Questions appearing at the end of this post...

* * *
1.) What is your game about?
My game is about convicts escaped from a maximum security penitentiary, attempting to flee the country. The game focuses on what the characters are willing to do in order to realize their goal. Conflict amongst the escapees is as much a part of the game as conflict with external forces such as the government.

A game is intended to take roughly 2 hours to play. This may be a “hard” time limit (see 17).

2.) What do the characters do?
The characters have a singular goal: get the hell out of Dodge in the most expedient and low-profile way possible, hopefully leaving John Law in the dust.

3.) What do the players (including the GM if there is one) do?
The players attempt to create and implement a believable escape plan wherein their characters flee from the state where they were imprisoned to another neighboring country. At times they will frame, participate in, or modify scenes (without their direct character participation). Scenes may include a conflict, but it is not a necessity.

4.) How does your setting (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?
The setting is our world, present day, untouched. The arena in which the game’s conflicts will be fought are rooted in the player’s knowledge (and perhaps misconception) of law, justice, and the criminal mindset.

5.) How does the Character Creation of your game reinforce what your game is about?
Players are tasked with choosing the crime for which they were imprisoned, as well as whether or not their character was actually guilty.

The characters write down some traits which they feel describe their character and discuss them with the group.

Finally, they each create one resource and narrate a brief scene surrounding that resource. A character might have a resource of “Knowledge of police procedure”, and could narrate a scene at the police academy. Alternately, he might have a resource of, “Old I-ROC Z, purrs like a kitten,” and might narrate a scene of him fixing up his old car on bail right before they slapped the irons on him and took him away. Some resources may not be available when play begins, but may be brought into play by player narration.

6.) What types of behaviors/styles of play does your game reward?
The game encourages the players to think and act like criminals. Noose mechanics make the players feel harried, while Sway mechanics will either get them working together, or pit against one another (probably a bit of each throughout play).

7.) How are behaviors and styles of play rewarded or punished in your game?
The system will encourage players to avoid conflict as much as possible, because it will increase their exposure and increase the threat of future conflicts. The system shall also encourage players to entrust power in others, but will incentivize them to not allow that power to be kept for too long.

8.) How are the responsibilities of narration and credibility divided in your game?
Any given narration is ultimately credible, though in extreme circumstances the table as a whole may revise any narration. Disputes are handled by GM fiat.

Narration rights are not static throughout gameplay. At the beginning of the game, scene framing rights lie almost completely within the purvey of the player characters. However, as the game progresses (conflicts occur), the Noose pool grows, enabling the GM to frame scenes and introduce more and more conflicts.

9.) What does your game do to command the players' attention, engagement, and participation?
The game starts rolling purely by player interaction. The GM may suggest scenes for the players to frame, but he has no ability to force them at first. The GM is able to introduce conflicts at first, which will render Noose dice that may then be used to frame scenes as the game continues. It is the hope of the designer that players will become invested in their characters during the initial “brick-laying” scenes of the game in which they have complete control and remain interested as the game progresses to a point where they have completely lost control.

Players have the ability to influence other players' die rolls, so it behooves them to pay attention to all ongoing conflicts.

10.) What are the resolution mechanics of your game like?
Resolution is conducted by rolling a certain number of six-sided dice. This pool of dice may be modified by character traits, die pools which the players may draw from (some communal, some not), and may be augmented or reduced when other players expend from their die pools (again, some are communal, some are not).

Success in conflicts generates Escape dice, while failure whittles them away. Escape dice are the metric of the likelihood of the cons actually getting away. Escape dice, when earned, may be added to the communal Escape pool, kept as Sway dice, or converted into Resources (a die pool type which may only decrease in size after inception, and may be mitigated, removed, or stolen).

11.) How do the resolution mechanics reinforce what your game is about?
Communal dice pools vs personal dice pools represent the dichotomy of the situation which the cons are in: must they stick together to survive, or are they better off on their own?

Augmentation or reduction by fellow players occurs due to “Sway” within the group. A character who holds sway over others may have it because he has intimidated them, other characters trust in him, or he seems to be the only one with “a plan.”

12.) Do characters in your game advance? If so, how?
Characters may gain resources as play progresses. Other “more personal” advancement is immaterial.

13.) How does the character advancement (or lack thereof) reinforce what your game is about?
The players are either criminals, or if they've been wrongfully convicted, have at leas lost their faith in the justice system. For the most part, their social trajectory is immutable. The only thing of interest to them, at this point, is the next tool that is going to enable them to get away (resources).

14.) What sort of effect do you want your game to produce for the players?
The players should at first feel anxious, trying to get the ball rolling with their escape while they have scant moments to stop and catch their breath. Early on in the game through to its conclusion, the players should feel beset on all sides, both dogged by the authorities as well as troubled by the intentions of their fellow escapees.

15.) What areas of your game receive extra attention and color? Why?
Sway (how it is earned, and how it is taken away) has been given special consideration. It is the opinion of the designer that most characters will not have much difficulty using and discarding NPCs along their way to try and escape. Therefore, in order to give conflicts at the table more merit, the inclusion of Sway to allow other players to exert some control over others (while simultaneously encouraging controlled players to resist) will make conflicts particularly complex.

16.) Which part of your game are you most excited about or interested in? Why?
The game is designed to build in a crescendo. The PCs will begin in control, but will feel that control slipping from their grasp as the game progresses. It is the designer’s hope that the game will grow more and more frantic until the inevitable conclusion, be it getting gunned down Bonnie & Clyde style or boarding that plane to the Dominican Republic.

17.) Where does your game take the players that other games can’t, don’t, or won’t?
The characters in this game have a single, selfish goal: escape justice that society has meted out to them. While many other games could play on this theme, it is the focal point of On the Run’s design. Many games can handle the PCs playing the bad guy: in OtR, the PCs are the bad guy, and they’re probably going to get worse in order to “win.”

18.) What are your publishing goals for your game?
Probably free distribution on the internet. Maybe print a few vanity books for myself and friends.

19.) Who is your target audience?
People who love The Fugitive. People who love success by the skin of their teeth, or losing in the most dismal way possible.

* * *

My questions:

Does this sound interesting? A viable game? I can't stress enough that I am looking for honest answers to this. I'm terrible at gauging whether or not something sounds like it might be fun. I'll take radio silence as "totally sucky." :)

Do you see any major mechanical issues? I'm looking, essentially, for things that might be pulling against each other in a weird way. Of course, I'm not going for realism, but when things "make sense" in addition to making a game playable, I feel much happier with the design.

Any other questions? I've left some of the meat of the mechanics out because they didn't seem like they belonged, but obviously, my answers are meant as a synopsis, and don't encapsulate fully my design.

Heya, Blake. Good to see something about your project.

In question 7, you don't really seem to answer the question. You say what will be rewarded, but not...you know...how.

As to your questions:

Does this sound interesting? A viable game?
Yes and yes. Heck, if you want to drag Frank along to my place, I'll see if I can grab Jon and Krista, and we'll put it through its paces. Honestly, though, I don't know that a question like this will get you much in the way of useful feedback. You designed your game, you think it rocks -- if someone else doesn't, so what? They're not your target player anyway, so why worry if it's interesting to them?

Do you see any major mechanical issues?
Uhm....I didn't see any mechanics. I saw some terms and general "how things kinda work," but no details. Which is cool, I guess, since that might be too much to take in at once, but I can't really address the question. Of course, I'm no good at looking at mechanics and figuring how they'll play out anyway.

Any other questions?
Have you looked at/read/played The Mountain Witch and Carry? My first impression (which could easily be wrong) is that your game has some similarities to both of these. I don't know if your mechanics work that way, but I'd really like to see something where character selfishness and betrayal makes me (the player) feel like I just got knifed in the gut by my buddy, which is what Trust does in The Mountain Witch.

Andrew wrote:
In question 7, you don't really seem to answer the question. You say what will be rewarded, but not...you know...how.

Andrew wrote:
Have you looked at/read/played The Mountain Witch and Carry? My first impression (which could easily be wrong) is that your game has some similarities to both of these.

Wait, wait...I'm confused. I do something that gets me Sway. I can now choose to keep the Sway and use it for myself whenever I want, or give it to another player in the hope that they'll use it to help me when I need it? Am I understanding this correctly? Because, if I am, I can't see what incentive anyone ever has to give Sway to another player.

Andrew wrote:
Wait, wait...I'm confused. I do something that gets me Sway. I can now choose to keep the Sway and use it for myself whenever I want, or give it to another player in the hope that they'll use it to help me when I need it? Am I understanding this correctly? Because, if I am, I can't see what incentive anyone ever has to give Sway to another player.

Hi Blake,

I wrote a "chase" game for the October Ronnies, called Get Out Get Away Get Wise Get Back Get Even. It's very differently executed from your game, but it might be worth a look, for ideas.

The problem with that game was that it tried to maintain the "breathless" chase style throughout the game. I playtested it a couple of times and quickly realised that it got dull: one chase scene was just like the next. Later on, I rewatched The Fugitive and realised that, actually, very little of that film is about chasing. It's much more about human relationships and making plans.

It sounds as though you've got a different focus - on criminals working together to evade the law -  which I think will work better than with my game - which focussed exclusively on the chase.

Good luck with it!

Graham

Let me see if I'm getting this. Player A does something that gets him Sway. He can now choose to use Sway to benefit himself, but once it's used, it's gone. Alternately, he can give Sway to Player B (who gets to use Sway as a limited resource), but then Player A gets bonus dice at irregular times to assist them. Determined, I assume, by some mechanic.

So, if I use Sway for my own character, it's a non-renewable, limited resource. If I give it to another player, it works that way for them, but I get a renewable, irregular resource for myself. That about right?

Andrew, I think I understand it. Blake, please tell me if I get this wrong.

Bruno, Rocko and I are escaping. Bruno attempts to pry open a locked door, so I lend him a hand by giving him Sway. This Sway isn't something I have, I simply choose to say "Hey, Bruno. Take a point of Sway" and boom, he's got a point of Sway. If Rocko does the same, Bruno's got two points of Sway that he can roll into his attempt to pry open the door. As I understand it, he keeps these points for the most part, unless he loses them in a conflict. What this means is that Bruno is more powerful than either Rocko or I. (I believe I remember reading that you said that only one character at a time can have Sway?) This is good because it means he's got extra resources to get us out of trouble. This is also bad because if he decides to sandbag my efforts in something because he doesn't like the outcome, then he's got the dice to do it.

The other way to get Sway is interpersonal conflict. Bruno can pop Rocko one, and possibly gain Sway in the process, because Rocko is intimidated by Bruno. On the other hand, if I decide to pop Bruno one, I can make him lose Sway, and if he's got none (or loses more than he had) I can gain some. I gather that Sway can also be lost in conflicts not involving another PC.

If I understand this correctly, I think you've got an elegant interpersonal conflict system that will make it so the players have to trust each other somewhat, but never too much. The only problem I see with this is the party mentality. If all of the players decide to work together and not ever try to screw each other over, then basically you'll have a lead man, and a few backup guys who will gain power over time until they're fairly unstoppable. If you can find a way to encourage the players to play fast and loose and never be too trustworthy or trusting, then you'll have something pretty awesome.

Wolfen wrote:
Andrew, I think I understand it. Blake, please tell me if I get this wrong.

Bruno, Rocko and I are escaping. Bruno attempts to pry open a locked door, so I lend him a hand by giving him Sway. This Sway isn't something I have, I simply choose to say "Hey, Bruno. Take a point of Sway" and boom, he's got a point of Sway. If Rocko does the same, Bruno's got two points of Sway that he can roll into his attempt to pry open the door. As I understand it, he keeps these points for the most part, unless he loses them in a conflict. What this means is that Bruno is more powerful than either Rocko or I. (I believe I remember reading that you said that only one character at a time can have Sway?) This is good because it means he's got extra resources to get us out of trouble. This is also bad because if he decides to sandbag my efforts in something because he doesn't like the outcome, then he's got the dice to do it.

The other way to get Sway is interpersonal conflict. Bruno can pop Rocko one, and possibly gain Sway in the process, because Rocko is intimidated by Bruno. On the other hand, if I decide to pop Bruno one, I can make him lose Sway, and if he's got none (or loses more than he had) I can gain some. I gather that Sway can also be lost in conflicts not involving another PC.

If I understand this correctly, I think you've got an elegant interpersonal conflict system that will make it so the players have to trust each other somewhat, but never too much. The only problem I see with this is the party mentality. If all of the players decide to work together and not ever try to screw each other over, then basically you'll have a lead man, and a few backup guys who will gain power over time until they're fairly unstoppable. If you can find a way to encourage the players to play fast and loose and never be too trustworthy or trusting, then you'll have something pretty awesome.

Okay, wait. So, if we have a group of five PCs (A, B, C, D, and E) and B gives Sway to A, A is the only one who can have Sway, even if D and E want to give Sway to C?

Andrew wrote:
Okay, wait. So, if we have a group of five PCs (A, B, C, D, and E) and B gives Sway to A, A is the only one who can have Sway, even if D and E want to give Sway to C?

That is until someone "removes" A as leader.

Hey Blake,

I think maybe you might want to do a separate post about the mechanics you have so far, and link this thread.  I think that would clear up a lot of confusion.  I helped you with some of this (acting a sa sounding board) and I'm confused about some of it (for example, why would I want to give someone Sway if it makes me their bitch? What's the benefit to me?).

I'm not a big fan of the potential 2-hour time limit, especially as a hard limit.  It should be able to expand or contract to meet need, like MLWM, I feel.

You say you'd like to see someone get offed during the course of the game.  What does that player do, then?  Watch?

Yeah, I'm pretty much with Rob on this. I'm not seeing why I would give Sway to another character, rather than keeping it for my own. Other than that, everything seems sound and interesting, to go back to your original questions.

Andrew wrote:
Yeah, I'm pretty much with Rob on this. I'm not seeing why I would give Sway to another character, rather than keeping it for my own. Other than that, everything seems sound and interesting, to go back to your original questions.

Ok that makes sense.

Interestingly, the only thing that mechanically differentiates them from one another mechanically in that early part of the game is trait choices, so that is going to put HEAVY pressure on picking good traits, and framing scenes that will let you show off your trait studliness.

I really like that.

after your initial trait/resource framing, is there a lot of oppurtunity in the game to add to/alter those resources? My concern is that those first assignments are so critical that if you make a choice early on and the game doesn't totally steer that way your gonna be up shit's creek with a turd for a paddle.

And don't say it's your narrative responsability to steer it your way, i think in the 2 hour limit that might be real hard to do without making it look like you're going for a "leader" grab.