Topic: Sorcerer at the Grenoble con -22/03/03
Started by: Fabrice G.
Started on: 3/20/2003
Board: Adept Press
On 3/20/2003 at 4:02pm, Fabrice G. wrote:
Sorcerer at the Grenoble con -22/03/03
Hi all,
this is a last time check up before packing for saturday con.
(Well, I still have a day and a half to rectify things if I need to).
Please, if you're a player signed to play this game, do not read further !
This scenario is based on the r-map of The Killer in the rain by Raymond Chandler.
You can find the actual, modified map here.
Is it too much ?
I mean, each PC is clearly linked to the map, 2 have really strong ties (Hellenna Storm and Joshua Daniels), 1 has a midly one (Johnattan Blackwood, as he doesn't know that his friend has adopted his wife's daughter) and the last one (Lazare) is just barely connected to a dead man.
Well, for me at the moment it looks a little complicated but okay... what do you think ?
Also, the Bad Guy(tm) begins the play... dead ! They're all looking for him for a reason or another, but he's lying dead. The fact is that there's a new Bad Guy(tm). The events planned to happen unless the PC interupt them are meant to let them know that there is that new Bad Guy (a poor crook possessed by the last demon invoqued by the dead guy).
My problem is that it could go toward an anti-climax.
So, should the new bad guy go after them with all he's got ? Or should I let the action roll normaly (in the "hey, that guy's got what I want/is the one doing bad stuff" kind of way) ?
Thanks for your time,
Fabrice.
[edited to add the second par of the post]
On 3/20/2003 at 5:54pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Sorcerer at the Grenoble con -22/03/03
Hi Fabrice,
I think it looks good, especially for con play. The thing to avoid is to have The Secret be the point of play, which unfortunately is exactly the assumption that most people will bring to the table ("we're playing Call of Cthulhu"). That's what makes the anti-climax.
Your techniques are not to establish a new Bad Guy and simply to attack them ("Oh!" they'll say, "So it's a combat scenario" and start playing Champions), but rather to make the NPCs as interesting, sympathetic, and totally engaging as possible. If the characters' Kickers are solid enough, they will be active, and they will tell you, through their actions, who the "new bad guy" is.
Best,
Ron
On 3/21/2003 at 12:27am, Tor Erickson wrote:
RE: Sorcerer at the Grenoble con -22/03/03
Hey Fabrice,
Do you have your bandolier of bangs at the ready? As it says in the book these can be location based, character based, time-based or whatever, but I've found it to be crucial in my games to have about 2 prepared bangs per character, less if the characters will be appearing in the same scenes together.
-Tor
edit: I mention this because I think there are some who believe the RM will offer up all the drama necessary for the game, without further prep... I have not found this to be the case (nor is it what the text advocates).
On 3/23/2003 at 12:51am, Fabrice G. wrote:
RE: Sorcerer at the Grenoble con -22/03/03
Thanks guys !!
I redefined the demon need and desire, I reworked to PC to make them more nuanced, worked on the bangs... and...
...the game was a blast !
I had a wonderfull time, and (more importantly ?) the players had a blast too !!!
They asked me to GM more sorcerer to them in the near future.
So, all in all, it was a very very pleasent game.
Fabrice.
ps: and I had my climax ! The PC decided to unite to practice a BIG contact ritual... man, that was so cool to see them describe all that stuff, to amass massives bonuses and to succeed !
pps: Ron, I really think that Sorcerer has a place in the french gaming landscape, but so few people have heard of it ! : (
On 3/23/2003 at 2:29pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Sorcerer at the Grenoble con -22/03/03
Hi Fabrice,
Congratulations! Please tell me as many details about the game as possible.
1. When did the players really understand the bonus dice for role-playing?
2. Did they realize, at some point, that their characters could command any demon to do anything?
3. Did any sorcerer-demon relationships undergo a change?
4. How did players show appreciation of one another's input, or of one another's characters?
5. Did players bring the characters closer to one another in the imaginary game-space? Did they bring them closer to one another in emotional terms?
I agree with you about Sorcerer's potential in France. I just spoke with people from the magazine Backstab at GAMA - with any luck, a review will show up there soon. Can you think of any other useful advertising venues?
Best,
Ron
On 3/23/2003 at 4:03pm, Fabrice G. wrote:
RE: Sorcerer at the Grenoble con -22/03/03
Hi Ron,
thanks !
The game took had four players, I used the demo pack as a model of presentation for the PC.
The r-map is the one that I linked to in my above post (but the link may soon be dead).
The disparition (a very very lame name, but linked to the firsts events of the story).
The premise was : How far will you go for the one you love
Humanity is your empathy and your ethics.
Demon are acting to make you loose your connection to other people and corrupt your ethics.
The major thing is that the characters have to deal with the consequence of the actions of a dead (bad) Sorcerer (on theit lives and on those they loved).
Now, on with your questions...
Ron Edwards wrote:
1. When did the players really understand the bonus dice for role-playing?
This one is the thing that did upset me most because I found that they were slow on understanding that although I clearly stated my feeling multiple times during the session.
I think they really got it by the end when I told them boldly that they should put all they've got into describing the final ritual.
It worked well, and they were amazed by the amount of bonus die each of them could garner (I think that the average was 4), plus some roll-over succes applied from a previous roll...
(Note: I think that each first session of sorcerer play must have this kind of dice-roll. It shows off much of the potential and the strengh of the system. For me anyway.)
you wrote:
2. Did they realize, at some point, that their characters could command any demon to do anything?
Well, as many others, the players didn't pay much attention to their demon for the first half of the session (witch lasted from 2 to 7 pm, with one hour devoted to presentation and the rounding of the characters). At least, not as much attention as I hoped.
One off them realised it right before the end of the session, when his character murdered another PC before the eye of that PC's demon. He rolled to order the demon not to interfer, and succeded... that was unexpected but really nice.
you wrote:
3. Did any sorcerer-demon relationships undergo a change?
Hum... yes, first in the above exemple, where the demon decide that time has come to change his allégiance. Second with "dead bad guy demon". They were first going to contact it then banish it, but the lead sorcerer of the ceremony accepted the demon's deal to bind it (at the others players/characters' surprise!).
What did change, was the player-demon "relationship" (for lack of a better way to phrase it). I did my best to show the players that their demon had 1) a personnality and 2) a desire. Some were surprised to see their demon acting all by itself, doing thing that weren't exactly for the adventage of the character.
you wrote:
4. How did players show appreciation of one another's input, or of one another's characters?
The first reaction of the player to the rounding of the characters (i used your method of letting important aspects of the character open for the player to decide, and asked a question about it he had to answer) was wanting to go "secret". But when I told them that much of the fun would be to share the input, and to enjoy the other characters stories, they rapidely get it. It could have be better, 'cause there was still some secrets (not much really). All in all, they were very happy to see that they could use the others input... even if such input was a bit rare (by my taste).
you wrote:
5. Did players bring the characters closer to one another in the imaginary game-space? Did they bring them closer to one another in emotional terms?
Well, the characters were already connected to each other. At the worst they new about each other (not as sorcerer, but still).
My scene-framing was heading toward a meeting of the characters, and I think that that tis intention was clear to the player. So yeah, they used some director stance to suggest that X an Y could be there at the same time, or went to see something or somebody each by their own way and meet "by coincidence". ;)
As for the emotional connection, one was provided from the begining for to of the characters: Joshua and Hellenna who did have an affair eight years ago... the players decided that 1) hellenna was still in love of him and 2) that Joshua was troubled to see her again after so many years (remember that at the time he is strongly engaged toward Isabella).
Guess what... Hellenna killed Joshua at the end, thinking that he left her to Isabella. That was so sweet, because of course, the players new exactly that it was not why Joshua left.
For advertising, Backstab is a good mean of exposition as it's one of the two big rpg-magazine of France. The other one is Casus Belli.
Another way is the Guide du RĂ´liste Galactique (or GROG), where they try to index all the rpgs. (I know, my promised review is way way late, but I'll do my best.)
Take care,
Fabrice.
ps: by the way, for promotional purpose, I think that con play is a very effective way to gain exposure and interest. None of the players had heard of Sorcerer before... and all quite loved it ! And I had some really positive feedback from others about my game (ya know, that mouth-to-ear stuff).
pps: one of the most satifying session I had.