Well, I've played in two games of Universalis so far, and while I enjoyed both experiences, I did notice that both times, the game eventually degenerated into some final catacylsm that involved everybody rolling stupid numbers of dice. This seemed motivated not so much by plots, as by the fact that everbody had gigantic wodges of coins by that point.

I was wondering what could be done about this, and it occured to me that one thing that might have been different about our play of Universalis was that both times we had six players. Correct me if I am wrong, but that seems like a large group, based on the actual play examples I have seen posted. And the fact that there were so many players, and that we were using the suggested 25/5 for initial coins/replacements lead to a much greater amount of resources being pumped into the story. Lots of resources early on also leads to larger conflicts early on (I suspect) which results in even more coins being pumped into the game economy.

I'm wondering if at least part of a solution would be to calculate initial coins/replacements using a constant pool divided by number of players. For example, using 4 players as a baseline, and the suggested 25/5, that would make the pool 100/20. So with 5 players, each player would get 20/4, and for six players, 18/3, and so on. Perhaps the pool size could be set at the beginning of the game depending on how much "whizz-bang" the players want for that session (smaller pools leading to smaller plots, as less compontents can be created, and there will be more desire to reuse them).

What do others think of these ideas?

Sounds like a good idea.
If enough coins get spent pre-building stuff things might not be so bad...

You can also fine tune things on a per session basis by adding in rules gimmicks to adjust the "after scene refresh amount".
You could also require that x% of coins won in complications must be immediately spent or that sort of thing.
Or perhaps just go wild with the Coin amounts, thus upping the Importance or characters and locations, then it will take even more to effect (or use some of the protection schemes that make it harder to destrot stuff).
Or you could put in a gimmick requiring a certain number of sessions before the end.

I've had simillar experiences - although we had only 4 players we had twigged that nobody loses in a complication (which isn't true but I'll save that for another day). So we would plough 20 coins at a time into making behemoth armies, demons, and fortresses and get them all to fight each other. (which generated even more coins).

The thing was though we weren't really utilising other "coin-drain" mechanics that act as a natural balance and are often much better alternatives to complications.

For example...

Take-overs
You've spent the whole game building up your cool samurai army. I've spent the whole game building up my cool demon army. A battle is inevitable. I plough every single coin I've got into traits for my cool demons. You hold 5 back.

You spend a coin to take-over my demon army
You spend a coin to describe the event of the samurai kicking demon butt.
Because you control both components there's no complication.
You spend a coin to give the demon army the trait "Eternally Vanquished".
Next time round everyone concentrates on trying to take-over the powerful armies instead of wasting time creating their own.

So you can see how even with six people they all end up ploughing all their coins into taking over key components that already exist rather than creating big "coin-vending-characters".

Challenges
We refresh and I get more coins - this time I'm smart, I save them in case you try another take-over.
I try and do what you do, I take over both armies and pay for an event of the demons kicking samurai butt this time round.
You object and initiate a challenge: "How can the demons be back after being Eternally Vanquished?"
We bid against each other but because you've got a fact to back you up, your coins are worth 2 for every 1 of mine.

So again you can see how challenges can be a coin drain. And the more "contentious" the issue is, the more likely that all 6 players are going to jump in and burn up all those precious coins. Try something funny like spending a coin for the fact "The demon army sucks" and watch everyone chuck away their coins on yay and nay votes ;-)

I realise that's not really what you're after but it might be useful. The main problem we had with a 6 (or was it 7) player game was that we didn't have enough physical coins to share around!

Tony

Hi all,

rafial wrote: Well, I've played in two games of Universalis so far, and while I enjoyed both experiences, I did notice that both times, the game eventually degenerated into some final catacylsm that involved everybody rolling stupid numbers of dice. This seemed motivated not so much by plots, as by the fact that everbody had gigantic wodges of coins by that point.

My games are your games Alan (this is Wilhelm). Just goes to show that perceptions can be very different. Don't get my wrong, I enjoyed both games, however I found the endings rather unsatisfying, especially the Orient Express game. I admit I was hoping for a game of more subtle conflit, ala the source material. The fact that near the end all the characters suddenly started sprouting "kicks butt x 5" kind of took me off guard.

Mulling it over in retrospect, I'm starting to understand that Universalis is essentially gamist, so perhaps the right way to set the conventions of a particular genre is more use of rules gimmicks. I recall at one point we had a "all complications must be social" in effect for one scene, I think stuff like that is moving in the right direction. If other players want something different they can spend coins to challenge, or buy off the rules gimmicks later. I do think (being polite folk) we have yet to explore the proper use of challenges in Universalis.

A big point here is that it's a good idea to never drain yourself of Coins entirely. Basically, if you do, you're taking your voice out of the picture. Always have at least five (and more like ten is warranted) or so so that you can Challenge other stuff. And then do so once in a while. Make people improve their descriptions. By not always buying as big and keeping some Coins in reserve this keeps inflation down. Play conservatively if you want a conservative game.

Another big point. Don't allow multiples on Traits without good reasons. This seems to be a place where inflation occurs. People don't just buy strong, they buy Strong 5 (as in the D&D conversion where characters had tons of stats). This will be inflationary.

The term Inflation, BTW, is completely appropriate. Basically by allowing large multiples and lots of Traits to be used in Complications, and excessive numbers of Complications, you are creating a situation where there just will be more Coins in play. What this means is that Traits are all simply worth less on a level for level basis. Which is fine. All it means is that you will have to occasionally roll buckets of dice.

If you don't feel like playing conservatively, and Inflation does get out of hand, then adopt the something like the proposed rule from the other thread, and force people to buy down some portion of the opponent's pool. Making Complications risky. The only problem with this is that they players will compete to actually win Complications.

As it stands, we've made it so that there is no problem with losing a Complication. You get your Coins back, essentially. What this is supposed to do is to make you willing to actually spend less. You aren't trying to "Win" Complications. You are simply trying to add to them creatively. If the "Winner's share" for Complications seems to be driving players to want to win, then have the winnings shared equally (or prorated) amongst all participants by Gimmick. Then have players only get back one Coin for partipating. This gives incentive to participate, then, but deletes the Gamism entirely.

I propose this because Universalis does not support Gamism in the least. If you try to play competitively, the game will fall apart. It's not designed for it, and it crumbles fast under such pressure (wait one player has more Coins than all the rest, and forces a Gimmick that the other Players have to get him drinks, or that he gets all the Coins that they accumulate; "I win!"). Like the text says, Universalis is a tool to help you tell stories collaboratively, in a shared framework.

One more thing. I don't actually suggest that you use the above idea about modifying Complications. But if you want a Gimick that might help to to get away from Inflation, try this: Traits cannot be bought in a Complication, and dice bought during a complication cost two Coins each (or just forbid such purchases at all). What this will do is give large incentive to invest in things before Complications. But, because Take-Overs can occur after adding Traits, you don't want to always be chucking in the whole load there either. This may result in more spending on Traits which means Coins invested in something less able to be used on a case by case basis. Which should do just fine.

Again, though, I've never experienced inflation in play, personally. I also don't understand the whole "Dump all you Coins on the last Complication" thing either. It only makes any sense if that's the last Complication in the game (in which case, it's very appropriate). If you're coming back for another session, you will need those Coins for the next session.

If you don't like inflation, be the player who puts a stop to it. One player playing conservatively and Challenging regularly will slow everybody down.

Mike

First time I've had a chance to catch up with this thread. Mike's covered pretty much everything I'd say 100%.

I'll emphasize his notes about Challenges. If you don't have any Coins at all (or significantly less) you're essentially impotent. The other players can do pretty much anything they want and you can do nothing about it. Once I realized that about my own game...my own spending habits changed dramatically. Always have enough Coins on hand to be able to credibly make a Challenge where necessary.

In addition, having the Coins isn't enough, being willing to use them is also required. You don't have to accept what other players have said at face value just because they spent a Coin on it. Make sure you fully understand the "Negotiation" phase of the Challenge. Thats the part where you jump into another player's turn and say "Hey wait, do you really think "Strength x3" is an appropriate trait for that character to have. I've no problem with him being strong, but are you trying to make him a Hercules/Samson/Hulk kind of character? " This costs you nothing and 9 times out of 10 (in my experience anyway) will result in one party coming to agree with or be willing to compromise with the other. "Strength x3" goes back to being simply "very strong" (with no multiplier) and no Coins were spent.

Make sure you are not simply being silent while others are taking their turns. Constant interruption and overbearing behavior will probably earn you a Fine, but a fair degree of interactivity and open suggestions between players is encouraged (subject to your own group's Social Contract).