Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2012 23:30:55 GMT -8
New to the boards, so bare with me as I ask my question(s).
Last year I ran my first convention game, Star Wars Saga. I used a canned adventure and created all the PCs myself. While I only ran two games over the course of the convention, I felt pretty good about the end results. But it appeared that very few knew the system, and therefore were hesitant in how to play their character.
This year I have decided to run Savage Worlds at the convention. To this point I have only ran a single game (at home), and it too was a canned adventure. Since none of the players had any experience with the system I chose to allow the players to pick an archetype and then fill in their Hindrances. Both players liked this idea, as they could develop a character of their choosing, rather than be force fed a pc they have little, to no connection with. Which gave me the idea to have the convention players do the same.
I would present to them the list of archetypes, listed in the deluxe edition, and allow them to finish out their characters as they so chose. I figure this would take maybe thirty minutes at the most (esp. if I provide a short list of hindrances and gear). And then we could jump right into the game (2 to 3 hr session). Thoughts?
As well, I had the thought of having several adventures ready to run at the convention, maybe three or four different games. This way if a player (or players) wanted to play another game, then they could experience a different setting or adventure. I was going to have the players randomly choose an adventure, or roll a die to see which adventure they'd play. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by shadrack on Aug 26, 2012 19:29:28 GMT -8
I think letting them pick their own hindrances is a great idea. I would try to make it a step or two easier (and quicker) for them.
Go ahead and make character sheets for each archetype you're offering. (you may need to come up with a couple on your own, cleric, druid, 2 weapon fighter, etc.. whatever is appropriate for your game). On these sheets, have a "Major Hindrances (choose 1)" section and a "Minor Hindrances (choose 2)" section. Both of these will have a few applicable/appropriate/interesting hindrances for that character.
ex: cleric archetype Major Hindrances (choose 1 of:) Vow to asdetkha (defend the weak, donate 20% of loot, never lie) Heroic Yellow Minor Hindrances (choose 2 of:) Anemic Quirk, (constantly says, 'praise asdetkha', 'thanks to asdetkha', etc. Poverty (this would give you an alternate starting equipment too) Cautious
these are just examples. That way the new player can quickly tailor a unique PC. I think you want to avoid giving too many options. That way you avoid 'analysis paralysis'.
Also, you know what interesting hindrances could be on those sheets. Have a quick run-through prior to the game starting. 'did anyone take curious?' 'did anyone take heroic', did anyone take overconfident?' etc. That way, you have a little cheat sheet of all the hindrances you want to tweak during the game.
As far as the multiple adventures, that's cool, just have a packet with each adventure and appropriate PC's. 'Fantasy', 'Aliens vs Predator', Super Heroes, etc.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Aug 27, 2012 6:56:30 GMT -8
Although playing indie games a bit lately has left me intrigued with the idea of giving the players room to make the character for themselves, time is so precious in a con game that I just don't know how well it would work out.
So, what I do is try to come up with extra characters (I scale for a 6 person table and have 8 characters) 4 male, 4 female (though I let players change this as they see fit). Every character fills or can support at least 1 need within the party and there is always overlap for a couple of reasons. Have only one lockpick in the group and he fails (critically) a very important role? Problem (We won't even go into the design flaw implicit in that but you get the idea.
Then I try to give them a sufficient background and enough information that a player can get hold of the character and try to make them their own. Different players respond to this with varying degrees of success, but that's my approach to characters for convention games.
Cheers,
JiB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2012 22:09:19 GMT -8
I sort of did the latter JiB, at last year's con (this is not a gaming con btw, this is animeusa.org/, so the focus of many attendees is anime, not rpg). My Star Wars game was a scenario in which the players were Imperial Agents sent to flush out a band of Rebels (which included 4 Jedi). So I made 6 characters, 2 soldiers (one melee, one ranged), a scoundrel, a noble (officer), a scout (sniper), and a dark Jedi. All were male, all 10th level. I came up with a short paragraph for each player as to why their character was here -- which everyone was tied to the officer is some way. While each player had a character sheet, I also included a separate sheet which explained all their Feats and Talents. Perhaps this was a bit overwhelming, as I also offered a fourth sheet that they could write on to track HP, Force Points and their Condition Track. (Information overload.) The game started off well enough, during both sessions, but the latter game ran into major problems during the final fight. I didn't hold back any punches and used the Jedi Master full throttle (I had raised her one level so that she could officially take the Jedi Master prestige class; this ended up not being a good choice). 3 Jedi vs this lot of Imperials was a major mistake. The officer couldn't even hit the JM; the scoundrel needed FP to beat her AC. It was a mess. In the end, I allowed for them to find a Thermal Detonator to finish off the master, but by then three of the six were dead, and I didn't want the game to end with a loss. They prevailed in the end, but I'm sure it wasn't as fun as they had hoped. So that is why I'm wanting to drastically change the way this con-game is ran. I want to ensure the players have fun. Which is where I missed the mark last year. Which is why I thought having the players go through character creation (or at least part of it) might be fun.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Aug 28, 2012 6:57:49 GMT -8
A tpk is not necessarily not fun for the players, it depends a great deal on how it happens.
I ran a game called Surgeon at a con a while back which was a spin on the Jack the Ripper story with a couple of caveats.
The pc's were all drawn from literature, much like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen but all were broken in some way, some more than others.
the Ripper was one of the pc's and they didn't know it. I chose at random who would be the ripper at the beginning of the game. (Honestly that part of it didn't play out as well as I would have liked, but it was an idea and we live and learn.)
One of the pc's was a werewolf and another was Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde. I had, after the play test, added a fight that was intended to challenge the pc's but not really slow them down all that much, except that I hadn't counted on players. The girl playing the Ms. Hyde character said as her first action when the fight broke out, "I drink the formula." Wha??? Says I. so she goes berserk which in SW terms means among other things she can't tell friend from foe. She puts the bad guy down and turns around looking for another enemy and spies the girl who's the werewolf, the player of which is sitting there going, "Oh hit me, please hit me." Hyde did, and she wolfed out. They went picknicking on each other and ended up killing themselves and the rest of the party minus 2 who ran and ran straight into the Ripper who made short work of them. I think at the end of the game it was decided that the result was that the Ripper and the werewolf teamed up to terrorize London.
But, it was a lot of fun and two of the players who now play in a regular campaign of mine remember the game fondly. I'll take it.
The point of this lengthy tale was that killing them all is not necessarily a bad thing.
I see your point about over scaling the bad guys in relation to the pc's. This is a neat trick most of the time to make a game challenging but not insurmountable, and this is one of the reasons why we play test. Very important and valuable to work out the kinks and figure out the things you've done that don't work.
Cheers,
JiB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2012 11:14:46 GMT -8
Character's aside, would having a selection of adventures be wise? Not that Savage Worlds is hard to run, but would anyone else have several adventures planned? Or would you only have one game that you know really well?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2012 12:17:07 GMT -8
I haven't actually run a con game, but I'd think it would be better to have an adventure planned that you know very well so that you can adjust to player inputs quicker. For a con game you need to be a little railroady, you make your scenes and let the players figure out how they get from scene to scene. That way you can better control the pacing and how long the game goes as con games do seem to require tighter time constraints then your home game would.
Also to jump on the death not being a bad thing, the most fun I've had in a session in a long time was a month or two ago when my character died. Our party had ended up in the treasure vault of a tower in a ruined city and were up against a Formorian, a psychotic twisted giant essentially. This guy had started a ritual that was about to envelope and probably destroy the tower so we were on a time limit just trying to get past him and grab an artifact that we were going to trade for another party members freedom from a fey queen.
Long story short things went really bad. We did grab the artifact, but with only moments to spare our mage and healer got out of the vault and I picked up the rogue and literally tossed him out the door (he's a halfling so he wasn't pleased). Then I shouted for them to shut the vault before the ritual went off. It wasn't planned, but I got to sacrifice myself for the party which was very cool.
Its how the characters die that tends to impact how much fun it is.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Aug 28, 2012 13:03:31 GMT -8
Character's aside, would having a selection of adventures be wise? Not that Savage Worlds is hard to run, but would anyone else have several adventures planned? Or would you only have one game that you know really well? I tend to over prepare, so having a list of adventures that I might run would probably be counter productive for me. I want to know the game really well so I don't have to look things up during game play. Just my 2 krupplenicks worth, your mileage may of course vary. JiB
|
|