Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Let's Play: RPGs: Vox

Bottom of Page

51 to 76 of 76

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >
    • CommentAuthorGrover
    • CommentTimeMay 18th 2010
     
    I'm not going to be able to make the next 3 weekends for various reasons.
    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2010
     
    I'm sorry to hear that, Steve.

    Table has been reserved for May 30th.
    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2010
     
    I'll be there!
    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeMay 30th 2010
     
    And so we played today.

    Nigel, Wallis and Jerod were contacted by their voices (in the form of a whisper, talking money and computer text respectively). The voices asked them to rescue Raymond (Steve's PC, not present) from HCMC.

    In the process of rescuing him and dealing with minions of the Divornium (aka the Nuit), the group managed to meet with and talk with agents of both the black card Divornium and the white card Lux Aeterna. Both groups had conversations with the PCs about their perspective on their conflict.


    And the session ended with the group, at the urging of Nigel's voice, jumping off of Minnehaha Falls...and waking up in "the Facility"

    Next session is Sunday June 13th
    • CommentAuthorGrover
    • CommentTimeMay 31st 2010
     
    I'm glad you were able to adjust so well to my absence. Are we playing again in 2 weeks?
    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2010
     
    Well, guys, I just talked to the Source...they are booked up solid on Sunday, June 13th.

    Alternatives?
  7.  

    I could probably move to this coming Sunday or put it off one week. I could also go to another venue.

    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeJun 1st 2010
     
    This Sunday (the 6th) will be very busy for me, so I'd rather not, but I can make it if that's what we've got.

    I could also host on the 13th.
    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2010
     
    If you could host, Eric, that would work great, I think.
  10.  

    So...is that happening?

    • CommentAuthorGrover
    • CommentTimeJun 11th 2010
     
    It works for me, but I don't know where Eric lives.
    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeJun 11th 2010
     
    525 University Ave SE. It's near the 35W Bridge that collapsed. Parking should be available on side streets in the area, though you might have to be a block or two away.

    Phone 612-623-0770, there's an intercom at the front of the apartment building, I'm in apartment 1.
    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeJun 11th 2010
     
    Also, yes, I'm hosting on the 13th! Doors open at noon.
    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeJun 11th 2010
     
    Awesome. Sunday, Noon at Eric's place (thanks again, Eric) it shall be.
    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeJun 13th 2010
     
    Thank you all for your participation, even if PDQ and my Gming can charitably be called a failure.

    The plan is for Eric to run Mouseguard, either at the Source or his place, next Sunday.
  16.  

    Thanks for running, Paul. I wouldn't call either of them a failure; even if I don't see PDQ as delivering anything particularly noteworthy. It's a quick, low-budget system.

    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeJun 13th 2010 edited
     
    Thanks for running it!

    Don't burden yourself with the failure of a group to have fun. If we got together to play soccer and didn't enjoy it, it's not your fault no matter were you the goalie or the forward linesman.

    I felt like Vox did not give the GM much in terms of in-game responsibilities other than "make it fun," which sucks as a game. It felt like you took upon yourself the responsibility of making the setting complex and interesting, which I felt you did a good job on. It seemed that this contribution wasn't enough to combine with what we the players were contributing to make the end result fun. Should you have taken on other responsibilities? Should the players have?

    I wanted to do a certain kind of thing, to contribute a certain kind of play and receive a certain kind of contribution from play. Did what I want to contribute line up with the responsibilities Vox put upon me? Did the responsibilities Vox put on other players encourage the kind of responses and play I desired?

    No, it didn't. Shortly after the game started I tried to stop and talk a little about this, and take the opposite approach: try to take a larger look at play and align what I wanted out of play to what the game actually brought about in our play. This didn't work so well for me either because I had a hard time deciphering what play was actually asking of me, and what it was giving me.

    So, really, only call your GMing a failure if you think Vox asked you as a GM to do things that you didn't do. More concrete things than "Oh and make it fun".

    EDIT: meaning-changing typos corrected.
  18.  

    Jared feels this way

    I thought the chased by circumstances conflicts in the facility were pretty good; there was plenty of conflict there. A capstone conflict (or boss fight or something...) in the metropolis would have been appropriate. As players, we seem to investigate too much, rather than get to the judging. I've seen this in Sorcerer, DitV, and Burning Wheel especially. I wonder if Vox (setting and rules) does not give enough information to the player to interact with the world. Would Jaws of the Six Serpents be easier to work with? That is, using PDQ in a swords and sorcery setting might give the players a better handle on what conflicts exist and how the characters relate to them.

    I really like the metaphysical questions as a game theme. A Zelaznyesque multiverse spanning game could never be about answering those questions (and as players, we should have realized that), but instead should reward engaging and acting upon them. PDQ does not really do that.

    Erm... in Solar System:

    Key of the Zelazny Hero
    1xp: You demonstrate that the Gods are clueless
    2xp: You get away with something that a God does not approve of
    5xp: You alter the fabric of existence

    Key of the Philosophic Hero
    1xp: You discuss philosophy as it relates to your situation
    3xp: You act on your philosophy, right or wrong

    Or something along those lines.

    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2010
     
    See, some sort of communication of responsibility for judgement would have totally changed the game for me. It never once occurred to me to have my character judge anything beyond "will this help me?"

    Here's some things that sparked interest in me, but never found kindling:

    Nigel killed two people trying to take them with him between worlds. How does he feel about that? Would he do it again?
    Jarod leaving the group to go a different path basically forced Wallace to decide between 1. going with him literally into hell because you *do not let your crew face trouble alone*, or 2. internally ejecting Jarod from the circle that is the "crew". Wallace chose #2 and in the brief time of life he had after that choice regretted it but was too afraid. So, Wallace is torn up and conflicted over his choice; how does he resolve this? Would he do it again?
    Was Jarod more afraid of meeting God than meeting the Devil? Was he more afraid of dying? What other kind of choices might throw light on these questions?

    All really questions from a player-perspective. My character never really judged any of that, excluding himself. As for judging the setting, meh. *Character* judgements I think are really interesting insofar as they spark character action, which can then be judged by the players.
    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2010
     
    I probably should have had a capstone conflict.

    Live and learn, I suppose.
    • CommentAuthorGrover
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2010
     
    I don't know about including a capstone conflict. One thing about the system was that it felt awfully arbitrary. It's hard to get yourself to care about a conflict when you know it's going to come down to 'cross your fingers and roll 2d6'. Vox seems like it's built for an illusionist GM, who doesn't want the system to get in their way.
    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2010
     
    Well, from what I understand, a 7 is a success, so even invoking a single +2 trait seems to have a heavy statistical swing. I think perhaps the way in Vox there were many reactive rolls to uncertain end clouds that issue. For example (non-encompassing**), I'm not particularly fond of a system with "everyone rolls and whoever gets the biggest number gets a prize". I mean, I feel like if I cared about rolls I would probably have the tools to be involved, at least to the degree that my character creation allowed (no kung fu carpenters, sadly). My guess is that it just appears arbitrary since, well, the fiction associated with the rolls wasn't worth *caring* about. Yay, I rolled high! Go me.

    I don't know that it was particularly on your shoulders, Jvstin, to create any capstone conflict. Plus, I mean how were you to know? The part of my character that interested me the most, I had no idea how to to *communicate* "Hey this is something worth having some play be about," or even who I should be communicating that *too*. Should I find some way to have Shane invested in my characters actions? Should I get Steve to act as a foil for my reflections?


    **Is non-encompassing even the right word? This bugs me now, and a casual internet search has provided unhelpful. There's totally a word that indicates an example is just one of many differnet kinds of possible examples, pretend I used that.
    • CommentAuthorMule
    • CommentTimeJun 14th 2010
     
    Kung-Fu carpenters probably needs more talking, and boy do I love talking, so I'll get back to that. Right now though I have people showing up for D&D in a few hours so I really should have some stuff prepared for them.
  24.  

    We certainly could have generated a capstone conflict as players.

    Like summoning the demiurge. Super difficult, even with pooling all our resources, but we had a lot saved at the end.

    • CommentAuthorJvstin
    • CommentTimeJun 15th 2010
     
    Vox seems like it's built for an illusionist GM, who doesn't want the system to get in their way.

    I DO think that's PDQ's schtick, or one of them.
    • CommentAuthorGrover
    • CommentTimeJun 15th 2010
     
    That was very much my impression as well.

51 to 76 of 76

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >