Topic: Scattershot Call for Playtesters
Started by: Le Joueur
Started on: 9/21/2002
Board: Connections
On 9/21/2002 at 5:48am, Le Joueur wrote:
Scattershot Call for Playtesters
My friends,
Yes, I'm afraid you read that right. We're looking for 'blind' playtesters (and I'm not talking about the sight-impaired); well, kinda blind.
It's a lot more complicated than just a playtest, check out the details down in "Call for Playtesters; Let's Make a Deal."
Thanks for the attention; I gotta get some sleep.
Fang Langford
p. s. And you never thought this day would come....
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 3548
On 9/24/2002 at 5:47pm, Eddy Fate wrote:
Re: Scattershot Call for Playtesters
Le Joueur wrote: It's a lot more complicated than just a playtest, check out the details down in "Call for Playtesters; Let's Make a Deal."
I'm looking over the details now (getting ready for a meeting) - I am interested, but I'll get back to you when I've read over the fine print.
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 3548
On 9/25/2002 at 11:06am, Demonspahn wrote:
RE: Scattershot Call for Playtesters
Fang,
Hi. Could you point me to the Scattershot rules. I seem to be missing something. As you can see I don't know anything at all about Scattershot so I'm as blind as they come. We're having an all night Halloween party and I plan to run a few games that are easy to set up. Right now I've got Dead Meat and a homemade horror version of Once Upon a Time. If Scattershot is simple to set up (as in not a whole lot of game terminology---the wives will be playing!) I would be happy to give it a run. The game would focus on normal people being exposed to some sort of supernatural horror, maybe a haunted house, a vampire, a demon or something else equally unoriginal. :)
Anyway, hope I can help.
Pete
On 9/27/2002 at 4:25am, Le Joueur wrote:
Too Soon to Tell
Hey Pete,
Demonspahn wrote: Could you point me to the Scattershot rules. I seem to be missing something. As you can see I don't know anything at all about Scattershot so I'm as blind as they come. We're having an all night Halloween party and I plan to run a few games that are easy to set up. Right now I've got Dead Meat and a homemade horror version of Once Upon a Time. If Scattershot is simple to set up (as in not a whole lot of game terminology---the wives will be playing!) I would be happy to give it a run. The game would focus on normal people being exposed to some sort of supernatural horror, maybe a haunted house, a vampire, a demon or something else equally unoriginal. :)
I wish I had the time to create something I could point to; to be honest, I'm lucky when I can devote a whole 40 minutes in a row to this thing. Right now, the closest there is, is the Scattershot Mechanix Article down in our forum. The thing is, the Mechanix make up less than a third of the game. Then there's the Techniques (read any of a half dozen "Emergent Techniques" articles down in the Scattershot Forum, just to get a taste of the first few or 'biggest' ones. Finally there's all the genre specific stuff (handled by the Genre Expectations Mechanix and Techniques).
As it turns out, the game is extremely hard to express without a Genre Expectation for it to 'form around.' This leads to the playtest in question; I'm offering to build a custom Genre Expectation around the lucky chosen playtester's favorite idea so they can playtest for us.
What that means is (considering the staggering amount of work I can do in five weeks) Scattershot wouldn't be "simple to set up" nor light on terminology. When we get much closer to a 'finished product' situation, it will, but this is too early. (Which is a shame, because we were just talking about Scattershot presents: Gothic with a K. Basically, there are monsters, but you are not allowed to play them, sorta. Each Persona is founded on a Mystique that cannot be revealed to any other player, gamemaster included. That being that the Persona is either a monster or not; the player receives Experience Dice - the game's reward system - for every time they successfully counter someone figuring their Mystique out, fairly. Perhaps the gamemaster would be allowed to circulate a hat with slips of paper marked monster, natural, or neither; neither stays unspecified until the player cannot think of a way to disprove a theory.)
Perhaps next year (I hope). Thank you for your kind attention; look me up if you have any other ideas you might want to offer. I'm giving the 'contest' a coupla weeks before we decide whose we'll make.
Fang Langford
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 1339
Board 22
Topic 3572
Topic 2043
Topic 2173
On 9/27/2002 at 10:57am, Demonspahn wrote:
RE: Scattershot Call for Playtesters
Ah, OK. Sorry I couldn't help. Maybe later(?)
Quick question---are only the people who win the "contest" going to get to playtest it out?
Pete
On 9/27/2002 at 1:38pm, Le Joueur wrote:
Probably Not
Demonspahn wrote: Quick question, are only the people who win the 'contest' going to get to playtest it out?
Well, since I can't promise much, ideally only the winner will get a custom Genre Expectation to playtest. Right now, I've got only two 'entries' and may just go ahead and do both, at a somewhat slower rate. If speed isn't a problem, this very likely might turn into a tradition or even a product; "Gettum while their hot! Custom Genre Expectations by the Author!"
Really, the only reason it's a 'contest' is because I know I can't promise much; the 'contest' is more of commitment on my part to complete at least one of the offered 'entries.' With my time commitments elsewhere, I don't think it fair to just say I'll do anyone's. (Even if that turns out to be the case.)
Since part of the process of playtest at this early stage will be culling together enough of an understanding of Scattershot (which remains an incomplete document), I don't forsee any kind of quick turnaround. Really at this point, I need to see if the theory that Scattershot can be written around a specific Genre Expectation is a practical, achievable goal. Or I'll have to go back to the drawing board.
Why don't I playtest it myself? Hey, it's all we play, but all my playtesters have been around since day one, it's hard to know if I have it all 'written down' in a way that 'strangers' will understand, here. The vernacular is pretty lingua franca for us; I have a hard time (short of doing this) knowing whether 'it works.'
Does that answer your question? (Ever notice how the quicker, or shorter, a question is, the longer and more difficult answers?)
Fang Langford
On 9/30/2002 at 4:38am, Demonspahn wrote:
RE: Scattershot Call for Playtesters
Why don't I playtest it myself? Hey, it's all we play, but all my playtesters have been around
since day one, it's hard to know if I have it all 'written down' in a way that 'strangers' will
understand, here. The vernacular is pretty lingua franca for us; I have a hard time (short of
doing this) knowing whether 'it works.'
Ha. Sounds familiar. We ran into the same thing with Dreamwalker:
"No, no. Everyone has their _own_ Dreamworld---it's not just one big place." OR "No, the Dreamworld is the current dream---the Underworlds are dreams-to-be or dreams-that-have-been---they're made the same way a Dreamworld is made except that they're sort of inert until the Dreamer begins that particular dream. Then that Underworld becomes a Dreamworld and the previous Dreamworld becomes an Underworld....Got it?" :)
Does that answer your question? (Ever notice how the quicker, or shorter, a question is, the
longer and more difficult answers?)
Yes and (yes). :)
Thanks again and good luck.
Pete