Land of Nodd is a game being developed by Paul Tarussov [http://ihousenews.pbwiki.com/f/Land+of+Nodd.pdf]. Paul was in Edinburgh during August and he had a short playtest with Per Fischer and me.
Here's my feedback on it, amended from my e-mail to Paul and Per, I guess I'm putting it here as a record of play and to see if anyone has any comments on it.
-----
The Game Itself, Actual Play
World Creation
We created a pretty interesting world with the set-up. I thought this was fine. More preparation can be a frustration for me, as I prefer the detail to be created during play, or between sessions, once we have something to work with. I liked the statements from the other players and didn't feel any need to "buy off" something with one of my coins, though I liked that I had the option.
Character Creation
Again I liked this. I thought the characters were interesting and in broad enough strokes that detail could be added as and when necessary. I liked the Desire, Antagonist and Relationship, though more on those later.
We had: Pierre, the composer; Friedrich, the mathematician; Emile, the spy. All good.
Turn 1: Per plays Emile and Paul is the GM, Gregor is the Observer.
Emile is awoken by his lover Ingrid and after some back and forth he seeks to leave the safe house in Berlin against Ingrid's wishes. At that point I called "contest" and we drew cards and threw in risks. The outcome was that Emile escaped (goal) but with a broken leg, having been exposed as a spy and having lost Ingrid's trust. You could say Emile was unlucky. He left his bible behing and it got added by Per as a story element.
Turn 2: Gregor GMed a scene for Pierre, Per is the observer.
Pierre is called to the Parisian School of Music, as he enters Felini, his antagonist is finishing playing the second Aria of Pierre's Mass for Napoleon. Emile's bible lies on the organ top beneath a marble-based golden imperial eagle. Felini is using the mathematics in Emile's bible to translate the powerful message contained in the notes of the music and he wishes to determine their purpose. Felini goads Pierre who protests his innoncence. Per calls "contest". The outcome was that Pierre gains possession of Emile's bible (goal). However, he plays a fuller version of the Mass to Felini, reveals the intent of the piece is to kill Bonaparte and is condemned as a traitor by Felini. Pierre is arrested and sent to Marseille.
Turn 3: Paul GMed a scene for Friedrich, Per is the observer.
Josephine lies on the bed entranced by Friedrich's playing of Tocata and Fugue. As she feels a shiver of peace run through her Friedrich stops playing. He implores her to leave the Emperor and flee with him to the East, through Germany and Prussia. She refuses and he insists again. Per calls "contest". The outcome is that Josephine flees Paris enthralled by Friedrich (goal), Friedrich remembers what effect a particular part of the music has, but having been witnessed leaving Paris by a Priest who reports his treachery to Bonaparte.
Turn 4: Per plays Emile in a scene GM'd by Gregor, Paul is the observer.
Emile is limping, and in the garb of a high priest in France. Bonaparte lies gravely ill in Paris and the New Republic's Committee have appointed Emile to catch the traitor. Before him in a cell in the prison is Felini, his hand's broken, his face a mess but with his hearing perfectly intact. Felini will not reveal the actual composer of the Mass, claiming it is his own work, nor will he reveal where Emile's bible is. The scene continues on until Emile tortures Felini repeatedlly. Eventually, as no contest looks like being called, I judge that Felini breaks. He reveals the name of Pierre, and still no contest. So, Emile leaves the prison to find all his guards gone and from a carriage steps his antagonist Hans Weber, spirited her by mathematicians in Leipzig. He confronts Emile and offers a trade: Felini for Josephine (who he may or may not be able to deliver). Emile agrees and since no contest has been called we close the scene.
Turn 5: Gregor plays Friedrich in a scene GMed by Per, Paul is the observer.
Friedrich and Josephine are not in Germany, Prussia or Russia but in Italy. Friedrich has gone there to see Marconi who is developing the radio. A less harsh scene where the Italian academic demonstrates his potentially powerful device and Friedrich tries to conceal his motives. No contest called and after Friedrich processes some equations to start mass stamping radio receivers in factories in the Ruhr we close the scene.
Play ended there.
-----
Game things...
I liked the story and it had many elements that I, personally, enjoyed. I also liked the way the story was developing in general.
Everyone got their Goal. No one sacrificed a Goal to avoid a risk. Is this expected? Or were our risks too acceptable? I think that risks shouldn't be unacceptable as they only add 1 card, yet can only be paid off by a pair (two cards) or a high card (i.e. the card that was drawn if it was high enough). So adding an unacceptable risk is foolish, since it lowers your chance of success. Did I explain that well enough? Adding an acceptable risk is OK since you might take it in return for achieving your goal.
Our desires had no mechanical weight, which I think is an issue. I wanted Peace In Europe. Perhaps I have to achieve 5 Goals to get this? This way each scene goal is advancing me towards my story goal? Or something like that? It might also make us ratchet up our risks in later play to make achieving your goal a harder pill to swallow.
The scenes flowed pretty well with Per and I being observer, I thought. Looking back we seemed to find a contest to our satisfaction and call it. In the scenes where you were the Observer we passed through a pile of things I might have called contests on, but it seemed you were unsatisfied that any of them were good enough contests for you. Perhaps we should have said more forcefully, hey Paul, I want a contest here (like would Felini out Pierre as having Emile's bible? Or who wrote the Mass? Or what is Weber up to? etc.), but I think it is better that we didn't for a playtest. Can we force a contest as GM and player? The GM and player are an audience too and I felt that Per and I were entertained by the story, but it didn't "bite" for you. I used my ratchet a few times to kick more potential contests in, and though Per and I were giving and taking in them, you could have called us to check on any of them. I felt you were waiting for a harsher contest but I didn't want to call for Weber killing Emile, or something like that. As it was, the contestless parts were OK story for me but mechanically they changed nothing. In a way, it could be used to stop a player achieving goals, since you refuse to allow a contest. If you can see that?
Per, it's true, softpedalled on the last scene, but still I was OK with this. After all you could have called a contest on whether this was all a set-up to trap Friedrich by the French or Germans, or perhaps the Bulletin had alerted spies or mathematicians to be there in Italy waiting for Friedrich. Scenes, I felt, didn't necessarily have to be harsh or bloody, because...
....when we get to a contest the Risks are interesting. They remind me of "The Danger" in Kill Puppies For Satan, which is a really great device. Oh, you get this but the danger is...
We used all the antagonists except my bloodthirsty German General, but I could have seen him coming in later (perhaps to snatch Friedrich's peace from the airwaves and replace it with the numeracy of war). So I think we were well disposed to bringing in these elements.
Equally, the relationships were good and I could see myself bring mack a distrustful Ingrid into the life of Emile, and making further work on the attempts to kill Bonaparte and for Friedrich to continue his affair with Josephine.
So, all told... I think that there needs to be something to gauge when I can achieve my goal. As I could set that as a goal in a contest if I am cute enough (perhaps) and then buy it with a pair or high card. My feeling is that scene goals are steps to achieving story goals. Are you familiar with 1001 Nights, a Gamist game, which is very wordy in nature?
Similarly I think that a contest should have to occur in each scene, otherwise the observers can just declare they can't find one. It seemed that Per and I were throwing some potential contests back and forth (some bigger than others) but they failed to strike you as worthy contests, so I think we were on different levels there. However, the real bite in the contests seemed to come from the risks, not the item being contested really. So maybe that was where you would find your "bite"?
And like 1001 Nights there is much value to be had in thinking of contests are questions. I wonder if Emile will break Felini? I wonder if Friedrich will dupe Marconi? I wonder if Emile will escape from the safe house? I wonder is Pierre will steal the Bible? I wonder if Weber will trick Emile? I wonder if Josephine will betray Freidrich in Italy? I wonder if... is perhaps what the observer should be looking for.
All in all, I had a fun time and I must say I really liked the characters and stories that we put together. The really good thing is that it gives you some points to ponder in making the mechanics or sequence of play instruct us how to have hit contests better in those last two scenes. But looking back I think they were all pretty good.
Hope this helps,
Gregor
-----
Per, do you have anything to add? I have missed out the background details of our game, can you fill them in? Basically Napeoleonic Europe at War with Mathematical magick pioneered by an Indian Mathemagician, right?
