In this thread, Gregor made the following comment which I felt deserved expansion and further discussion, in general terms.
For me, I like the reaction the game generates when players realise they're telling a story about people and connections. The lightbulb switching on. That seems to strike home more when it's been boxing/fighting since they expect the game to be just fighting, and it's not at all. The problem with boxing as a backdrop is the barrier it seems to cause to people trying it out. (And it's a barrier I don't quite get.)
I can totally see where Gregor is coming from, but have approached Contenders from the other side. On first contact, I saw Contenders as an interesting set of mechanics, but the subject matter totally turned me off. I have zero interest in boxing, it's brutality, punch-drunk fighters staggering around the ring, brain damage and blood. That's my perception of boxing. I played the game and was immediately taken by the ability of the system to actively and brilliantly support the creation of stories, full of pathos and genuine humanity. Buy-in was hard for me, because of my dislike of the subject matter, but once was in, I became hooked. But, the barrier was there, for me, in the first instance.
Now, what I would like to discuss in this thread is how we approach and overcome these barriers. I'd like to see more than a simple list of 'games that have barriers to entry in my opinion', but a discussion of techniques that we have and can use to get people involved in games that, to them, offer a barrier to play.
Contenders is the obvious example. I always pitch the game as one which creates great stories about people, with boxing as a backdrop. That sometimes works, but sometimes people are still unsure about the boxing. Then you can go a little deeper, talking about connections and one of the key goals is engage positively with those connections, weaving tales around the relationships between the protagonists and the people around them. Others may have different tactics.
Your challenges and solutions would be appreciated.
Cheers
Malc
Barriers
Submitted by Rich Stokes on Mon, 21/01/2008 - 11:37.
Dirty confession: I've played Contenders a lot, but never as a boxing game. We've always drifted it. I think that one of the reasons there are so many hacks for it might be that a lot of people just don't want to play a game about boxing. Were it not for my own fiscal irresponsibility and Iain and you badgering me at Dragonmeet, I'd never have bought it.
The barrier, hmm, yeah, it's definitely there. Especially when you think of the cornucopia of games out there these days.
With Umläut, I just tend to let it go: if someone doesn't like Metal, hey that's cool, the game's not for them then. I'm not really going to try and get them over that. I think it's a bit different because firstly, metal isn't as divisive as boxing. I think a lot of people who aren't into metal think it's funny in that clichéd way. Also, I think that Metal is more central to people having fun with Umläut. In Contenders, the boxing is there, but you're going to enjoy the characters and their stories.
The question (with Contenders specifically) is how to interest someone in the game without giving them the impression that it's "about" boxing. That is, maybe come up with a gentler pitch which emphasises what the game's really about:
* Struggle against adversity
* The protagonist's relationships with other people (npcs)
* Pain vs Hope. What the protagonist is willing to risk and endure for Hope.
Someone who doesn't like the sound of that really is someone who's not going to enjoy Contenders. Which is more accurate than saying "If you like boxing, you'll like this game". I imagine that there are millions of people who just LOVE boxing, but wouldn't like Contenders.
Wow, that's a lot of waffle. Maybe the core of the thing is "Emphasise the Awesome"?
Of Dogs, Zealots, Officers and Heroes
Submitted by Neil Gow on Mon, 21/01/2008 - 12:25.
The game that I have the barrier with is Dogs In the Vineyard in it's natural setting. No matter what angle I come at it I seem to always come back to 'Facist Zealots Meet Little House On The Prairie'. And that for me couldn't be more of a disconnect. I'm pretty sure its because my mindset sees the Dogs as the 'bad guys' in the setting which probably says more me than the game!
With Duty & Honour I have come across two perennial barriers that sadly seem to cause problems from two different angles. The first is that the literature is very much framed as a ‘lone hero with happy hangers on’ which never really goes down well with a lot of roleplaying types. The second is that in a military game ‘everyone has to do what they are told by another player’.
I concur with Rich – the way I work around this is to ‘highlight the awesome’ – so for the first people I point out the way that the Mission/Challenge system works and mimics the episodes where, for example, Rifleman Harris has to break a code from a book by Voltaire or where he has to protect Sharpe’s wife from the amorous writer – except this sort of stuff happens every session. With the second problem I have to accept it and say yes, that’s right – and that’s all part of playing the game. However because you define your regiment you can write in an NPC who ‘has the men’s best interests at heart’ or ‘hates wasteful injuries’ and voila! Your problem suddenly becomes an outlet for conflict and drama!
Strangely, the one thing that I expected from the game has never transpired – people just saying ‘No, I know nothing of the genre.’ – Strange.
Neil
Take the King's shilling at http://www.omnihedron.co.uk/dutyandhonour/
Neil, your Dogs Barrier talk
Submitted by Rich Stokes on Mon, 21/01/2008 - 12:51.
Neil, your Dogs Barrier talk is pretty interesting stuff.
Would it help if I pitched it as a Mormon version of Judge Dredd? ;^)
Seriously though I have actually used that pitch to interest people in that game. Sometimes they actually agree to try it once they stop laughing.
Great question. In cons, I
Submitted by Joe Murphy on Mon, 21/01/2008 - 19:17.
Great question.
In cons, I just try to smell nice, smile nice and be enthusiastic about whatever it is I've chosen to run. With Contenders, my spiel is often 'Interested in boxing? Neither am I. But here's how this is is a fabulous game...' and then I describe the balance of pain, hope, cash. That seems to grab the system monkeys who like balancing stuff and the storyheads who recognise the themes.
Fantasy games are a hard one. I've run Polaris and TSOY at cons, and mostly emphasised that I'd be handing over the story-creation to the rest of the group. I'm not in charge. Some cool system stuff - structured arguments in Polaris, getting rewarded for what you'd do anyway in TSOY. And evocative, open settings.
With my regular groups, I don't have to encourage or push. The will is either there, or it isn't. And I don't want to persuade regulars to try something. At most, I'll send round a mail with some AP and let play do the talking.
But what do you actually do?
Submitted by evilgaz on Wed, 23/01/2008 - 08:45.
The primary question for most players I know when they ask what a game is about, actually comees down to what will their characters do? I've had some great backgrounds pitched at me, but sometimes I'm at a loss as to what to do as a player. I could Savage up BSG for example (easily) and for a one-shot it would work, but as a campaign what do your characters actually do? If its "shoot cylons" week in week out I'm not that interested. If someone could pitch game that works on the interplay between characters and trying to stay sane and human in surreal circumstance, then it might have more legs.
Dogs is a better to sell (to me personally) when I'm told its about being God's watchdogs blowing into town and dealing with the sinners than "You're a Mormon cowboy who makes up the religion as you go". Of course there are lots of other pitches based on what the game is actually about...
But I feel barriers to entry are largely down to players not knowing what to do or liking what they're told. I've not played Contenders, but I get the impression that its not about Boxing. If that ain't it, then What Do You Do.
To dissolve barriers to entry I think you need to pitch to people who'll play the game what they're expected to do. I like the look of the Nobilis book. Its square. It looks pretty. People have told me good things. I've played a game at a convention. I still haven't got a fncking Scooby what I'm supposed to do as a player or GM. I'm not going to buy it.
Contenders (and hacks) sounds interesting - I might try it and by extension - buy it if I like it. I get a feeling of a something involving a struggle to make it against the odds. Which takes us to teh only real way to get people playing your games and that's to demonstrate it to people (who then hopefully like it and play it with others and so the word of mouth spreads). I've "sold" Savage Worlds to so many people (some very sceptical in advance) just by running sessions.
Tell people what they're actually going to do - especially in the small press world, where there's generally more emphasis on what the players get up to than 400 page background and settings.
Run lots of demos.
Gaz
Weapon of the Chods
Submitted by Neil Gow on Wed, 23/01/2008 - 10:55.
I could write these all day...
Another game that I have a massive barrier to entry with is Weapon of the Gods. Its about Chinese Hero Folk doing C.H.F. stuff. Thats great - I adore the Water Margin so I should be all over this like a rash right? WRONG!!
The stop for me is those bloody background sheets - like an inch of them in dense text. Am I supposed to read ALL of these before I understand the game? What if there's some awesome that I miss that totally undersells the game to the players? And well, Bergstroms writing style is ... not to my tastes.
What I have taken from this is to try to make things accessible. Smaller, well defined chunks. If it has to have backgrounds, key points rather than massive essays. Making the assimilation of the crucial details as easy as possible so that the understanding of the game is easy.
Neil
Take the King's shilling at http://www.omnihedron.co.uk/dutyandhonour/
Summarising
Submitted by Malcolm Craig on Tue, 29/01/2008 - 22:58.
Thanks for the responses so far, I'm still hoping that others might pitch in with their thoughts as well.
To distill the thread down to it's essentials at the moment, ways you can overcome barriers to entry are:
(although, there is always the possibility that one persons cool is another persons barrier to entry)
(if someone is already seeing a barrier, getting them in to a demo highlights another challenge)
Thanks
Malc
Contested Ground Studios