maria in three parts: the prep

intro

i ran a UA3 demo at a local rpg meetup. i used the Maria in three parts introductory module. Iโ€™d like to share a report of how things went.

i have way more to say than i thought i did so i’m splitting it into two parts: the prep and the run.

prep

goals

i had two objectives for the session:

  • Run a fun rpg session for everyone.
  • Run a fun UA session for everyone.

the session needs to be fun in a way that’s unique to Unknown Armies. i’ll elaborate on what that means in terms of look/feel in the second post. In terms of game mechanics. i wanted to make sure that the group engages with the most idiosyncratic unknown armies rules during the session:

  • The shock gauge.
    • To resist Stress Checks.
    • As attribute rating for other tests.
  • Identities, both magickal and mundane.
    • replace attributes for rolls.
    • spell casting.
    • determinants of behavior
      • things to do to gain charges.
      • things to avoid so that you don’t lose your charges.

read the module

After reading the module, I assessed much of i could remove and still fulfill my two objectives. 50%; i concluded.

this informed the rest of my prep.

the marketing

the flyer

first things first: i made this (โฌ‡๏ธ) flyer to building some extra hype for the game.

the pitch

i wrote this short sales pitch for the game to attract the interest of players were still unconvinced by the flyer:

Maria, a fellow occultist, was spit into three parts by an artifact. Now the three Marias are wrecking havoc at the local hospital. Meanwhile, the demon responsible is after your friend, and fellow occultist, Renee.

You don’t really care a whole lot about Maria, but she knows how to stop the demon that’s after Renee. You care a lot about Renee, so you’ll do everything in your power to stop that demon.

i tried to do a couple of things here:

  • set the mood and tone.
    • you are an occultist like maria and renee.
    • you don’t give a shit about maria, but you care a lot about renee.
      • she is either a shitty person or you are a shitty person. it doesn’t really matter.
    • you have the power or means to help renee deal with a demon.
      • magick!!!
        • the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with the will” according to Crowley.
  • give the players everything they needed to get to the module’s epic conclusion right off the bat.
    • a clear problem and enough information to solve that problem.
  • speed things up.
    • by removing the “investigation” portion of the session.
      • i was able to reduce the number of locations from 4 locations to
        • The hospital where the characters interface with maria
        • maria’s house where the characters will interface with the demon and renee.
    • skip the boring exposition parts.
    • open the door for some serious occult mayhem and chaos as early in the session as i possibly could.
      • started the session in media res.
        • told the characters to pick who to fight next:
          • the three marias in the hospital.
          • the demon hunting down your friend.

module notes

my note taking approach is heavily influenced by the concept of encapsulation from object orientated design. i treat characters, npcs and locations as independent objects. each object has internal data that it needs to do its thing and different methods to interact with other objects.

this approach helps me decouple characters and locations from plot; which makes it easier for an organic story to emerge from the events that took place in the session.

i filled 5 index cards with notes. one index card for each npc and location.

npc cards have:

  • the goal the character is currently pursuing.
  • stats and other systems related stuff.
  • how the character interfaces with other objects.

location cards contain the same information sans a goal.

pre-gens

i printed out character sheets for the 4 pregens provided by the module.

i wrote guidelines for players that wanted to modify their characters. They are mostly just guard rails to speed things up.

here’s an example for your perusal:

# The Cinemancer 

## You at a high level

### Exposure to the Occult Underground
- Renee saved you from a serious ass-whopping once. You exchanged phone numbers. 
- You know this film-bro dude that also happens to be a budding cinemancer . He clued you into into the occult underground and the mysteries of cinemancy.

### Fill in the Blanks
- What did you do to deserve an ass-whopping that day? 
- What do you do for a living? **Remember that you lose all your charges if you don't ensure that all cliches are followed through.** 

## Game Stuff
### What Are Adepts?
- Practitioners of magick who follow specific traditions. 
- They have to embrace the paradox of their tradition in order to build up minor and significant charges.
	- To cast a spell, they roll their Adept Identity. 
	- If the roll passes, the spell works and the charges are spent.
	- If the roll fails, the spell doesnโ€™t work, but the charges are not spent.
- To get more charges, adepts must perform the activities listed under Generating a Charge section of their character sheet.
 
### Cinemancy (At a high Level)
- Cinemancy uses Magick to make movie clicheโ€™s real. (After all, everybody knows about them already.) Magick just gives the cliche a push to manifest in our world. 
- Known as Auteurs, Cliches, Tropers
- Central paradox in Cinemancy is that movies are fake but more accepted than reality.  

end of part 1

and after all this, i felt ready to run ua for two strangers at a local meetup.

i’ll finish the report next post!

, , ,

5 responses to “maria in three parts: the prep”

  1. You’ve given me some flashbacks to playing Unknown Armies during the original edition days, especially in encountering the published scenarios. The same points apply to the game’s “parent” (or at least “uncle”) game, Over the Edge, and it’s related to a lot of issues concerning the original publications from White Wolf.

    Briefly: a lot of the concept and a lot of the operations open the door to unpredictable play in the best sense. I want to play the magic-nutjobs, I want extravagant activity from various NPCs and entities and fellow player-characters, and who knows what surreal madness or social comment may emerge as what may be called, eventually, the plot.

    However, this promise turns out to be a hard fake. The instructional text and genuine operations are keyed directly opposite: how a single person conceives, implements, manages, and confirms their preferred plot. The other people’s input is reduced to colorful chatter and effectively fake decisions. At this time, approximately thirty years ago, the term “intuitive continuity” was coined to describe (favorably) this kind of behavior, effectively crowning a managerial GM as a showrunner. The term is one of the categories here at my site in order to critique it, and, I say without reservation, negatively.

    I’ve written recently about such texts displaying a reverse mullet haircut: party in the front, business in the back. It’s displayed in core texts, usually via the GM’s section, but it’s super evident in published scenarios for play, which are in effect the teaching-texts for the games. I easily recognized the problem when it appeared in fantasy and superhero games, but unfortunately the party-promise in Over the Edge was especially attractive to me because it was edgy, sexy, crude, and intellectual, all sorts of things which 1980s role-playing texts had avoided in spades. Then hitting the business in the texts was like a sickening drop: the same people who wrote the party stuff couldn’t possibly have written this awful garbage, could they? But they did.

    … Anyway, I’m commenting to identify strongly with your exact methods of using this sort of published material: dissecting out the promise and developing it via the available methods, then actually using those methods, rather than accepting the hard fake into managerial play. It took me years to learn to do this, mainly playing Champions and Cyberpunk, during the late 1980s through the mid-1990s.

    • Iโ€™ve written recently about such texts displaying a reverse mullet haircut: party in the front, business in the back. Itโ€™s displayed in core texts, usually via the GMโ€™s section, but itโ€™s super evident in published scenarios for play, which are in effect the teaching-texts for the games.

      I totally agree! I think published scenarios might be a bigger contributor to the reverse mullet phenomenon than core texts. They implicitly enforce a top down approach to a playing a specific role playing game. So what often happens is that the group (mostly the GM) end up outsourcing the creative part of the learning process back to the publisher or designer.

      You don’t need to figure out what an campaign should be like because already did that for you when they published .

    • dissecting out the promise and developing it via the available methods, then actually using those methods, rather than accepting the hard fake into managerial play. It took me years to learn to do this, mainly playing Champions and Cyberpunk, during the late 1980s through the mid-1990s.

      The idea of “revisiting” some games from the 80s and 90s has become very appealing to me in recent future. But, now that you mention it, I’ve realized that by “revisit” I actually mean dissect and develop the promise of the original game.

      Almost all of the games on my “to-revisit” list were published in the 90s.

Leave a Reply