Back in October, it was time once again for the finest (and only) gaming convention I attend: the Yog-Sothoth.com games day, formerly YSDC Games Day, now going by the name of Convocation.
(I'm not really sold on the name change myself - I quite liked the simplicity of the old version! - but it's not really pertinent)
I managed to record a couple of games, once of them being the game that I landed in myself. This was Bookhounds of London; not the Trail of Cthulhu supplement, but a Fiasco playset based around it.
I've had one previous game of Fiasco and found myself less than impressed, but then having absolutely no concept of what a "Coen Brothers Movie"* should be like was bound to cause some hiccups.
(from everything I've heard since, I would immensely dislike a Coen Brothers Movie were I to encounter one, so that probably also doesn't help)
This time I enjoyed myself immensely. The fact that I have a much better idea what to do with an explicitly occult theme helped, and my group seemed to fit together really well. I've played with some of them before and it was great getting to know the new faces. Nellkyn did a great job facilitating the game, and my previous experience meant I could throw out a couple of helpful tips now and again.
As for the game itself, let's just say I started off dead and it got worse.
You can listen to it on Archive.org: here's Part One, and here's Part Two.
While the session was great fun, I still don't really get the point of the Fiasco dice system. Why do black and white dice mean one thing during the game (good vs. bad scene endings) and another in the aftermath (physical vs. mental trauma)? What's the point of getting you to pick dice in the first half and then assign them to other people arbitrarily, only to keep the dice you get in the second half? I can't help feeling you could strip out this mechanic entirely and there's bound to be a mechanic out there that handles resolving 'winning' scenes more elegantly.
On the other hand, it was fun using the dice as a framework for setting up the game, and I do think setup is something Fiasco handles in a pretty satisfactory way. To be honest, I'd probably be inclined to use the Fiasco setup rules and then run an actual game in a different system.
But that's just me. Hope you enjoy the recording.
> While the session was great fun, I still don't really get the point of the Fiasco dice system
ReplyDeleteIn my sole play of Fiasco, I found that it made for an interesting experience... but ultimately, considering none of us really cared about the dice system, it didn't feel like a game per se. Not a gatekeeping statement, just a 'the system didn't matter because... well, it didn't'. More like an improv training session?
> On the other hand, it was fun using the dice as a framework for setting up the game, and I do think setup is something Fiasco handles in a pretty satisfactory way. To be honest, I'd probably be inclined to use the Fiasco setup rules and then run an actual game in a different system.
I did find the set-up system good as well, in my experience - especially the 'let's network these characters' part.
Ultimately, I find that it's a good way to tell a story... one which doesn't really go anywhere that you think it will.
> from everything I've heard since, I would immensely dislike a Coen Brothers Movie were I to encounter one
This, on the week in which two of your co-Wharties look at a Coen Brothers movie on their other podcast? Oh, I can hear Nick in the distance...
> 'the system didn't matter because... well, it didn't'. More like an improv training session?
DeleteYes, very much this. I'd prefer there to be more (some?) structure to the actual gameplay. I'm not sure it even explains how you're meant to know what a "good" or "bad" ending is, or on what basis you would make the call, or how long you should let a scene run before deciding.
> This, on the week in which two of your co-Wharties look at a Coen Brothers movie on their other podcast? Oh, I can hear Nick in the distance...
Well, that's going to be fun! I just looked at the synopsis for it, and... yeah, not remotely my cup of tea.