Entry? : Reflection

[Joshua BishopRoby]

Ingredients Glass + Committee + Emotion
Time Constraint: Two sessions of six hours each, separated by two weeks

Very sketchy right now. The primary concept is that players play out a vicious conflict with two pretty defined sides motivated by strong emotions: North vs South, Sunni vs Shi'ite, the Mountain vs the Girondins. In the first session, you play one side; in the second session, you play the other side, allowing you to comment on the events of the first session. The scheme should allow the players to really get into the reasons -- often pretty rational -- behind both side's actions. The only problem I see, though, is that there is no allowance for any kind of resolution of the conflict, which is a pretty bleak outlook in general.

Does that float anybody's boat? I feel like I've got half of a concept.

[Antti-san]

I was actually interested in making a similar (well at least in general) game. I had in mind two worlds that are mirror images of each other, and two gaming groups: one for each world. Then the groups would have to affect the other group, either directly or indirectly, to get further. I dumped it after thinking it would be either too difficult to pull or too repeatant. (umm, I guess that it isn't actually a word.. repeats itself a lot?)

So I'm looking forward for your entry. It sounds interesting. Good luck!

[Joshua BishopRoby]

Repetitive, I think you're looking for.

[Antti-san]

Oh, that's the word. Thanks. How could I forget such an usual word.

[matthijs]

What if: During the first session, the other side does some seemingly random stuff, and in the second session, the players have to come up with good, rational reasons - since they're now controlling that side?

How is the Glass ingredient used?

[Joshua BishopRoby]

Glass -> Looking Glass -> Mirror -> Reflection.

Leaving it there will not be a worthwhile connection, though, so I'll add in something more explicit... like the Andromeda Glass, an alien relic that fell from the sky one day, emitting strange radiation that made the two factions live each other's lives for 6 hours. You know, something subtle. ;)

[Joshua BishopRoby]

[Jason Petrasko]

[Joshua BishopRoby]

I'm trying to figure how similar to make the two sessions and how different to make them. Obviously, the first session will function so as to set up the second, and the second will function so as to resolve the first. However, both of them should be entertaining in and of themselves, obviously.

Should the first session set things up via a situation map? Should that situation map be preserved until the next session, or should the final phase of the first session have the players formulate questions ("Why did the armory blow up?") based off of the situation and what happened, to be answered in the second session?

One simple mechanic is to give everyone a budget of "Crazy Shit Happens" points for the first session where they can introduce something happening and not have to explain why. Players can then earn points (or some other resource) in the second session for resolving the open question. Would probably be a good idea to tie these things into the emotions that drive both sides of the conflict.

Given the generous six-hour session, I'll probably do a 'world creation' sort of thing where players define their setting in the first hour of the first session, and in the first hour of the second session they re-interpret it. So if I introduce the High Temple of Goulash in session one, someone other than me has to add something to the High Temple, like it is built on the ruins of the Arch-kiba of Hastur, to recontextualize it for the second session.

Thinking...

[Joshua BishopRoby]

The game works off of sketchy characters (three defining elements), a situation map, and three resources. The resources are currently cleverly named tokens, points, and power. I'll make em all cool and stuff later.

I highly suspect the following makes no sense whatsoever to anyone who isn't me.

Session One

Situation Creation - Players pass a large sheet of blank paper around the table. On his turn, a player can either (a) write in a new item, (b) circle an item, (c) strike out an uncircled item, (d) draw a line between two circled items, or (e) label a line between two circled items. Continue going around and around until there is a network of circled items connected by labelled lines with a number of circled items equal to the number of players times two. Then send the paper around three times, with each player adding a tally mark to any circled item on the paper that they want to be significant. Total up the tally marks; these are the items' values in the first session.

Resources - Players begin with five tokens that get piled on one side of their character sheet. These will be given to other players when that player introduces something interesting about one of the circled items. When a player receives a token, they score a number of points equal to the value of the item they referenced. Say something interesting about an unimportant item, get a point. Say something interesting about an important item, get a lot of points. You keep the token, and hand it off to other players when they say something interesting, et cetera.

Framing Scenes - All scenes are explicitly framed by the players in succession around the table. Each scene must take place at or around one or more of the circled items, and must include two or more characters. If the characters are player characters, their players portray them; all other "incidental" characters are handed out to the other players by the scene framer. The scene progresses until the scene framer calls it.

Character Introduction Scenes - Players introduce their characters by framing scenes. In the course of that scene, they hit on the three defining elements of the character. They may write up the character prior to roleplaying the introductory scene, or they may write in the defining elements as they play. Each character must be tied to circled items in the created situation -- the total number of tally marks on those items must be six or more (so linked to one item with three tallies, another item with two, and a third with one tally mark). Again, these connections can be predefined or created in the introductory scene.

Creating Adversity - Any player may introduce adversity into a scene by spending tokens. Adversity always relates to two or more of the circled items, and the power of any adversity is equal to the circled items it relates to multiplied together. Adversity is written into the situation map and clearly labelled as such (perhaps written in a different color). Tokens spent to create adversity are removed from play. In order to overcome an adversity, players must spend a number of points equal to the adversity's power. Keying in one of the character's defining elements reduces this cost by one; if all three elements apply, the cost is reduced by three.

Increasing Adversity - Once there are a number of adversities on the situation map equal to the number of players, players may opt to Increase Adversity rather than add a new one. This re-activates the adversity if it has been overcome and doubles its power.

Resource Depletion - This is a closed cycle. Tokens circulate to create points, but are lost to create and increase adversity, which require points to overcome. As tokens are invested into adversity, the supply of points to power actions decrease. This is intentional, and the game should devolve into an insoluable and relatively bitter tangle by the end of the first session.

Open Questions - The final half-hour of the first session is devoted to coming up with a list of open questions for which the answers have not been explained. Motivations, histories, and support structures of the adversities are high on the list, but the same can be said for the things on the "good" side -- even the player characters themselves.

Session Two

Situation Revision - Break out the situation map again and pass it around the table three times. Each time, a player may either cross out a tally mark on one item and move it to another or relabel one of the connections between items.

Resource Replenishment - Players begin with only one token each, which are spent to recognize intriguing player contributions as before, but not to create adversity.

Scene Framing - This is unchanged from the first session.

Character Adoption - Instead of character introductions, players pick a character who appeared in the first session, preferably one of the adversities, as their player character. They frame a scene to introduce their defining elements and ties to six tally marks' worth of significance as before.

Assigning Adversity - Instead of creating Adversity, players assign adversity to things that came up in the last session. Adversity can be assigned to just about anything, even the barest shred of something that was perhaps implied last time. Adversity is linked to and has its power derived from the circled items it connects to. Instead of investing tokens into Adversity, players earn a token for each Adversity that they assign and activate. However, once the number of tokens is built back up to five times the number of players, no more adversity can be assigned. Only one Adversity can be created per scene.

Overcoming Adversity - Adversities can only be stymied, not permanently overcome, by spending a number of points equal to their rating. In order to overcome any adversity, you must spend those points and link your narration of your struggle to one of the Open Questions created at the end of Session One. Once overcome, Adversities cannot be increased or reactivated.

Resource Explosion - As the inverse of the first session, resources will exponentially explode in the second session. Players will have increasing numbers of tokens available to them, producing tons of points, which will defeat the limited adversities' power ratings.

I'll try and put together an example of play so y'all can get an idea of what I'm talking about.