quinta-feira, 5 de março de 2020
Two Types Of Game Stores
Right now, hobby game stores are as numerous and prosperous as they've ever been. However, the hobby has grown so huge in the last decade, and the Internet such a powerful force, they struggle to remain relevant. I struggle to just keep up with customer demands, and only occasionally flex my muscles as taste maker.
This is not to say brick and mortar stores are dying or having problems, which is their natural state, it just means they're trying to find their position in the changing marketplace, where Amazon has steadily gobbled up game trade market share and now owns, what 80%? Who really knows. Many game stores are selling on Amazon with a, "if you can't beat them, join them" strategy. So stores struggle with how to approach this perilous new world, where the Internet dominates as a sales channel, with Amazon and direct to consumer sales being the primary means of commerce. It's such a powerful force, it not only drives customers to us, but they arrive with a different idea of how the games are played.
There are two primary strategies to stay relevant as a hobby game store, serve the lowest common denominator or serve the highest common denominator. When I say highest, I refer to the intense amount of retail work required to bring in new customers, expose them to a broad variety of games, and later watch them wander off to Internet sales once educated. It's game store ownership as parenting. It's time consuming, expensive, and only works because nobody big is dumb enough to try. It's the full spectrum, high capitalization approach.
Deciding on being the highest common denominator requires a serious capital budget, strong sales training, and a local market where this is possible. Most scorched earth regions, characterized by close to free real estate and a customer based trained to pick apart newcomers, need not apply. There is a strength to this model, but there's also the eternal question of, if you have enough money to do this right, why would you do it at all? When I mention the scorched earth issue with scorched earth store owners, they have no idea what I'm talking about. Scorched earth is the game trade in many regions. It would be like asking a convention of ice cream store owners to consider a world without refrigeration. Sucky stores exist to serve a sucky market.
The lowest common denominator is serving the most profitable customers right now. It's a supremely logical business model, unlike the high store. You identify the lowest hanging fruit, the maximum value for the least effort, and you serve that. You serve it all the time in every way possible. You don't invest in fancy fixtures or worry too much about Kickstarter or Dungeons & Dragons table acreage. Every D&D table of players is worth one Magic player, and you make no bones about it. You serve the beast that feeds you. I should mention a good LCD store is just as well capitalized and the owners just as smart and clever as the HCD store. They just satisfy different needs in the marketplace.
The lowest common denominator store serves Magic to Magic players in every Magic configuration imaginable. You have events for every format, you sell tons of singles and have a war chest of cash reserves for buying cards from customers that would make a marijuana dispensary nervous. Where the high road store spent a small fortune on fixtures, trained staff and diverse inventory, the low road store has a shockingly large collection of used cardboard. That other expensive stuff? It's just not necessary. That means lots of singles sold in store and online and deep discount pricing on sealed product because you're essentially selling a commodity item, like soy beans. If you could buy stock in Lifetime Products, Inc., you would. You are not concerned with margin, only the market price.
Both models work. However, imagine if you were trying to grow your market as a publisher. Do you want the image of where your game is played to be that of a dirty den of dudes or a professional enterprise that welcomes all new people? Do you want to be associated with a pawn shop or Neiman Marcus? You created the marketplace where the dirty dude model worked best, but you no longer need them to sell things, just act as an onramp to your hobby game. Your own child is a delinquent and now that they've grown up, you're tired of them hanging out at your house, eating your food.
The game trade is headed in a direction that rewards the highest common denominator store because publishers are primarily interested in image, not sales volume from this increasingly insignificant sales channel. The ability of a store to sell lots of a product is literally none of a publishers business, other than knowing people come to buy it there. Supporting stores is just a marketing expense now, not a requirement for economic survival, and nobody wants to spend money on representing a poor image. It does not mean the high stores will get any sort of real sales benefit, any guarantee of meat on the bone, but when there are bones thrown, they'll get them first.
We are at the point where there is a push to transform the lowest common denominator stores into something more presentable, while rewarding highest common denominator stores with perks to help showcase publisher brands in these locations. Again, sales are irrelevant other than a marketing indicator. Is it financially feasible to transform your store? Even a very good store might spend thousands of dollars to attain what's considered great, but will it result in stronger sales? Not necessarily, and although that might be the store owners goal, it's not the goal of the publisher.
Will customers appreciate the change. It turns out the answer is sometimes. The stores that catered to the hardcore Magic crowd most effectively are not usually the stores being rewarded in this new paradigm. Some hardcore customers, catered to by the lowest common denominator stores, are angry and resentful that these "Magic light" stores are getting bones. Sure, the casual players at the high road stores enjoy tablecloths and shiny trash cans, but they're not buying more because of it.
There's two points I want to make about this mismatch between hardcore players and high road stores. First, when someone is truly angry about a business, it means they need them. They want it one way, but it's the other. When a grognardy Magic player is resentful a product or event is being held by the high road store, that's a sign that stores strategy is working. They are needed and it rankles the mercenary customer. This was once reserved for pre releases, where I would see the once a quarter customer scowl at me for existing. How dare you offer something exclusive I need, you sell out.
Second, if you're playing a game from a publisher who doesn't seem to align with your interests, maybe it's because you no longer align with theirs. Maybe your mercenary nature means you'll find your way in the marketplace regardless and you no longer need to be served to such a high degree. Perhaps you've graduated. Perhaps the penalizing of the low road store and reward of the high road is a signal to the customer base that it's time to grow up.
quarta-feira, 4 de março de 2020
Legion Vs. Cygnar + Musings On Oblivion And Riot Quest
Riot Quest
Since I've got young kids, there was no way I'm making it to Gencon. Luckily a co-worker was going and was willing to Ninja for me. As such I've got nearly all of Riot Quest Wave 1 and the Oblivion Box.
I was interested in Riot Quest, primarily because it appeared to be something that I could use to teach my daughter to play and hopefully get something we can enjoy. I also have some other friends who aren't really down to play big games like WM/HD but would be in on Riot Quest.
This was my daughter after our first game. I'm calling it a win.
I'm looking forward to getting a bunch of the new releases and my daughter is just as excited for the new models as well. It's actually been a lot of fun just playing with her, and I should be playing with actual adults this weekend. It's absolutely great!
Oblivion
I splurged and got myself the Oblivion box. People can joke about the $60 Hermit model, but I primarily wanted it for the campaign system, though I won't lie - the Hermit is stupidly powerful and I'm glad I own him.
That said there has been one thing I've loved about getting the box: It's just nice to have an old school PP book again. I started this game by going through and reading all the rules and story in MK1 books and I loved the way the books flowed. I'm a sucker for fluff and I've slowly been reading the book at night before bed and loving it.
Playing in an Oblivion Remix
So it's been almost two weeks since Oblivion theme remixes and the dynamic update dropped. It was a great time for me since it was right before my birthday weekend.
My group of friends is having a number of people get back into WMHD again, and my birthday present was my wife watching our kids while I had four of my friends over to play games all day while drinking beer and getting some tacos.
I got to play two games. First into Ossrum in Irregulars where my Lylyth1 Jank list got crushed down. My scenario play was utterly terrible and neither of us scored well. I got up on attrition, slowly where my Archangel was about to run the table, but Lylyth just got killed. Note to self: you need a lot more bodies than what I had on the table for this match to play the new scenarios!
The second list was supposed to be a toned down list to play into my friend Russ's Cygnar to help ease him back into the game. I went with this Twins list that I ended up seriously liking:
Legion
[Theme] Children of the Dragon
[Twins 2] Saeryn & Rhyas, Talons of Everblight [+24]
- Blightbringer [32]
- Zuriel [18]
Annyssa Ryvaal [8]
Blighted Nyss Shepherd [1]
Incubus (5) [0(6)]
The Forsaken [0(4)]
Blackfrost Shard [9]
Blighted Nyss Legionnaires (max) [13]
- Captain Farilor & Standard [0(5)]
Blighted Nyss Raptors (max) [18]
The next week Russ came back for another game, this time using mostly the same list but with Stryker1 as his caster instead of Maddox:
Cygnar
[Theme] Storm Division
[Stryker 1] Commander Coleman Stryker [+30]
- Stormwall [36]
- Squire [0(5)]
Gobber Tinker [2]
Journeyman Warcaster [4]
- Firefly [8]
Stormblade Captain [0(5)]
Storm Lances (max) [20]
Storm Lances (max) [20]
Stormblade Infantry [9]
- Stormblade Infantry Officer & Standard [0(5)]
- Stormblade Infantry Storm Gunner (3) [6]
I drop Fury and Iron Flesh, moving Fury over to the Raiders, trying to go after two of the Lances without Arcane Shield and who are outside of Stryker's feat on my right. Due to bad to hit rolls I only kill one of the Lances. I do however get to aim with one Deathstalker and kill two Stormblades. The other Deathstalker gets Wraithbane and is able to walk into the forest, kill two more Stormblades and swift hunter back behind the forest.
I missed playing with Deathstalkers. So. Much.
I also managed to get a Tentacle to hit one of the Storm Lances with Arcane shield on my left, which promptly pulled it out of command of the unit and out of Stryker's feat, allowing the maw to kill it.
I move up and feat, contesting the zone with two Raptors and a tentacle. I move my Neraph to be out of the Stormwall's threat.
Russ comes back hard. Due to poor positioning on my part he realizes the Stormwall is only in threat range of one Neraph. He elects to put shots into my objective and uses a Storm pod to clear out some of my Raiders. The Lances come in and between impacts and assaults and charges kills even more, leaving me with only 4 left plus the assassin. Russ gets my objective.
Russ kills one of my Raptors on the charge and while he misses my back Raptor I have to repo out of melee range which takes me out of the zone contesting.
He then jams in the Stormblades as best he can and mini-feats with Iron Zeal. He also toe's the squire in to the back of the zone.
Russ ends the turn up 2-0. Ouch!
Feats are off the table, it's time for me to hit back!
My Raiders and Assassin kill of two Storm Lances, leaving us in a bit of stalemate on my right zone, however his cav is now nicely jammed up.
On my left I throw my Raptors in to the Lances, killing two and jamming with my repo moves.
Fyanna moves up and cycles Fury and Wraithbane on a Neraph. My Naga moves up and puts Wraithbane up on the Deathstalker again and takes a shot into the squire putting damage on it. The sorceress moves up to get my beasts into free charge ranges and spray the Squire to kill it.
My Deathstalkers do a repeat of last turn. One aims and kills two, the other with Wraithbane moves up and kills two, using swift hunter to end on the flag.
The unbuffed Neraph on my left kills the Stormblade Officer and Flag without having to spend any fury. This clears the zone allowing me to score 2 points.
I then send in the Sacrificial Neraph to get some work on the Stormwall. Between the free charge, Fury, and Wraithbane it does over half the damage. Golab with Admonition positions in the forest to finish off the Stormwall next turn.
The turn ends 2-2.
At this point we forgot to take pictures for bottom of 3.
What happens is that Russ is forced to move the Stormwall into the zone to contest it and the Stormwall kills the Neraph that attacked it. He also drops a Stormpod to kill my Deathstalker on my flag.
Russ also kills two of my remaining Raptors that were jamming up his lances, but after landing a hit with his Jr. on the remaining Raptor contesting my left zone and failing to kill it, the Stormblade Captain charges...and misses the Raptor, causing Russ to fail to clear the zone.
On my right Russ's two Storm lances kill off the rest of my Raiders, but my Assassin is still alive.
Apologies For Lapses In Posts - Resolutions! (Monday Musings 72)
The reasons are that I enjoy blogging, and it'll "force" me to think about pertinent topics to write about, which can also help with figuring out streaming topics.
Resolutions can be kept if we troubleshoot and remove foreseeable obstacles that can get in the way of resolutions.
The major obstacle with weekly postings, is not having a set schedule to sit down and write. As I'm not working on Mondays, it makes the most sense, after exercising, chores, and breakfast, to write my post on Mondays.
There's a possibility that I'll be working on Mondays, so the other free day I have is Friday, as the alternative option. I didn't know that Blogspot can automate the exact time to post, so Friday is a perfectly viable alternative.
My other resolution, I've been rather consistent, which is getting up as soon as the alarm clock rings, which I was never able to do since day 1, until recently.
I changed my alarm clock to an earlier time (from 7:00 AM to 6:30 AM) which will give me the time to exercise before work. I noticed my mind shuts down around 8 PM (I'm not a night owl), so why not go to bed earlier and get up earlier in the morning, during the hours where I truly enjoy activities?
Thanks to my Twitch buddy, who inspired me to pop out of bed as soon as the alarm clock rings, I've been more or less successful in doing so. He mentioned that he'd get up at 5:00 AM, exercise and do his chores, and has a couple of hours before he heads off to work to have fun. I was very motivated, because I would like to get everything out of the way as soon as possible, so the rest of the day, after work, I'll have free time until heading to bed!
I was surprised because last week, I actually exercised before work (the first time in decades), and today, despite not streaming, I also exercised!
In other words, I've been streaming in part because it forced me to exercise, but now I have internal motivation to exercise thanks to my Twitch friend! I very much enjoy streaming, but I now have more freedom to chose to stream or not (in the past, the major reason to stream is because it forces me to exercise). If I get burned out from streaming (which can very well happen), I won't feel guilt that I'm not taking care of my health.
In this way, I can truly evaluate Twitch streaming as a hobby I want to keep or not, and if I no longer enjoy it, I can leave streaming behind without feeling remorse.
What are your resolutions, and have you kept them? If you have, I'd love to hear about your troubleshooting.
The How of Happiness Review
segunda-feira, 24 de fevereiro de 2020
Life, The Universe And Everything Symposium Preview
On February 13–15, 2020 I will once again be attending Life, The Universe and Everything Symposium (LTUE Website). There is always something for everyone who wants to be involved with being creative in multiple forms of communication media. This year is no exception. There are development tracks for developing skills writing books, screenplays, and theater, along with developing games, both electronic and tabletop. And if you're interested in creating art for any of these there are events for those.![]() |
| Howard Lyon |
![]() |
| Megan Lloyd |
![]() |
| Natasha Ence |
![]() |
| Kevin J. Anderson |
domingo, 23 de fevereiro de 2020
Storium Basics: Narration Basics
It's hard to spell out absolute basics for narration, and hard to really learn it without diving in and doing some narration. Unfortunately, there haven't really been good ways to get a beginner narrator game going the way we can for beginner players. But here, I'm going to try to give at least a general overview, and link to some articles that can develop things further. I highly encourage going through at least some of the articles I link to below, as there's just no way to adequately explore narration in one or more "basics" articles.
In Storium, a narrator is the person who is in charge of setting up the story, creating scenes, defining the story's focus, and in general guiding the story along. It is the narrator who creates the game's starting concept and advertises it to players, who selects the characters who will enter the story, and who creates the scenes and their challenges and outcomes to give players writing cues and situations to address.
Over the course of the game, the bulk of a narrator's time is going to be spent setting up scenes, and setting up challenges. Storium makes this pretty straightforward technically - it only takes a few clicks to set up a scene and start creating a challenge - but philosophically, it can be complex.
While scenes can be set up without challenges, the bulk of them in your average Storium game are going to focus on one or more challenges, and that's honestly how I encourage beginning narrators to think through their scenes: Focus on what challenges the scene is going to be about, and then work on the actual scene text. It may not work for everyone, but for me, I found starting out that starting with the mechanics and moving to the story text made my story text more focused.
So, let's start out with challenges.
I've always had a bit of a problem with that term: "Challenge." It puts Storium narrators in the mindset that these are things that are meant to "challenge" the players, in some sort of tactical sense. They aren't.
A challenge, in Storium, is simply a focal part of the story - a situation which can turn one way or another, and lead the story in different directions. One of those directions (the Strong outcome) feels better for the main characters or for the overall tale, and one (the Weak outcome) feels worse. There's nothing tactical about it. It's a writing cue.
When you set a challenge out, what you're saying is "this is the situation I want you to write about for this scene," or "this is the focus of this scene." Think about things in that mindset. You aren't trying to challenge the players - you're setting up something for their characters to deal with, but as far as the players go, you're just giving them something to write about.
A challenge can be one of two types: a Character, or an Obstacle. Mechanically, these work identically, and there's not much of a difference that I've found about them philosophically. I use the two types more to just keep things sorted than anything else. Conceptually, a character challenge is one that focuses on dealing with a specific character (or sometimes specific group), whether that be by communication or by combat or anything else. An obstacle challenge is one that focuses on other things that can get in the player characters' way or complicate the story, whether that be ancient artifacts, natural disasters, crumbling hallways, dangerous river crossings, corrupted magical energies, messy crime scenes, or anything else. Choosing the type of challenge you're making is more something to keep things sorted as you get a lot of cards, in case you want to pull out a challenge again later, and to highlight to players what the focus of a challenge is.
When you create a challenge, you're going to have to describe it. The challenge description will show up on the challenge card when players click on it in game. The purpose of the description is to give a basic overview of the challenge and help players understand its focus. If it is a character challenge, what is that character doing now, or what do they want now? How does the scene revolve around that? If is is an obstacle, what are its characteristics and how is it in the way? How does the scene revolve around that?
Once you've come up with a description (and, optionally, added a picture), you "Play" the challenge. This puts the challenge into the game, and brings up a new window where you'll set three things: points, strong outcome, and weak outcome. Let's take these in order.
The "challenge points" represent the number of cards which will need to be played on the challenge in order to complete it. One card equals one point, and a challenge can have anywhere from 1 to 9 points on it. So, if you set up a challenge with 4 points on it, the players will have to play 4 cards to complete it. This could come in various combinations - maybe 4 players each play 1 card, maybe 1 player plays 3 and another plays 1, maybe 2 players each play 2. What matters is that at the end, they've played 4 cards.
How do you determine how many points to put on a challenge? I think of two things.
First: the level of focus I want this situation to have. The more points a challenge has, the more moves it is likely to involve. If I set a challenge with a single point on it, no matter what, it will take only a single card to complete - which likely means it will be around for one move. If I set a challenge with three points, under default settings a player could complete it in one move, but it'd be a complex, multi-card move...and more than likely, it's instead going to be played across at least a couple different moves. If I set it as 4 points, under default settings, I'm guaranteeing that multiple moves will happen as no player can play that many cards in one move. And at 9? I've just defined it as a major, perhaps singular focus for the entire scene, a huge situation that will take many moves to get through and let players play a lot of their cards and explore a lot of elements of their characters.
The more points, then, the more focus the challenge receives in the story. If a challenge is important, if it provides a lot of opportunity for drama and interesting writing cues, and if the situation feels complex and fun to write about, add more points.
Second: the number of players I hope to see involved. I mentioned this a bit above, but by default, a player can play only 3 cards in a single move. What that means is that you, as narrator, can encourage challenges to involve more than one player - you just have to set the points at or above the upper limit of what a player can play. If you set a challenge at 1 or 2 points, you may end up with only one player playing it. If you set a challenge at 3 points, you're probably going to end up with more than one player playing on it - players, as they get more experienced, tend not to want to blow all their plays on one move. If you set a challenge at 4 points, you're guaranteeing that more than one player will play on it, because one player can only play 3 cards. And if you set a challenge at, say, 7 points? Now you need three players to complete it. All by default card settings, of course.
The more points you put on a challenge, the more players will play on it - so, if things feel like they should take more group involvement to complete, or feel like good opportunities for character interaction among the heroes, put more points on them.
Be aware, though, that you have a point limit: You cannot put more points on challenges in a scene than the number of cards your players can play in that scene (because, after all, we want challenges to be completed). So if, say, you have 4 players who can each play 3 cards, you will have a point limit of 12 for that scene. If you put down a challenge with 9 points, that means you only have 3 points left for any other challenges you want to do in a scene.
Except...in my experience, it's actually not a good idea to use all of your points. If you do that, and one player is away or unable to play for a bit, you get yourself into situations where challenges can't be completed and you have to work around it, which can be detrimental to the game. So, my personal rule is to hold back one player's worth of points and not use it. At a basic level, then, if I have 4 players who can play 3 cards each, I hold back 3 points that I won't use: So instead of thinking of my limit as 12, I think of it as 9. So if I spend 9 points on a single challenge, then, I won't use those remaining 3 points that scene.
Now, once players have completed a challenge, they get to write the ending...and for that, they look to the appropriate outcome.
The outcomes, then, are the potential endings for the challenge. There are lots of different ways narrators have found to write outcomes, and I'm not going to delve too deeply here - suffice to say that you will find many of those in the links below - but let's look at the basics of them, in any case.
Your outcomes are the challenge's potential endings, and they come in two flavors on the challenge card: Strong and Weak. In both cases, what you're writing is a quick look at how the challenge ends...an overview of the ending, with room for the player to make it fit his character's actions and explore the specifics on his own.
You don't want to spell out every little detail here - you just want to give the players what needs to be in the story for that ending, or how the situation goes more in general. You want to lay out what's important, what needs to be specified, and let them play with the rest.
Now, as I mentioned, there's two different outcome types you'll be writing here: Strong and Weak. In general, the difference is simple: Strong is better for the player characters and the story situation than Weak.
Storium suggests that in general you use the following interpretation:
- Strong outcomes mean that things worked out well for the players.
- Weak outcomes mean that the situation was overcome but at a cost or with an interesting complication.
This doesn't have to be what you do all the time, but it's a good philosophy to follow. Stories are most interesting when they keep moving forward, and they keep moving forward if, generally, the heroes are finding their way through situations. So, for Strong outcomes, I tend to write up outcome text that suggests an outright success for the heroes. Strong outcomes are pretty easy to understand how to write, honestly - I think we all get "the heroes succeed," right? The main thing to worry about for Strong outcomes is making sure to give them the proper amount of success - if it feels like something should be more involved and not fully resolved, that's fine - stories are full of really complex situations that can be resolved only in part. Just make sure your outcome text suggests that.
Weak outcomes can be more difficult to understand. For Weak outcomes, I tend to write outcome texts that still show the situation ending up resolved in their favor in some way, but with complications or costs, or that show the situation partially resolved in their favor but partially not.
This keeps the story moving forward, but perhaps even more importantly, it makes Weak outcomes often interesting for players - things they will intentionally decide to play towards at times. This is precisely what you want. You want your players to sometimes get Strong outcomes, and sometimes get Weak outcomes, and to be engaged with the story either way. An outright failure can be interesting, but more commonly, it serves as a brick wall that stops the story. If you outright fail to find evidence, well...where does the story go? But if you find the evidence just as the villain's big, burly henchman comes in to try to destroy it, and now you have to run away from him, well, that just added a new twist to the tale. Primarily use complications, costs, and partial successes, and you'll find that not only will the story move more smoothly, but the players will be interested in seeing the Weak outcomes come up.
The best experiences I've had in Storium, as a narrator, have been when I've played a challenge card into the game and players have looked at it and said, "Oh, wow - I hope this goes Weak!" I love that.
This is actually a technique that I've found in a lot of recent tabletop games. Fate uses it, and so does 13th Age, for two. You can find it under various names - Success at a Cost, Success with Complications, Fail Forward - but in all cases, the idea is that if the rolls don't go well for the players, the story should still move forward. In Storium, things are a little different - the players aren't depending on dice rolls or luck of any kind, and they may outright choose the Weak outcome - but the principle is similar: Keep the story moving forward, and keep things interesting for the players.
Again, this doesn't have to be your theme all the time. You can do a Weak outcome that's an outright failure on the part of the characters (note: the characters, not the players - never think of a Weak outcome as a failure on the part of the players, and never think of it as a punishment for them), and you can even do a Strong outcome that is a failure on the part of the characters, but a less painful one than the Weak. Those can and have worked for me. But by and large, stick to the philosophy above, and you'll have an easier time.
Now, there is one more outcome type: Uncertain. This comes up when the challenges comes out neutral, with equal numbers of Strength and Weakness cards played on it (or none of those, just neutral cards). When the Uncertain outcome comes up, it is your job to write an ending for the challenge, rather than the players'. This is easiest if you spend a little time thinking about things before the challenge starts, and leave yourself a little room "between" the Strong and Weak outcomes that you can use for your Uncertain, but that isn't the only way you can do them. Uncertain outcomes are a great chance to put in twists or send things a little sideways. For the most basic level, though...try to write something that feels "between" the Strong and Weak outcomes. You can get more advanced with these later and have more fun with them (see my article on Uncertain Outcomes for more on that!).
Now, it bears mentioning that you can have more than one challenge in a scene - either by playing more than one challenge to the game at once, or by playing a new challenge to the game as a continuation after the first challenge is resolved. The point limit I described above applies, but otherwise, it's up to you how you want to handle it. Just be careful: It's important not to have challenges that clash - if one outcome could prevent another simultaneous challenge from being resolved, they probably shouldn't be out there at the same time. And you don't want to undo the results of an earlier challenge, generally - so don't play a follow-up challenge whose outcomes will undo the outcome the players just got.
Once you've set up the challenges, then, it's time to write the scene's actual text. When you're doing that, use the challenges as your guide. What's going on? What's important? Those are the things you want to call out in the scene text. The challenge descriptions are the basics, but here is where you get to dress things up a little bit and make it actually exciting. If you've got a challenge about a charging army, for instance, you don't just write "the army charges" as your scene text. Delve into how it looks. How it sounds. How the army is equipped. How the player characters' allies, if any, are reacting.
What you're doing isn't just mechanically kicking things off, though that's part of it. What you're doing is setting the scene and giving the players things to use. This matters. Setting the scene with the enemy army charging, talking about how they're heavily armored and well-equipped, and how the players' allies look like they're about to break and run, is very different than if you describe the charge as that of a massive but untrained and poorly equipped rabble, and the players' allies as confident and heavily armored themselves. In the former, players are going to write moves about finding ways to blunt the dangerous charge or work around it and encouraging their side. In the latter, players are going to write about knocking back the charge and working with their confident allies. The tone of the challenge will be very different.
Your outcomes can affect this too, of course - I talk about this on the player side, but outcomes both describe the ending and set a range of things that can happen during the challenge - but your scene text is going to be a much larger impact.
Aside from just setting the tone, though, as I said...you're giving players things to use. Cues. A lot of narration is setting up cues. It's what you do in the challenge description, it's what you do in the outcomes, and it's what you do in the scene text. You leave openings for players to fill in the blanks. You give details that they can use to expand their storytelling. You lay the groundwork, the foundation, that they will build upon to complete the story of the challenge.
That's the basics of narration in a nutshell. Look...there's more, a lot more, but narration, at heart, is doing the above...over, and over, until the game is complete. A lot of the rest is style - there are a lot of different narration styles, a lot of different priorities, and a lot of different ways a narrator can make Storium work for them. I go into those a lot in the articles below.
Above all, remember: You are narrating to help the players draw out a story. It isn't your story...it's yours and the players'. Narrate to help them write. Narrate to make things interesting for them. Your job isn't to challenge them as players. Your job is to help them as writers. Have fun, be a fan of them, enjoy what they write, and look for ways to help them bring out the themes of their characters.
For more on narration, you can see the "Storium Narration" category overall, but here are some articles I particularly recommend:
- Narrator Types
- Story Scope
- Getting the Right Cast
- Setting up a Challenge
- The Player Characters are the Stars
- Have an Ending From the Start
- Use the Characters You Chose
- Collaboration - Narrator and Players as a Team
- Challenges that Matter
- Challenges: Simultaneous or Sequential?
- Weak Outcomes are Not Punishments
- Finishing a Challenge - Uncertain Results (Narrator Role)
- Maintaining the Pace
- Tell the Story of the Characters
quinta-feira, 20 de fevereiro de 2020
Download Hunting Simulator For PS4
Download Hunting Simulator For PS4
Features
- Experience the thrill of hunting with a campaign mode of 111 missions.
- Track 37 species each with realistic animal behaviours. Big and small game, predators, waterfowl…
- Explore 12 vast regions in Europe and North America and adapt to the elements with dynamic weather and day / night cycle.
- Choose from among 17 different firearms (rifles, bows and crossbows) and close to 50 essential accessories.
- Improve your shooting skills on the shooting range and track all sorts of prey in Free Hunt.
- Set off for adventure with three of your friends in multiplayer mode.
- Use a drone to explore your surroundings.
Hunting Simulator FOR PS4 | SIZE: 4.3GB
| # | SIZE | CLICK TO DOWNLOAD |
| 1 | 2GB | DOWNLOAD |
| 2 | 2GB | DOWNLOAD |
| 3 | 370MB | DOWNLOAD |
The World Is Safe... For Now
Today for the #2019gameaday challenge I decided to get an early game in because of our big move. I decided to play Elder Sign: Omens, basically Eldritch Horror mobile.
After getting reacquainted with the game I started to try and save the world from the ancient ones!
After a few rounds of success in closing gates the game started showing me it's TRUE colors and killing off my party!
(I failed to grab a screenshot of the first death but it was the guardian angel)
By the time all was said and done it was 3 dead and only Joe left. Surprisingly he pulled himself together and mustered up the courage to close the last gate himself and thus saving the world from ultimate doom and destruction!
I'm unsure if my score is any good to be honest as this is my first win. Let me know if you play this one and if my score is good or subpar at best.
As always, thank you for reading and don't forget to stop and smell the meeples! :)
-Tim
In Defense Of Metal Gear For The NES
But you know what... I have played the MSX version, I've played through it, I've tried to complete it, but imho, for all the supposed inadequacies of the NES version, I actually prefer it.
I prefer the fact that you have to infiltrate the base at the beginning, that is fantastic! People love MGS3 for that reason and I think it is a great touch. In the MSX version.... meh.... you start out in the base already.... not very sneaky.
And as to the fact you don't fight Metal Gear? SO WHAT? Why should you? I actually thought it stupid in MGS that you actually fought Metal Gear, it is meant to be a mobile device that fires nukes.... not something designed for combat with a single man. It stands to reason that it makes more sense to destroy the computer that controls the thing and also the man who is operating it.... which is exactly what you do in MG Nes.... Imagine someone having a fight against an ICBM machine, that would be dumb, it wouldn't be an opponent... it would not be geared up to fight you, and you would be able to take it out easily.... so that's why it doesn't matter that you don't fight Metal Gear.
And above all.....
The MUSIC in the NES version is absolutely superior! The MSX music is painful, dull and something to mute as soon as you can. The NES music is fantastic! It is exciting, it is tense, it is an amazing score and whoever produced it should be proud of themselves.
I could write more on this, but I need to prepare to offer Holy Mass, which isn't in 5 mins, but in 30 mins by the way. Priests should prepare for Holy Mass properly.
quarta-feira, 19 de fevereiro de 2020
MONTHLY 5 - JANUARY 2020
We've got something for everyone in the first collection of mini-reviews of the new decade. Survive an alien game show in the 2D platformer Hunter Hunted (1996, Sierra On-Line). Mourn the loss of Terry Jones by playing the action platformer Monty Python's Flying Circus: The Computer Game (1991, Virgin Mastertronic). Spill blood in the ultra-gory fantasy action-RPG Moonstone: A Hard Day's Knight (1992, Mindscape). Want more blood? Then play Quarantine (1994, GameTek), an ultra-violent action/driving game. Lastly, save your planet in the sci-fi puzzle game Syyrah: The Warp Hunter (1997 Sunsoft). Enjoy!
Read more »


























