Playing Fantasy for Real

[pemerton]

On the backstory thing: I’m not sure what you mean. Going back to previous examples.

Can Verly pull back her hood and reveal herself to Natan AND I say, yeah Natan is my ex-lover? It doesn’t seem so but I’m not sure.


Putting that aside and letting the GM choose the exact nature I can see something like the following. Consider two pickets

To apologise to my lover.

To apologise to my lover, Thruk the brash, for an unflattering poem I wrote about him.


In the first case it seems like I can provide some back story as and when. The fact the lover isn’t specified might mean you get to choose.

So I invoke my picklet. You say it’s Natan who is my lover. I then say, oh yeah I wrote an unflattering poem about him.

I was thinking about this more while out for a run.

I think my approach in our game was a misplay. Here's my reasoning:

A player can test Elan (once per scene) to introduce a new picklet. So you could have tested Elan to introduce the picklet Natan is my ex-lover, to whom I must apologise. And then whether you pass or fail, the picklet is established although how it plays out in the immediate situation will depend on whether the test succeeds or fails.

So when, instead of doing that, you particularise your picklet - Natan is my ex-lover - it should be the same. So when you failed the test, my correct play as GM is not to contradict your content but (for instance) to have Natan's household guard turn up on the scene to take you into custody (or whatever).

For my play to be correct, it has to play out something like this:

Player: Is Natan my ex-lover?

GM: Why are you asking me?

Player: It's all a lotus-induced haze. I remember Natan had something to do with it, but I'm not sure . . .

<Roll test, which fails>

GM: You're right that Natan was part of it, but not your love. He's the one that your lover, Ubalnu, left with after you upset her.​

I played it like the GM in that example, but without eliciting the appropriate context from you. So as I say a misplay, or at best very incomplete in attention to the fiction.

 

[pemerton]

On the backstory thing: I’m not sure what you mean. Going back to previous examples.

Can Verly pull back her hood and reveal herself to Natan AND I say, yeah Natan is my ex-lover? It doesn’t seem so but I’m not sure.

I think the answer is yes, as per my post just above. Whether we treat this as specifying picklet details, or a new picklet, doesn't matter because the procedure is the same either way.

 

[pemerton]

@thefutilist

Thinking this through a bit more: the ability to introduce new picklets really means that, once per scene, a player can frame their PC into some sort of relationship/goal/etc in that scene. But whether that is good or bad for them will depend on the Elan test.

Does that seem right to you?

 

[thefutilist]

@thefutilist

Thinking this through a bit more: the ability to introduce new picklets really means that, once per scene, a player can frame their PC into some sort of relationship/goal/etc in that scene. But whether that is good or bad for them will depend on the Elan test.

Does that seem right to you?

Yes.

 

[GMMichael]

Interesting landing page. Doesn’t give much away about the game itself except that it is designed to “teach game mastering skills”

Let me know how that goes

So, @pemerton , did you learn some game-mastering skills?

Fantasy for Real sounds like just the kind of rules-light game I'd love (if I didn't already have one). But I am curious about that description; how does the game teach GMing?

So far, I see these possible teaching points:

• Sharing setting details (required) is something that could possibly be overlooked by GMs, although there's something to be said for PCs discovering some details in-game.
• Rolling for PCs sounds like a good way to break some bad habits of experienced GMs.
• Rolling the pickle looks like a good creative exercise, for those used to having a module tell them what the pickle is.

While useful/refreshing, I wouldn't call the above "teaching," exactly.

 

[Old Fezziwig]

Fantasy for Real sounds like just the kind of rules-light game I'd love (if I didn't already have one). But I am curious about that description; how does the game teach GMing?

Ron Edwards talks about his aims in the design here under GM Skills. I think the framing there is more helpful than the blurb for the PDF is.

 

[pemerton]

So, @pemerton , did you learn some game-mastering skills?

<snip>
While useful/refreshing, I wouldn't call the above "teaching," exactly.

I'm not sure if you've read the rules. The things you mention aren't the teaching points. The emphasis of the rules, for GMs, is on managing situation and incorporating the players' contributions.

And yes, I did find it helpful. As per my post #6 above, I think GMing Fantasy For Real was a good lead-up to GMing Mythic Bastionland, which is not quite as clear in structure and instructions.

 

[soviet]

I thought this thread was going to be like that Tom Hanks movie, with tales of going down into the steam tunnels with home-made armour