[Game Chef] House of Masks?
I think I’ve settled on an idea for Game Chef. It uses the Horstman and Shoemaker sets of art, which also are apparently the most popular sets so far. Hopefully the crazy gameplay of my game will set it apart from everyone else with the same art. I feel like last year my game got lost in a shuffle of similar games, and fear this might happen again.
Single Sentence summary: Six players switch in and out tag-team style to play three predefined characters in a randomized, complex web of intrigue and sorcery.
Rough outline: Three predefined characters (depicted by Horstman) are all the PCs there are (some minor NPCs are possible, but unimportant). Players play either the “real world” or “spirit world” form of the character, and can take control of the PC under specific conditions. Each player randomly draws a card with a goal on it, which will likely conflict with the other aspect of their character and with the other PCs. There are three decks of goals (on for each character) with three goals in each deck (one for each of Shoemaker’s hand photos, which are symbolic).
Yes, initial setup is pretty constrained, but once you get to actual play the players have a lot more freedom to act. I think of this as closer to a parlor larp played at tabletop than I do a normal tabletop game.
The setting is a high fantasy / mythical kingdom. The God-King Castor rules from a castle where the spirit realm and physical realm touch, allowing for powerful magics to happen and for a person’s spirit form to manifest as a separate personality. On the eve of Castor’s wedding to the foreign princess Inanna, a strange peasant woman comes knocking on his door…
Characters:
The first name is that of the character’s physical form, the second is the name of their spirit form.
Thalia / Melpomone: A peasant witch, who claims to have returned from the dead. (Coelacanths are symbolic of return from the dead and a connection to the past.) If Thalia ever expresses sadness or regret, Melpomene takes control. If Melpomene ever expresses joy, victory or satisfaction, Thalia switches in.
Goals:
KEY: Wishes to steal Castor’s magical scepter and gain his magic power.
NECKLACE: Wishes to acquire wealth and great power, possibly by marrying Castor.
BLOOD: Wishes to get revenge on Inanna, whose nation’s armies destroyed her home village.
Castor / Pollux: The God-King of the nation, Castor is suave and cool. His spirit form is bestial, crude, violent and easily angered, though. Castor controls a vast kingdom through his mighty armies and sorcerous power. He has just ended a long war against Inanna’s nation, which he won. Marrying Inanna will mark the coming of peace between their two lands. When Castor expresses anger or frustration, Pollux takes control. When Pollux shows restraint, calculation or deception, Castor takes control.
Goals:
KEY: Wishes to strip Thalia of her powers so that he can return from the dead, as she did, and therefore rule his kingdom forever.
NECKLACE: Has become infatuated with Thalia, and therefore wishes her to love and/or marry him.
BLOOD: He wishes to kill Inanna, and be free of her scheming and her politicking.
Inanna / Kur: A foreign born princess and skilled sorceress. She is currently betrothed to King Castor, though it is a political marriage rather than one of love. Their marriage will end a long war between their two nations. Inanna is smart and cunning, but she relies on her spirit form for deception. If Inanna ever tells a lie or deceives another character, the serpent Kur takes control. If Kur ever admits something truthful, Inanna takes control.
Goals:
KEY: She really does love Castor, jealously guards him, and wishes to keep this dirty peasant girl away from him.
NECKLACE: She wishes to cast out Castor and rule this land herself.
BLOOD: Beneath her cool exterior, Inanna is cruel and bloodthirsty. She does not care what happens (even her own death) so long as it ends in bloodshed, murder and violence.
At the end of a scene, if a player sat out the entire scene, they switch in and the other player switches out. A player can claim “you just triggered a switch in who controls”. If the player currently in agrees, then they switch. If the player currently in disagrees, the two other players currently switched out decide if the in-player actually did trigger a switch or not.
Conflicts:
When one player says they are trying to do something and another player objects, you have a conflict. Generally, these conflicts take place between the switche din players, though I could see conflicts happening between two aspects of the same character. But since I don’t think a conflict will ever involve multiple switched-out players, you only ever have two or three participants in a conflict.
Determine if the other switched-in player also wishes to participate in the conflict, if applicable.
Two player conflicts:
The objecting player declares a set of outcomes, without stating who gets which outcome. They can say “one of us gets the scepter, and the other one escapes unharmed” for example. The other player in the conflict decides who gets which outcome. So in that example, they could decide that they want the scepter and will take the punishment, or they might prefer to remain uninjured.
This should encourage the framer of stakes to set ones that are each a mixed bag, or that tempt their opponent into abandoning their current goal for the other option in the conflict. I don’t know how this will work out in play yet, though. Playtesting is required.
Three person conflicts:
Works sort of like two person conflicts, but with some intermediate steps. 1) Objector establishes two sets of outcomes. 2) Tertiary player establishes a third outcome. 3) the original acting player chooses one of the outcomes for their own character. 4) Tertiary player chooses one outcome for their character. 5) Objecting player suffers from the third outcome.
Actually, that might not work, now that I think about it. It allows the tertiary player to really screw over the objector player. Maybe all conflicts must have two sides (though a side might have multiple characters)?
Boons:
There are two boon cards (the other two images by Horstman). The happy trees and clouds card is the Boon of Beginnings. (Starts with Melpomene?) Whoever has that card at the start of a scene gets the power to frame the scene: establish location, time frame and who is initially present. They then hand the Boon off to one of the switched out characters.
The other card, with the scary lightning and nautilus shells, is the Boon of Endings. (Starts with Kur?) The holder of this card can ask for a scene to end at any time they think is appropriate, though the scene does not actually end unless two other players (either in or out players) agree to end the scene. The holder of the Boon then hands it to one of the players who will be out in the next scene
Boons can also be used to disagree to a set of stakes that a player sets. When an objecting player declares two possible outcomes for a conflict, the acting player can hand them either of the Boon cards to instead set their own set of outcomes. The original objector player then gets to choose which outcome happens to them and which happens to the other character.
When the acting player gives a Boon to reject stakes, the objecting player cannot reject the stakes in turn, as that’d lead to a potential stalemate/infinite loop, which is bad.
One last bit: Boons can be used out of conflict to activate sorcerous power. You must have a Boon to use your magical skills, and must give the Boon to one of the players being affected by your display of sorcerous might. You then declare what happens, though characters can still declare a conflict to resist the effects of your sorcery.
NPCs:
Occasionally, but rarely, someone might want an NPC involved in a scene. They should ask any players currently sitting out if they wish to play them. Do we need anything else here?
Concerns and Unresolved Questions:
Three party and greater conflicts.
Groups smaller than or larger than six players. Some alternate set of rules for one person playing both aspects? I’ll see what I can think of, but I think that the Game Chef version of the game might just require six people.
More defined rules for magic? Less defined rules for magic? Does it need a separate set of rules?
NPCs? Anything need to go here? Carrot for playing them? Or would it be better making them almost non-entities, as it is currently?
Current goals sufficiently conflict-y, varied and interesting to play out?
Current switching rules favoring one aspect over another? Will any of this work?
Will the conflict rules work at all? Will they prevent the game from building to a satisfying climax?
Do we need a better identifier of who is in or out at a given moment? Should the last two Horstman pictures be used for in/out identifiers? I like the Boon system, but I’m not sure it actually draws on the images that much.
Is there anything else I’m missing from this game? Some part that really needs to be in there?
I need a better title, too, as that's the sort of thing i'm bad at coming up with.
Single Sentence summary: Six players switch in and out tag-team style to play three predefined characters in a randomized, complex web of intrigue and sorcery.
Rough outline: Three predefined characters (depicted by Horstman) are all the PCs there are (some minor NPCs are possible, but unimportant). Players play either the “real world” or “spirit world” form of the character, and can take control of the PC under specific conditions. Each player randomly draws a card with a goal on it, which will likely conflict with the other aspect of their character and with the other PCs. There are three decks of goals (on for each character) with three goals in each deck (one for each of Shoemaker’s hand photos, which are symbolic).
Yes, initial setup is pretty constrained, but once you get to actual play the players have a lot more freedom to act. I think of this as closer to a parlor larp played at tabletop than I do a normal tabletop game.
The setting is a high fantasy / mythical kingdom. The God-King Castor rules from a castle where the spirit realm and physical realm touch, allowing for powerful magics to happen and for a person’s spirit form to manifest as a separate personality. On the eve of Castor’s wedding to the foreign princess Inanna, a strange peasant woman comes knocking on his door…
Characters:
The first name is that of the character’s physical form, the second is the name of their spirit form.
Thalia / Melpomone: A peasant witch, who claims to have returned from the dead. (Coelacanths are symbolic of return from the dead and a connection to the past.) If Thalia ever expresses sadness or regret, Melpomene takes control. If Melpomene ever expresses joy, victory or satisfaction, Thalia switches in.
Goals:
KEY: Wishes to steal Castor’s magical scepter and gain his magic power.
NECKLACE: Wishes to acquire wealth and great power, possibly by marrying Castor.
BLOOD: Wishes to get revenge on Inanna, whose nation’s armies destroyed her home village.
Castor / Pollux: The God-King of the nation, Castor is suave and cool. His spirit form is bestial, crude, violent and easily angered, though. Castor controls a vast kingdom through his mighty armies and sorcerous power. He has just ended a long war against Inanna’s nation, which he won. Marrying Inanna will mark the coming of peace between their two lands. When Castor expresses anger or frustration, Pollux takes control. When Pollux shows restraint, calculation or deception, Castor takes control.
Goals:
KEY: Wishes to strip Thalia of her powers so that he can return from the dead, as she did, and therefore rule his kingdom forever.
NECKLACE: Has become infatuated with Thalia, and therefore wishes her to love and/or marry him.
BLOOD: He wishes to kill Inanna, and be free of her scheming and her politicking.
Inanna / Kur: A foreign born princess and skilled sorceress. She is currently betrothed to King Castor, though it is a political marriage rather than one of love. Their marriage will end a long war between their two nations. Inanna is smart and cunning, but she relies on her spirit form for deception. If Inanna ever tells a lie or deceives another character, the serpent Kur takes control. If Kur ever admits something truthful, Inanna takes control.
Goals:
KEY: She really does love Castor, jealously guards him, and wishes to keep this dirty peasant girl away from him.
NECKLACE: She wishes to cast out Castor and rule this land herself.
BLOOD: Beneath her cool exterior, Inanna is cruel and bloodthirsty. She does not care what happens (even her own death) so long as it ends in bloodshed, murder and violence.
At the end of a scene, if a player sat out the entire scene, they switch in and the other player switches out. A player can claim “you just triggered a switch in who controls”. If the player currently in agrees, then they switch. If the player currently in disagrees, the two other players currently switched out decide if the in-player actually did trigger a switch or not.
Conflicts:
When one player says they are trying to do something and another player objects, you have a conflict. Generally, these conflicts take place between the switche din players, though I could see conflicts happening between two aspects of the same character. But since I don’t think a conflict will ever involve multiple switched-out players, you only ever have two or three participants in a conflict.
Determine if the other switched-in player also wishes to participate in the conflict, if applicable.
Two player conflicts:
The objecting player declares a set of outcomes, without stating who gets which outcome. They can say “one of us gets the scepter, and the other one escapes unharmed” for example. The other player in the conflict decides who gets which outcome. So in that example, they could decide that they want the scepter and will take the punishment, or they might prefer to remain uninjured.
This should encourage the framer of stakes to set ones that are each a mixed bag, or that tempt their opponent into abandoning their current goal for the other option in the conflict. I don’t know how this will work out in play yet, though. Playtesting is required.
Three person conflicts:
Works sort of like two person conflicts, but with some intermediate steps. 1) Objector establishes two sets of outcomes. 2) Tertiary player establishes a third outcome. 3) the original acting player chooses one of the outcomes for their own character. 4) Tertiary player chooses one outcome for their character. 5) Objecting player suffers from the third outcome.
Actually, that might not work, now that I think about it. It allows the tertiary player to really screw over the objector player. Maybe all conflicts must have two sides (though a side might have multiple characters)?
Boons:
There are two boon cards (the other two images by Horstman). The happy trees and clouds card is the Boon of Beginnings. (Starts with Melpomene?) Whoever has that card at the start of a scene gets the power to frame the scene: establish location, time frame and who is initially present. They then hand the Boon off to one of the switched out characters.
The other card, with the scary lightning and nautilus shells, is the Boon of Endings. (Starts with Kur?) The holder of this card can ask for a scene to end at any time they think is appropriate, though the scene does not actually end unless two other players (either in or out players) agree to end the scene. The holder of the Boon then hands it to one of the players who will be out in the next scene
Boons can also be used to disagree to a set of stakes that a player sets. When an objecting player declares two possible outcomes for a conflict, the acting player can hand them either of the Boon cards to instead set their own set of outcomes. The original objector player then gets to choose which outcome happens to them and which happens to the other character.
When the acting player gives a Boon to reject stakes, the objecting player cannot reject the stakes in turn, as that’d lead to a potential stalemate/infinite loop, which is bad.
One last bit: Boons can be used out of conflict to activate sorcerous power. You must have a Boon to use your magical skills, and must give the Boon to one of the players being affected by your display of sorcerous might. You then declare what happens, though characters can still declare a conflict to resist the effects of your sorcery.
NPCs:
Occasionally, but rarely, someone might want an NPC involved in a scene. They should ask any players currently sitting out if they wish to play them. Do we need anything else here?
Concerns and Unresolved Questions:
Three party and greater conflicts.
Groups smaller than or larger than six players. Some alternate set of rules for one person playing both aspects? I’ll see what I can think of, but I think that the Game Chef version of the game might just require six people.
More defined rules for magic? Less defined rules for magic? Does it need a separate set of rules?
NPCs? Anything need to go here? Carrot for playing them? Or would it be better making them almost non-entities, as it is currently?
Current goals sufficiently conflict-y, varied and interesting to play out?
Current switching rules favoring one aspect over another? Will any of this work?
Will the conflict rules work at all? Will they prevent the game from building to a satisfying climax?
Do we need a better identifier of who is in or out at a given moment? Should the last two Horstman pictures be used for in/out identifiers? I like the Boon system, but I’m not sure it actually draws on the images that much.
Is there anything else I’m missing from this game? Some part that really needs to be in there?
I need a better title, too, as that's the sort of thing i'm bad at coming up with.