This doesn't have a good forum to go in, so:

What was everyone's indie game pick of GenCon? Excluding Sorcerer, which is obvious, mine's FVLMINATA, a historical fantasy game set in the Roman Empire.

I wasn't very interested in this game before GenCon, although I thought the website was slick. Anyway, it's a softcover book with a Christopher Shy cover, and ass-all bad layout inside, and I bought it just because I try to buy all new semi-interesting games to learn something from.

Anyway, I'm reading it, and it's amazing. Not only is the authors' research incredible, but the system--which isn't light at all--is very narrativist. The mechanic that's blown me away so far is the "influence skill roll," or the resolution of a player using a skill to influence someone.

First, success on the influence is determined. In FVLMINATA, this is either determined by a die roll under a target number, or is stated by the GM (if a character has a high skill, success can be granted automatically.) Then, for the effect of the success, the player rolls. (This is normal for most successes.) The roll mechanism is complex, and too long to explain, but the result is determined like so:

The player determines three differing ways the target can respond: Agreement (the ideal result), Neutrality (less in line with the character's wants), or Concession (a small compensation the target will give up if he is dead-set against the character's wishes.) The player makes all of these up, putting the words in the target's mouth. Then, by consulting a table and comparing the player's effect roll, the GM determines whether the target agrees, is neutral, or only gives a concession. No matter what the roll, though, the player has determined the effect of the roll.

This is MASSIVE Director stance like I've never seen in a printed role-playing game besides Extreme Vengeance. It's Director stance WITHOUT being funny, which is doubly unusual. Wild.

The game also includes very Roman-esque mechanics, including rolling on weird Roman dice (made from d8's) and using the four humours to determine characters' and NPC's character traits. It's quite good--I've not really seen anything in it that I don't think is an interesting use of mechanics.

Hey Clinton,

...the mechanic that's blown me away so far is the "influence skill roll," or the resolution of a player using a skill to influence someone....MASSIVE Director stance like I've never seen in a printed role-playing game besides Extreme Vengeance....

Fulminata was one of the first games I looked over at GenCon, but I was still searching out items on my priority list at the time and ended up passing on it. Then I spoke with Michael S. Miller briefly on Friday afternoon, and he commented that one of his favorite games is Theatrix. In fact, his wife Kat Miller ran the Theatrix game that Tom played Saturday afternoon. So I gave Fulminata another look. And I still passed on it!

The influence mechanic sounds great. But here I am the target audience of the game and two browsings of the book, looking at mechanics, failed to sell it to me. Again and again I'm mystified to see games like Theatrix and Dying Earth shipped pre-shrinkwrapped, so they fail to hook their target audience, and games like Fulminata fail in their presentation to draw attention to their most compelling mechanics.

Paul

Hey,

I'm a little mystified by the excitement over Fulminata. Like Paul, I'm looking at it and looking at it, and all I see is Setting. Not even Situation, but ONLY Setting. I agree that the rules Clinton describes promote Director stance, but I can't see any focus or circumstances of play with a Narrativist bent at all. I don't even see any story-prompting point (read: Premise) to adding gunpowder to the Roman setting; everything in the book is so solidly Roman-historical that you can snip out the gunpowder and nothing would change.

As a general rule, mechanics should not be confused with behaviors and neither of these should be confused with whole games. The mechanic in question is usually associated with Narrativist goals - but no one has said that it HAS to be, especially since it concerns stance (a notoriously flexible thing across GNS).

My indie pick for GenCon is Little Fears.

Best,
Ron

My faves are Sorcerer and Little Fears. Easy picks! Both books are incredibly well written & designed (and both feature a far more intense read than 99% of other RPG's), have great art, and both were a steal at 20 bucks.

If you're including card games, add "Blood Suckers from Outer Space". Again, $20, easy to play, great art, funny as all hell, and it's not collectable!

Wish I would have had another day off to keep reading them all!

Sean

I've enjoyed all the games I picked up at Gen-Con (I'm reading Sorcerer right now). One game I picked up (and I won't mention which one) summoned to mind the phrase:

"Teeters on the edge of genius, but pulls back in the nick of time."

Take care,
John

"Live like nobody's looking."
- The Tao of Zen Nihilism, a Self-Hurt Book

I'm a little mystified by the excitement over Fulminata. Like Paul, I'm looking at it and looking at it, and all I see is Setting. Not even Situation, but ONLY Setting. I agree that the rules Clinton describes promote Director stance, but I can't see any focus or circumstances of play with a Narrativist bent at all.

Just to chime in, I wasn't that taken with Fvlminata, although I did talk to Jason Roberts for a while, and picked up a copy based on the conversation I had with him (and the fact that he was willing to take a look at WYRD). I haven't had a chance to read it thoroughly yet, so I'll reserve further comment until I have a chance to do so.

I will say that I was generally quite disappointed with the new products that were out. There were some nice *looking* books - Last Exodus comes to mind - but nothing I got too excited about. Little Fears and Sorceror seemed to have the most substance behind them, but discounting those, I'd have to say Dave's freebie THE HUNT was quite an attention grabber. Is it online somewhere, as I lost my copy somewhere around the table Saturday afternoon?

Oh, and for a little bit of post-GenCon goodwill, try checking out the WotC website (or maybe it's the TSR homepage). Somewhere, Ryan Dancey has released a rather scathing reprimand to all D20 publishers, most of whom are apparently not living up to the standards set forth in the OGL. I found it to be an amusing read.

Take care,
Scott

[ This Message was edited by: hardcoremoose on 2001-08-07 22:18 ]

Jim wrote,

"I'm having trouble following this. Why would it have to have a Narrativist bent to generate excitement or qualify as "the indie sensation of GenCon" or whatever?"

It doesn't. We're talking about personal picks, not recommendations, and certainly not any kind of official or blanket "best" thing.

On the basis of personal preferences, Fulminata isn't my pick. Furthermore, specific to Clinton's post, I wanted to draw the distinction between a mechanic and a whole RPG in terms of GNS, which is an ongoing tricky issue.

In Fulminata's favor, I really like the care and interest they brought to the Roman setting, and the illustrations have a lot of mood rather than being the same old stuff.

Best,
Ron

Scott:

"THE HUNT was quite the attention grabber..."

Now you scare me, and thoroughly. As for its availability, it isn't, not really. I can email you a copy if you want it. I was going to more with it, but my 'bad-idea alarm' went off in my head. The overall purpose was to do what VIOLENCE and POWER-KILL both pointed toward; which was to make a psycho-killer game with no redeeming social or ethical qualities that (and here is the big difference) could be effectively played. See? Bad idea alarm. I even toyed with making it a larp, but that would be asking for lawsuits wouldn't it?

If you want it, I will give it to you. It ain't pretty, and I think I go a bit bonkers in some of the later text of the game, but you can have it. If you play it, take pictures.

Dav

I really dig FVLMINATA. A lot.

The mechanics are a bit heavy for my taste (I'll be using an abbreviated version of them), but that's just me. I'm sure there are tons of folks who love them.

"Love the direction, not happy with the distance," is probably the best way to describe my reaction to the mechanics.

Ron, your comment "It's all setting." What do you mean by that? I thought the game mechanics were very innovative and evocative of the setting. Also, the book suggested to me many different kinds of stories using all kinds of different characters.

1) Escaping slaves.
2) Gladitor stories.
3) Senator politics.

Tons and tons of ideas. I can't wait to run the game.

Here's my quick deal with FVLMINATA. Ron's right in that the game is not very skewed towards narrativism. I'm not as hardcore narrativist as some, but I do tend to buy narrativist games. So why do I like it?

For the same reason I love Monte Cook's The Book of Eldritch Might. Monte's online PDF product has garnered amazing sales and won several awards. When big name game designers are publishing indie stuff and selling it online and getting press everywhere - well, indie games, and especially online indie games, get noticed and get legitimized.

FVLMINATA is a slick game with a Shy cover that's bound to sell in stores. It's got a detailed background (which people love), good production value, and a fun system. It's also indie as hell, and includes some mechanics which move towards Director stance (something you don't see in mainstream games much.) The more people buying indie games and being exposed to mechanics that push traditional limits - well, the more indie games get noticed, and the quicker Director stance mechanics and narrativism get legitimized.

I think FVLMINATA's one of the best things that could happen to indie games. It's not everything I want, and not everything it could be, but it's a stepping stone, and one I appreciate.

John,

By "it's all setting," I do not mean "this is bad." However, these days, I'm looking for games which provide Premise - a judgment-based question which itself grabs me. (Also, my comment relates to Clinton's identification of Narrativist elements in the game, but I know such talk gives you hives, so I'll shut up about that.)

With respect, I think that you and many of us are so used to injecting Premise into an RPG, and so experienced at doing so, that a setting by itself is in fact adequate for us. Give me Romans? No problem - I gotcher Romans story-Premise stuff ready to go. I have no doubt at all that your Fulminata game would surge into action within minutes of starting play.

But the game itself doesn't provide SQUAT along these lines. If a GM doesn't have that experience or instinct to create and present Premise to the players, then the game isn't going to help him. He and they will be looking at their utterly consistent, utterly "described" characters, as well as all the culture and map stuff in the book, and wondering what to do. At best they'll try to fill in the gap with Situation, and run another "guy hires you to get the Thingamabob, and he betrays you once you get it."

I've realized through observation that a great deal of role-players really need that Premise stuff, not only verbalized, but also reinforced by the system mechanics (e.g. Trouble in Orkworld). Without it, they try to play, get very disoriented, and the game fizzles.

Clinton's second post, above this one, makes a lot of sense to me, and by no means do I think "Fulminata sucks" or anything stupid like that. And any REAL judgment of the game would of course rely on actual play experience, and God knows I've been surprised before based on that.

Best,
Ron

So what you're saying is you want a "How to use this game" section. That right?

(Jumping in because this little dialouge helped crystalize a concept/reponse for me - I'm NOT speaking for Ron here, I barely know the dude.)

On 2001-08-09 19:48, John Wick wrote:
So what you're saying is you want a "How to use this game" section. That right?

Hey,

I do not NECESSARILY want a "How to use the game" section. What I want is an issue at stake, and if it's described in such a section, that would be fine. Or (and) if it's inherent in the mechanics of resolution, development, or character creation, that's even better.

I'm being very precise about my verbs above - this is what I *want*, not what a given RPG *should be* in order to be good. The difference is huge. This entire discussion is about personal picks and preferences, not about evaluating Fulminata in any judgmental way.

Since Fulminata doesn't provide any such issue, I would have to run with its potential - for me, that means the ongoing conflict between Roman citizen ideals and the corruption of the governmental mechanisms. For someone else, it might be the interesting back-and-forth between Empire culture and colonial culture. But such a thing will always be injected and dependent upon (1, positive) my agreement with players about it from the outset, or (2, negative) my social dominance over those players and their access to the game.

All this is nothing more than my usual claim about Narrativism: that it relies on Premise, which is an issue of some emotional importance to the players (which includes the GM). Neither Setting, Situation, nor Character is Premise, although any one of them can pose or reinforce a Premise.

Best,
Ron

Ron,

FVLMINATA kinda does present a premise, but not in a clear "This is what the game is about" kinda way.

You get 3 Humor Points (these are good things) if your Humors are imbalanced.

But a character with his Humors IN balance gains 6 Humor Points. The ideal Roman is serious and grave and not given to bouts of extreme emotion.

The problem is, I WANT my guy to be experiencing extreme emotions. I WANT that conflict between "being a good Roman" and "being a human being." FVLMINATA doesn't do anything more about this conflict...and it should, really. But it's still a cool game and damn, iff'n those boys didn't do their homework! Wow. Lotta good stuff in there.

I'm all about Gladiators, natch.

FVLMINATA is definitely one of those games where the premise is present but has to be inferred. Or premises. Whatever.

For example, the scenario which comes with the book, Mercator Piperis, is all about trying to determine whether this pleb is a good enough Roman to be raised to equestrian status. The characters are assigned to evaluate him, which raises the question "I've been assigned to tell if this guy is a good Roman - am I a good Roman?"


Which, I guess, raises two other possible premises for campaigns:

"people coming from a society without Christianity (or without whatever) would be fundamentally very different" or "people are pretty much the same everywhere."

It would have been nice to see the premise explicitly addressed, but FVLMINATA is definitely old-school in terms of its presentation.

There's a question for you, then - are there games out there which have very clear sets of premises they support, and which may even have been designed with them in mind, but which don't articulate them in the rulebook because that's not what is usually in an RPG book?

Me, I bought the game for kind of different reasons, and I'm recruiting players weirdly.

There's an illustration in there somewhere of a legionary's uniform, including his musket and shield. The shield has a little notch in the right-hand upper corner, where the legionary rests his musket in preparation for firing. When I show people that illustration, if they laugh and go "of course," then I think they'll appreciate the game.

I'd say that's a simulationist priority coming to the fore right there, but in actual fact I think it's just a history-geek priority.

[ This Message was edited by: James Holloway on 2001-08-14 10:46 ]