Last night, I ran my new one-session Sorcerer adventure, The Keys of Uriel. I was very surprised at the outcome, although I shouldn't have been: like every other attempt I've made to run a one-shot of Sorcerer, it went relatively poorly, at least in comparison to the bad-ass drama that Sorcerer's provided in longer campaign play for me.

There were lots of good points:
- The players immediately latched on to the setting, and made it their own. For example, the western element of the setting was very downplayed in my imagination, with D&D-looking characters wandering around a setting that was dusty and western-y. Instead, the players, while describing their characters, made them look like awesome figures out of some alternative Wild West. Angus, the big Conan-ripoff character, wore a tight three-piece pinstripe suit with bowler hat, and his huge demon sword strapped to his back. Darcy, the half-fey thief, dressed in men's clothing like some mid-20's Paris expatriate, smoking cigars and usurping masculine roles.

- The first half of the game was rad. There were lots of good scenes and interactions with NPCs. The "PC connections" I provided - pre-made links between the PCs and NPCs - worked well, and the players used them to get into the story.

- We did have one good sorcerous scene, with Darcy, the half-fey, contacting and summoning up her immortal elders and Pacting with them to bring her to the man who stole from her.

- A great narrative scene happened with the one player totally not accustomed to Sorcerer. He had an NPC's wallet, although he didn't know it - it had been planted on him. He whipped it out to give that same NPC some money, starting some story-movin' hoo-ha.

Past the good points, though, the session seemed to drag, which was surprising to me as I loaded it with Bangs - assassins kicking in the door, half-mad men kidnapping women half the town loves, sorcerers suddenly realizing they've been sleeping with someone else's demon, and the like.

I sat down and tried to figure out why things went wrong, and came up with this:
- Sorcerer - and some other narrativist games - don't deal well with one-shots. The point of the game is for players to be invested in the story, and when the GM makes up the characters, their Kickers, their connections, and the setting, it doesn't matter how cool they are. They're still not the players' stuff.

- As a system, Sorcerer is daunting enough that it really takes a session to get into. I've found in longer campaigns that the first session is always just OK, with the second getting better, and the third being the real sweet spot. A one-shot of Sorcerer with experienced Sorcerer players might go differently.

- Everybody has to cooperate on Story Now. At one point, a player said, "Well, I'm thinking about not jumping through this portal because I don't think my character would want to, but that's boring, so I don't know what to do." A healthy disconnect between the player and the character has to happen for Story Now: the question that player should have been asking himself was, "What would make my character's story the coolest?"

- Strangely, some players didn't use many of their demons' abilities. I don't really know what's up with that, to be honest.

- As a GM, I should have started throwing more demon antagonism in there. A new technique I'm using with Sorcerer is to have the demons start rebelling any time the story isn't otherwise moving: sort of the infernal equivalent of having a guy with a gun burst through the door. I didn't do enough of that because I wanted to go "easy" on the players.

As someone who has yet to play and/or run Sorcerer, I find this thread very useful.

Do you think the scenario would have worked better if it had been run as more of a mini-series rather than a one shot? Would that have helped to overcome some of the problems you felt occurred when you reflected on how the session went?

As I mentioned in a previous thread, I am not a fan of one shots for ANY game although I suppose that the fact that so many great campaigns died after one session has jaded me(I know the two are not related per se but my brain thinks they are and is jaded none the less).

My own running of Sorcerer is still of the best gaming I have seen and two of my three players what I would call "weak" players? If that makes any sense. I wanted to drag the story out (and add a fourth player) but I think it could have been done in one sit down.

I do not think I can address all the points but there a few comments I would like to make.

Strangely, some players didn't use many of their demons' abilities. I don't really know what's up with that, to be honest.

Well mine used some of the powers once in a while but honestly they were more interested in interacting with NPCs and getting into the setting / surroundings. I think I played the Demons very well (not sure what that says about my immortal soul but anyway) and they were ever present, however I got the impression my players just liked being Sorcerers, knowing the power was there but relying on other talents. Obviously mileage will vary depending on players.

Sorcerer - and some other narrativist games - don't deal well with one-shots. The point of the game is for players to be invested in the story, and when the GM makes up the characters, their Kickers, their connections, and the setting, it doesn't matter how cool they are. They're still not the players' stuff. [/b[

I am curious, were you introducing new playuers to the game? I did not get that impression from your post. If they are not new, then why was ot necassary for you to make all that up? Limited time I know can be a bitch but I think still, there is always time for character creation. Of course now I see you addressed that somewhat later on.

I agree there should be an immersion process for new players but none the less, I see nothing wrong (assuming you have time) with a Pre One Shot setup session.

As a GM, I should have started throwing more demon antagonism in there. A new technique I'm using with Sorcerer is to have the demons start rebelling any time the story isn't otherwise moving: sort of the infernal equivalent of having a guy with a gun burst through the door. I didn't do enough of that because I wanted to go "easy" on the players.

First off I think "go easy" and Sorcerer should not be in the same session. I ran Sorcerer with the idea that going easy would not be as rewarding to the players or myself. Of course I could be confusing go easy when you mean go slow. This would cause problems for a one shot.

Also I mean I do not know if there is a worng way to use your demons, so using them to fill in the slow spots should work just fine.

Well just some thoughts from the peanut gallery. OVerall it sounded like a great game.

Sean
ADGBoss

As one of the players in this particular game, I thought I'd contribute some impressions from the other side of the table.

First the good stuff:

I thought one exercise that really helped everyone "take posession" of their character was having us describe our binding rituals. For me at least, it really made me think about what drove my character, and I think it did for others as well. John's description of Darcy's binding was especially effective I thought.

The relationship maps were good, as well as the little handouts with "stuff that has been going on for this character recently". It immediately gave me ideas for what I wanted to do next. I'd suggest also providing the kickers written out on the same sheet, I actually forgot some details of my kicker because it hadn't been written down.

Now the bad:

One thing that came to me in retrospect was that for most of the characters, some of the stuff on their relationship map seemed more "kickery" than the Kickers themselves. Darcy's kicker was an obvious "do something - now" but in my specific case (Theon), I looked at my kicker and thought, "well that's nice, but I have no idea what or where these keys might be, so I'll look into that later, but OHMIGOD, my boss has payed to have somebody WHACKED! That's WRONG! I gotta do something NOW!"

So for me, my characters kicker was not the one you handed me.

Clinton R. Nixon wrote:
- Strangely, some players didn't use many of their demons' abilities. I don't really know what's up with that, to be honest.

Clinton R. Nixon wrote: - Sorcerer - and some other narrativist games - don't deal well with one-shots. The point of the game is for players to be invested in the story, and when the GM makes up the characters, their Kickers, their connections, and the setting, it doesn't matter how cool they are. They're still not the players' stuff.

Clinton R. Nixon wrote:
- Everybody has to cooperate on Story Now. At one point, a player said, "Well, I'm thinking about not jumping through this portal because I don't think my character would want to, but that's boring, so I don't know what to do." A healthy disconnect between the player and the character has to happen for Story Now: the question that player should have been asking himself was, "What would make my character's story the coolest?"

Clinton R. Nixon wrote:
A one-shot of Sorcerer with experienced Sorcerer players might go differently.

Wilhelm,

You're on the mark with what I should have done with Matt's character.

To explain for everyone, Gwendolyn's (Matt's character) demon had Psychic Force with Gwen as the user. The description of Psychic Force describes the ability being used with dice equal to the Will of the user. Not reading carefully during the character's creation, I thought it would be used at the demon's Will (6), not Gwen's (3). Big difference, and one that did deprotagonize Matt as he realized that his character didn't really have the ability he thought she did.

I don't see this as a fair cop. The criticism I always hear about bog standard role playing is the expectation that players should "go along" with what the GM wants or the party wants in order to "make the adventure happen". If a player really is saying "so what" about a piece of the adventure, I don't think that is a criticism of the player.

As for the fate of Gwen's Psychic Force ability, I'll probably make Alex (her demon) the user, meaning she has to ask a bit nicer to use her most powerful ability.

I was jazzed about this scenario as soon as I read Clinton's first few posts about it, and have been following it since. I printed out the scenario breakdown from the website, and I think it rawks azz. I'd be really interested in hearing more about the actual play session and how things went, both IC and OOCly. The scenario might need tweaking, or even some rewriting, but I think you really have a great combination of flavors here that has a pretty big potential for an extremely exciting run, whether it be a one shot or a miniseries, so to speak.