Saturday I’d have anywhere from 4-6 hours, Sunday is completely free and I can’t do Wednesday. Provided I’m getting the time right, of course.
1 Like
For Australian (AEST) people it would be 10am the following day.
Fine for me, being an Aussie, as long as I don’t sleep in…
My best times are Saturday and Fridays. Anytime after 5:00 pm EST works for me.
weekends work as well for me (EST)
Let’s meet this weekend Saturday 8pm EST in Purgatorio so we can talk about what we’d like to do. I’d say 3-4 hour sessions is what we’d be aiming for. I want to discuss what system we’re wanting to try, how frequently we’d have sessions, and just generally talk about expectations for the game. It’s kinda like a session zero. I look forward to seeing you all there
1 Like
Sounds good to me. I have been reading the Blade in Dark rules slowly, and I do think it is a great system for intrigue and deception- which is perfect for a Umineko-esque game.
1 Like
Any of you lovely people interested in 8pm EST on Saturdays? @King_Titanite_XV @Rena-Ryuugu @VyseGolbez @akafa123 @pictoshark
1 Like
That’s 2 am for me, so no. But don’t let that stop you, I’m currently in another campaign, so I don’t know if I’d want to start a different one anyway.
That time thingy is hard. It’s 0:07 in my country, so how much hours is the difference?
You’re four hours behind me, so it would be 6am for you. If we need to bump the time back a couple hours to accommodate people I’m all for it.
That’s unfortunate, I’m hoping we’ll have people willing to run at other times.
6 am is too early for me, I always sleep at that time hehe…
Reminder:
Meeting at 8pm EST Saturday (today) to talk about what we want to organize. I hope to see all of you there~
1 Like
I’m interested! And it’s 8 PM, so literally perfect timing haha.
FYI: don’t make me a GM unless you want everyone to die.
Good discussion today guys, it’s looking like we’ve got a good group for some mystery solving and social intrigue.
We’ve decided we’re going to try some 07th themed mysteries, most likely in episodic format. I will be GMing to begin with starting next week (hopefully), and now that we have a better idea of what we want to do i’m going to hunt down a system that works for what we want.
For those of you who weren’t there, we’re looking at playing an improv mystery where we create red truths as we go and try to figure it all out at the end, maybe in a Ep4 Tea Party style climax where we figure out what the truth really is. In order to do this I think hacking an existing system will suit our purposes. So far the most relevant systems are;
InSpectres
Blades In The Dark
OVA
Dogs in the Vineyard
and all of the Gumshoe systems
From what I’ve read of Gumshoe it seems to be the best fit, the part I’m stuck on is mechanizing Red truths into the game. We may have to just agree on Red Truths to use as a group rather than properly mechanizing it but if anyone has any fun ideas feel free to throw them into the mix.
I’m going to work on creating a hack for Gumshoe and see what i can come up with, I should have something in a couple of days to share with you all.
Edit: Alright, I have a thing. Give me some feedback everyone.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3cFPF2uUULbRkNKaGJmRmctLW8
3 Likes
Okay went through the system and here are my thoughts :
First, the core concept is solid- that is the three phases and the dice rolling mechanic. However some of the details bother me
-
Skill system: I think that there is a bit of overlap between leadership and manipulation. In particular, it is somewhat difficult to differentiate pursuasion to say manipulation in certain instances. This isn’t a huge problem, but I guess in game there will be instances of judging this.
-
The Well of Truth: I like this system well enough, in particular we can only establish truths on sixes. In any case, I think the only thing we have to be careful of is to not write boring truths :P. Also I am not sure if I am reading this correctly, but effectively each player in our game will have 12 points of truth? I feel like that is way too many points for each individual player. I suppose 12 points for the entire game is fair, but definitely not per session.
-
The networking phase: I like this idea, but you should probably update the document and put the mechanical details for those who aren’t famililar with blades of dark.
-
Judgement-calling phase: I am not famililar with Fiasco so could you explain how that end game works? In any case, I think the best way to do this is for each player to present a theory based on the red truths presented. We then all vote for which theory makes the most sense/is the most engaging. That player “wins” in that sense. As for who keeps tracks of the truth, I have two ideas :
-
Each player has access to only the red truths they established- ie: we pm the GM our red truths. This allows for a bit of manipulative play in the judgement-calling phase. That said I don’t really like the idea of making the final phase’s competition based on missing information, but it is there if people want that kind of thing
-
This idea I am more fond of- All players have access to all red truths- we just keep a list in one of the roll 20 hand outs. During the Judgement calling phase, we spend time establishing our blue truth and we simply vote on the best one.
1 Like
All of the phase-specific is TBD (to be determined) I’m still working it out. I’m glad you like most of the core stuff.
-
yeah I’m not a big fan of skills to begin with, Im wondering if I should get more or less specific with the titles, or if I should do away with them entirely and just have a ‘detective rank’ that goes up or down depending on how many clues you have and a ‘social rank’ that goes up or down depending on how many people want to cooperate with you.
-
sorry I’ll clarify that when I get the chance, I’m thinking one big we’ll that everyone can draw from, maybe there’s a voting system to make sure everyone’s on board with a given truth? And I’m thinking 3*x players per mystery, so whether it’s one or two or three sessions you’ll have a decent number of truths (more if you roll well)
-
still working it out, the basic idea is to have a rating that shows your relationship with a person that can go from -3 (actively works to sabotage the case) to +3 (they trust you implicitly) and these ratings can change through the game
-
I’d like to have some more randomness to add some drama to the ending (it is the climax after all) but voting on a certain theory is a quick and easy way to resolve things.
Also I am much more in favour of the second one. Even if it gets competitive it will just lead to problems if people are hiding information from each other.
Oh and if it looks like there’s a distinct lack of Umineko terminology in the document, it’s because I’m trying to keep it as non-Umineko-reader friendly as possible. That way we can play it with people who haven’t read Chiru and I can share it with my friends outside of the fandom to see how they find it. An outsider’s perspective will help me make it easier to play.
Thanks for the feedback! We should have something workable by Sunday, and we’ll be able to try out the game after the Higanbana Bookclub podcast which I will be taking part in, I hope to see you all there!
EDIT; Alright, I’m happy to meet tomorrow at the usual time and give what i’ve got a little playtest. I can not promise the game will work properly so full disclosure on that part. I’ve got a oneshot set up that might do the trick but I wouldn’t expect the game to go longer than 2 hours, and it might be cut short due to podcast recording depending on how scheduling lines up. I hope to see you guys there so we can start working on this game in earnest!
Of course the other option would be to try every other week, so that i have time to get more development done. Let me know if you can make it and we’ll see what ends up happening.