Chris Engle

The beginner game certainly is GMless though I’m not certain you quite showed how it works. A player makes an “argument” for what they want to have happen next. They pick another player to be their referee. The referee’s job is to decide what their “to happen” roll is. Adversity is added by other players – who can jump in with counter-arguments.

So the referee may give a little adversity – by giving them a bad chance to succeed – while other players can add more by saying “No that didn’t happen. This is what happened…”

The Hamster Press booth is catty corner across from the Forge booth at Gen Con. I hope you are making it this year. Drop by and say hi.

MatrixGamer

Thanks for the podcasts guys they were awesome to hear. Shame the last one was a bit of a downer, made even more sinister by the weird sound quality. I see where it’s at – Shane wins so you don’t let him talk on the cast, tsk, tsk tsk!

I’d have commented earlier but was still going to the old rpgtalk site – d’oh!

Lot’s of food for thought on the old Endgame and Pain spiral. I’ve had some ideas and will be posting about them soon over on: http://www.collective-endeavour.com.

I should hunt you all down for suggesting the Endgame wasn’t playtested but you’d only hide behind The Sons of Kryos…

Also I saw Joe Prince break a guy’s spine at Gen Con.

Your constructive criticism is just as valid as your “This game rocks!!” comments. But I know how hard it is to say something that could be perceived as negative and perhaps bring down all the positive things you already said.

If I was the designer of this game (and I have not had the pleasure to meet Joe), I would think that this episode was pure unadulterated GOLD.

Further, I’ve met Joe Prince and he’s an incredibly good person. I feel that saying anything on the podcast that I wouldn’t to say to Joe’s face would be more dishonest than any perceived sugarcoating.

Also, Joe could kill all three of us at once without breaking a sweat. Not that he would, but he clearly has the ability.

You were cheerleaders for Contenders the first three sessions. But when you finished the game you sat down and talked frankly about what rocked and what didn’t. You also talked about how you drifted or interpreted the rules to make the game more fun. And most importantly, you gave great constructive criticism on how the game could be even better.

Don’t apologize to the designer or try to sugarcoat things. Speak loudly and often!!

This was by far my favorite episode of your podcast! I loved how you broke down GM-less games, I hope to hear more such discussions in future shows. I also enjoyed your discussion on Contenders endgame, but wish it would have gone on a little longer.

Thanks,

Yoki