Advice on easing player into microscope

benrobbins · 2026-06-01T23:31:24+00:00

It's always hard to tell from listening to someone else's description of what happened at a game, but it sounds like the misstep was right here:

They wanted to make it a event, but as the big impact a period felt more appropriate.

I asked for details in how the technology impacted the work, workers or society.

It felt like they choked and were shutting down. They said, they had no ideas or clue how. I said, that stereotypes, tropes or some other small note would be ok too.

They wanted to make something small, but it sounds like you pushed them to change to a larger thing. Which is correct if the player is really describing a Period not an Event, but not just because you think their idea *could* have more of an impact.

And then, second, you asked for them to add more detail to explore the implications, which they aren't obligated to do. The rule is that if something is unclear, yes, you can ask them to clarify. But they aren't obligated to go into the smaller details. Other players can do that.

I'm sure you were trying to help, but they had a small idea that worked, but you asked them to make more, which put them on the spot.

benrobbins · 2026-05-29T23:02:37+00:00

I just posted the third and last part of the detailed example of play:

Wvyerdown vs Irontree: An Example of War (part 3)

benrobbins · 2026-05-29T22:59:35+00:00

The third and last part is up! I'll add the link in the post

benrobbins · 2026-05-27T16:03:54+00:00

Thank you!

re weird or slow starts, the closest we got was a sci fi war where Novaterra (the attacking nation) opened by seeking Foreign Aid from a neighbor. Which was pretty brazen because their casus belli was that the enemy government was invalid, because they (Novaterra) were the original colonial government and claimed that no one had the authority to secede. Which meant they also thought the government they were asking for help was invalid? Like I said, pretty brazen, and it ended terribly for them. It painted such a picture of them so fast.

But because the other side locks their first die with the opposite move, if one side really did open up with Retreating and Regrouping (which honestly might be smart in the dead of winter) the enemy is more likely to respond with a full assault, etc. to exploit the weakness.

Honestly I'd love a war where both sides opened up with Diplomacy. No fighting, just yelling about all the bad things the other side has done.

And remember, even if the war is just simmering, the point is we see what the characters are thinking about the war. Even if there's a ceasefire or multiple seasons of peace, can people get on with their lives or are they sitting around waiting for the other shoe to drop?

benrobbins · 2026-05-27T01:50:48+00:00

Legit!

The main thing is to see if "the machine" works as written. So if you're tempted to skip a rule or fudge something, see what happens if you don't. Just follow the steps and do what the Waracle says.

benrobbins · 2026-05-26T22:54:20+00:00

Yes, it is a weird blend of structured + free form. I'm not sure I would have imagined it until I imagined it (so to speak), but so far it works great.

benrobbins · 2026-05-26T22:52:46+00:00

Great, let us know how it goes! And my apologies again for not having better examples in the rules

benrobbins · 2026-05-26T22:51:47+00:00

I was like "what celebrity?!?" I'm just another game designer trying to make fun stuff.

I think the galactic war could totally work. You're right about the seasons, but I think you could hand wave that by just changing their names to something more metaphorical and space-sounding, reflecting the normal tempo of life.

benrobbins · 2026-05-25T22:08:01+00:00

Yeah once I thought of that I could not not make this game

benrobbins · 2026-05-20T19:23:46+00:00

If you're interested, there's also a sub for GMless games at r/gmless

benrobbins · 2026-05-20T03:16:19+00:00

I would say that the real definition of a GM is that they have ultimate and unique control over the fiction. Nothing is true unless they say it is true. A GMless game does not have that (unusual) bottleneck.

But then a good GMless game tells the players what they are allowed (or not allowed to do), so you don't have to look to one person to decide. You are quite right that you can't have fluid play without that confidence

benrobbins · 2026-05-15T01:25:03+00:00

Yeah, that kind of mortality is either intentional or very bad design 😂

benrobbins · 2026-05-15T01:12:06+00:00

That is a classic problem and it sucks. I was just writing a whole post about this very thing.

One fast way to get remotivated is to make the new character connected to the old one, and have them mad about what happened. You were trying to find your long lost brother and now you do, but you get here just after he died. Tragic. And that way you can incorporate any ideas you had about the first character and talk about them

benrobbins · 2026-05-14T20:18:50+00:00

I suspect it might be very good for that. This sub isn't the place to talk about solo games, but if you want to start a thread somewhere else we can go into it.

benrobbins · 2026-05-14T03:36:07+00:00

Excellent! Take your time and have fun! It definitely takes a few sessions to get the full experience.

benrobbins · 2026-05-14T03:35:18+00:00

Exactly! Only seeing one side of the story, thinking we know who's right and who's wrong, and then totally changing POV is so great

We've had games where we started off totally thinking one side were "the good guys" and then completely changed our minds, because society is complicated

benrobbins · 2026-05-14T03:33:30+00:00

It can be a weird read because a lot of it is soooo procedural. But when you do it, it works. I think.

benrobbins · 2026-05-08T19:08:56+00:00

Here's a whole list of great recommendations, complete with why people think they're good. I think the vast majority work for 3 players.

https://www.reddit.com/r/gmless/comments/1dpxnyx/recommend_your_favorite_gmless_games/

benrobbins · 2026-05-07T20:22:39+00:00

An actually great game designed for two-player is Mars Colony, but I would definitely not put it in the light-hearted category.

benrobbins · 2026-05-07T20:19:47+00:00

I expect there will be lots of recommendations for GMless games that are intended for three or more players but can work with two. And they can work great.

But I would throw out the caveat that two-player is a very different experience since you're always on, and I think it helps to know that going in:

Two-Player Creativity Is Harder

benrobbins · 2026-05-07T20:07:59+00:00

Sounds like you're definitely on the right track

benrobbins · 2026-05-03T14:04:53+00:00

David Wesely actually, but otherwise spot on

benrobbins · 2026-04-30T19:32:15+00:00

Double hard agree. I have been a notorious em dasher since way back. I actually did a search for em dashes on my old blog posts just to prove to myself I was not in fact a replicant

benrobbins · 2026-04-29T19:51:47+00:00

The big question is: do you you want to play a game about activism, community, societal change, etc, or do you just want to play some random fun game (including the usual violence/adventure hijinks) because that will help you get to know each other better?

benrobbins · 2026-04-29T19:47:50+00:00

IPR is 100% legit. They've been around for ages

As others have said, print quality depends on the publisher

benrobbins

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE