Cool stuff. Very helpful, I hope!
So, Luke, am I right to assume that you designed the game to be played much more “loose” and “bottom-up” than “tight” and “top-down”? Or is my makeshift terminology radically missing some crucial point?
At HQ, we play all our games BW or BE as “tight”. They can be played other ways, though.
Interesting. So how do you make “tight” work, in terms of being very explicit about what scene type someone’s requesting, when they earn the right to influence the Infection roll, and the various other factors I listed? Because the game does seem very much geared towards “you guys roleplay along pursuing your personal goals, and we’ll work out the impact on the Infection at the end.”
We talk about the meta-game as players, then dive into the scenes and try very hard to focus on in-character play. Then we come up for air, look around briefly and then dive in again.
I think it helps that as a GM, I’m almost always talking trash and threatening to jam my scenes down their collective throat. I have an opinion and an agenda, but I don’t necessarily get to say what goes.
-L
It starts when we select the Infection Maneuver.
We choose a Flak. Great. What’s our intent for this Flak? The Kerrn Ghetto Sheef is going after Dro’s company, the Ernte Consortium. we’re going to make the Ghetto Sheef look bad to the public.
Luke kicks things off with a scene in which we see the Court Lord’s shuttle detach from a satellite and zoom into the surface.
He privately marks off a Color scene.
He then has the Court Lord meet with Dro’s character. Offering to buy out Dro’s company. He gives Dro 24 hours to decide.
Luke privately marks off an Interstitial.
Mayuran starts things off for the human side, “I’m going to meet with the Ghetto Sheef.” Mayuran’s lawyer-psychologist flies to the city and has a conversation with the Ghetto Sheef trying to convince the Ghetto Sheef to hire him. I interject by describing my character – ostensibly the Ghetto Sheef’s human head of security, but actually an Agent working for Dro – monitoring Mayuran’s character’s approach and logging it in a dossier. Mayuran finishes his conversation with the Ghetto Sheef and the scene is over.
At this point, none of us have actually mentioned the scene mechanics. But Mayuran privately notes on his sheet that he’s used an Interstitial. I note on my sheet that I’ve used a Color scene.
At the end of his conversation with Mayuran, the Ghetto Sheef said something about being late to an important meeting. I say that I want to tail him to the meet – my lieutenant and I will front-and-follow – and covertly record the meeting. I use Observation to stay on his tail. When he gets to the meeting, I use my instinct “Always Inconspicuous when on the “Job”” to make a free Inconspicuous roll and nail it. Then I make a Security roll to record everything. Luke finishes the Ghetto Sheef’s meeting with a speech before a bunch of Kerrn tug captains, telling them that Ernte Consortium has to agree to the buyout deal, and to agree they’re going to need to feel pressure. So he sends them out to rough up Ernte’s operations.
I note privately that I’ve used my Building scene on my sheet, though I’ve only made two rolls toward it, so I’ve got a third roll in reserve if I need it. I then have my character get on my comm link and get Dro on the line: “Boss, there’s a problem heading your way,” and I upload the recording.
I mark off my Interstitial.
Does that clear things up Sydney?
Thanks, Thor. That example really helps solidify things in my mind. Since my players aren’t fluent with the mechanics yet, I’ll probably need to take a larger role as GM.
What I am really tempted to do is to treat the scene economy as an escalation system along the lines of Dogs in the Vineyard: In other words, start with in-character goals put in story terms, but explicitly engage the mechanics to see how far people are willing to push things.
“You want to prepare your minions for the coming battle? Fine, that’s just a Color scene. Check one off, or…Oh, you want to Circles up some new minions? With gear? Sure. If you want to spend your Builder on it…Gee, did you get Emnity Clause on that guy? So sorry. Y’know, if you want to Duel of Wits him to joining your side, you could always spend your side’s Conflict for this maneuver…”
Or
“You want to talk to me? Sure, that’s just an Interstitial… Ohhhh, you want to trick me into letting slip information about my secret plans? Well, you can roll for it, but that’ll be your Builder… So you didn’t like that roll, really? You want to try to capture me for interrogation? Well, sure, if you want to escalate to a Firefight and spend your side’s Conflict…”
Sydney: Are you going to be happy when people back down from that escalation? I think that you run the risk of giving them some (in this case unnecessary) negative feedback that could stymie the scene, particularly if you jump the gun and start pushing the mechanics before the escalation is clear-cut and necessary.
Remember, we waited you out on a conflict scene last time. You were practically bouncing in your chair, saying “Well, y’know, you could spend your one and only conflict scene right here in order to get this really cool conflict going,” and we all just sort of looked at you and somebody (don’t remember who, could have been me) said “Or we could wait, and you’ll spend your one and only conflict scene, because you clearly want it more than we do.”
I suspect that having you aggressively push us to spend our resources is going to encounter backlash just like that pretty quickly.
Hi Sydney,
I just wanted to weigh in on our style of play at the table. I remember things differently. We DO use the meta-game talk. For instance, in that session I distinctly remember Thor asking if his builder could be interspersed with Mayuran’s interstitial. (I said no, 'cause I didn’t want to crap on Mayuran’s interstitial.)
And after say, Bob, has described himself punching through the mirror in his barracks, I quietly told him to mark off his color scene.
And I bounce up and down in my chair, too, “Who wants to take the first shot? Who wants the conflict?” I let the players negotiate and offer, “'Cause if you’re not ready, I am!”
As Tony pointed out, laconic players will try to wait you out. That’s cool! It’s a strategy! But it’s part of your job to drive them so crazy that you goad them to action. In our game last night, one off-handed comment from my bodyguard saw Bob turning his building scene into an assassination run.
Challenge their Beliefs, attack their assets, exile them, have them fired, have them sent out on “maneuvers,” hull them, attack them and stab 'em in the face. If your players don’t sit up and take notice, then there’s something else going on and we can talk about it in another thread! 
-L
I think I’m getting it. Tony’s a master of galvanizing people into action by subtle implied threats to their characters – he’s done it to me in Capes time after time – but I think I can manage enough carrots and sticks if I prep properly. Which this thread is helping me do, fortunately. I think those carrots will need to include explicit, mechanical acknowledgment of the impact of certain story actions, e.g. “Cool! And here’s a notecard to remind you that you now get to give helping dice on the final Maneuver roll.”
Last thoughts, if you care at all:
-
Play faster. Two maneuvers per night, short quick-cut scenes. Aim for two maneuvers. Make it extremely clear that there’s an urgency to get two maneuvers done tonight.
-
Hit them square in their Beliefs. The GMPCs don’t get to have free will. The players want you to try and stop them. They really don’t care if your GMPCs have their own little plans and dreams.
-
Play faster. Show them how by example. Run tight, focused color for starters.
-
Hit them square in their Instincts. Give the players interesting tactical choices around their Instincts, make them decide between Artha and optimal play. If you can’t remember what people earned in the past maneuver, your maneuver took too long.
-
Play faster. Plan out your own Conflict and chase that shit down hard and fast. Don’t worry about finagling the timing; they have two Conflict opportunities, just like you.
-
Keep the scenes really, really simple. How much story could you tell in a two-page spread of a comic book?
-
Play faster. If you get your stuff done and the players are hemming and hawing, bring the maneuver to a close. Just like that. If they don’t know what they’re “supposed” to be doing, their Beliefs are broken. The whole point of the Beliefs is for the players to tell you, “This is what I’m going to do – try and stop me.” If they do have a clear bead on their to-do list, bring the maneuver to a close anyway. Let them say “Wait! We’re not ready yet!”
Good luck, Syd!
p.
wow!
We just finished a phase in four days of play and those are near exactly the guidelines we followed!
-L
One thought that just struck me strongly is that it is essential, to get the fast, directed play you’re all talking about, to have everyone talk (out of character) about what they want to see in the session to come. My group’s already started drifting into this, especially those of us who were in our prior Prime Time Adventures game (where we did this agenda-setting scene by scene), but I really need to encourage it. “Secret GM plots” and “surprising the players” really aren’t the way to go in this game.
What we’ve had so far, by the way, is Eric and Tony saying their characters – Sebastian, the ex-heir turned pirate, and Sebastian, his dutiful younger brother – need to be reunited the next session. (In part because Sebastian’s isolation from the family imposed some awkwardness last session, e.g. when no one else could plausibly affect his Duel of Wits with the Vaylen FoN). I responded by saying, albeit with various equivocations, “cool, but if I win, Sebastian comes home in chains for trial.” I think this is the way to go.
We rediscovered this weekened one of the techniques we used a lot in playtesting that I think goes to this: At the beginning of each manuever, before we select the maneuver, we make a list of our goals. I’m not talking Beliefs per se. We go around in a circle and, in turn, say stuff like “I want to assassinate the Ghetto Sheef,” or “I want to bring down the Hokatsu Combine,” or “I want to investigate the connections between the Lord Steward, the Court Lord, and the Travelers.”
One person keeps notes. If multiple people have a similar goal, we try to combine them. For instance, one person might have, “I want to assassinate the Ghetto Sheef,” one might have, “I want to depose the Ghetto Sheef,” and one might have, “I want to kidnap the Ghetto Sheef.”
We talk it out and try to consolidate if possible.
Then we go through and decide upon which goals we want to focus on in this particular maneuver, and which we are willing to wait on. Generally, we find that we end up with three players focused on achieving one or two goals, while a fourth player lays the groundwork for focusing on another goal in the next maneuver.
Once we have our goals selected, we figure out which maneuvers fit those goals. Then we select among them and announce our maneuvers.
Once we’ve done all this, framing our scenes inside the maneuver becomes really easy.
Got it. Story first, then strategy; individual goals first, then consolidating to a team approach.
And, of course, your job is to keep them on their toes with your own nefarious plans (which don’t get discussed with the group, per se).
I still want to nuke that fucking alien cruiser. Even though I already did.
Exactly how I go about doing my various awful things I won’t discuss in advance; what awful things I plan on doing I rather think I should, because if all the players don’t go “yipe!” then I’d better figure out something else.
At least until the players have a lot of momentum and a very firm grasp of what they’re capable of doing, I’d probably not play too close to the vest.
This was my strategy for last night’s game, which was two very, very good maneuvers. I discussed what the “bad guys” are aiming for in general terms and direct threats: The Archcotare is gonna make you his bitch! The warlord is gonna burn your city to the ground! And so on. Now they have a clear threat overlapping with their personal to-do lists. They don’t have to wonder if they’re doing the right thing.
When’s your next turn, boss?
p.
Sounds like a good approach to me. Our next turn – our third session, our second actual Maneuver – is tentatively set for Wednesday.