?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Conquest in review

There was a con. I ran a game. All was good.

I played in three games, "The A Team", "A Day of Wine and Roses" and "Pathway to Eternity". They were all enjoyable, but I could have gone for a bit more in-depth characters; mind you, with the "A Team" I knew what I was getting myself in for, and with "A Day of Wine and Roses" there was only so much depth a non-Amber person like me could bring to an Amber Freeform. No harm done, mind you. :)

Now, the writer's review of "All Hallow's Eve". I was rather chuffed with how the whole thing panned out. My two major regrets are that some of the character sheets were poorly edited after some plot changes, and that two of the characters (Mr Henry Glover and Mr Randall DuMontford) ended up a little light on with plot and, towards the end of the session, had little to do. This is especially sad for me, because I take pride in giving characters far too much to do so as to avoid having that akward last half-hour of game time.

The Changeling plot was also a little patchily recieved. I think that I maybe didn't get across my intentions very well - what I was trying to get at was that this is how Changelings (or other World of Darkness creatures) would actually roam about in the mortal world - they have their own concerns, their own agendas, and they have to get them to work without the mortals knowing about it.

And, you know, I like Changeling. A whole lot.

In general, the players were absolutely fantastic. I really enjoyed the fact that within five minutes of the game starting, people were thoroughly in character and milling about. I loved standing off to the side at about midgame and listening to the rich burble of conversation as if it were really and truly a ball - none of the akward freeform silences that you tend to get. Mostly, though, I loved how enthusiastic some of the players were. That really, really makes a difference for a GM. There were a few players who were obviously not enjoying themselves as much as the rest, and while this bothers me I acknowledge that it wasn't the sort of game that everyone would enjoy.

My co-GMs were grand, of course. I think that now that I have begun training myself to be less precious with the GMing of my game, I've put a lot of trust in my co-GMs and letting them do as they see best. This worked out splendidly for me this year, and I am most endebted to aeliel and delwyn for being super.

***

Now, of course, I am left with some decisions to make. I had made up my mind that next year I would run a Changeling: The Dreaming freeform in a quest to return to my roots as a player and as a GM. And while I have some nifty plot ideas so far, I'm finding it difficult to coem up with more detailed and intrcate plots. Also, with the New World of Darkness Changeling game being released this year, I'm not sure if I want to run a Changeing: The Dreaming game or a Changeling: The Lost game. Problem is, I won't be able to make that decision until August, by which time I should have a fair bit of the game written. My other issue is that C:tD has been out of print for a long, long time now. I am a little concerned that people would simply not know what the hell was going on with it, or wouldn't be interested in it at all.

So, what are the alternatives? Well, as happens whenever I run a con game, an idea for a sequel to "All Hallow's Eve" has already taken shape in my head. A game set at a party (rather than at a Changeling court) is much easier to write, because you can just bring in all the petty foibles of mortals for plot. And, you know, you don't have to worry too much about how much system knowledge someone has.

However, a sequel has its own problems associated with it, especially in the case of "All Hallow's Eve". Mostly, there is the question of whether or not to include any World of Darkness stuff in it at all, Changeling or otherwise. I purposefully didn't include mention of C:tD in the blurb for 'All Hallow's Eve' because I didn't want to colour people's expectations of the game; the game wasn't about the Changelings, they just happened to be there. On the other hand, I fully acknowledge that, because of this, the Changeling stuff didn't sit well with all of the players.

So, I've kind of written myself into a bit of a corner. I think, though, that if I do write a sequel and if there is World of Darkness stuff there, I will have to mention it in the blurb. Sure, it may change people's attitudes to the game, but let's face it - the return players will know about the Changeling plot anyway, so why not acknowledge the possibility that there is more stuff like that going on?

I still have to make a decision between the two games, of course. I don't want to, but I guess that I have to. Sigh.

Comments

( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
(Deleted comment)
miss_rynn
Apr. 10th, 2007 03:14 am (UTC)
Lies! Lies and trickery!

...

Well, part of the problem is that (at least in my memory) no-one has run a Changeling freeform at a Melbourne con that wasn't Camarilla-based, so it's hard to judge how popular it will be. It's one of those things that can go either way, I think...
aeduna
Apr. 9th, 2007 11:41 pm (UTC)
I still have to make a decision between the two games, of course. I don't want to, but I guess that I have to. Sigh.

But not right now :-) Let it bubble around in your head and see which one comes out on top (assuming that writing both would be a bit much).

Readin' the blurb for All Hallows Eve, if it had been me(tm), I might have put in a brief mention of mystic stuff, maybe calling attention to the name of the game a bit more... so not mentioning Changelings, but clueing people to the possibility it wasn't just 3 hours of social fu :) And you could maybe do the same deal for a sequel?
miss_rynn
Apr. 10th, 2007 03:11 am (UTC)
These are all good points. What I was thinking about was mentioning in the blurb "World of Darkness Themes" or some such - you know, acknowledging that there may be *something else* there, without actually saying what it is. Or something.

PS - I heard that your game rawked. :)
aeduna
Apr. 10th, 2007 03:56 am (UTC)
yah, that whole sub-tool thing i've heard about :)

danke *beams* I was worried - it didn't quite work on a technical level, so as long as people enjoyed themselves, i am satisfied.

gadge
Apr. 10th, 2007 04:07 am (UTC)
Don't tell 'em. You did the different levels of ability well, I thought. I mean, I got done over by the fae, but I also was done over by the non-fae - and most of my getting screwed was done in a decidedly non-fae manner. Not knowing as a player that anything specifically untoward was going on made the game much more 'real', in a way, as I wasn't subconsciously letting anything even slightly out of the ordinary ping on the radar. Girl plays beautiful music? She is accomplished, not supernatural. As a player, I'd have pinged she was fae if I'd known there were fae around; instead it worked to make my character's life hell but the game an awful lot more exciting.

So. Keep mum.
teknohippi
Apr. 11th, 2007 01:27 am (UTC)
Someone spilled the beans 6 weeks ago that there would be fae to me so I was ignoring any of that stuff. No such thing as Monsters or Faries
nicked_metal
Apr. 12th, 2007 01:53 am (UTC)
Speaking for myself, I'm looking forward to playing in "Becka's freeform."

Then again, Fi will confirm that I was halfway through reading my character sheet in my Min Min session and somebody made a comment about the background which led me to exclaim, "Oh this is that game! Cool!"

Of course, I also have the luxury of having Peter Strong for a writing partner, which means I never really have to choose between concepts, I just have to fit them into a schedule.
( 8 comments — Leave a comment )