FLEB - On Vox: [Questy Quest!] Playtesting. It's key.

Well, they're right when they say "playtesting is key". Sure, it was the first time I'd ever tried a system that I'd made, mechanics and all, but the "mechanics" were so simple that... what could go wrong?

The game was Questy Quest! (Formerly known as Bullshit! RPG. We were going to call it Quest: the Questing, but upon rethinking, I'd have to say that ripping off White Wolf name schemes is a rather tired joke.) The rules as they first existed were pretty simple:

OLD RULES:

• Everyone creates a character with a name, a concept, 3 positive stats, and two negative. Character types can be from any type of setting, and the setting is not determined beforehand.
• Players number off.
  
• Players take turns being GM for a round. The first GM is the most important person in the room, as they determine the actual setting of the game.
• Instead of chance conflict resolution, players roll a die, and the player whose number comes up decides whether the winner of the conflict.
• If the GM makes a call that is wildly implausable, a player can call "Bullshit!". A vote is taken, and the action can be overruled.
  

As it played out, it started chaotically for all the wrong reasons:

• I realized that in a "no permanent GM" game, the procedural rules had to be well defined and firmly stated, otherwise everyone had questions, and there was no authority to answer them. Things such as turn order and speaking precedence had to be far better defined.
• Along the same lines, the GM's duties and abilities needed to be firmly and explicitly stated. Since the role was skipping around so much, players were making GM-ish decisions as the GMs fumbled.
• Speaking order, and the question of "who controlled the current reality" had to be explicitly dealt with.

• Aside from just a concept, characters needed to have a goal (a.k.a., their Questy Quest!). A GM for one or two turns is-- let's face it-- not going to be able to sustain a challenging story arc, especially since they are, in a sense, playing both GM and character. With a goal, everyone is working toward something, even if it's a divergent goal.
  
• 2 downsides ended up being too many, and in post-game wrap-up, we all decided that only one downside was really necessary. With 3 upsides and 1 downside, it becomes more a definition of the character than a stat sheet, and it's simpler to remember and roleplay a single Achilles Heel.
• Players shouldn't reveal their characters until the GM makes the initial scene. For the sake of interest, the GM should not be trying to accomodate the other players' character types. The characters have to deal with the setting, not the other way around.
  

(see the next post)

Originally posted on fleb.vox.com