Topic: 3:16 gives me love
Started by: Matt Wilson
Started on: 5/28/2009
Board: Actual Play
On 5/28/2009 at 11:50am, Matt Wilson wrote:
3:16 gives me love
We played Gregor's fantastic game 3:16 for the second time last night, with only Brennan returning as a veteran player. Kevin Allen JUNIOR and a friend of Brennan's (I'm so bad with names. Probably because I don't care enough) joined us.
Brennan continued to play Stavro, who'd "seen it all."
Kevin ended up as the new sergeant, "Sorenson," whose reputation was "bleak."
Brennan's friend was Itchy, whose reputation was "screw up." That was good material for laughs, like forgetting his helmet, etc.
Planet Renoir was home to hostile plant life, which of course was an experiment gone terribly wrong, causing havoc at the local Club Paradise.
These poor guys: I rolled "ignores armor armour," which is a mean, mean ability. So it went poorly.
Highlights: they see a group of civilians cornered by some hostiles, and Kevin's reply is, "look man, we have our own problems. They're way over there, they might as well be on TV."
Both Stavro and Itchy use a weakness IN THE FIRST FIGHT. There's Sorenson, with his pistol, rolling 1d6 and getting a 1 three times in a row. After four rounds where Kevin and I consistently roll 9s and 10s, he says in Sorenson's voice: "I'm bored. I'm calling for evac."
And of course they're asked to retrieve a specimen. They ask for gear to help them with the task, and a drop ship flys by and dumps what looks like a dog carrier.
Stavro buys the farm, and Brennan's new character is Turk, who's FA 9 NFA 2. A meathead. He gets most kills for the planet.
Sorenson ends up using a strength: architect. It gets him a promotion to Lieutenant. We're loving the idea of you know who getting promoted up the ranks.
The next planet I take a suggestion from Harper: the plants take over the cruiser. That was fun. So they're running around in the dark as gravity and oxygen are failing, choosing to ignore unarmored crewmembers in an effort to save their own skins.
Everyone uses a strength on this one, and everyone is promoted. Captain Sorenson? Yeah.
Will add a few more details when I have a chance, but my favorite line of the whole night is Kevin describing a flashback:
"I was on the track team, at a really important event. And I came face to face with my long jump competition, a hulking, awesome olympian athlete. I knew it would take everything I had to beat him. So I quit."
On 5/28/2009 at 4:43pm, Matt Wilson wrote:
Re: 3:16 gives me love
A thought on my mind is that these characters might not be empathetic enough for me. It's a good short-term attention getter, but maybe not long-term.
I enjoy the chance to think, wow, they didnt' help those civilians. What dicks!
But at some point I'll need a reason to be invested in their stories.
On 5/29/2009 at 12:15pm, Noon wrote:
RE: Re: 3:16 gives me love
Matt wrote: Highlights: they see a group of civilians cornered by some hostiles, and Kevin's reply is, "look man, we have our own problems. They're way over there, they might as well be on TV."
Well, do you need to have empathy with them?
Well, I suppose I'm being a bit hypocritical. There's the prince of nothing series of books that I think are great, but I almost tossed them at the start because two of the main protagonists - well, lets say child killing was part of their repotoire. It was the Achamian sorcerer spy that got me through, as a character of self doubt and someone I felt was likeable. But at the same time, the really horrible characters weren't just a write off as being vile evil - they had their passions, fear and such...all with roots you could relate to, and expressions of them that were abhorent. In the longer term, it paid off. Though I would say it was more an education than an entertainment (it's an edutainment! heh)
And this guy sounds empathisable in terms of him just being human - I think it'd lean towards the education end rather than the entertainment end, but while perhaps he's not likable, it's not hard to feel sorry for him. He's just a man not up to that situation, in that situation.
On 5/29/2009 at 12:34pm, Darcy Burgess wrote:
RE: Re: 3:16 gives me love
Hi Callan,
I don't understand what you mean when you're labelling things as lying on a single Education-Entertainment spectrum.
Surely these are simply parallel spectra, with highs and lows on each. I fail to see how something has to be low on one to be high on the other.
Cheers,
Darcy
On 5/30/2009 at 12:47am, Noon wrote:
RE: Re: 3:16 gives me love
Well, maybe not?
But if you can't emphathise with the characters, you might do well to look at the education level - that might be high, even if the entertainment/empathy level is low. That's worth considering.