*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 29, 2021, 01:34:10 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4285 Members Latest Member: - Jason DAngelo Most online today: 72 - most online ever: 565 (October 17, 2020, 02:08:06 PM)
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: messing around with Otherkind, poking it with a sharp stick  (Read 1929 times)
Matt Wilson
Acts of Evil Playtesters
Member

Posts: 1121

student, second edition


WWW
« on: December 06, 2004, 07:26:00 AM »

I had this cards idea based on otherkind, sort of a cousiny generic kind of game.

You get dealt X cards, at least three, maybe more via some character ability.

You assign one card to each of 3 categories: success, setback, story.

They're all compared to a draw made by the GM, maybe random, maybe planned, depending on the stakes or something.

If the player gets the high card in each comparison, that's good. If not, that's bad.

Success is whether you achieve what's at stake.

Setback is whether there's a related consequence of some kind.

Success is who narrates, and also who has the say over what the setback is if it comes up.

So you've got this gambling crisis, since you don't know what the opposing card's going to be. If the stakes are high, will you risk some sad consequence to get a success?

To beef up the game a bit, you could have Trollbabe-like re-draws based on suits or numbers or something. So maybe you have the 3 of spades as a magic hat. If you're dealt a spade, maybe you can elect to redraw. If you're dealt the 3 of spades, that card is wild and is a guaranteed win.

Just some ideas, is all. That's as far as I got.
Logged

Ron Edwards
Global Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 16490


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2004, 07:31:45 AM »

Hi Matt,

Cross-reference this with Once Upon a Time ...

H'm!!

Best,
Ron
Logged
Joshua A.C. Newman
Member

Posts: 1144

the glyphpress


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2004, 09:24:26 AM »

I love this idea: consequences vs. success. It's why I take d4 traits in Dogs as often as possible. I think this mechanic is more graceful than the Primetime Adventures one. More fluid, but, of course, more difficult to assign by trait.

So perhaps this: Your number of traits is your hand size. Each card is first assigned to a trait, then to Success, Consequences, or Story.

For example, If my "I'm Physically Invulnerable" trait is used for Consequences, the consequences are related to that trait. That is, if it was a failure, maybe I throw myself in harm's way, but I don't manage to protect someone because I wasn't fast enough. Maybe the stakes were, "Do I stop the zeppelin from crashing?" and I did it, but this person died, my invulnerability not being enough.

I love the idea of choosing what you pay to get what you want to get. Very heroic.
Logged

the glyphpress's games are Shock: Social Science Fiction and Under the Bed.

I design books like Dogs in the Vineyard and The Mountain Witch.
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!