Review: Ancient Dreams, Glass Towers

[Joshua BishopRoby]

In this game, players recreate the war between Yu-men and Dragonlords in five rounds.

REVIEWER NAME: Joshua BishopRoby

1) CREATIVE AND EFFECTIVE INCORPORATION OF RULES (1-10): 7
Feedback: Michael went all the way and incorporated all eight of the ingredients into his submission, and while not all of them were soundly anchored in the game, it's saying something that he got all eight in there one way or another. The game is supposed to take place in one two-hour session, of which I am slightly skeptical. There's a lot to cover.


2) CLARITY (1-10): 4
Feedback: The game suffers from a lack of structure which seems to be rooted in the author not quite knowing what the game is supposed to be doing. The resolution mechanic of team rock-paper-scissors sounds intriguing, but I can't quite make out how it's supposed to work.

3) COMPLETENESS (1-10): 4
Feedback: I don't find much role in this game. The team rock-paper-scissors is neat, but I don't see character impacting any element of the game. On the other hand, there are 'Armies' and you get a number of them, and you can take them out, but I can't quite tell how to really do any of it in a step-by-step way. Either this needs a heavy rewrite to make it into an RPG, or accept the fact that it's a wargame and revise to make itself a better fit.

4) ESTIMATED EFFECTIVENESS IN PLAY (1-10): 3
Feedback: I do not see many meaningful decisions being made by the players. I see a lot of really juicy color and starting enthusiasm, but I don't see anything to really retain interest for more than the first few rounds of combat.

5) SWING VOTE (1-10): 3
Final Feedback: This game either doesn't know what it wants to be or doesn't know how to get there. Michael, I'd advise you writing out a transcript of what you'd think the players would say as they played the game, and then take a good hard look at what they're doing in there. That should give you an idea of what you're striving for. Then look at how your structure of rules helps players achieve that.

TOTAL SCORE (add items 1 through 5, above): 21

[redivider]

[Lebrante]

[DevP]

Creative and Effective Use of Ingredients: 6

The 2-hour time limit feels just right for this short, competitive game. I'm impressed at the broad reaching for all 8 elements; I considered glass/committee/emotion to be the "judgeable set" of components, and these were all used pretty well.

Clarity: 3

The rules could use a rewrite, to better help the color pieces and the rules pieces interact. I don't feel that the rules followed a clear chronological order, and with the lack of sections I had trouble keeping up with it. When revising, consider how to give the reader a high-level view of what the phases of play will ential, and then zoom in on the details of each section.

Completeness: 5

Aside from rules clarifications, more examples of play and more introduction to the color of the game would be a help. I think the rules could really use some extension to make this game more playable.

Estimated Effectiveness in Play: 2

I think this game is missing a lot of what it needs to work. Some of the tactical choices don't quite pan out. (For example, launching a surprise attack in exchange for automatic destruction of the tower; in terms of getting ahead, this seems like a universally bad choice for the humans.) Also, be aware that randomized RPS-style bonuses, on their own, don't necessarily add any tactical choices if they work out to be effectively random (i.e. neither your partner nor opponent can guess what you're going to play). This is a game that would benefit from rich tactical choices, and I think the RPS is a great base to start from.

Also, does the +1 for evocative description really work in what seems like a competitive game? If you count on general good will and average players, is the game okay if all players always get +1 for their descriptions?

I don't think the core mechanic is greatly helpful in this game, at least as presented. It doesn't seem like there are many times where the gradiation of die results actually effects what happens in play.

Finally, it's worth questioning whether this, as written, is really an RPG yet. Beyond the ritual language and the opportunity for the evocative descriptions, what other roleplaying is there? Perhaps are there other ways you can empower roleplaying people in their roles (perhaps ad hoc taking up the roles of famous doomed Human / Dragonlord generals), and ways to guide the freeform narrations of attacks? This game needs a little bit more to play more like an rpg.

Swing Vote: 7

I like the color of the ideas you have in this game, of this huge and epic war, and there's the starting of a good lite-wargame/roleplaying hybrid, neatly playable in 2 hours. I think that's really neat! It would be great to see you give some more development to the fiction that you're developing here, and then tightening the rules structure around it.

Total Score: 23/50

[Graham Walmsley]