I recently had the pleasure of teaming up with my pre-fatherhood gaming group; we got together five days ago.  We started early (10am), and in a nod to days of yore, had planned on "all-day gaming"; RPGing up until supper time, and then changing gears to some board game fare.  We'd settled on Agon as our RPG for the day, and I'd prepped The Island of Skyros and attendant NPCs ahead of time.

I've been excited to play a proper game of Agon for some time, and it was with great enthusiasm that I opened the day by reading the "What the Players Do" section on page 9.  I made sure to emphasize the fact that the real competition was between players, and that my job as GM was to provide a level playing field for them to get their game on.

I don't think that anyone believed me, but there's only so much exhorting you can do, right?

Early play was a little meandering, as the players settled into their characters and poked at the system in a somewhat tentative fashion.  It also took a little while for the fact that I wasn't going to "hide" the quest objectives away from them to dawn on two of the three players.  They spent a fair bit of time just discussing what they'd do rather than doing it.  This wasn't 'in-character' planning; it was meta-gamey planning, in a "nah, we can't do that - he'll just move the dingus, and then we'll have to go find his mcguffin".  Again, I tried explaining to them that the only thing that could "hide" stuff from them was the dice.  However, my words carried a decided lack of credibility, and it wasn't until the first few contests were resolved (some favourably for the Heroes, some not), that the even-handedness of Agon's resolution system began to take hold.

At least, that's my perception of things.

The initial meandering pace of play was left behind once Glory started getting doled out.  It wasn't long before players started making out-of-character comments along the lines of "Right, so we need to make everything a roll, all the time.  That way, there's more Glory!"  This was great -- it showed that John's design had engaged their competitive sides.  The hunt for Glory was on, and everyone was mixing it up.

Due in large part to my inexperience with the game, I didn't have a real sense of how long a quest should take for me & mine.  From the moment that the players latched on to a specific quest (the Quest for the Heart-Stone) to its completion took us about 5-6 hours of solid play.  By the end, I was starting to wear down, and I think some of the players were beginning to tire as well.  This wasn't weariness per se; rather, I found that it was analagous to the deep-muscle burn I remember from cross-country running, way back in Grade 4.  Agon is hard work, but it's rewarding.

In addition to a number of minor rules questions (which I'll handle in a separate thread), there were two major issues that cropped up in play that I really needed to address.

Narration Rights
Other than during Achievements, I can't find any guidance regarding who narrates what once a contest roll is made.  Do non-achievement rolls follow the same formula (Antagonist sets up the contest, and the Aggressor has the narration rights?) as those in Achievements?

We settled on the Antagonist holding the "rubber stamp" of narrative authority, and I was always keen to hear from the players.

The Wound Track
When I first explained the nifty "you only check off the box of the wound level" mechanic, all the players were enthused.  They were even more enthused when I explained the "wound sliding" mechanic.  This is cool stuff!

Except it's not.  At least, it wore on us by the end of the game.  Here's why:

It's next-to-impossible to score the high-enough rolls to land a level 4+ wound in a single strike.  However, the players, all hopped up on the competitive goodness that is the rest of the game, were constantly open-ending their attack rolls in an effort to do single-hit take-downs.  And then, they'd follow it up with a "Right.  I completely forgot again that I just can't do that.  Not without a horseshoe shoved up my Aenis..."

So, we discovered that combat in Agon essentially boils down to "who gets the last hit out of six", not "who can maneuver for the best hit".  How do the players compete over that -- it seems to me that the pertinent subsystems are too intricate to form a suitable playground for functional competition.  However, I'd love for someone to point out to me what we weren't doing.

Conclusion
We all had a good time, and were really into the game until that wound track realization dawned on us.  Even then, I know that I was still enjoying myself.  The wound track wasn't a deal-breaker for me.  We were all bummed over it, and we even went back through the rules to make sure that we weren't missing something.  However, we couldn't see a procedural error on our part.

Hi,

In the interests of easier cross-referencing, here are the minor rules questions.

Darcy

Hi Darcy,

Sounds like solid Agon play to me. The tentative opening is common for new groups. I'm very happy to hear that they grabbed on to the necessity of conflicts and rolls for Glory. The game was built to address the "resolution avoidance" of some types of old-skool play.

You didn't miss anything regarding narration rights. It's not spelled out in the book and is meant to be left up to whatever method your group prefers. Antagonist rubber stamp is what I do, too.

I have something to say about the wound track, brinksmanship, and competition during battles, but I'm going to hold off for now and let other people chime in.

Our group also wound up disappointed that the wound scale turned all the combat into a war of attrition. 

I'd love to play again, so I'm looking forward to your thoughts on that subject, John.

Kill stealing...for Glory!!!!

Hi James,

Hey, I wasn't clear enough, was I?

That bit in my opening post that went "It seems to me that the pertinent subsystems are too intricate to form a suitable playground for functional competition." is basically saying "Hey, we should be able to steal each others kills, but the system is really tough to navigate in and around those parts."

Then next bit, "However, I'd love for someone to point out to me what we weren't doing." Is asking you to play tour guide.

Since you're now a self-proclaimed kill-stealing expert, care to share?

Cheers,
Darcy

Darcy wrote:
So, we discovered that combat in Agon essentially boils down to "who gets the last hit out of six", not "who can maneuver for the best hit".  How do the players compete over that -- it seems to me that the pertinent subsystems are too intricate to form a suitable playground for functional competition.  However, I'd love for someone to point out to me what we weren't doing.

Ah!  Ok... so what you're saying is that at your table, the first 3-4 successful hits in combat are used to size up the opponent, and try and assess their weak spot?  Then, it gets all competitive?

Darcy wrote:
Ah!  Ok... so what you're saying is that at your table, the first 3-4 successful hits in combat are used to size up the opponent, and try and assess their weak spot?  Then, it gets all competitive?

Hi Mel,

We're talking about the same thing.  I didn't mean "assessing" in the sense of gaining or eliminating advantages.  Rather, I meant it in a sense of "what's a good weapon to use on this guy", or "well, I think that the Antag has busted out all the special powers, so now seems a good time to go at it".

Thanks,
Darcy

A battle in Agon can be a subtle and tricky thing, competition-wise, and has everything to do with brinksmanship or "playing chicken" with the other heroes, as well as good Oath management.

As you discovered, a hero cannot rush in, charge up his uber attack, and swat down a bad guy with one blow. This is by design. It's basically impossible to take out any character with one shot during a battle. The result is that the hero who jumps in and does damage first is helping the other heroes by softening up the baddie. Someone has to be the first one to strike the bad guy, and this move will help the hero group (by shortening the combat and giving the bad guy fewer opportunities to do damage and suck up the resources of the party). But it will likely hurt the hero, because his fellows will have an easier shot at the higher wound boxes, which are worth more Glory.

It's almost always a better strategy to hold back and let someone else strike the first (and probably second and third) blow, then cherry pick the higher wound boxes by using the "attack again" Divine Favor ability at the right moment. But if all the heroes sit back and wait, the bad guy gets in more hits and hurts the group.

So there's your dilemma. Agon is a game of dilemmas. Do you go in swinging and try to get it over with, probably missing out on the higher Glory? Or do you take the chance that someone else will do it for you, and wait for the juicy shot?

Then, throw Oaths in to the mix. The guy who goes first and softens up the bad guy is helping the other heroes. Every single time you help the other heroes, you should charge Oaths for your trouble. If they don't want to pony up, that's their problem, and you can sit back and wait right along with them. (Assuming you haven't positioned yourself as the bad guy's punching bag, of course.)

There are layers and layers, not all immediately apparent on the first go. Try being the "I'll hit him first" guy for several battles and build up a nice pile of Oaths to cash in later -- right when the other heroes least want you to.

As the player in Darcy's game who was most vocal in his dislike for the wound mechanic, I suppose I should contribute a few words to the discussion. 

I think that the problem I have with it is that the game mechanics seem at odds with the roleplaying elements.  There seems to be quite a bit of emphasis placed upon the quest for glory--that is, as far as I can tell from what I have seen of the game thus far, the main goal for each player/character.  Having read the posts of those in favour of the wound mechanic, it appears that the best way to achieve glory is to hang back and let others do all of the work for you.  The roleplayer in me cries foul at the mere of thought of such an act.  That's not glory...that's cowardice. 

A warrior seeking glory would denounce all other warriors for being weak and girlish (ancient warriors weren't known for their political correctness) and charge into battle.  The bravest, and therefore most feared and respected, warriors were those who stood at the front of the battle formation, hacking away limbs with seemingly reckless abandon.  It seems to me that the warrior who hangs back, making largely ineffective ranged attacks while his companions are bathed in the blood and viscera of their enemies, is being clever and opportunistic as far as the game mechanics are concerned, but that warrior is far from glorious.  They should earn the wrath of the gods, not reap the bounties and rewards.

Also, mechanically you spend divine favour in order to pull off spectacular attacks by "opening" dice.  Presumably, the gods like this sort of thing because its bloody and leads to more deaths, which is, of course, glorious.  So shouldn't opening your dice to score an attack with 2 or even 3 victories earn you more glory than an attack that only produces 1 victory?  Is it more glorious to graze someone with a 1 victory spear thrust when they are already at death's door and would probably topple over in a strong breeze, or is it better to bring a thunderous 3 victory sword smashing through someone's armour and into their collar bone with a single blow?  I'll take the latter.

It feels wrong to me.  As a set of abstract mechanics, it's fine to say that poaching kills is the best tactic on the road to victory.  As a roleplaying game, that involves some level of immersion into the setting, it just doesn't sit well with me.

That is my initial reaction after a single evening of play. 

Out of curiosity, I don't recall this coming up at all during our game, but just how difficult is it to kill minions (i.e., generic, relatively weak opponents who tend to appear in large numbers)?  Even though I suspect there will be more hits worth multiple victories (because the minions would likely be using fairly small dice on their defense), it seems that they would still take a long time to kill or defeat.  I picture a heroic warrior, in the tradition that Agon seems to be built around, cutting a swath of carnage through minions, but the wound system really seems to discourage even the possibility of a one shot kill.  Is there a separate mechanic to cover that?

Glenn

I have some questions of my own regarding John's comments, but I want to let Glenn's feedback rule the thread for a bit.  I don't have anything to add right now, Glenn, but I'm watching intently.

First, minions. A minion is defeated with a single hit. They're worth 1 Glory each.

Glenn, we are on the same page regarding charging into battle and being brave and glorious and such. So why does the system work the way it does? Some of that answer has to do with emergent properties of the game, and it's hard to unpack unless you've seen it. But maybe I can sort of point at the thing I mean, and you can fill in the rest with play and reflection.

Here's something: When minions are involved, the hero who dives in first and attacks the most wins big. If you have the Divine Favor to spend, you can step up to a group of minions and cut them all down before anyone else blinks (two swords are great for this). This might be worth as much as 6 Glory in one chunk, and you don't have to share any of it with the other heroes.

Now the big nasty NPC guy? He's worth 6 Glory to the hero who hits that last wound box. BUT, he's also worth 5 Glory to the hero who hit the no. five box, 4 Glory to the next one down, and so on. When an NPC is defeated, there might be a Glory differential of 2-3 points among the heroes involved. And then everyone also shares equally in the bonus Glory based on the Strife cost of the NPC. So when an NPC goes down, the group as a whole gets a nice big Glory boost (towards advances and increased effectiveness).

So: Fighting minions with aggression and verve can mean a big Glory boost for the hero who is brave and quick. Fighting NPCs is a more bitter battle of attrition that doesn't reward one hero very much more than another*. Groups of minions are ridiculously dangerous with their big fat attack bonuses, and are basically the only entity in the game that can score a 6-victory roll and drop someone with one attack. The hero that charges up to a group of minions risks a lot with his aggression, and stands to gain a big individual reward. The heroes who fight an NPC must be more wiley, more crafty, more subtle and skillful to edge out an advantage over their fellows, but when an NPC goes down, the collective reaps a nice big reward.

One way is Achilles, the other is Odysseus.

Does that help?

- J

* (Unless you are really, really good at Agon, and can gobble up the 4, 5, and 6 boxes yourself for a nice 3-pt. bump over the next highest guy who got the 3 box.)

I have more to say about contests vs. battles, but that can wait.

Data point: we saw no Minions during our trip to Skyros.

Data point: we saw no Minions during out trip to Skyros because I didn't get what John just said when I planned my NPCs.

hermes wrote:
Having read the posts of those in favour of the wound mechanic, it appears that the best way to achieve glory is to hang back and let others do all of the work for you.  The roleplayer in me cries foul at the mere of thought of such an act.  That's not glory...that's cowardice. 

One thing to add: there is sometimes value in opening up a roll and hitting an opponent big early in the fight.
If you get the 4 point wound box, no-one can take it away from you. The next few hits are probably hitting the lower boxes, and so are worth lower glory.

I wouldn't recommend using this is a tactic too much, though, as it's a bit costly.

The main advantage I see for the rolling up mechanic, is the ability to get a hit at all when your opponent has rolled a high defence, and/or you're staggering under the weight of wounds.

And you can never have too many minions! Although the PCs will soon disagree, once they see what kind of attack bonus a group of minions gets. :)

John:

Let me begin by saying that I enjoyed my gaming group's first try at playing Agon.  Then again, I usually enjoy most games with that particular gang of misfits.  But that doesn't take away from the game itself in any way.  It has some intriguing ideas and a very evocative setting to put them to use. 

I am glad to hear that minions can be hewn asunder like the cannon-fodder they are (though you make it sound like they can do some serious damage to the unwary).  This fits my conception of the genre.

As for your explanation regarding NPC's, I do see your point that most of the combatants have a chance to earn some glory in the battle, even though it's he who deals the killing blow who reaps the biggest reward.  I can envision a situation wherein none of the heroes are willing to attack a wounded monster because each player is waiting for the others to perform the set-up so they can score the killing blow.  That's the part that irks me somewhat (and which seems decidedly unheroic).  It feels like an artifact of the rules rather than a "realistic" action that might be taken by the character in-role.

Perhaps part of this stems from my conception of competition.  I guess I'm not overly fond of the idea of "screwing" the other players over in order to earn some form of advantage (usually glory, but there are other options as well).  I tend to imagine a more collegial atmosphere to the competition where the warriors attempt to help each other, but the one who gets the kill also claims the bragging rights around the campfire that evening.  The notion that players can and will perform actions that disadvantage other players in the interest of self-promotion just seem contrary to why
I play RPG's most of the time.  I actually like the idea of competition, but I think maybe I'd prefer it if the characters had some motivation to work cooperatively in the pursuit of their quests--something like an honour code might fit the bill (I believe the oath system can also accomplish this, but it is still a form of self-promotion and is, therefore, a bit difficult for me to swallow).

For what it's worth, I do like the Achilles vs. Odysseus analogy.  That works.  What makes me hesitate is the thought that Achilles wades into battle against a cyclops and steadily wears it down with telling wounds, only to have Odysseus, who has been hanging back the whole time doing nothing, suddenly toss a proverbial banana peal under Achilles in order to throw off the mighty warrior's positioning while he puts a single arrow to his bow and finishes off the dying creature.  Odysseus isn't just being clever...he's being a complete bastard...but he still gets the biggest chunk of the glory.

As an almost random thought, related to all of this, I like the notion that the heroes would be quite at home singing each other's praises.  Singing a song about how cool you are is kind of lame, but singing a song about how lucky you were to be standing side by side with "so-and-so, far-seeing son of that older guy" when he slew the cyclops in an epic confrontation.  Perhaps that's the sort of thing I meant previously about collegial competition.  I think they should want to sing each other's praises.

Of course, if, in roleplaying, you decide that one character is competing against another character because he stole the other's woman (or something along those lines), then I could see how one might sabotage the other's actions and try to steal his glory.

Anyway, I will continue to wrestle with this particular aspect of it.  Aside from that, I applaud the work you have done.    :) 

Mel:

I like your use of the phrase "roleplaying glory"--it's so true! 

hermes wrote:
Odysseus isn't just being clever...he's being a complete bastard...

hermes wrote:
Perhaps part of this stems from my conception of competition.  I guess I'm not overly fond of the idea of "screwing" the other players over in order to earn some form of advantage (usually glory, but there are other options as well).  I tend to imagine a more collegial atmosphere to the competition where the warriors attempt to help each other, but the one who gets the kill also claims the bragging rights around the campfire that evening.  The notion that players can and will perform actions that disadvantage other players in the interest of self-promotion just seem contrary to why

For what it's worth, I do like the Achilles vs. Odysseus analogy.  That works.  What makes me hesitate is the thought that Achilles wades into battle against a cyclops and steadily wears it down with telling wounds, only to have Odysseus, who has been hanging back the whole time doing nothing, suddenly toss a proverbial banana peal under Achilles in order to throw off the mighty warrior's positioning while he puts a single arrow to his bow and finishes off the dying creature.  Odysseus isn't just being clever...he's being a complete bastard...but he still gets the biggest chunk of the glory.

Hi Darcy, no kill stealing expert here I assure you and everyone has said it much better than I could. I haven't played the game all that much yet, but I enjoy it. The game is definitely all about the cock-blocking. I find its loads of fun and there's strategy in it. But its not the most glorious hero gets the most glory. Its the one who gets the most glory is the most glorious. I like the fact that the hero's are performing un-heroic acts so that their heroic exploits are remembered throughout the ages. That kind of tickles my irony bone.

Imagine if the aim of the game was to be first in with a big ol' wallop with your sword. All the heroes rush in and start hitting the thing and opening rolls and trying to do the most damage. The game is basically just rewarding with glory behavior that other games reward with XP. Maybe you position an ally out of range so he can't hit it. But that's not as involved strategically as positioning your ally so that he can hit it first, before you hit it. Or calling on an oath to make him soften the NPC for you. Plus you don't get to swear at your friends for knocking you aside after you did all the hard work and taking your reward, the fuckers! :)

Darren is totally right, as always, with all things Agon.

Thanks John :)

One other thing I forgot to mention. I said:

Then, when the fight looks like it's going the player's way, and they are about to win, there will be a scramble amongs the heroes to get the last and highest glory blows on those NPCs. That's when the competition kicks in.