Hallo Dear forum!
Some friends and I will have a nice dinner on Sunday and we are going to play something afterwards. I recently was given (or asked) for the FIASCO Rulebook from a friend of mine and I wanted to play it with my friends on Sunday. The problem is - I got no feel for the gameplay whatsoever.
I know somewhat what's happening but I fear that my lack of knowledge about the rules and basic game mechanics will stop the flow when playing. I just don't feel comfortable with the mechanics yet and I'd be happy if somebody could give me a quick summary of what the game should feel like, how long one session takes and how I best introduce my friends to the game. I want to know what the game "feels" like and I'd be happy for any advice!
Thanks in advance! :)
I'm not sure if I can be a lot of help because I only played FIASCO once and that time was a couple of years ago, but I had a blast with it and really enjoyed the experience.
What I remember is that the first phase is to set up the playset and establish a web of relationships based on dice choices. Then you go around the table telling a story by setting up scenes with various players and locations involved and you go around the table a couple of times doing this, and each time someone can decide if the scene should end well or end poorly. Much of the fun comes from the fact that no pre-determined direction for the story has been established and so each person has differing ideas of what can happen. An intermission occurs, then another round of going around the table twice to get to the end of the storyline. I think that most of the mechanic involved dice color over dice pip numbers, but it's been a while and my memory is probably faulty.
I loved playing the game but it does seem strange at first and I could never talk my regular group into giving it a go. I played at a game demo session at my local game store, so I was with a group of strangers who were willing to take the story in all sorts of random directions. My regular group might have been a lot more tame.
A Google on "fiasco game playthrough" gives several videos that can help.
Watching the newly released movie Free Fire (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDD3I0uOlqY) should inspire.
=
Print out the play mat, cheat sheet, the playset(s), tilt and aftermath tables.
http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/fiasco/fiasco-downloads/
In my experience, a Fiasco session takes about 3-4 hours if you have 3 or 4 players.
The "win condition" at the end really sours the gaming experience for me. Once you know that all that matters to get "the best ending" compared to everyone else is to collect the most consistent color of dice, either all bad or all good, then it becomes a shallow metagame of dicking around first round to see what majority people give you, then play up and control that in the second round (such as choosing outcome over location). If you have a high majority of good OR bad dice, sheer probability plays to your advantage in having a positive resolution.
The game is better off not running the pre-written end conditions, which negates the whole point of the colored dice at all, and any metagame social cliques that emerge from play. For the best version: use the character interlacing in the beginning, play two rounds of freeform "simming," and don't care about the ending -- or let each person make their own.
Once you see the basic engines behind the game, you'll either love it or hate it. I hated the in-game engine. (I liked the pre-game PC interconnections.) I can still have a good time, but the competitive mechanic embedded in the entire dice function totally ruins the game for me. After that's gone, along with their eye-rolling worthy "endings," you don't really need anything that a FIASCO volume offers you.
Quote from: Opaopajr;960844The "win condition" at the end really sours the gaming experience for me. Once you know that all that matters to get "the best ending" compared to everyone else is to collect the most consistent color of dice, either all bad or all good, then it becomes a shallow metagame of dicking around first round to see what majority people give you, then play up and control that in the second round (such as choosing outcome over location). If you have a high majority of good OR bad dice, sheer probability plays to your advantage in having a positive resolution.
The game is better off not running the pre-written end conditions, which negates the whole point of the colored dice at all, and any metagame social cliques that emerge from play. For the best version: use the character interlacing in the beginning, play two rounds of freeform "simming," and don't care about the ending -- or let each person make their own.
Once you see the basic engines behind the game, you'll either love it or hate it. I hated the in-game engine. (I liked the pre-game PC interconnections.) I can still have a good time, but the competitive mechanic embedded in the entire dice function totally ruins the game for me. After that's gone, along with their eye-rolling worthy "endings," you don't really need anything that a FIASCO volume offers you.
This is essentially the entire Storygame movement in a post. You never needed the mechanics to begin with.
Like Hobbit Tales...once you start playing and the beer starts flowing (because who the fuck would play a Hobbit Storytelling game without beer) you throw the game mechanics away and start just roleplaying Hobbits telling whoppers and it's a great night.
But...to be fair...you can say the same thing about roleplaying games if you focus too much on game strategy and mechanics as opposed to the roleplaying elements. But, I'd argue with roleplaying there will always need to be some determiner of task ot conflict resolution where as storytelling needs no mechanics whatsoever, unless the ability to create the story under specific constraints is the point of the exercise.
Okay, sitting around drinking beer and telling Hobbit tall tales sounds like a fun way to spend an evening. But I don't see you need a "game" for that, I agree.
Quote from: CRKrueger;961022This is essentially the entire Storygame movement in a post. You never needed the mechanics to begin with.
Like Hobbit Tales...once you start playing and the beer starts flowing (because who the fuck would play a Hobbit Storytelling game without beer) you throw the game mechanics away and start just roleplaying Hobbits telling whoppers and it's a great night.
But...to be fair...you can say the same thing about roleplaying games if you focus too much on game strategy and mechanics as opposed to the roleplaying elements. But, I'd argue with roleplaying there will always need to be some determiner of task ot conflict resolution where as storytelling needs no mechanics whatsoever, unless the ability to create the story under specific constraints is the point of the exercise.
Dropping the rules for hobbit tales and beer?
Ah yeah... I see...
I don't want to sound to rude, but sorry this is just a spam post.
Thanks everyone for your advice. Especially für the DLC @pyromancer.
I will need to take a better look and the rulebook and I won't be abel to play the game this eveing. It looks a lot of fun though. Also for people who are not familiar with RPGs whatsoever.
Quote from: Opaopajr;960844The "win condition" at the end really sours the gaming experience for me. Once you know that all that matters to get "the best ending" compared to everyone else is to collect the most consistent color of dice, either all bad or all good, then it becomes a shallow metagame of dicking around first round to see what majority people give you, then play up and control that in the second round (such as choosing outcome over location).
I don't particularly like the mechanics of the game, either, but that's not how the game works. In the second round, you can choose the outcome, but you can't keep the dice, so this kind of metagame doesn't work.
I never found any issues with metagaming but have only played a few times and those involved were unlikely to metagame anyway. I do wish it had a more elegant dice mechanic. I prefer the dice mechanic in 1001 Nights by Meg Baker or the card mechanics in Final Girl or HGMO for storygaming elegance but also a mechanic that really works to shape play without imposing too much.
I find it helps to think of it as a particular kind of improv exercise. You pick a playset and it gives you some constraints and enough randomness to toss you some curve balls and keep things fresh if you ever decide to use the same playset more than once. Pick. Set up. Go. Really, don't sweat the rules that badly. I played it before, it was most of the group's first time, and we had a blast.
ETA - That thing above about trying to get same-colored dice? Ignore it entirely! Yes, it's true that getting more of the same colored dice improves the odds of having a good outcome for your character, but if you're shooting for a good character outcome you're completely missing the point of Fiasco. It's a one-shot game about making a big mess and it's actually huge fun when your own character goes up in flames.
Quote from: GeekEclectic;961407I find it helps to think of it as a particular kind of improv exercise. You pick a playset and it gives you some constraints and enough randomness to toss you some curve balls and keep things fresh if you ever decide to use the same playset more than once. Pick. Set up. Go. Really, don't sweat the rules that badly. I played it before, it was most of the group's first time, and we had a blast.
ETA - That thing above about trying to get same-colored dice? Ignore it entirely! Yes, it's true that getting more of the same colored dice improves the odds of having a good outcome for your character, but if you're shooting for a good character outcome you're completely missing the point of Fiasco. It's a one-shot game about making a big mess and it's actually huge fun when your own character goes up in flames.
It was the one time I played. The objective isn't to win by getting a good outcome but to have fun seeing how and how badly things blow up. It'a remarkably freeing allow you to really get into things and even ham it up playing horribly flawed characters and situations to the hilt.
Quote from: MES;961140Dropping the rules for hobbit tales and beer?
Ah yeah... I see...
I don't want to sound to rude, but sorry this is just a spam post.
You're not being rude, you're correct. But then, it's CK and Gron-with-the-Wind. You get used to them soon enough, just ignore their posts and you'll be fine.
Quote from: CRKrueger;961022This is essentially the entire Storygame movement in a post. You never needed the mechanics to begin with.
This is total drivel, you've been drinking the Pundit Kool-Aid. The quality of a game is defined by the efficacy of the rules, not the quantity.
One of the things about Storygames, not least
Fiasco, is that they are often very finely-tuned and concise, and that takes real game design skill and playtesting.
Yeah I think it is nonsense as well. When you play a storygame with very good mechanics, like Final Girl, as opposed to games with more vague or even confusing mechanics (eg. Grey Ranks) the results are completely different.
Quote from: Voros;962164Yeah I think it is nonsense as well. When you play a storygame with very good mechanics, like Final Girl, as opposed to games with more vague or even confusing mechanics (eg. Grey Ranks) the results are completely different.
What's Final Girl? Anything like Slasher Flick?
Quite possibily, I'm not familiar with Slasher Flick but it sounds similar. Final Girl's setup is a group of teens being picked off by the killer. It can be reskinned into other horror genres. It uses a simple but very effective card mechanic.
Quote from: Voros;962375Quite possibily, I'm not familiar with Slasher Flick but it sounds similar. Final Girl's setup is a group of teens being picked off by the killer. It can be reskinned into other horror genres. It uses a simple but very effective card mechanic.
Slasher Flick is very similar. Its set up emulate the same genre but doesn't use cards. It has a fairly traditional set up including a GM but has some neat twists for the sake of genre emulation such as all or at least most of the players controlling two PC, a primary and a more expendable secondary one and a sort of metagame 'currency' that the PCs build up by doing in genre things (like going into the basement alone to investigate odd noises and taking random showers :D). The "final girl" trope is even coded into the game's mechanics. But there's ways to tinker with it. I had some basic notes on reskinning it for different genres too but I don't know if I do anymore. Its allot of fun, a good way to kill (no pun intended) an evening.
Come to think of it (and to get back on topic), Fiasco could probably be used to run a slasher or other horror scenario pretty easily.
Quote from: Nexus;962389Come to think of it (and to get back on topic), Fiasco could probably be used to run a slasher or other horror scenario pretty easily.
You are correct!
FIASCO Horror (http://fiascoplaysets.com/genre:horror)
=
Quote from: Greentongue;963081You are correct!
FIASCO Horror (http://fiascoplaysets.com/genre:horror)
=
Hey cool, thanks!
Eclipse Phiasco made me chuckle :)
A friend of mine that plays Fiasco on a frequent basis wanted to offer some of their thoughts.
QuoteMore than most games, the quality of a Fiasco session is dependent upon the people playing it and the attitude they bring to the table. When it's a good group entering fully into the game, you'll be hard pressed to find an experience that's more fun; when you have even one player who's determined to have fun at others' expense, you can't find a more miserable experience in an RPG. This is because Fiasco is less an RPG than it is a framework for semi-structured improvisation, and no mechanisms exist to coerce or correct recalcitrant players, or even to limit the harm they can do to other people's fun. This is truly a case where one bad apple can spoil a barrel. Another nit is that the game is definitely possible to "win," which brings out an unfortunate competitive (if not outright bitchy) streak in some players.
That said, if you trust your group, Fiasco can bring a kind of roleplaying experience you simply can't find anywhere else. Countless playsets -- each providing seeds to create characters, motivations, items, and locations in a single setting -- exist for everything from fantasy to science fiction, from Medici Italy to a modern game convention, and if you don't find the one you want, creating a new playset is simple, fast, and extremely fun. The structure of the game is such that everyone gets the spotlight in roughly the same proportion as everyone else, so nobody feels left out or marginalized even if they're unfamiliar or uncomfortable with the freeform, freewheeling roleplaying the game promotes. Further, everyone has influence -- but not control -- over their ultimate destiny, which means you're left in suspense until the very end.
If I were to make a single change to the ruleset, it would be to introduce some sort of veto system whereby players might corral a player who seems dedicated to ruining other people's fun; while this isn't an issue at the average friendly table, it is a known plague of Fiasco games at cons.
Anyone played Morningstar's Carolina Death Crawl or The Skeletons?
The premises are great but I'm wondering how the mechanics are as I find the mechanics for Grey Ranks confusing and Fiasco's dice mechanic gave me a headache but made a lot more sense at the table.
Quote from: Voros;965734Anyone played Morningstar's Carolina Death Crawl or The Skeletons?
The premises are great but I'm wondering how the mechanics are as I find the mechanics for Grey Ranks confusing and Fiasco's dice mechanic gave me a headache but made a lot more sense at the table.
I played CDC a couple of times, always had a blast, it's really clever and atmospheric, rules were pretty straightforward.
It's super-dark though, you need to be know that everyone in the group will be comfortable with the tone and content.
Awesome thanks.
Quote from: Nexus;965428A friend of mine that plays Fiasco on a frequent basis wanted to offer some of their thoughts.
Eww, a veto mechanic just reinforces cliques. Just remove the win condition entirely and that aspect is
GONE! Yet once you do that, all you have is an improv session where everyone "sims." And at that point all you have is FIASCO being a prompt, which is easily doable yourself. My big issue with the game (and its ludicrous number of splat variations) is once you remove their shit competitive mechanics and ending fiction, there's nothing to really
buy from FIASCO. But hey, not my money...