With great thanks to Petteri, Santiago, and Paul, we enjoyed diving pretty deep into the game, with more to go. Given four briefly-described choices from Petteri for our starting short-story piece, we used From the World of Old, which concerns a dragon who wakes into the developing civilized world (not really historical, but symbolic thereof) and decides to make his way there in human form. Our common proclivities may have turned it into some commentary on capitalism.
Here are our initial meeting video, linked here, and the play session, below. Since play includes a lot of writing and editing both personal and common sheets, it was beyond me to keep transcribing each version into images for the video, so I’ve attached a summary to this post. It might have some errors due to one or another fiddly point but you’ll be able to follow along.
I’ve found it useful to keep the differences among four of the games I’m consulting for in mind, and already posted this table once, but it belongs here too.
Of all four, this is the most fixed-in-place for dice-based resolution, although not the most assertive regarding GMing.
The really-playing video’s a beast – even with pretty aggressive editing, there’s still almost two and a half hours. Part of it was due to perfectly ordinary learning, with how-to and what-is-that, but while editing, I realized that certain features of this multi-author play bleed into table-talk in a fashion that actually works against play. Or at least as it seems to me; perhaps that’s an individual issue. You can see me get testy about it as I am thinking, “all right, enough processing about what it’s like or how much it’s justified, what next for pity’s sake,” and then see me realize it’s not about me and just ride with it.
I’m bringing it up because this isn’t directly due to any techniques – the techniques being used shouldn’t take any more time or require any more dialogue than any other way to play. But something about the multiple-authority play tends to lead people to explain and justify more than otherwise.
Lest that sound overly critical of my play-partners, I’d like to signal that this is yet another instance, since the launch of Adept Play, of finding some really freaking nice and fun people to play with. Santiago was like a kid in a candy shop, busting out great ideas, and I draw your attention to his joy at realizing, “I can just play?” at one point.
You can see me get awfully confused about Flame, which I thought I understood, but then stumbled over – I hadn’t realized that you protected yourself from Folding by re-rolling; I’d thought those were separate and potentially opposed things. I need to review the rules to see if they confused me, or if I confused them.
I still have some system bones to pick with Petteri, which I think I’ll do as a consult and review here later. Briefly, they concern the amount of pre-baked conflict built in, as well as inadvertent story front-loading, and whether other mechanisms are easily used to counteract them, i.e., for them just to be available on paper may not be enough.
Another issue to consider is protagonism, or the possibility that the game turns the characters into unlikeable caricatures whom we’re all willing to make miserable, ownership or not.
Look forward to seeing the next session not too long from now!