Monday, November 7, 2011

Gaming Update

Shitloada shit been going on. A very stressful period at work and many games I've not written about. So where to begin?

Let's go with Rogue Trader. And massed battles and on how Rogue Trader seems not to support them. But, umm... I was really tired that day so the not-so-grand success might be due to it. But then again, was I tired because there was nothing to grab at the session?

I had somehow developed a preconceived notion that my Explorator would not be allowed to do anything useful save for shooting shit. I do not know why I had this notion as I've had my Explorator do some other shit earlier. Maybe it is just disappointment on the difference between the power level I had thought the PC's would be having before the game begun and what it actually was in games sessions.

Anyway I had gotten so passive that the GM had to push the investigation and opening of the Farming Pods down my throat before I got down to it. So there's certainly some adjusting of the attitude to be done on my part before the new session. Must try more stuff out even if it means getting denied to do stuff more.

Be it as may, the mass battle part was not conducted well. What should have been epic and cinematic showdown and a major point of exposition on the plot, became an exercise in boring, punctuated by occasional single die roll.

So what I would have done differently if it was my game? Dunno man, I have a pretty shit history on mass battles myself. The one exception being some WFRP stuff, that was not a load of suck, but not memorable either. There I made the PCs a crack team having a special mission inside the battle and then simply narrated the rest of the battle based on the success of the PCs. Don't know if that approach would have worked here, though. We were supposed to lead the battle you see. We'll we did not.

So maybe the problem was on the players' side too. We should have organized to each lead a front ourselves instead of fighting as foot soldiers. Then we could have taken a front at a time and rolled for both our own and our subordinates rolls. Yeah-yeah, our PCs do not have the necessary skills, but I think there would have been more fun -- or at least shit to do -- when done in that way. So in the end, the responsibility of that evenings boretude was ours too. Bot yeah, maybe the battle could have had more narration anyway.

What else? What else? Oh yeah, I've now played some more indie games. 3:16 and Fiasco were huge successes while Dogs in the Vineyard sucked ass. OTOH I think that DitV was presented in unfavorable conditions as the structure of the game does not allow well for time-boxed games. DitV is more of a traditional campaign game and should be played leisurely and without time constraints, otherwise the story becomes constipated and unnatural.

There was also some minor structural shit going down as the order we did things was not dramatically optimal. And I was also too tired to be able to create a whole, interesting alter ego for that one. Plus some of the rules were not interpreted unambiguously. So there was too much baggage on the poor game to say if it suits me or if it does not.

Then there's Descent and Munchkin and Chaos in the Old World. Descent has been good fun for the off-game banter and imagining the subterranean violence. Otherwise the game has big problems. There's too much grinding and a severe disconnect between the grand campaign and hitting shit with a stick in a cave. And the cave chess bores me, as I mostly do what others have calculated. Our team does not do the 'teamplaying' bit well in the sense that everyone would get to contribute and communicate and plan shit together. So there's not much to lean on once the off-game jokes get old and hitting shit with a stick becomes routine. My recipe would be shorter dungeons more closely connected to the main plot. Or maybe no campaign gaming, can't know.

I have trouble with playing well both the Munchkin and the Chaos in the Old World. In fact, I suck ass in them. But Munchkin I hate and CitOW I kinda like. Why? Dunno, Munchkin just does not have the humor value for me and I am not able to enjoy the social back-stabbery aspect of the game. There's also the "host gets to cheat" part, which destroys the game immediately for me. CitOW has the same ingredients in a board game format in principle, but somehow there seems to be more that stirs my imagination and there always is something to try to advance. Not one of my favorites, but I'll play it without grimaces and it passes the time well enough.

So there you have it, extra-whiney to compensate for unfrequent updates.

5 comments:

Jaakko said...

Man, I know Jari and I were pushy in Descent but didn't know it was that bad. Maybe you could've, you know, said something before it spoilt your fun :(
-Jaakko

Yama- said...

Problem with Descent has been from the beginning that your grand strategy is really poor. You have travelled very little, mostly just grinded the nearby Dungeons to bitter end, regardless of cost. This not only means that Overlord (me) ends up with huge exp imbalance, it means that campaign levels go through very quickly, since progress is based on TOTAL Exp, not game weeks or Party Exp. As I can only buy one upgrade per week, I just don't have enough time to advance the Plot, forcing me to use the Exp for boosting my Dungeon and Lieutenant powers.

That said, the Campaign Plots are poorly designed. It is very difficult for Overlord to win by plot, and very easy to win by destroying Tamalir. Since the only way for me to lose is to lose Final Battle, we are now in a situation where it would be advantageous for Heroes to just keep killing themselves until Campaign total Exp reaches Final Battle, and Overlord should attempt to stop Heroes hurting themselves!

PS. Comment system sucks ass. It wiped out my first attempt to comment when I tried to log in.

Yama- said...

As for the mass battles on RPG's, they are difficult since one has both to give players something meaningful to do (Okay, you killed 27 Trollkin. This means rest of your army only has 3963 Trollkin to kill), whilst keep the NPC's role relevant too. In RuneQuest, I've been doing them in several ways, most of which have sucked.

Best approach is to develope some simple system where different friendly and enemy forces are modelled in some simple way based on their equipment, physical attributes and skill. On a small battle, players can fight conventionally in the front line and/or command the NPC forces. In large battle, it is best to give player characters some special role to perform - especially as Player Character equipment and armament tends to be non-milspec! A fighter swinging large two-handed sword within a Legionnaire Phalanx will only mess everything up....

petrus said...

Re: Descent, it's not that you have been pushy, it's more that I've had not much to contribute in calculating combos to the cave chess part of the game. The game nights as such have not been sucky, far from it, we have played for a long time after all. I just think that the fuel has (almost) been spent already.

Re: Mass Battles, I completely agree with Yama, provided one is taking the simualtionist approach to gaming where simply narrating combats would seem like cheatin.

petrus said...

Went back to the old look for the blog to circumvent the comment-suck-assage inherent to the dynamic look.