1KM1KT Free RPG Community

The Perfect Laws is a game in which players attempt to write out the laws of the planet as it is about to be redesigned through awesome new technology. Players play one session setting up the rules and a second session living under the rules.

REVIEWER NAME: Joshua BishopRoby

1) CREATIVE AND EFFECTIVE INCORPORATION OF RULES (1-10): 7
Feedback: Law is easily the most prominent of the ingredients, and players are able to work together to pool credibility, so Team figures prominently, too. Steel is used as a physical in-game currency, although the reasoning behind it seems tacked on. The game is primed for utilizing the two-sessions-two-weeks-in-between time constraint.

2) CLARITY (1-10): 4
Feedback: I really had a lot of trouble reading through this design. There is little to no structure and a good number of homonym-typos and misplaced prepositions. The rules suffered from a lack of examples, as I have no good idea what a Law constitutes, exactly, or what kind of things the players are supposed to come up with for the brave new world they're constructing. This seems, on the whole, to be notes about a game design rather than the game design itself.

3) COMPLETENESS (1-10): 3
Feedback: While the first session seems pretty solid in terms of what the characters do, the second session leaves me really wondering what is supposed to take up the six hour time slot. The win condition is set up to be determined on the basis of steel pieces the characters end up with, but there is no provision for doing anything with the steel pieces in the second session, since there are no black boxes to use them in. I'm left with a very big sense of "Okay, what now?"

4) ESTIMATED EFFECTIVENESS IN PLAY (1-10): 3
Feedback: I don't see this as a viable game yet, and I'm positive that players would not have enough to do to fill up the six hours.

5) SWING VOTE (1-10): 5
Final Feedback: The concept behind this game is intriguing -- remake the world -- but the proposition of living in that world afterwards seems kind of dead. If the goal is to create a world-spanning utopian society, where's the conflict once you live in it? Similarly, the godlike power that the players have in the first session sounds like fun to use, but I don't see that power being used to any specific purpose.

TOTAL SCORE (add items 1 through 5, above): 22

Hi.

I don't know if it is bad form to give coments on reviews, but I hope you dont mind if I am giveing it a shot.

The markdown on the clarity side does not come as a bomb. English is not my primary language, and the game was _written_ (as oposed to concieved) in a rush, so I am actualy quite pleased with a 4 in this category.

The feedback on category 3-5 Is more concerning. It seem like you mark me down for what I considder the main driving force of this game. I hope that this is simply because of the doubt that I have been thinking on these aspects when I created the game (witch I can imidiately disconfirm). The questions you rise somehow stands as the premise of the game. The fact that you point out these things actualy gives me the feeling that the game is working as intended.

I won't be getting into a lengty theoretical discusion on how this game is screwed together here, as I believe it more fruitfull if you pounder on this youselves. But if you still is in doubt that I have considdered these issues take a look at hour 4 and 5; I think you will find that close review of these might cast some light over the true intentions of this game.

I may also add that this is ment to be a bit more challengig game that your common "go out and do this and that" kind of affair.

So I am afraid I can't at the time being see anything I can do about the "problems" you point out in 3-5. If it should become clear that these things ultimately is flawed, then the whole game is dead, as this is the primary platform it stands on.

Rune,

I read through The Perfect Laws last night.

Firstly, I need to say that I'm excited about this game. The concept is excellent: that a group of players designs a world in one session then lives in it the next. It's superb. It's a John Rawls / Social Contract game. I'd love to play a game like that.

However, if I played the game, I wouldn't know what to do. I'd be sitting there in the first session thinking "What sort of laws are we meant to be developing?" and "Will this actually work?". In the second session, I'd probably be thinking "OK, we're not breaking the laws, but what else are we meant to be doing?".

In other words, although I like the idea, I don't understand how it would actually play. What would really help me out would be an example of play. Could you give an example of some laws which a group might develop and then how they'd play with those laws in the second session?

Graham

Rune,

Nice example, thanks.

When I read this game, I expected the Laws created in the first session to be things like "All food should be shared equally", "No-one should be left to die", "We must preserve the environment" and so on. You know, rules to base a society around.

But that example looks much more interesting. You're creating rules about the steel pieces which will affect how players can get hold of them. That's interesting.

I think that, in some way, you need to guide the players into creating rules that will make the second session exciting. I'm not sure how you do that - especially as you're saying you don't want to suggest laws to them - but I think that's the direction to go in.

Graham

Well, I am kind of really in need of a playtest, as I have really made an attempt to "guide the players into creating rules that will make the second session exciting". But I have done so in rather subtle ways. I can now say that they seem to be to subtle to be easily detected by reading the game. But the game was made with play, and not reading, in mind (Probably not a good idea in this competition ). So the question remains: Will players playing the game react to it as I espect them to do, or do I really need to tell them to have their own enjoyment in mind?

For instance, after spending the first half hour making "All food should be shared equally" and stuff, I think the players will find that this is just to boring, and do something else. But you have to actualy be there and play in order to experience this strong effect. And yes, I do/did expect/hope that people should make laws like this at first, but I am also pretty sure that this will not consume the entire first session.

Creating rules about steel pieces is actualy given an entire houre in the proposed schedule, so that should not have come as a surprise.

So are you certain that there have to be more? I have to admitt that I am rather uncertain at this point myself, but my evaluation is that there is enough (but with thin margins). And as you point out, it is really difficult to do so without sacreficing the principle that I don't want to give any unfortunate "standards" to how to play this game within the limitations I have already set.