I have just been inspired by a glorious mash-up.
Play InSpectres–in Duskwall.
The three anchoring concepts in InSpectres are that it is rules lite, it is player driven within a structure, and it is about the work-a-day ho-hum business of cleaning up supernatural messes.
I might have to put a little thought into a conversion document. But seriously–the idea is golden!
http://www.rpgnow.com/product/17891/InSpectres?it=1
For those unfamiliar with the game, you can get a glance at its basics by looking at the background material I made for it.
https://fictivefantasies.wordpress.com/2014/07/29/inspectres-support-material/
So… I’m thinking switch around the mission generator, and have some freelance ex-rail jacks or ex-spirit wardens, and whispers, available to sort out pesky escaped echoes in the ghost field.
I think I might have to do more with this.
BWAhahahahahahahahaha! Brilliant!
You even have a unifying business with its own rudimentary stats! =)
I might have to try this.
Don’t even play it in Duskwall, just export the system!
One attribute: Cool. Actions: Academic, Athletic, Technology, Contact.
One of the problems I had with InSpectres was that players had a LOT of power, and different ideas about what they could be up against.
That’s how they ended up battling random, dumb foes; everyone in the group stapled something onto the Frankenstein, but it wasn’t all human (or even compatible) parts, so the thing just jerked and fried under the lightning. It was good for comedy, but little else.
Like the moss that generated cold, and grew in runic shapes to attract ghosts, that was planted by a Nordic witch, who had a chupacabra familiar, and could only be damaged by religious objects, and so was battered to death (and her chupacabra too) by Russian icon paintings on a length of chain.
In Duskwall there’s the unifying Ghost Field, there’s a coherent and ever-present supernatural structure of ghosts, vampires hollows, hulls, and demons. So, I think it would be easier for the players to collaborate and bring in fresh elements to the investigation without getting totally wacky. (Unless you WANT to get totally wacky, then, you know, go for it.)
Andrew Shields All true, and all part of the comedy. (It also introduced me to Sorcerer, so I’m somewhat forgiving of the flaws.) Theoretically, you’d eventually build some sort of consensus around the table.
To mash it up with Blades, I’d probably end up aiming for something more like Discworld in tone.
I always thought of it as part of the charm. I like to sit back and let control go from time to time. Also your example sounded awesome.
I’ve only used it for one shots, though they had enough fun it ended up being 3 games. Anyway, I would not wipe the comedy out of it, but I do think it’s helpful to provide more structure for the sorts of supernatural things they could encounter, and moving it into a Duskwall setting also shifts away from modern culture in some interesting ways.
Duamn Figueroa It depends. I don’t mind letting go control in some games and settings, but it does induce some cringe-worthy moments in an investigation style.
There is a mystery, you are uncovering it. That seems to call for some guidance, for me. At least some unity in vision for what the problem is and how it is uncovered and dealt with.
I think it is easier for players to work together to make something a little more coherent in a setting with the variety within limits provided by Duskwall.
I don’t mind some random, but I am quickly bored by nonsense.
This could also explain why we only played three times.
I have only played for one shots, sometimes had a blast, sometimes was okay. Always bizarre.
Franchise upgrades: office, credit card, gym card, library card, bank account.
Special abilities: take +1D when resisting supernatural effects. You’re so cool.
This part, right here…
“There is a mystery, you are uncovering it. That seems to call for some guidance, for me. At least some unity in vision for what the problem is and how it is uncovered and dealt with.”
QFT. For gonzo comedy, it works. For anything more serious, not so much.
Part of that is possibly due to the way in which players are trained by the general hobby to rely on the GM for so much. When you give them a hint of creative control, they tend to go a bit wild.
And this…
“I think it is easier for players to work together to make something a little more coherent in a setting with the variety within limits provided by Duskwall.”
Having guidelines no doubt helps quite a bit!
Maybe trusting your players could make it easier for them not to go nuts on the long run.
Most games rely on heavy handed GMing, its kind of a shame, IMO, to homogenize those that don’t.
Duamn Figueroa The good news is, I will never have an impact on the InSpectres game. So, it will not be homogenized in the least, and it continues as it was written.
Sure we gamers can do whatever we want, I’m just arguing in favor of shared authorship. Specially on a game like blades that shifts a lot of the responsibility from the GM to the player (for instance the action dynamics).
In a BitD framework I would solve it somewhat like:
Piece of Cake. Crit: you do it with increased effect, tell me how it goes. 6: you do it, there is a new piece of information you got or a cool stunt you made, tell me what it is. 4-5 Well that’s weird, you thought you got it, you can do it anyway and end up in a worst position, take more time than usual, reduced effect or suffer some lesser harm. Give me a weird or problematic detail about the situation. 1-3: this isn’t definitely not going your way, tell me what left you hesitating, stalling or faltering. Push again by taking a weird position or pull back.
Well that’s weird. Crit: you do it with increased effect. Add a cool detail, stunt or piece of info. 6: you do it. 4-5: you do it but there are consequences, take harm, a complication, reduced effect or end up in a total meltdown. Give me a weird or problematic detail about the situation. 1-3: things go badly, suffer harm, take a complication, lose your opportunity or end up in a total meltdown.
Total meltdown: Crit: you do it, the GM will tell you what kind of miracle it took for you to make it. 6: you do it. 4-5: GM puts you in a tight spot, take severe harm, reduce effect, a serious complication. 1-3, complete meltdown, suffer severe harm, serious complication, lose your opportunity. GM picks who tells the tale of your complete f*ckup, either you, one of your coworkers or himself.
Confessionary: take a minute to talk about a cool/embarrassing/weird/interesting thing that happened in the scene. Spend 2 stress to have it happen on the scene or gain potency in a roll or don’t spend anything but talk about something one of your coworkers did/suffer. If he follows through, he takes a playbook advancement.
Advancement: if you complete your playbook advancement, talk with your coworkers and make up a special ability following these guidelines (…).
(…) So, for example, Roberta recently took a gang of vampires with a blessed lead pipe by herself. She now doesn’t suffer the scale penalty when fighting against gangs of monsters with a lead pipe.
InSpectres is a great game and was definitely on my mind when creating Blades. Lots of similar concepts there.
An InSpectres agency in Duskwall would be hilarious and horrifying, both. 🙂
John Harper Andrew Shields
Great ideas! I actually was playing around with this idea as well. I was going to start off by making a “Spirit Wardens” crew-type to handle this and expanding from there. Since I’ve learned Spirit Wardens will be a crew-type in the full version, I’m working on making a sort of “renegade spirit fixer” crew type to handle more “sensitive” requests!
I play most of my games online nowadays, so I’m looking at more “TV-like show” games like PTA and InSpectres. I could see something like the flashback mechanic being used exactly as a fit in for confessionals!