was meant by Y in response to X, and that sort of thing. Can I get a straight answer regarding the actual success and experience of the demo? Maybe Mike, you can just go away for a little while and then come back after some folks who played have responded more?

Best,
Ron

Oh, ok Ron.  I misunderstood ownership.  You mean it like "the feeling of authority over the actions of the character", or something similar right?

I was more in the "I know this person"-type ownership.

But yeah, now that we're on the same page here, I totally felt the ownership.

Successful?

*ponder*

I was entertained.  What I learned about the system over and above what I already knew was pretty minimal.  At no point did I feel the need to jump up, run over to the shelves, and get every expansion for the game before someone else got them first.

-Eric

Actually, I was kind of mean just now.

Mike, you wrote,

Basically I think that in 25 minutes or so, you can get in a 15 minute demo that has everything you need. Because it's not a lack of motivation that's keeping these demos all running a tad long. I think that without being really drastic, you just need another ten minutes.

Now, if this is something you realize, and the 15 minute goal is just there to try to keep things as absolutely short as possible, well, I understand. But my point is that I don't think we have to beat ourselves up when the demo runs a bit longer.

Hiya,

Eric, correct me if I'm wrong, but this was the game that followed your donkey's-ass-sucking L5R experience, right? In that case, my whole purpose was to entertain (mutually), and to give you guys some plain down-home authorship fun. So yeah, I was pretty oriented toward basking in the imagination and the decisions, rather than sales.

Best,
ron

Oh shit yeah.  Then 100% rawk-on success.  It was the I Acutally Get To Do Something anti-venom that I needed.

-Eric

I ran in Ron's demo, and there were definitely things that worked really well.  That Platinum Blonde wisp of hair is demo gold.  Letting people jump in to narrate when they have energy, but just soak up the atmosphere-of-play when they don't, lets you demo for almost any number of people.

It felt, however, like Ron was trying to do two things:  First, he wanted us to understand what playing the game feels like.  Second, he wanted us to understand how the rules make the game feel that way.  That may be one goal too many for a tight demo.

For instance, we spent almost five minutes on the "crosshairs of story" diagram on the back of the page.  Now I totally agree that this diagram is key to the act of actually playing Sorceror.  The rules don't run without it.  But in the demo itself, this diagram evoked no emotions for me, and was never used as a relevant tool in context.  If you discard any idea of actually explaining the rules then you can reclaim that time instantly.

So I guess my incredibly leading (but sincerely and nonjudgmentally curious) question back to Ron is this:  Is explaining that diagram (and other rules, like dice-as-currency) an absolute deal-breaker for you?  If you managed to get across exactly how cool it feels to be playing Sorceror and Sword, but nobody knew about these rules, would you consider that you'd failed at the demo?

Hi Tony,

Specifically the diagram: I jettisoned that after the first couple of days, except for pointing to it when I introduced Captain Zhenko, as well as mentioning her sword. Cut those five minutes down to forty seconds, with no value lost. So yes, I hear you on that one.

Your final question, I'm afraid, is therefore not going to work for me. Yes, I jettisoned the diagram. But no, I do consider the dice-as-currency and the Humanity-consequences, as mechanics, absolutely central to the demo.

Unlike Capes, Sorcerer can be mistaken for a White Wolf knockoff, and 100% of the time, when someone thinks that's what it is and plays it that way (usually accompanied by plaintive cries that the rules aren't clear, which obviously they won't be if read from that mind-set), their play-experience sucks equid wang. I am demoing the game to model the actual dice-work and decision-making that needs to be done in order to enjoy the game to its fullest. It's a system demo.

Best,
Ron

And that's why Sorcer is going with me to Iraq...

Jake

You are right, I'd never played Sorcerer before, and this was really fun. I think there may be a whole new area of demo play opening up here with the one protagonist thing. I think the main point of a demo should be "What makes this game so special?" and if half the time is eaten by char gen, that's just silly. So, in my notes for my potential future demos, I'm looking at pre-made chars or this troupe-run style. I found it easy to get into, freed a bunch of time so I could see more about the game mechanics (ok, that's a first for me), and I work very well collaboratively anyway.

I got the setting right away, because you had really though it out. The 'lock of hair' was fine - it was funny to overhear the exact same words in other demos later, but it did give a very personal color to the character, as did the reference to the fur cape, the chill temperature, and the color of the water. Go back and look at the three italicized descriptive sentences in your opening. They engage the senses, and activate enough hooks we can all grab on. I played with John and I think Mike, who I understood to have player the game before, so that helped, since they knew what to expect a bit.

Character ownership issues: After the initial description, which I had to wiggle a bit about the drama of the hair over the one eye (it was effective, but still), I had no problem owning the character. I definitely felt like we knew her and were in charge, and I loved playing up the haughty, icy, over-worldliness behind her actions. It was funny how we all dismissed the prince as a lovesick, fawning puppy, and I like how we ran with Mike's (?) idea about the whale swamping the skiff. I don't remember any serious conflict of vision as to her actions, even when we had her attacking the captain.

Dice issues: the trading off of who rolled was totally natural, and also I intentionally gestured to the others a time or two at the beginning, to make sure it wasn't just one of us rolling. I found that the person who rolled narrated character through the results, also naturally. There were lovely moments when we all were in clear concert about how the scene went.

Demo of game/mechanics issues: There was a momentary hitch when I needed to pause and get clarity as to whether the demon wanted her to get mad or to incite others to get mad, but that resolved quickly. Same with "why is Ron handing us dice? Oh, 'cause we did something cool." I grasped the crosshairs on the back just fine with very sketchy minimal or no explanation, and figured I'd read about it at home, since I already have the game in my house. One comment: at least in my demo, you shifted the name of the ship from the Grey Wolf on paper to the Grey Maiden in speech, which I actually liked better because it pointed so clearly at the character and her story.

~Meguey

Not to toot Ron's horn any more than I have to, but one protagonist for three players worked really well. Granted, I was coming into the demo with Sorcerer experience. Still, I was able to think back to my first Sorcerer demo. In short, all of the confusion that comes from trying to understand multiple characters, demons, and game mechanics seemed nonexistent. It allowed the players to focus on less, and therefore understand more about what was going on in general with the dice, etc.

That said, I think the real key is to get every player involved. I feel that some people will inevitably use the other players as a crutch, and be content to sit and watch. Watching is not a demo. Luckily, the other players tend to come enthused, and seek input from the the quiet one out of politeness and a desire to share the spotlight. I hope everyone else's experience was similar.

I'm glad that this thread came along when it did.  I was contemplating running a demo of Legends of Alyria for a church talent night (not the normal roleplaying environment), and I was struggling with figuring out a good way to do this, given the uniform inexperience of the proposed audience and the time constraints put in place by the format of the event.  This could be a good way to do it.  I'll try it out and write up my experiences in another thread.

Hello,

It'd work great for Alyria, Seth! Especially if you do the situation-creation as usual.

"We've created these dozen people interlinked by conflict. Which one shall we now choose to play as the principal?"

Best,
Ron

Ron, yeah, you're right that you have to push for 15 minutes to get 25 minute demos. That's just one of those strange rules in life that deal with things being imperfect.

For reference, the Mike Meg references isn't me, as I didn't get to try the demo. Mike Miller, I'm guessing?

Jake, I understand your reasoning, and there are probably worse dangers you'll face in Iraq, but...taking a game called Sorcerer? And I thought that Luke, Thor and Dro were crazy for taking a bag of supplements with "Jihad" on the cover on board their flight to GenCon.

Mike

I got to sit in on the demo Saturday, after Ron had clearly had some time to polish and practice it.  Setup was snap-snap-snap done, and I think all four of us demo-ees were onboard.  Now, I have to say that certain aspects of the demo rocked, but some of them didn't work for me.

The good:

The aforementioned character + rote description.  The way this all came about to give us a real sense of "I know who this character is and what motivates her, now lets get on with the playing!" was great.

Sharing the character was good.  As Eric mentioned: if you didn't have any good ideas you could let someone else pick up the slack, and if you had something good you could jump right in.

Humanity roll.  Seeing the mechanic at work was cool, and seeing the situations in which they should/could be used was also cool.

The not-so-good:

In the demo we didn't ever see dice as currency.  No successes rolling over into a later conflict.  Now, that's not too bad, but it's a super-cool part of the mechanics and I think some oppurtunity was lost there.

The opening bang (Ron mentioned the captain and the "this is not your story" statement) was a bit of a monkey wrench for me.  I wasn't entirely clear on what was meant by the specific phrase employed ("this is not your story").  I'm pretty sure I understood it, but I consume the source materiel for S&S like nobody's business so I've probably got a bit of a leg up.

The humanity roll (again).  The specific situation that we made ours in felt a bit forced.  It didn't feel like a powerful mechanic to me.

That's it off the top of my head.

Thomas (the guy with the neck brace)

Hiya,

In the demo we didn't ever see dice as currency.  No successes rolling over into a later conflict.  Now, that's not too bad, but it's a super-cool part of the mechanics and I think some oppurtunity was lost there.

No, ours wasn't the psyche-laid-bare session.  Ours was the "Order demon to attack" followed by "Full defense" session.  Oh, and something else I didn't mention:  I'm not sure if this was just our session or something you did more often, but the shift out of the demo scenario to demonstrate the way turn order worked in rolling was a bit jarring to me.

I hear you on the Humanity rolls, and for what it's worth I think it's probably better to have them possibly weakly than not have them at all for the demo.

Thomas

Hello,

Ah. Yes, that one was boring. Frankly, that demo group was boring, and in Sorcerer, the character is whatever you decide to do with her, so she was boring. You were clearly in pain, Thomas, and said as much at one point, so I forgive you.

Perhaps I ought to clarify some of the history, too. When I demo this game without explaining the dice, people bitch about not getting how it works. When I demo with explaining the dice, people bitch about getting jarred out of the imagining, or something.

I decided a while ago that these were, indeed, teaching demos. We aren't playing Sorcerer. We are getting a little taste of it, then explaining what we're doing. This is the opposite of Tony's approach, which works for him, but not for me or for my game - if I play "ignore half the rules" Sorcerer, or even "Ron handles the rules and just tells how many dice" Sorcerer, then I am doomed to a dozen actual play threads all screaming bloody murder that their play failed, and when I ask what they did, they describe horrible humpbacked misapplications of the rules, claiming that's what I did right in front of them.

Been there. Not doing it again. Sorcerer demos are for getting a taste of playing a sorcerer, then learning just what those dice are doing, because (until recently) not one single game these people had experienced, in their lives, had used statements, dice, and interactions the way Sorcerer does.

So no, my demos are not intended to be amazing hallucinatory flights of fancy into which the customer may sink, and be dazzled with wonder. You'll learn how a bonus die works and if possible, how easy it is to run a complex conflict with five characters all doing wild things.

Best,
Ron