However, the whole process did get the players excited for the game, and we already have a list of questions and "concerns" (I put it in quotes because it isn't as serious as it sounds, and it is a playtest after all) to try to address at the next game, mostly concerning some of the background of the game and a few mechanical issues. As I get more time, I will post more notes and be sending item lists to Jake Richmond, one of the designers working on the game.
I did run the players through the basic rules of the game, and they picked them up quickly. I do see one possibility that I think really isn't a concern for my group, but could be for other groups: There seems to be a lot of potential for players to force a game master to burn through challenge dice. I need to re-read the various rules sections, but I don't remember anything that addresses how often a player can challenge a situation. For example, if my character tries to convince the shop keeper to give him the magic item, and the GM uses challenge dice to set a challenge level, does that challenge level stand regardless of how many other characters attempt the same feat? Or could players continue to keep pushing the issue, or changing tactics to force new Challenges, causing the GM to burn more dice?
Or on the other hand, if a GM has a character argue with a player, is that considered a challenge? Does it need dice? Or can the player automatically win any argument simply by calling for a die roll (assuming the GM doesn't want to burn any dice)?
Also, I know once you purchase a monster, the monster is part of the story for that session. Does that mean unique or recurring villains (say, one pursuing the characters through Yeld) must be purchased for every adventure in which they appear?
These are just a few simple questions that came up while explaining the game, and likely as I re-read the rules they will be answered, but it gives you an idea of what players think about when they look at a game like this. Though everyone at the table was all about having fun, there still is an element of competition and wanting to "win."
I'm going to be posting more notes and observations as we go through the playtests, and I will put up some of the character stats/descriptions hopefully tomorrow.
Before I go I'd like to point out the icon I'm using for this post is one of the characters from Magical Land of Yeld as drawn by Jake Richmond. You can find this icon and others from Yeld at Jake's livejournal
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
jake_richmond
Page Summary
Designed by chasethestars
chasethestars
Comments
This is true. My idea here is that you use the Adventure dice to challenge players. Anything you don't want to challenge them on, they pretty much get to do. There is a potential for abuse to this, and I'm trying to decide if this is a problem. The players can say "we want the next adventure to be about finding out more about the goblins that live in the forest and learning to shoot bows and arrows", and you can use that input to prepare an adventure. Then it's pretty easy for the players, knowing what they told you and what you're likely to have prepared, to exploit that and insist on doing things that you aren't really able to challenge. This is totally possible, but I think maybe it won't be a huge problem for two reasons. First, it totally violates the spirit of the game. The game is built around the idea that everyone decides as a group what they want the next adventure to be about, and they feed that info to the Game Master. The Game Master then goes off and builds them that game, to the best of their ability. Telling the Game Master that you want one kind of game, just so you can exploit the system drains out all the fun and sabotages the adventure for everyone, including you. The second reason is there's actually no mechanical advantage in doing this. You get Reward dice for completing the Adventure and defeating the Boss. Insisting on turning other conflicts into challenges doesn't actually help. You can't force the Game Master to spend his dice. You can totally insist on doing what you want and having your way, but there's no mechanical reward in this. But... that doesn't mean it isn't a problem. It hasn't been a problem so far, but I also haven't played with anyone who has tried to exploit it. So we'll see.
"if my character tries to convince the shop keeper to give him the magic item, and the GM uses challenge dice to set a challenge level, does that challenge level stand regardless of how many other characters attempt the same feat? Or could players continue to keep pushing the issue, or changing tactics to force new Challenges, causing the GM to burn more dice?"
The GM can use the same roll to against multiple players and attempts. Alternatively, if you think your players are just going to keep challenging the same thing over and over, you can spend your dice on a Trap. This may not be explained very well in the text.
"Or on the other hand, if a GM has a character argue with a player, is that considered a challenge? Does it need dice? Or can the player automatically win any argument simply by calling for a die roll (assuming the GM doesn't want to burn any dice)?"
It can be a challenge, but only if you want it to be. Or feel like it needs to be. If you don't want to waste dice on arguments your players insist on having with random travelers and bakers, you don't have to. Although this may feel like you're letting them have their way. Again, this sounds like a situation where a player would be purposely trying to derail the game, and that just sucks. But it could certainly come up in other situations. The example you gave before, where a player argues with a shop keeper for a magic item... I could totally see that happening. One of the things we're working on is actually how you can acquire items and equipment in the game. So I think that specific examples will be invalid.
Abut yeah, a player can win any argument by demanding a dice roll of the Game Master isn't willing to spend his resources. My goal here though is that anything the game master isn't willing to spend resources on isn't worth doing anyway.
(more...)
Yes. If you intend to use a monster to challenge the players, you have to buy it. Even if you bought it in a previous adventure. That doesn't mean it has to be the same monster stat wise. If all you wan the monster to do in this adventure is shoot the players and run away, theirs no reason to buy it the axe and Break special dice it had last adventure.
Does any of this help? I can look at all this stuff and know that it needs to be addressed in some way. But I'm not sure if my replies help at all.
Jake
One thing I do like is the fact that, since you are purchasing monsters, NPCs don't need stats unless they are in direct conflict with the player characters (like a monster). "Skill rolls" would be handled as challenges (if needed, going back to my shop keeper example). I like this because it means I need to be more descriptive with my NPCs rather than relying on stats. It is more about the character than the mechanics, if that makes any sense.
I plan on posting the initial stats for our four (so far) characters. Would there be any objection to me cross-posting info on a site like story-games.com?
Thanks again,
ME
yeah, I really wanted NPC's to not have to have stats. I really hate stating a bunch of characters, knowing that all they're going to do is sell cake to the players. I was mentioning this to some of the Seattle guys ( here: http://yurodivuie.livejournal.com/4
yes, please posty up your characters. I'm really interested in seeing what you are doing. Story games (or wherever) is fine!
Thanks,
Jake