Review Roundup

[Carrie Bernstein]

[chris_moore]

[adgboss]

[adgboss]

Revolution Review
Game by: Chris Moore

Review by Sean Hillman (adgboss)

First Impressions: A pretty short three pages but the idea of the game I think does come across. What jumped out at me was the idea that only two people play the game and that it has a feel of a sort of political chess match. This comes from the inspirational time period of the French Revolution. It also feels very empowering as this game pits two very determined sides against one another. Many of the game chef games that I saw this year were using alternate-RPG styles like boardgame design and GM-less play. I think Revolution fits into this nicely.

Use of Ingredients: Chris uses the French Revolution as inspiration for Revolution and I find this is a good visualization. Although the time period in question was certainly not the first to feature political maneuvering, I think it conjures the right kind of images for the game. It was a very polar time in European politics: You either supported the Revolutionaries or you supported the Old Guard. This is key in my opinion as it sets up the inherent conflict in Revolution.

Three ingredients appear in Revolution and all of them as part of the Conflict Resolution mechanic. Accuser, Companion, and Invincible make it in as descriptors of the situation that develops when the dice are rolled. Descriptors tend to be more potent and leave a better impression during play then simple numbers and I think this was pretty good use of the ingredients. Finally, Chris the limitation chosen is no character sheet. I think this is very appropriate because I do not see Revolution going more then one session and a Character Sheet would be superfluous. Also, it can be argued that a Character Sheet is a limiting factor and without one, the players in Revolution have more room to maneuver.

Basic Gameplay: The game begins when the two players sit down and fill out the statement:
" (A) has been so ___________'ed by (B) that he/she/they can't take it anymore and
plan(s) to ___________________ so that he/she/they _______________."
(Revolution, pg. 1)

It is here that the players develop not only the setting of the game but also the characters or sides they will be playing. This does not have to be a specific person though it can be. The game is not required to be necessarily overtly (or covertly) political but I think it does require two very strong willed sides.

From here the game develops as each scene is developed jointly by the players, using dice to see who gets the initial input. Players go back and forth, answering a variety of questions until one player asks “When does the Scene end?” This is explicitly stated as Scene Framing in the text. During each scene the two players go back and forth to try and further their character’s agenda. At any time during this, one player may bring some opposition to the other player’s statement and this calls for Conflict Resolution.

I believe one player (the one being opposed?) rolls a single die and the outcome of the scene depends on the roll of that one die. In basic:

1-2 You don’t get what you want
3-4 You get what you want but it costs you and you can decide whether to pay the cost
5-6 You get what you want with no reservations

The scenes and little conflicts continue on until both players run out of ideas and they go to the End Game round. This is related (I believe) to the initial question asked and once this scene is resolved, all the small victories are tallied. The highest score wins. Simple enough.

Impressions & Questions: Revolution definitely has some potential. It certainly is not a classic RPG but I think this style of one on one gaming has a great deal of life in it. Although I like the use of the Ingredients they are just descriptors after all and it might be interesting to see if they could be integrated into the game a little deeper. An additional bit of structure, not necessarily rules per se, might also make the various mechanics clearer. It could be that just a re-write of the rules and a bit of editing clear up any confusion on exactly how something is supposed to work. My own impression is that Revolution is definitely a playable game and one that I would certainly try out. Players have complete control over their agendas but must negotiate the setting around them in which these conflicts will be played out. I like the idea of a middle road in conflict resolution especially one that offers success at a price. Overall a darn good concept and neat game.

Note: This review as done from notes previously made a lil over a week ago as well as a second and third read through here at work. I would certainly invite someone to review Revolution again if you all feel this was a bit rushed.

Sean

[Matt Cowens]

[sandy]

Hmm... I couldn't find a review of 'Founding Fathers', my game, I believe it was the first one submitted... anyone cover it anywhere I missed?

Obliged,
Sandy
sandy@rpg.net
freelance

[Rossum]

[Andy K]

Oh, just wanted to mention, we're starting to post Judge Feedback. It'll be updated as we get it over this next week.

Check the sticky thread at the top of the forum.

Thanks!
-Andy

[Mike Holmes]

All I can say folks is, Wow. Great job on these reviews. Keep in mind that the judges who are doing the reviewing for the official winner are doing it just for that - that is to say they're under no real requirement to provide the sort of feedback that you good folks have given here. Just the numbers for scoring purposes.

That said, I think almost all the judges have put at least a little more effort into their judging and have provided some written feedback. But don't expect it to be up to the quality you see in the reviews here. It's really just to come up with an official winner.

In fact, in the future, I'm thinking that perhaps what would be best is to move to some sort of peer review like this.

Anyhow, note too that there's nothing stopping any judge from commenting on his own out in the open about a game. So you can probably safely assume that some of the reviews out there are actually from secret ninja judges in their secret IDs.

Anyhow, I think the support that everyone has shown is tremendous, and I hope that some of these games move on to be published.

Mike