Scenario: Q&A

[Rex]

That is cool. I think just as much as the differences in systems the differences in DM style and how they interact with the system will be interesting to see.

[tibbius]

I'm very interested to see how the systems might affect players' styles, as well. I've run this scenario with Risus and with Tunnel Goons, and the players had different approaches in each. I don't know whether that was the players or the systems driving that mostly.

[Rex]

Different players and mix of players will definitely approach the same thing differently, but I also don't doubt that the system will also play a role in how things are approached.

[dmw71]

There is so much of this post that is excellent!

It might be helpful to clarify what our objectives for the scenarios(s) is/are before we get too caught up in the specifics.

Outcome: We want a body of players to be able to compare a variety of different rulesets.

• For this, we need a short scenario, so that any given ruleset isn't too much of a time commitment.
• We need a scenario-template that establishes enough consistency that meaningful comparison is possible.
• We need a scenario-template that is flexible enough to allow for different rules, genres, and play styles.
• We need a scenario that can be rearranged and reskinned enough to allow for replayability without becoming rote.
• The scenario should offer opportunity to test and compare consistent elements of rpgs (role-play, combat, overcoming obstacles, etc.)
• The scenario should not assume specific player solutions, but present obstacles that invite players to engage with the ruleset in open-ended play (e.g. you don't have to fight the golem if you'd rather sneak around it, or charm it, or lure it into a trap).

Possible Scenario Elements:

• A social/rp challenge (negotiate, persuade, intimidate, or deceive a group of NPCs)
• Combat (1. Group opponents; 2. Strong individual opponent)
• Investigation challenge (hidden door, hidden objects, clues, etc.)
• Puzzle/Trap/Environmental challenge (any sort of open-ended creative problem-solving obstacle)
• A magical/psychic/weird science/genre-whatever element
• Movement challenge (stealth, chase and pursuit, etc.)
• Rest and recuperation

How many elements can the scenario contain before it becomes over-long?

How about the five-room dungeon as a template?

• Entrance/Guardian
• Puzzle or RP Challenge
• Setback/Trick/Obstacle
• Bossfight
• Reward/Twist

The beauty of the five room dungeon is how flexible it is. It could be a traditional dungeon with actual rooms, or it could be a point-crawl, or five individuals in a bar. Would something like this give us enough meaningful points of comparison?

Regarding the following, however, let me ask a hypothetical:

How many elements can the scenario contain before it becomes over-long?

What if, instead of attempting to cram all the 'Possible Scenario Elements' into a single, cohesive scenario; we ask the GMs to create micro-sessions that focus on one specific element of the game instead.

1. They create a combat encounter.
2. A social interaction/roleplay scenario.
3. A situation that will require ability/skill use.

Instead of trying to force everything above into a single scenario, every game will have a dedicated scenario prepared that will test the different situations individually.


Consider the following list (turned into a numerical list):

Possible Scenario Elements:

1. A social/rp challenge (negotiate, persuade, intimidate, or deceive a group of NPCs)
2. Combat (1. Group opponents; 2. Strong individual opponent)
3. Investigation challenge (hidden door, hidden objects, clues, etc.)
4. Puzzle/Trap/Environmental challenge (any sort of open-ended creative problem-solving obstacle)
5. A magical/psychic/weird science/genre-whatever element
6. Movement challenge (stealth, chase and pursuit, etc.)
7. Rest and recuperation

#1 could be a dedicated social interaction scenario.
#2, #6, and #7 could all be part of a combat encounter.
#3 and #4 could form a focused ability/skill use challenge.

* Note: #5 is a bit of a wildcard and could be worked into any (or all) of the three above, into its own test, or ignored completely if not relevant to the game system being used.

I see these micro-sessions (or whatever) having a couple of advantages:

1. Forcing all three to be resolved in a single, cohesive story will really stand to draw out how long the session will take to resolve;
2. The GM would could possibly get a lot more creative if they're not forced to tie the three tests (social interaction, combat, and ability/skill use) into a single scenario;
3. There may be games where only one or two players express interest in trying the system, but they're only interested in testing how combat works, for instance. Or how skill challenges are resolved.
   
   We could be forcing GMs to "waste" a lot of effort creating a full experience that tests everything if their players only want to sample one aspect of it.

Thoughts?

[Rex]

That is an excellent point Dave. Tying everything in together may make a better story, but that really isn't the objective here. I do think we are making pretty good progress on refining the ideas.

[Pulpatoon]

Instead of trying to force everything above into a single scenario, every game will have a dedicated scenario prepared that will test the different situations individually.

Ah, that's a good idea!

In addition to combat, social, skill encounters, I'd add that character generation is a significant interaction (how many games do we own and love that we've never done anything more than generate characters?). This way, if 20 people wanted to, say, make Harn characters, they could. If some of them never played, that'd be fine. If everyone wanted to try combat, the ref could schedule multiple combat encounters. Very, very flexible!

Aesthetically, this approach puts in mind of those weird, beautiful, grody black and white fantasy comics anthologies from the 70's, full of sex and gore, that occasionally made into my inappropriately young hands. The stories were usually between 4 and 8 pages long and were often little more than set-up, encounter, ironic resolution.

lf.jpeg (1.72 MiB) Viewed 527 times

[tibbius]

What if, instead of attempting to cram all the 'Possible Scenario Elements' into a single, cohesive scenario; we ask the GMs to create micro-sessions that focus on one specific element of the game instead.

1. They create a combat encounter.
2. A social interaction/roleplay scenario.
3. A situation that will require ability/skill use.

Instead of trying to force everything above into a single scenario, every game will have a dedicated scenario prepared that will test the different situations individually.

Clever! I like it!

If people already have scenarios that they want to run, those can be split like this. I agree that Character Generation should be added as a micro-session.

One thought about it: an important aspect of comparing systems is how flexible or broadly talented a character can be. Therefore, it would make sense to suggest that a player participating in more than one of the micro-sessions should use the same character for each.

[dmw71]

In addition to combat, social, skill encounters, I'd add that character generation is a significant interaction.

Yes!

I mean, I easily own 40+ different games where I've never even attempted to create a character... but totally should.

One thought about it: an important aspect of comparing systems is how flexible or broadly talented a character can be. Therefore, it would make sense to suggest that a player participating in more than one of the micro-sessions should use the same character for each.

Agreed.

[dmw71]

Another byproduct of these 'micro sessions' would be distilling/sharing rule highlights or overviews with players that don't own them.

Instead of needing to create cheat sheets for the entire game system, it will be a lot easier to explain just how character creation works, or just how combat works. Or spell casting. Or ability/skill checks. Etc...

[Rex]

Character creation is essential for sure and in some games like Harn, will be the longest micro session. We should be using the same characters through out I think. If someone wants to make a couple of characters as part of character generation it is fine but playing on all the way through seems a good idea.

[Pulpatoon]

Another byproduct of these 'micro sessions' would be distilling/sharing rule highlights or overviews with players that don't own them.

Instead of needing to create cheat sheets for the entire game system, it will be a lot easier to explain just how character creation works, or just how combat works. Or spell casting. Or ability/skill checks. Etc...

The ala carte approach also allows us to, say, get a wild hair about chase mechanics and run that for a few rulesets where it seems interesting without everyone having to commit to it.

And it opens up the possibility of multiple refs running sessions of the same system.

Long term, this could be a good way for people new to PbP to try playing or running games, and also a good way to test how well different rulesets translate to PbP.

[Rex]

This would actually be a good way to introduce someone new to pbp to the style as well.

[dmw71]

I see these micro-sessions (or whatever) having a couple of advantages:

1. Forcing all three to be resolved in a single, cohesive story will really stand to draw out how long the session will take to resolve;
2. The GM would could possibly get a lot more creative if they're not forced to tie the three tests (social interaction, combat, and ability/skill use) into a single scenario;
3. There may be games where only one or two players express interest in trying the system, but they're only interested in testing how combat works, for instance. Or how skill challenges are resolved.
   
   We could be forcing GMs to "waste" a lot of effort creating a full experience that tests everything if their players only want to sample one aspect of it.

Something else I just thought of:

This could potentially also allow multiple GMs to come in and run their own focused sessions. Say, someone has never actually played a game before but has created dozens of characters. They could lead a session on character generation.

Other potential GMs might have stronger backgrounds running roll-playing or role-playing games. This would allow those GMs to really focus on what they're good at and not force them to include aspects outside their comfort zone or expertise.

A GM that just really loves combat could run potentially run multiple different combat sessions where social interactions or negotiations are not expected or emphasized.

Conversely, there may be GMs that really love to build and run detailed/motivated NPCs and can go multiple sessions without a fight breaking out.


Again, just a thought...

[Pulpatoon]

Okay, I'm ready to hang my shingle for Knave, and have posted an LFP. Since chargen is not so elaborate and the rules for it are freely available, I don't expect much guidance or time will be needed for it. So it's time for me to start thinking about the mini-scenarios.

The ala carte approach allows a lot of flexibility, but I want to make sure that I hit the high-priority benchmarks for comparison. Perhaps we should come up with our must-have list of encounters, and then a menu of could-haves?

Just to get the ball rolling, how does this look?

High Priority Encounters

• A social/rp challenge (negotiate, persuade, intimidate, or deceive a group of NPCs)
• Combat, group
• Combat, big bad
• Puzzle/Trap/Environmental challenge (any sort of open-ended creative problem-solving obstacle)

Optional Encounters

• Investigation challenge (hidden door, hidden objects, clues, etc.)
• A magical/psychic/weird science/genre-whatever element
• Movement challenge (stealth, chase and pursuit, etc.)
• Rest and recuperation

[Rex]

Excellent points Dave.

I think your encounters look good to me Pulpatoon.

[tibbius]

Are there any opposed to this?

Just to get the ball rolling, how does this look?

High Priority Encounters

• A social/rp challenge (negotiate, persuade, intimidate, or deceive a group of NPCs)
• Combat, group
• Combat, big bad
• Puzzle/Trap/Environmental challenge (any sort of open-ended creative problem-solving obstacle)

Optional Encounters

• Investigation challenge (hidden door, hidden objects, clues, etc.)
• A magical/psychic/weird science/genre-whatever element
• Movement challenge (stealth, chase and pursuit, etc.)
• Rest and recuperation

[Rex]

As I said, it looks good to me. That is the rough outline I am working from as I set up to Run the HarnMaster scenario.

[Rusty Tincanne]

Sorry I'm late to this party! I missed this thread until yesterday!

FWIW, I enjoyed the conversation, and the list it has produced!

The list doesn't include the obligatory Character Generation scenario though.

I would like to recommend adding "A highlighted rule that is specific to this RPG" to the Optional Encounters section. (Eg. Five Torches Deep has an end-of-session rule to "teleport" a party back to town. It is based on the Gygax sandbox game, so not actually applicable to PBP. But It is still cool, taking into account the danger of your locale, and then rolling dice to see if anything befalls the party as they return to town.)

I'd also like to recommend "Leveling Up" to the High Priority Encounters section. I find that to be very interesting. So even if players don't meet the rules-criteria for leveling (unlikely with such a short scenario), it would be nice to see how each system handles PC progression.

Anyone else agree?

High Priority Encounters

• Character Generation
• A social/rp challenge (negotiate, persuade, intimidate, or deceive a group of NPCs)
• Combat, group
• Combat, big bad
• Puzzle/Trap/Environmental challenge (any sort of open-ended creative problem-solving obstacle)
• Character Progression/Leveling Up

Optional Encounters

• Investigation challenge (hidden door, hidden objects, clues, etc.)
• A magical/psychic/weird science/genre-whatever element
• Movement challenge (stealth, chase and pursuit, etc.)
• Rest and recuperation
• A highlighted rule that is specific to this RPG

I think I can get going with The Black Hack 2e, as well. Once I drum up a couple more players...

[dmw71]

I think all three of your following suggestions are great ideas:

1. The list doesn't include the obligatory Character Generation scenario though.

2. I would like to recommend adding "A highlighted rule that is specific to this RPG" to the Optional Encounters section. (Eg. Five Torches Deep has an end-of-session rule to "teleport" a party back to town.)

3. I'd also like to recommend "Leveling Up" to the High Priority Encounters section. I find that to be very interesting. So even if players don't meet the rules-criteria for leveling (unlikely with such a short scenario), it would be nice to see how each system handles PC progression.

[Rex]

Agreed, all great idea and should be included.