Review Roundup

[Emily Care]

Hey there,

Eric, I'm glad you're pleased with the review. I look forward to playing it and would love the slimmed down version. I'd been assuming that you would only do cut scenes for the actual player characters, so it didn't sound like quite so many scenes.

And, Ben I think you're selling yourself short. I happen to have it on good authority that there's more subtlety to the strategy of Baihua than meets the eye. It is however focused on politics and philosophies of statehood. The last Supper is more personal. These are not random differences, they are tied right in to the cultural and thematic differences between Christianity and Confucianism and the various schools of thought you're modeling from China. It would be fascinating to see a game about Ancient Greece in a similar vein, or Islam. Those games too would have to have different forms since the conflicts and issues found in each are so very different.

So though the games differ, they both come from a similar impulse and allow players to gain insights into philosophical systems and historical patterns. Don't knock it. This is great stuff.

yrs,
Em

[hardcoremoose]

Yo Eric,

After having discussed The Last Supper with you and saying that I couldn't find anything wrong with it, I'm sure glad Emily arrived at the same conclusion! It's incredibly evocative, really deserving of the good press...people should take a look.

When you have it done, I'd like to see the revision.

- Scott

[Emily Care]

So, just these left:

Myrmidion
Sedition!
Jackals & Hounds
Revolution
The Shab Al-Hiri Roach

All else have had some form of review, or have folks working on one for them.

[jmstar]

Did somebody review THE GOVERNOR'S REPORT CONCERNING THE DOOMED ASSAULT ON THE FIRE MOON and I missed it? Because that'd be great.

[Emily Care]

[blankshield]

[jmstar]

[Rossum]

[Rossum]

Game: THE GOVERNOR'S REPORT CONCERNING THE DOOMED ASSAULT ON THE FIRE MOON, aka TGRCTDAOFM, aka Fire Moon.

First Impression: I love the title and its presentation. I instantly see the period you're going for- part Buck Rodgers, part Pearl Harbor and the Enigma machine. What font is that, anyway? Hmm, this game sounds interesting and fun!

Game Chef components:

For each requirement of the compiitiion:

History: We don't have a specific historical period, but rather an evocative sense of the aftermath and a military tribunal. Jason mentions a few specific real-world examples. I'll allow it!

Ingredients: Accuser, Companion, (Entymology) Invincible. I like what he's done with the ingredients, as he's incorporated the concepts of the ingredients deeply into the game structure without declaring them so obviously. To recap: Each player, through their statements, accuses the others of incompetency while maintaining the position that their companions were not- all in the face of an invincible enemy. If the enemy is bugs, you've got Entymology, but let's set that aside.

Rule Limitations: No character sheets, custom cards. Not much to say here. I think in a full production of this game, I'd expect to see cards to represent the different roles someone is playing, but that's more of a housekeeping/presentation issue. The custom cards are used as a requirement during the tale-telling. Nothing specatular in terms of presentation, but the words are well-chosed and -paired.

Overall feelings:

Fire Moon sounds to be a fun little game. Not designed for long-term play, this is another game in the category of a one-shot, few-hour, minimal-prep storytelling game that I'm not quite sure is actually an RPG. Each player takes two roles- one of a witness to the disaster, and one as a questioner on the board of inquiry. The lack of structure (vagueness about the world, the assault, the characters) doesn't deter the reader because the objectives (CYA) are so crystal clear.

I need to find an uncomfortable chair to play? Brilliant! What about five (FOUR!) bright white lights?

I'd like to see in-play examples of sample questions and answers.

A minor quibble- the wording on how many tokens you need is a little unclear, and the change of person doesn't help. Maybe change it to "Thus, if four people are playing, each player would need nine tokens."

I'd also agree with Tobias' chop- a better endgame would be tastier. I also imagine there could be a way for a player to voluntarily take blame tokens for narrative power during another's turn- maybe look to the Baron Munchausen game rules for a player to force such an action. Perhaps taking a blame token to ask an extra question? You could get a lot of mileage out of allowing blame tokens to have mechanical effects.

Finally, I'd like to see the roll result table added to the card layout. All you'd need is to divide the card in half for positive and negative and have the numbers jotted down. I think it would help the portability very much.

Judgement: I want to play this. I also want to see this as a driving game, packaged as a deck of cards. One could use the odometer or a watch as a randomizer.

[PlotDevice]