I played the Roach again last night with three non-gamers.  My wife Autumn, who is familiar with the game (she's copy editing it), has played Breaking the Ice once and that's about it.  Our two friends Dan and Anmar are both actors, writers, and musicians with no recent gaming experience (Dan played D&D in high school).  I was worried that it would be difficult to explain and that scene framing would be a huge challenge.  It wasn't, and the game hummed along with a few noteworthy differences.

1.  It was much tamer than a "normal" Roach game.  Only two NPCs died, and Regina Sutton was not interfered with at all (OK, I slept with her, but just to feed my debauchery enthusiasm, without in-game effect, really).  Many of the conflicts were for fairly low stakes, although this evolved as the game progressed.  It ended in a satisfying but lower-key way - the winner (Autumn, as it turned out) poisoned her fiance and escaped to South America with Hattie, her housekeeper/lover.  Dan, Roach-mad, set himself on fire at the Christmas ball and died dramatically.  Anmar chose for her final conflict a showdown over the "most popular professor" trophy, and lost, retreating to her garden of deadly orchids for solace.

2.  Autumn and Anmar both said it was a challenge to follow the many loose narrative threads the game spawns.  Autumn compared it to an Agatha Christie novel.  I hadn't heard this before.

3.  Explaining the die mechanic and card handling was a piece of cake.  Everyone "got it" pretty quickly.

4.  Framing conflicts took a bit more work and seemed to feel unnatural to them, but once I set a good example and demonstrated setting stakes that were fun regardless of outcome, it made more sense I think.  Some weak stakes were still proposed at times, and one interesting result of this was the heavy introduction of NPCs.  Seriously, there were a LOT of people being narrated in - more than usual, and I rarely got any takers when I proposed calling bullshit per the rules.  So everybody was chucking big handfuls of dice and really wanting to win every conflict.  Not a problem, but quite a departure from previous games.

I think one take-away here is that narration-heavy games can be pretty accessible to non-gamers  (I'm sure lots of you already know that).  Autumn felt strongly that the Roach required too much thinking throughout with players required to stay on their toes constantly. She wanted more structure, but "not too much" more structure, having seen D&D. 

--Jason

Real interesting stuff.  Lots to think about & process.

Something in particular jumped out at me.

Autumn felt strongly that the Roach required too much thinking throughout with players required to stay on their toes constantly.

Cool, Eric, glad to help.  I think Autumn will *really* dig a game like, say, Trollbabe, when I get the chance to share it with her, because she does not have to always be "on".  There will be other players doing other things, and a GM, and a chance to take a mental and emotional breather.  It's the constant demand for attention, creativity, and enthusiasm that fuels a game like the Roach (or PTA, or...) that can be mentally exhausting.  That's what I think she meant, anyway.