Two Questions After First (Half) Session ...
Aug 30, 2016 13:42:34 GMT -8
Post by Wrunner on Aug 30, 2016 13:42:34 GMT -8
After finally managing to pry the d20s from my gaming group's hands for a session, our first run at Fiasco managed to get as far as The Tilt when it was decided the hour was too late to dive into Act II.
But we've been having an absolute BLAST! We were laughing out loud and getting giddy by, like, the second die of The Setup. After my Essential Introductory Fiasco RPG Primer, they required very little clarification or guidance. In fact, they picked up and ran with story elements so well that I felt like I was the one having to keep up. We're playing the Gangster London playset: I'm a history major named Joff in a "we're just mates ... nothing going on here" relationship with my flatmate, Alfie. His aunt runs an Indian restaurant, and she's plotting with Nick - an IRA veteran and co-worker of mine at the Salvation Army. Y'see the two of us have the bell-ringing holiday donation gig where he dresses as Santa and I'm an elf. The plot Nick and "Aunt Madge" have brewing involve the unexploded WWII bomb Nick and I found mysteriously delivered to our S.A. locale. Their plan involves using it to destroy all the local criminal/gang competition by detonating it at the annual holiday poker night they host in the basement of Madge's Indian restaurant. (She got a new padlock to the door going downstairs, after all!) I was initially opposed because I appreciated the bomb for its historical significance ... until Madge explained how it would be a sort of modern day reenactment of the Gunpowder Treason and Plot. She had to get me on board, of course, because I was the only one who had discovered how to detonate it. Also, of course, I had written down an earlier version of the instructions ... but had lost it ... so that's floating around out there. Madge also managed to enlist the support of two female bartenders who work under one of the crime bosses she intends to destroy (or at least she is confident she has). Sort of a "we women should be running this racket" sort of thing. They seemed a little too eager to betray their boss for my liking ...
Our Tilt is the Mayhem "release a wild animal" result, made manifest by Madge's old crazy brother - Alfie's dad - getting out of prison ... it's probably good we stopped there for the night because it gave us time to talk all about everything going on and revel in how hilariously awesome our beautiful mess is developing. The post-Tilt break is definitely a step not to be skipped!
I do have two questions after our initial (half) experience:
1) While the scenes were being Established, before they actually "began", I found we fell into a lot of "meta-talk" ... where things could go, proposed plot elements, "oh, and then" type of talk ... it felt like maybe we were getting ahead of ourselves. Sometimes it went on for minutes, but I was reluctant to pull the reins as the ideas and enthusiasm and excitement kept growing with the pre-scene conversation.
Is it okay to talk about things outside of the central questions when establishing a scene (Who's there? When is it taking place? What locations/objects/needs are involved?) or would you encourage we keep those topics and decisions to actual in-scene role-playing? Is it less desirable to talk about what your character would potentially think or do and more desirable to just play it out?
I'm thinking there is a balance that each table/group kinda finds on their own, but I was curious for anything you fine Jackers had to say on the topic.
There was a point where I was unsure how my Joff was going to approach a scene that was established for him (trying to talk Madge out of using the bomb) ... I thought about it for a while before jumping into the scene, but came up with nothing ... so, not wanting to stop the momentum, I decided Joff was just going to be unsure, too; wary and reluctant, but unsure how he was going to talk to and try and convince Madge. With that premise, she didn't have much trouble changing my mind with her Guy Fawkes talk, which I thought was a great and unexpected twist for my character - and helped establish more of my somewhat educated but foundationally criminal/gangster nature - as she used my love of history to her own ends.
2) This question is far less subjective/open to interpretation:
Should everyone have the same number of dice in front of them (ie 2) at the end of the first Act?
When a scene is done and the active player gives their Resolve die away, we allowed that you could give it to whomever, even if that meant one player might be rolling 3 dice for the Tilt while another rolls 1 (which ended up happening) ... is this wrong? Nick was the one rolling the 3 (2 Light and 1 Dark) and I rolled a single Light and it was still close (his 12L - 3D = 8L over my 6L) and I kinda like the asymmetry of it, so I was fine with it.
There's also the "last die is wild" rule to factor into consideration. Since it exists to not force a choice as options run out, it would seem against the spirit of that rule to force players to give their Resolve die to only the remaining "eligible" players that haven't yet received their second die that Act ... but I just wanted to make sure!
Thanks!
But we've been having an absolute BLAST! We were laughing out loud and getting giddy by, like, the second die of The Setup. After my Essential Introductory Fiasco RPG Primer, they required very little clarification or guidance. In fact, they picked up and ran with story elements so well that I felt like I was the one having to keep up. We're playing the Gangster London playset: I'm a history major named Joff in a "we're just mates ... nothing going on here" relationship with my flatmate, Alfie. His aunt runs an Indian restaurant, and she's plotting with Nick - an IRA veteran and co-worker of mine at the Salvation Army. Y'see the two of us have the bell-ringing holiday donation gig where he dresses as Santa and I'm an elf. The plot Nick and "Aunt Madge" have brewing involve the unexploded WWII bomb Nick and I found mysteriously delivered to our S.A. locale. Their plan involves using it to destroy all the local criminal/gang competition by detonating it at the annual holiday poker night they host in the basement of Madge's Indian restaurant. (She got a new padlock to the door going downstairs, after all!) I was initially opposed because I appreciated the bomb for its historical significance ... until Madge explained how it would be a sort of modern day reenactment of the Gunpowder Treason and Plot. She had to get me on board, of course, because I was the only one who had discovered how to detonate it. Also, of course, I had written down an earlier version of the instructions ... but had lost it ... so that's floating around out there. Madge also managed to enlist the support of two female bartenders who work under one of the crime bosses she intends to destroy (or at least she is confident she has). Sort of a "we women should be running this racket" sort of thing. They seemed a little too eager to betray their boss for my liking ...
Our Tilt is the Mayhem "release a wild animal" result, made manifest by Madge's old crazy brother - Alfie's dad - getting out of prison ... it's probably good we stopped there for the night because it gave us time to talk all about everything going on and revel in how hilariously awesome our beautiful mess is developing. The post-Tilt break is definitely a step not to be skipped!
I do have two questions after our initial (half) experience:
1) While the scenes were being Established, before they actually "began", I found we fell into a lot of "meta-talk" ... where things could go, proposed plot elements, "oh, and then" type of talk ... it felt like maybe we were getting ahead of ourselves. Sometimes it went on for minutes, but I was reluctant to pull the reins as the ideas and enthusiasm and excitement kept growing with the pre-scene conversation.
Is it okay to talk about things outside of the central questions when establishing a scene (Who's there? When is it taking place? What locations/objects/needs are involved?) or would you encourage we keep those topics and decisions to actual in-scene role-playing? Is it less desirable to talk about what your character would potentially think or do and more desirable to just play it out?
I'm thinking there is a balance that each table/group kinda finds on their own, but I was curious for anything you fine Jackers had to say on the topic.
There was a point where I was unsure how my Joff was going to approach a scene that was established for him (trying to talk Madge out of using the bomb) ... I thought about it for a while before jumping into the scene, but came up with nothing ... so, not wanting to stop the momentum, I decided Joff was just going to be unsure, too; wary and reluctant, but unsure how he was going to talk to and try and convince Madge. With that premise, she didn't have much trouble changing my mind with her Guy Fawkes talk, which I thought was a great and unexpected twist for my character - and helped establish more of my somewhat educated but foundationally criminal/gangster nature - as she used my love of history to her own ends.
2) This question is far less subjective/open to interpretation:
Should everyone have the same number of dice in front of them (ie 2) at the end of the first Act?
When a scene is done and the active player gives their Resolve die away, we allowed that you could give it to whomever, even if that meant one player might be rolling 3 dice for the Tilt while another rolls 1 (which ended up happening) ... is this wrong? Nick was the one rolling the 3 (2 Light and 1 Dark) and I rolled a single Light and it was still close (his 12L - 3D = 8L over my 6L) and I kinda like the asymmetry of it, so I was fine with it.
There's also the "last die is wild" rule to factor into consideration. Since it exists to not force a choice as options run out, it would seem against the spirit of that rule to force players to give their Resolve die to only the remaining "eligible" players that haven't yet received their second die that Act ... but I just wanted to make sure!
Thanks!