I first asked this question here, but it generated no response, and I think that the issue I raise here is integral to the further development of the game I'm designing. In addition, I think this is perhaps the second best place to post this, for these questions have not come up in playtesting, and due to the nature of the game, I think I should first ask people who are more familiar with GNS theory.

Currently, I am revising and expanding Kathanaksaya. So far, the basics are covered. Pretty much any experienced roleplayer can pick it up and play it as written, but I am certain there are things I can do to make the game easier to grasp for new roleplayers or for roleplayers who do not have experience in playing RPGs in a more patently dramatic medium. I am not so confident in my perceptive abilities that I can honestly say that the game is ready.

So, in the hopes of perhaps getting this distributed to more people, I think it is time for me to ask what players would need to play. I'm speaking from a pragmatic standpoint, not a theoretical one. What do you think you need to play this game? What questions would you have, as a player or Narrator, when it came to the actual act of using this game and the system? What concepts or ideas still seem vague? Where do you see players having trouble understanding what it is they can or should do in a given situation?

As a side note, I would like to keep references to similar games to a minimum. Not only does it have the potential to erupt into a copyright dispute, but I would also like to entertain the delusion, just for a little while, that my idea is unique.

Hey Green,

This may make me Mr. Obvious, but some concise and engaging examples of play can go a long way to helping people 'get it'. Show how you expect the game to be played, the play structure, narration and who does it when, and illuminate decisions made during play. It can be difficult to conceptualize how play is supposed to proceed in a game that doesn't adhere to more common conventions.

-Chris

I'll add a simple practical "requirement" - get it all organized and in one place (a pdf or some html somewhere). To be honest, I'm not sure I can really even analyze the content until this happens - picking through a thread for a game design just isn't my thing. Explaining, perhaps, my low participation in the Design forum . . .

Gordon

Gordon C. Landis wrote: I'll add a simple practical "requirement" - get it all organized and in one place (a pdf or some html somewhere). To be honest, I'm not sure I can really even analyze the content until this happens - picking through a thread for a game design just isn't my thing. Explaining, perhaps, my low participation in the Design forum . . .

I have the game on file as a Wordperfect document and as a RTF document. I don't own Adobe Acrobat (just the reader), and I don't have a web publishing program. If you want a copy of the game, I would be glad to send it to you via email.

Or, if you know someone who can do it, I wouldn't mind converting the file to a PDF or HTML document.

Green wrote: I have the game on file as a Wordperfect document and as a RTF document. I don't own Adobe Acrobat (just the reader), and I don't have a web publishing program. If you want a copy of the game, I would be glad to send it to you via email.

Or, if you know someone who can do it, I wouldn't mind converting the file to a PDF or HTML document.

John> The third option seems the most reasonable. I had already created a Yahoo group for works I've done, and the lack of traffic is, shall we say, depressing. I appreciate that it won't have any ads.

Green wrote: I have the game on file as a Wordperfect document and as a RTF document. I don't own Adobe Acrobat (just the reader), and I don't have a web publishing program. If you want a copy of the game, I would be glad to send it to you via email.

Or, if you know someone who can do it, I wouldn't mind converting the file to a PDF or HTML document.

I've already emailed John Kim with the information. Thanks for the assistance in that regard. You can find PDF, RTF, and TXT versions of the game here.

Be forewarned, though, that some of the formatting is off because it was originally a Wordperfect document. It is still legible, though.

If any of you are not averse to it, could we go back to the initial thrust of this thread and address the issues I raise there?

Green wrote: If any of you are not averse to it, could we go back to the initial thrust of this thread and address the issues I raise there?

Gordon C. Landis wrote:

Green wrote: If any of you are not averse to it, could we go back to the initial thrust of this thread and address the issues I raise there?

I personally will be waiting for the aforementioned single, organized doc before I comment. Make sure to announce when/where that's available.

Whoops - got it. Might I recommend a post over in Design announcing it's availability?

Hi Green,

Here's my suggestion, based on your point:

I am certain there are things I can do to make the game easier to grasp for new roleplayers or for roleplayers who do not have experience in playing RPGs in a more patently dramatic medium.

Ron> OK. Who, then, do you consider the converted? I apologize for seeming slow-witted, but I'm not exactly sure who you mean here.

Also, would it be OK to move this thread to the initial thread I posted at the Indie Game Design forum?

We're here now!

I'll try to clarify. The primary audience for any RPG is composed of the people who get the point of play with only the most basic introduction or description of your vision of it. They just plain already agree with you and share your basic aesthetic.

You: "K, here's what I have in mind about how to play and what's the point. [quick description]"

Them: "Yeah!" [followed by instant creation of characters that totally blow you away with how appropriate they are]

I am recommending that your first pass at the game design be written only with them in mind. Just take it as given that a whole passle of such people are out there, and never mind if they are "most gamers" or "beginning gamers" or whatever. In fact, and as a side point, I suggest that "beginners" are often more intuitive and skilled at picking up unusual ways to play than long-time role-players.

Back to the main point, I have seen far, far too many instances of the following:

1. The author continually trying to explain how to look at these rules (a) while still trying to explain how they work and (b) positing as a given that his audience isn't understanding the point at all. This is literally an unfinishable writing process - it spins the author into a hole of re-explaining a re-explained point, over and over.

2. A finished game-text such as I described before, with so much orientation plastered over the meat of what to do, with so many explanations starting with "Traditional gamers might not understand ..." and so forth, that it's unreadable.

Best,
Ron

Ron,

In that case, the game is pretty much finished. As you may have gleaned from other threads about Kathanaksaya, it is pretty much finished. It is ready for playtesting. I have played with the system twice (with experienced gamers), and it went well enough. Unfortuantely, I didn't have time to prepare something more substantial.

Now, I think I am ready for the next phase, whichever that is.

Cool! The next phase is now! Play and feedback. You play, we play, the text gets a beating, and so on.

I've got my copy and have added it to the stack ...

Best,
Ron

Tomorrow (or rather, later on today), I'm playtestint it again, but this time it'll be more structured and planned. I would like to do an online playtest, if only that way I could get more people together instead of relying on solos.

As far as your suggestions in your previous post, I take it you mean you want designers to focus more on what the game is than what it isn't. So, instead of saying, "My game is different from Game X because..." or "This is not like Game X because...", you actually say what it is the game does.

Are there any thoughts on Kathanaksaya itself, though?