So, I'm working on a game about "psychic runaways" as someone put it.  After another internal playtest, I'm realizing that the roles people take on in the game might not be as appropriate, or as interesting, as other choices. 

Right now, it's pretty traditional.  Players make characters with psychic powers that have escaped, and are on the run from a shadowy organization.  GM = Them, Players = runners.  Hide-and-seek.

What if there was one "runner" and the rest of the group played "Them"?  Like reverse hide-and-seek. 

Is it fun to have one protagonist, and everyone else playing the antagonist?  Are there other ways to apportion roles, a la Polaris, that sound more appropriate to the game fiction?

Thanks in advance, Chris

Are you imagining that the antagonists are (among themselves) operating cooperatively or competitively?  Or something else?

Broadly speaking:  Are they working together to provide the best team-adversity possible, or are they each trying to be the shining star who screws over the runner as perfectly as possible?

Fair disclosure:  I've got more experience in the latter than in the former.

Excellent question!  My initial assumption is that the Chasers will conspire, as a team, against the runner.  But I'm not set on anything yet.

Chris

My reasoning for "All of Them against You" is that, well, it feels creepier than a group of runners. 

And with good reason!  The chasers have two huge advantages.

First:  There's a lot of them.  Even if their in-game power is (in total) identical to that of the runner, their brain-power is many times his.

Second:  They're not on the run.  They can strike (for the most part) from a position of impunity, while the runner must constantly be on the defensive.  This means that the chasers can be more relaxed, whereas the runner will be more tense.

Those are some pretty damn hefty disadvantages.  I'd expect the runner to get themselves well and truly creamed on a regular basis, just from the player ending up too mentally exhausted to mount an effective defense.

I think it might actually be fun to suborn the second point I raised:  What if the runner is not merely running away, but is running toward something?  What if it's the chasers who are on the defensive ... trying desperately to stop the runner from crossing the finish line that will destroy them all?

I know you say roleplaying game but... is there a way i can play this in a park at night and actually chase down someone physically. That, mixed with story and character sounds like a really exciting prospect to me. Is there a draft of rules for this yet, or do we know everything at this point?

What if it's the chasers who are on the defensive ... trying desperately to stop the runner from crossing the finish line that will destroy them all?

And maybe the horrible doom that the chasers are trying to avoid is exactly the same thing as the discovery that the runner seeks.  Maybe his ignorance is the sine qua non of their continued peace.

TonyLB wrote: Second:  They're not on the run.  They can strike (for the most part) from a position of impunity, while the runner must constantly be on the defensive.  This means that the chasers can be more relaxed, whereas the runner will be more tense.

Those are some pretty damn hefty disadvantages.  I'd expect the runner to get themselves well and truly creamed on a regular basis, just from the player ending up too mentally exhausted to mount an effective defense.

I think it might actually be fun to suborn the second point I raised:  What if the runner is not merely running away, but is running toward something?  What if it's the chasers who are on the defensive ... trying desperately to stop the runner from crossing the finish line that will destroy them all?

What if its both? What if your protagonists alternated between Runners and Chasers. Play a scene as a group of Runners trying to escape the opressive grasp of the government, then pick up the next scene with the Chasers trying to stop the terrorists from overthrowing Utopia. Switching POV each scene could be intense as the prior scene is recast in from the new perspective. A runner makes a mad dash from cover, sacrificing his life to draw fire away from his friends. Well, in the next scene the Chasers are congratulating themselves on superb teamwork that flushed out a dangerous insurgent. Too bad the rest got away.

James

Thanks, all for the feedback!

The feeling I'm going for; the fun of the game, as I see it, is (originally) players racing to remember who they are while trying to keep their freedom.  But, the problem is, why would one character's story mean anything to the other players?  What purpose does it serve to have multiple Runners?  I can't think of an answer, so I'm worried I'm just defaulting to a "PC Group" situation. 

Tony, I'm intrigued by your idea of the Chasers trying to stop the Runner for their own survival.  On a meta level, maybe the players could also be competing in a "Who's the Real Bad Guy" type struggle.  Here's what I mean:  one of the categories on the conflict resolution chart is "Reveal", where a character gets to "remember" something about themselves - particularly, an answer to one of their Questions.  Perhaps the Runner player could have a chance, at some point, to reveal something about the Chasers, thus shaping their motives, etc.  Perhaps the "real" protagonists / antagonists won't be revealed until the end of the game!

Thoughts?
Chris

My suggestion: One player must play a runner, one player must be a GM, the rest of the players are free to choose whichever role they prefer.

If you have a group of five, you might wind up with one runner and four co-GMs, or four runners and a solo GM, or anywhere inbetween.

Also, just who exactly turns out to be a protagonist, you as designer don't need to decide. Let it show up in play.

-Vincent

Oh and to address your concern: this thing where you get to say what someone else's character remembers? That's a powerful way to get everyone to care about everyone. I wouldn't expect it to be any problem at all, in play. Has it been?

-Vincent

this thing where you get to say what someone else's character remembers? That's a powerful way to get everyone to care about everyone. I wouldn't expect it to be any problem at all, in play. Has it been?