Hi,

If you haven't been following my thread in First Thoughts, I'm writing a game called George's Children, set in a post-post world where everyone over the age of 12 is dead. This idea grew organically from a conversation with the illustrator of the project. Anything that remotely looks like someone else's work is an accident.

Honest.

Our first playtest session was a huge success. I had six players, each playing distincivetly different children (although fast was a common strength).

The oldest character in the group was 11, and he was the watchdog of the 7 to 9 year olds in the group.

Since gameplay follows a FIVE ACT structure "day in the life," the player's took turns in ACT ONE describing how they found FOOD that session. Each took turns telling his version of the story and all the player's respected the group's time. They did not spend 20 minutes on their diatribes. So, I think the GM-less format worked for them. Since gameplay is in reverse age order, the youngest children tell their stories first. One child gorged himself on candy, another had rabbit, another ate bad prunes, one killed a dog, one killed a squirrel with a baseball, and one ate some rotting vegetables.

Presently, there are three methods to getting food. But I'm thinking this will change to a preperation stage, where everyone does their "thing" and the oldest child provides the food for the group, which leads to...

the second ACT is the opportunity for children to tell stories of things they'd heard. This is where rumors are revealed, each child taking a moment to reveal his/her tale. Die rolls were used to determine whether or not a story garnered interest from the other children. The "rumor" that seemed the most interesting became the "hero's journey for the day."

In this first session, they heard about things like "the itchy", "the grandma", "the flying bird", "the other kids with weapons", "the cave", and "the barn." After a lot of childlike discussion, the children decided to go see the itchy, which was described as a monster that eats your eyes (it turned out to be a crane in a junkyard).

ACT III was sort of a prep scene that I think I'm going to remove from the game. It involved each child getting "something" to help him/her in the journey. It seems superflouous now after my first playtest.

ACT IV was the journey and there is way too much to describe here, so I'm going to paraphrase. Each child takes turns describing his/her scene. The player to his left describes the success or failure of the action based on a die roll. Where the scene involves other kids, other people play the adversaries and make up the dialog.

I'll have more to say about this in another post.

ACT V During the finale, each player took a turn describing what happens during the "fight" with the "the." In this case, the players rescued a child from the crane that they thought was being hurt by the machine. Because the token system from Act IV wasn't as clean as I would have liked, Act V worked, but had no real "mechanism" for working.

Altogether, the game lasted about 2.5 hours. About what I expected.

Afterwards, we had a very long discussion about what to fix and how to fix it. I may just simplify things a little and add more opportunities for "worry" instead of adding all the elements that were suggested.

Epilogue: While the tone was not dark, the playtest was strong. While I have to find a system that has more "obstacles" in it, I was very pleased of the playtest. Hopefully, I'll get to play it again in two weeks and I'll have another post. And soon, I'll have workable mechanics that other people can work from.

This sounds AWESOME. I love how you divide play into acts. Have you considered making this a longer game, with each act lasting for one session?

It reminds me of Golding's "Lord of the Flies", and a short story called "A boy and his dog" by Harlan Ellison.

I'll definitely be following the development of this game.

matthijs wrote:
This sounds AWESOME. I love how you divide play into acts. Have you considered making this a longer game, with each act lasting for one session?

It reminds me of Golding's "Lord of the Flies", and a short story called "A boy and his dog" by Harlan Ellison.

I'll definitely be following the development of this game.

Hi Jim,

Six players is a lot, so one thing you should definitely assess is whether everyone was engaged with what was going on, during play. I don't mean they have to be glued to the action, but whether they were having long side conversations, leafing through the book they brought, or on the Playstation.

If not, then mark that down on your "works!" list, because that's a great sign - especially if the mechanics got bumpy, if people were still interested enough in others' scenes to know what was going on, then you know you're on the right track.

Best, Ron

Ron wrote:
Hi Jim,

Six players is a lot, so one thing you should definitely assess is whether everyone was engaged with what was going on, during play. I don't mean they have to be glued to the action, but whether they were having long side conversations, leafing through the book they brought, or on the Playstation.

If not, then mark that down on your "works!" list, because that's a great sign - especially if the mechanics got bumpy, if people were still interested enough in others' scenes to know what was going on, then you know you're on the right track.

Best, Ron

This was fun to playtest. The mix of kids & post-apoc makes it easy to get involved. The story and journey stages drove the story. Dividing actions by imagination and memory created a nice tug-and-pull between fanciful and gritty (and younger & older kids).

Looking forward to a second go at it with the system modifications and to seeing if the food and bedtime stages become more important.

Yeah.

I playtested again with a different group last night.

We ran into the issue of no one getting any worry, so I have a new system for increasing that. And now we have a new use for Imagination as well.

Which I know josh will love.

The big problem I'm having is that ACT 2: Rumors, doesn't play like the rest of the game. In this stage, players take turns talking about the rumors that they've heard, one of which will become the thread of the adventure.

Because younger children have a lot more imagination than older children, if rumors are driven by Imagination, then the older children are stuck on a journey to rescue the monkey king from the junkyard of doom.

However, as one player put it, the game is about THE JOURNEY. It does not matter what they are going to go and do, so long as the older kids can look after the younger ones. The younger children, however, wouldn't care about a journey to go and fight a rival gang. So why would they go?

So. Presently, I'm leaning toward a system that encourages wild "plots" born from the imagination of young children, while the events of the game are driven by reason (memory) and rational action, perforated from time to time, with a "monster sighting."

Of course, once I have a concrete definition about what Memory and Imagination can do, perhaps this will eleviate the problem.

Anyway. I've had four really good playtest sessions and the game is really taking shape now.

More posts, soon. I hope.

The big problem I'm having is that ACT 2: Rumors, doesn't play like the rest of the game. In this stage, players take turns talking about the rumors that they've heard, one of which will become the thread of the adventure.

Because younger children have a lot more imagination than older children, if rumors are driven by Imagination, then the older children are stuck on a journey to rescue the monkey king from the junkyard of doom.

Acts 1 and 2 are really lively at the moment, actually. And provide a short "intro" into the game system for people playing a 1-shot.

I like your idea of writing down food acquisition on your character sheet though.

As soon as I have some rules written, I will post them.