Review: Team Steel on Trial
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:03 pmThe title of this game does exactly what it should do: it tells you exactly what the game is about. This is a group of superheroes on trial for their actions. The specifics of the crime, the superheroes, and the city that hosts them are all made up in-game.
REVIEWER NAME: Joshua BishopRoby
1) CREATIVE AND EFFECTIVE INCORPORATION OF RULES (1-10): 9
Feedback: All three ingredients were used in solid, straightforward ways, and the time constraint (while optimistic in my mind) is used in a similarly solid and straightforward way. "Steel" is perhaps the least firmly attached, as it's the name of the Team and the city they're in, and is pretty arbitrary. This could be X-Men on Trial in New York and it would play pretty much the same. All the same, this is a really strong (though obvious) use of ingredients.
2) CLARITY (1-10): 8
Feedback: The author's technical writing could be a little firmer, but he writes with an enthusiasm that is infectious. I could go for a little more formal structure and diction, but that really is a personal preference more than anything else. There is a lot of "figure it out yourself" where more specific guidelines could have been given, but I suspect that this is more a function of how the author expects the game to be played than any laziness on his part.
3) COMPLETENESS (1-10): 8
Feedback: The game is mostly complete and anybody with half a brain could pick this up and play it. However, it does gloss over some procedural details and could give more detail and guidance in a number of places. I would like more guidance and suggestions on making prosecutors, for instance. Additionally, examples of play would go a long, long way to displaying the rules in action.
4) ESTIMATED EFFECTIVENESS IN PLAY (1-10): 10
Feedback: As the scoring guideline says, I want to play this game RIGHT NOW. Specifically, I want to convene the Game Chef Convention, get a roomful of people, and play it. I suspect that this game works best with about eight to twelve players, and contrary to suggestions in the text, I think this would be much more fun played "LARP-style" with tables, chairs, witness stand, bench, et cetera.
TOTAL TANGENT: This needs to be played at Con. You need to show up with masks and bits of costume that Team Steel can don for their parts, and maybe ties for the Prosecutors and a wig for the Judge. Assign roles, let them strategize for a half hour, and then play out the rest over the rest of the time block allotted. That would rawk.
5) SWING VOTE (1-10): 9
Final Feedback: I would have given this category a 10, but this is supposed to be my subjective playspace of the review, and the one drawback I find in this game is its lack of crunchiness and its reliance on GM/Judge fiat and guidance. Additionally, the jury sitting there or maybe being witnesses and such, and then after a couple hours voting one way or the other leaves me cold. This game would go from veryvery cool to superfucking cool if there was a simple die mechanic or even an in-the-moment scoring mechanism for every point the Prosecution and Defense tries to make, with results accruing to determine the final verdict or something. That said, I'd play this game as-is, with the understanding that it's "just that sort of game."
TOTAL SCORE (add items 1 through 5, above): 44
REVIEWER NAME: Joshua BishopRoby
1) CREATIVE AND EFFECTIVE INCORPORATION OF RULES (1-10): 9
Feedback: All three ingredients were used in solid, straightforward ways, and the time constraint (while optimistic in my mind) is used in a similarly solid and straightforward way. "Steel" is perhaps the least firmly attached, as it's the name of the Team and the city they're in, and is pretty arbitrary. This could be X-Men on Trial in New York and it would play pretty much the same. All the same, this is a really strong (though obvious) use of ingredients.
2) CLARITY (1-10): 8
Feedback: The author's technical writing could be a little firmer, but he writes with an enthusiasm that is infectious. I could go for a little more formal structure and diction, but that really is a personal preference more than anything else. There is a lot of "figure it out yourself" where more specific guidelines could have been given, but I suspect that this is more a function of how the author expects the game to be played than any laziness on his part.
3) COMPLETENESS (1-10): 8
Feedback: The game is mostly complete and anybody with half a brain could pick this up and play it. However, it does gloss over some procedural details and could give more detail and guidance in a number of places. I would like more guidance and suggestions on making prosecutors, for instance. Additionally, examples of play would go a long, long way to displaying the rules in action.
4) ESTIMATED EFFECTIVENESS IN PLAY (1-10): 10
Feedback: As the scoring guideline says, I want to play this game RIGHT NOW. Specifically, I want to convene the Game Chef Convention, get a roomful of people, and play it. I suspect that this game works best with about eight to twelve players, and contrary to suggestions in the text, I think this would be much more fun played "LARP-style" with tables, chairs, witness stand, bench, et cetera.
TOTAL TANGENT: This needs to be played at Con. You need to show up with masks and bits of costume that Team Steel can don for their parts, and maybe ties for the Prosecutors and a wig for the Judge. Assign roles, let them strategize for a half hour, and then play out the rest over the rest of the time block allotted. That would rawk.
5) SWING VOTE (1-10): 9
Final Feedback: I would have given this category a 10, but this is supposed to be my subjective playspace of the review, and the one drawback I find in this game is its lack of crunchiness and its reliance on GM/Judge fiat and guidance. Additionally, the jury sitting there or maybe being witnesses and such, and then after a couple hours voting one way or the other leaves me cold. This game would go from veryvery cool to superfucking cool if there was a simple die mechanic or even an in-the-moment scoring mechanism for every point the Prosecution and Defense tries to make, with results accruing to determine the final verdict or something. That said, I'd play this game as-is, with the understanding that it's "just that sort of game."
TOTAL SCORE (add items 1 through 5, above): 44
