Observations of the Fox

The premise is simple... I have a group with a total of about 25 kids, 10 minutes a day, 5 days a week.  On any given day, most of them will be there and some of them won't. It can be pretty random which kids are there on each day, but there is almost never all of them present at the same time. Some of the kids don't want to play a game, and a couple may actively resent being forced to play (in the situation I've been working through, two students are actively trying the sabotage the game).  The game is played out over several days, weeks even. So rather than a 20-30 minute turnaround on each cycle, the game has a drawn out melodrama... which also means that it can feel particularly unfair for those players who get eliminated in the earliest rounds. So I need to accommodate for all these things... above and beyond the regular requirements of a social deduction game. I'm going with the basic framework of "Werewolf/Mafia". One quarter to a third of the players w...

I have a class of academically gifted young high school students. Here in Australia, they are year 7, which makes them on average around 13 years old. It would be fair to say that since these kids are targeted as "gifted and talented" many are socially awkward, and more than a few share traits that they're probably on the Autistic spectrum at some level. I've already posted a few times about the high school gaming club I ran a few years ago, and since I'm currently unable to run this (for ongoing reasons that have now been a concern for 2.5 years), I've decided to experiments with a social deduction game using this class of students. The reasons are basically two-fold... A lot of the kids are smart, they work things out really quickly, and understand how connected systems can impact on one another. There has been a lack of social cohesion among them and I've wanted to get a sense of fun and community back into the class as we wind down toward the end of th...

Getting inspiration from other RPG designers is one thing, but I like casting my net a bit wider. Articles, like this one , help to give me the feeling that I'm on the right track with my design theory.  I've mentuoned a few times that running games and workdbuilding are both like developing a recipe. A single ingredient is linear, monochromatic, even boring. A pair of ingredients adds interest, especislly if they vary in proportions through the dish. Three or fout msy add further imterest and depth... but when you add toi many, or add conflicting ingredients, the various dlavours start working against each other and you end up with a mess. This kind of idea is a decent chunk of the t3ason why the guide to my current game system us called the "SNAFU SRD and Cookbook". Knowing ehat goes together, how it goes together, and what can go wrong if the wrong things go together is the key to producing something classic snd memorable. This is not to say experimentation is bad....

    I've set up title cards for short videos before, and I've been enthusiastic for the before as well. It's probably the AuDHD/"Neurospiciness" that alwas gets in the way of me completing the project, but hopefully this time I stick the landing.

I like reading other people's posts about game philosophy and design. Like this one I've played most of the games listed here, and generally agree with the sentiment that people should be willing to try new games...even just as one shots. Knowing what I do about the games, it's an interesting progression. I like the way it builds with ideas, showing new elements of what game design can be. I think there are some lesser known indie games that could have really explored the concepts better, but for folks taking baby-steps away from the juggernaut that is D&D, there is often a need to go with something that has a name and a community associated with it.  Naturally, when I read posts like this, I want to scream about other Indie games...like I did for DURF a few weeks back, or like I've done for others over the years (or even just the game mechanisms they use).   image from here  which claims the source is actually here image from 

You know what?... it's probably not surprising, but I solved the issue I was having in the last post , and I actually had solved it months ago. The problem with my recent thoughts has been that I wanted a bit more grittiness and depth to the conflict resolution system. I had broken conflict down into a multipart die roll with successes on an initiative roll giving an action in the combat round for every degree of success obtained, then each successfully gained action would be rolled separately. That turned out to be pushing the system in directions it was never intended to go, so I've gone back to the KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) methodology. I'm also utilising the basic fundamentals of the rules rather than adding new concepts with conflict working as an exception in a " design by exception " model. This game is meant to be about telling dramatic stories, the conflict system applies to physical violence, arguments, riddles, psychic showdowns, and anything else w...