Creating an extra character

For Halloween, I'm running a light horror-ish RPG for some friends. We play other RPGs regularly. I had a great little game in mind called ViewScream, designed for online play. Everyone plays a character isolated on a spaceship that has Problems (TM). Each character has two life-threatening emergencies which must be solved lest they die in the end. Each character also has three technobabble solutions to help solve others' emergencies. These may or may not work; the player knows, but the other players don't know. Everyone takes turns dialoguing, telling about their emergencies, offering up solutions, seeing how they worked (or didn't).

But there are 6 of us, and I didn't have a prebuilt scenario that went past 5.

Characters are pretty minimal. They have a tiny personality description and a little bit of relationship info, a couple of barebones sentences explaining how they feel or think about another character. In addition they have one secret or twist or scripted mini-scene. Should be easy enough to insert a 6th, right?

The main thing to check is whether the overall mechanics will still work. This is a horror scenario - some characters will die. So check the math - looks like the options are giving a 6th person either 1 or 2 successful solutions, meaning either 1-2 or 1 (respectively) characters are mathematically guaranteed to die. Seems fine, make it 1 successful solution. But what's the twist? All of the other characters' twists are slightly connected to each other, and this new character won't have anything pointed back at itself. My solution is to make the new character's twist more impactful to everyone. They get a pre-game choice: either follow their orders and knowingly have less effective solutions, or ignore their orders to make improvements they think are good and run the risk of hurting the crew overall. Either way sets them up to yell at basically everyone which is exactly what I want in an otherwise disconnected extra.

Will do a bit of retrospective after Halloween.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Make A Bad Plan

One of my more lucrative techniques at work I call Make A Bad Plan. This is where you know  that something  has to happen, but no one really has a good idea of exactly what or exactly how to do it, and also it's a lot easier to go work on less ambiguous projects, so how do you make it happen anyway, when no one, including you, really knows what "it" is? Two common ways this comes up are when you can see that there's an important problem in a system even if you don't know how to solve it, and when you can see that there's an important piece of information that humans know that isn't baked into automated systems and if only it was then something would be better, who knows what, but clearly humans know and act on this kind of thing so we should be able to use it, right? Make A Bad Plan calls for you to make a bad plan. Think of a few " something "s, pick one or synthesize one from your (bad) options, write it up as a draft proposal with enough detai...
Read more

"Liberty" Tasks

A "Liberty task" is a small, self-contained task, ready to pick up and just start. No dependencies or blockers. It must be useful rather than make-work, and very often it is one of many similar tasks. It should not require deep thought; it is a thing which can be done, not a thing which surely could be done after figuring out how. In a codebase this might look like a list of tech debt noted over the years, or like the dozen refactorings needed before an unwieldy component can be broken up into three clean components. At home this might look like the ten yearly maintenance jobs needed to avoid early breakage, or like writing out the ingredients needed for each recipe you intend to try soon so that a legitimate shopping list can be created.  Some years ago one of the cofounders of the company to which I sell my labor found out he had a brain tumor. He took a step back from being the CTO while he dealt with the immediate mental and physical issues, including brain surgery, but d...
Read more