. . . and so was I.

I am really excited by what I can see ahead in the learning curve, and the feeling that there's more stuff out of sight.


This is my 2nd session, LordSmerf's 4th session, Player 3's first session, and Player D's 3rd session. We could together constitute one of those standardized test problems asking if this is X's kth session, how many sessions has Z had? (But only if we were very bad.)

Play occured in LordSmerf's house, approximately from 2003.10.10.2000 to 2003.10.11.0100. I arrived perhaps an hour in; everyone else was there from beginning to end. I had had a haircut the previous day.


Tenets included: mostly serious, urban, fantasy, gunpowder weapons present, "locked" scenes available (though none were invoked), water primary means of transportation w/in city, no gasoline engines, magic items possible but very rare, pro/an-tagonist rules*, and some others.

The setting hasn't really congealed, although we're getting there. We have Eastern Martial Arts, Renaissance Europe, and Victorian England influences thus far.

We have a Mad Scientist who is an antagonist, complete with Lab.

Rodents that track psychically, called rangs, are present, as are the Krimm, mental parasites that can be commensalist or possibly mutualist symbionts at great expense of energy.

We created a Master (as yet unnamed), complete with student (Raul), and order-giver (Don Horatio). The Master knows Miguel, and Miguel thinks The Master's skills complement his**. Miguel is apparently a master, but not The Master. Thus and so, we have a Master Suite.

Aside from gondolas and green-glowing orbs, we have Katrina, Friedrich, and Dante. The first two are protagonists, the latter an antagonist. (Not the gondola and orb, silly. Katya and Fred.) They appear to be chums. We also have Katrina's sister, who hasn't appeared onscreen yet (or has she?).


I came perilously close to outlawing Ninjas, and may yet.


The most clever phrasing IMHO came from Player 3--the young lady, or woman, or possibly grrl, but probably not The Girl--to wit: that certain Thugs (a master class, of course) were "brought" or "laid" low in the terminal confrontation.

No major climax occured, but we press onward.


New to me: Universalis lets you know what others want to see far more directly than them articulating such. Players are enjoined to actually make things, which eliminates the 2 possible sources of error inherent in auto-articulation of self-perception and communication. I'm afraid no insight of earth-shattering import has yet sprung to me; perhaps 'twas the apple juice.

I like Universalis. Thank you Ralph and Mike.


Best Regards,
Kelvin



*Refreshment after a scene in which a pro/an-tagonist appears is 8 Coins rather than 5. Not Facts are that there are no more than three of either active at one time, and that pro/an-tagonism is as universally actionable as Proper Names.

**I suggested that I should like to play an Us game of Universalis, merely so I might make it a Fact that LordSmerf's talents complement mine (rather than the other way around). (Also so that Factually we could see that LordSmerf was Something of a Roguish Fellow.) We have currently tabled the Us game pending maturity.

I've got some incoherent notes floating around my computer and counter. They were recorder by three different people. Once i get things figured out i'll get a somewhat coherent summary up. Things are preceding in an interesting direction. I am really enjoying Universalis, but the more i play it the more i realize that there are (of course) some things it doesn't do well. I don't enjoy it any less, i just acknowledge that it isn't perfect... :)

Thomas

What are you seeing as its limitations?

Steve

Briefly: the elimination of personal protaganism. Not that this is a bad thing. Universalis just doesn't facilitate single-player driven protagonists. While it is possible through Gimmicks to make it play that way, there are better games for personal protaganism (assuming that that's what you want). Again, not bad, just different.

Thomas

The Pro/Ant scene refreshment Gimmick is pretty cool!

Did it work out?
Did most of the scenes feature one or several of them?

Slick way to encourage their use, without driving the economy too crazy!

I promise to get a detailed post up soon... (these notes are confusing). To answer your question: it worked fine. We didn't have a single scene (bar one mini-scene) without one or the other. There was also a caveat that there could be no more than three of each tagged. Otherwise i fear we would have had every major character as one or the other... Of course i'm not sure if we put them in scenes for coins or because we had decided that they were important...

Thomas