Yesterday I finally got to play Sorcerer for the first time and I'm going to put up some general thoughts about the session. Our game is pretty close to the black forest setting presented in Sorcerer & Sword but perhaps with a bit more "general horror" style for demons etc. I adapted a relationship map from the movie Suburbia. It ended up as 4 brothers fighting each other with a lot of jealousy around. Enough about the story, here are my comments:

1. It was fast. I expected it to be a bit clumsy both for me and the players, and it was, but I never thought things would move this fast. It felt like I didn't have time to reflect much, I needed another bang right away so I just used one. We did get story however, maybe unfocused but still story, so I shouldn't complain.

2. It wasn't that hard. I was a bit worried of some comments on massive preps, pondering all ties in the map after reading r-map threads. I did put some time on it but not that much. From stage one of adapting the map I could see how it would affect play and hooking up the players wasn't hard at all.

3. What I'm most worried about is how long we can go on. This session lasted about 3 hours and most of it was just dropping bits of the map to the players. Next session I expect to see a lot of action among all characters, but then what? It seems like everything could actually be over in the next session. With the masses of NPCs etc. I have, I would like to go on with this for something like five sessions. How do you keep it intresting? Add ties to the map? Just play around with what you got? Outer conflicts not directly tied into the map?

4. Humanity worked in a funny way. There were almost no actions really worthy a humanity check (maybe becuase a lot of time was spent on exploring the map, not reacting to it) but I used humanity to highlight the most relevant decisions.

5. At large I'm very pleased with how it went. I've run quite open games and talked about my players as co-authors before, but all that seems stupid now. For the first time I could really feel a creative force on the other side of the table, shaping the the story. Wonderful.

I guess this is a good time to thank all of you for posting very helpful stuff which brings me great gaming.. Thanks.

Thanks, Petter! Many thanks back to you, speaking both as the game author and as fellow Forge member.

So far, I think it sounds ... perfect. No problems at all. I'll look forward to a details-light summary one of these days (check out the Southern Fried and Hellfire threads for good examples).

Here's my answer to your #3.
"What I'm most worried about is how long we can go on. ... Next session I expect to see a lot of action among all characters, but then what? It seems like everything could actually be over in the next session. With the masses of NPCs etc. I have, I would like to go on with this for something like five sessions. How do you keep it intresting? ..."

Let's examine some of the assumptions in this paragraph. (a) The GM is supposed to "keep it interesting." (b) Learning the whole map means the story is over.

(a) and (b) are related to one another, and I think I can deal with them both together, as follows.

The GM certainly has a responsibility to keep things moving, up to and including inserting phenomenal Bangs if necessary. However, as you've already discovered, it's a shared responsibility, and I urge you to trust the players a bit to swing into action, for their own purposes, during the second run. You may find that both player-character actions and (to your own surprise) NPC actions become more complex, which will lead perhaps to one climax for the second session, but far, far from the final climaxes and decisions of the whole story.

Now, a big part of this is Humanity. So far, it sounds as if none of the characters have really had to make a moral decision yet - and that's what "revealing the map" is supposed to be bringing into play. Knowing the map is not a goal; making decisions based on what you've learned is definitely the goal.

So I suggest raising the stakes of each moment that knowledge is gained. By "stakes," I mean, something that matters emotionally to the players (note, the players, not the characters). Which NPCs do they obviously like? Don't merely threaten those NPCs, which is old-school and kinda stupid; do, however, upset those NPCs and potentially ruin their lives, and what they value.

Finally, Kickers, Kickers, Kickers. Review all the Kickers. Are they in action? Have they been forgotten? Are there NPCs who should exist, given these Kickers, which haven't been brought in or even made up? Do that. If this needs work (as I suspect it does), then spend the whole second session "getting personal," leaving the relationship-map to relax for a bit, and merely ramping up the Kickers in a big way.

Best,
Ron

Shared responsibility is indeed wonderful. I find myself constantly solving problems by taking them up with the players instead if thinking it's my problem.

Ron Edwards wrote:
Finally, Kickers, Kickers, Kickers. Review all the Kickers. Are they in action? Have they been forgotten?

Ron Edwards wrote: Knowing the map is not a goal; making decisions based on what you've learned is definitely the goal.

Petter--

The Hellfire thread is here:

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1513