That Oh So Little Death
REVIEWER NAME: Chris Hall
SUMMARY: Players take the role of archetypal characters engaging in sexual acts with one another. That Oh So Little Death is part competition and part storytelling, as each player seeks to find perfect happiness.
1) CREATIVE AND EFFECTIVE INCORPORATION OF RULES (1-10): 2
Feedback:
Time doesn’t really have anything to do with the structure or narrative of the game. There is no rule for what to do, for instance, if no one has gotten a perfect 10 by the time two hours are up.
The author has put a reviewer in an awkward position here as this game does not follow the rules of the contest by picking three ingredients from one category. Emotion seems the most closely tied of the ingredients. Law is also well integrated as the list of laws is central to how the game is played. Glass and Steel are perhaps the worst integrated, its clear that the author just chose to name these laws those names because of a desire to hit every ingredient.
While many aspects of the game are strong, the author didn’t really seem to be trying to score points in this category, but rather was making up a game that they thought was neat, and then wedged it into this contest.
2) CLARITY (1-10): 6
Feedback:
Starting out with an example of play is a good way to introduce the reader to the game and catch the reader’s interest.
The cyclical nature of the three priority rules (glass, steel, light) could be explained more clearly. These there rules could be grouped together, to show that they are the three priority orderings.
I’m fairly unclear on how the laws of team and the laws of committee interact. As I understand it team allows players to make more rolls, while committee allows rolls to effect more subjects.
The different rules do a good job of explaining how to play the game in general though.
3) COMPLETENESS (1-10): 9
Feedback:
The cheat sheets and character sheets are a nice touch.
What are the colors of the three types of pleasure?
4) ESTIMATED EFFECTIVENESS IN PLAY (1-10): 3
Feedback:
The law of experience seems to give the (The Ancient) a big advantage.
In general the different archetypes do not seem balanced (compare the Innocent to the Ancient). Balance may not be a goal of the game, but since there is an explicit victory it seems to be needed.
Since it seems that only subjects gain points, the game seems political, you scratch my back and I will scratch yours. This is neat. But how can a player actually win if they are at less than 10 spiritual pleasure?
Why would you ever reveal a turn off? It seems to only hurt you. Having an extra revealed preference is not so good, as it only lets you give more people points faster, it doesn’t gain you any points.
5) SWING VOTE (1-10): 7
Final Feedback:
It seems like the different archetypes are looking for different goals rather than starting at different points. Consider the writeups: “angel seeks to elevate the act of
sex into an almost religious experience.” & “the beast is focused on the physical, on lusts and passions.”
The game does a good job of allowing different play styles for people who want to be more or less explicit.
I think it has some serious playability problems, but it has the potential to be a good game that doesn’t get so bogged down in the rules that it looses its mood or becomes silly.
TOTAL SCORE (add items 1 through 5, above): 27