And the winner is....

[subplotkudzu]

Star Trek, by a nose! Actually., by a half point because Evynrude doesn't like integers. The final scoring was

Game                  An Invitation  ARCHIVE    USS Carter      Monarch
evynrude             3.5               2.5               3.5                 3
kriz1818               3                  3                  3                   2
ashacat               3                  3                  3                    4
Jason                       3                 2                  3                    4
netcurmudgeon   1                  3                  4                   3
Total                        13.5             13.5              16.5              16

Even if you remove Jason, who might only be part time, the USS Carter still wins, this time by more points, though Monarch did have more people giving it their highest rating. Now that it's over, I'd love to see some discussion as to why you voted the way you did.

In my case, Trek and Monarch were the easiest things for me to run - Trek lends itself to short bursts of prep work and has few ongoing threads to juggle, Monarch would have been the easiest mechanically. Expect to see it as an option again; unlike other strange settings this one apparently caught your interest and I'm not giving it up without a fight.

I expect the point system will get modified next time to prevent the clustering of scores that have turned up. Rather than giving a limited number of points (which runs the risk of acceptable games being blackballed to prop up multiple preferred ones), I might limit everyone to a single 4 and a single 3. With a longer list (since I usually provide 6 games) it should break up the field a little bit. It's gratifying to see that I've learned to craft game ideas that are all appealing, but the ego boost doesn't make the selection process easier.

Expect several Trek related posts in the next couple months, especially questionnaires designed to integrate Evynrude into the existing crew relationships.

Comments

Voting

[netcurmudgeon.livejournal.com]

I've been itching to get back into the Trek saddle for some time, so giving USS Carter season two my highest vote was a no-brainer. The only thing that could have challenged that ranking (and probably would have resulted in a tie) would have been an opportunity to return to the 1001 New York NightsFeng Shui game.

ARCHIVE and Emperor of Cats were both interesting, and while Emperor sounded like it could be plenty weird, I've come to trust your sense of the flavors of weird that this group goes for, and your ability to lure players into genres they're a little unsure of (e.g. the Russia D&D game).

Which leaves us with the Castle Falkenstien game. As I said a while back in an answer to one of your questions, and repeated here for general consumption, the thing that sunk the C-Falk concept for me was narrative structure implied by the prospectus write-up. In the single-game model, that's pretty much it: everything needs to happen within the confines of that one session. In the multi-game arc there's still a per-session narrative structure that brings some kind of resolution. It may be problem >> resolution >> escalation, but there is that resolution inherent in the session. The 'plan one session, execute the next' model just left me kinda cold. Not cold enough to spike it with a zero, but cold enough that it fell to the bottom when presented with three other more attractive choices.

I might limit everyone to a single 4 and a single 3

I like that idea.

Re: Voting

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

In the multi-game arc there's still a per-session narrative structure that brings some kind of resolution. It may be problem >> resolution >> escalation, but there is that resolution inherent in the session.

That makes more sense than what I was understanding originally, and I suppose I can see your point.

The 'plan one session, execute the next' model just left me kinda cold.

I have an article in the Pyramid hopper that I should show you, because I think I wasn't clear in my explanation.

In the short form, the classic Caper has 2 stages - planning and execution - but there is a lot of problem >> resolution >> escalation in the first stage. If you look at Ocean's 11, for instance, everything that occurs before fight night is the planning: recruiting the team, doing the reconnaissance, tapping into the computers, inserting the inside man, setting up the relationship with the mark, etc. etc. The back half of the movie - call it everything from after they get the Pinch - is the execution of the plan, but the making of the plan is a complex adventure that needs enough time to gell.

I'm not sure I got that across, or that you were assuming the first session would just be planning rather than tension packed subterfuge before D-Day.

Re: Voting

[netcurmudgeon.livejournal.com]

The tension packed subterfuge completely did not come across. I read it as straight up planning. Ah well, the book that you think you're writing is not the book your reader is reading. ;-)

Re: Voting

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

So after saying that you trusted me in my ability to get the group into genres and settings they weren't familiar with you though that I was going to subject this group of players to 6 hours of pouring over blueprints and timetables for every other month?

You can see how that doesn't quite follow, right?

Re: Voting

[netcurmudgeon.livejournal.com]

What influences someone to extend a grant of trust in one case but not another? With the prospectus it's the totality of the writeup; one game isn't all that interesting and the structure sounds iffy, another sounds weird but kind of fun ... which one gets the benefit of the doubt? Mind, that in this context are two other games with either very high appeal or a good interest factor and a well-known structure. And, maybe in the end, it was just the weakest writeup of the four ... in this reader's eyes.

Re: Voting

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

Oh, if you didn't think the MI-Falk idea sounded interesting that's a fine reason it give it a 1. I have no problem with you seeing it as the weakest of the four. I'm just questioning why you thought I would subject the group to 6 hours of tedious planning every other month. Hopefully you realize that would be out of character.

In any event, have fun in India!

Re: Voting

[netcurmudgeon.livejournal.com]

I think you may be digging too deeply into a decision process that took five minutes to make in total (and may well not have an internally consistent logic, as preference in humans is not a logical process). We've already spent 2 - 4 times longer discussing it than I took doing it originally! :-)

[evynrude.livejournal.com]

I had way too much information in my head to make the decisions. Which is in part why I took me so long to make my choices.

I put the Trek game as one of my highest ‘cause I didn’t want to cause it not to happen. As we’ve all seen previously it was not high on my list of things to do. Since, the reasons I play are more social and I have had a great time in each of the games I’ve been involved in, I decided that if everyone else wanted to play I was willing to go along for the ride. Even if I’m not a huge fan of the original Start Trek. I‘m not sure I couldn’t count the number of full episodes I’ve seen on one hand.

(As I was writing this, and it’s taking way longer to write than I feel it should, I was realizing how hard it must be to choose between games that you’ve already played. I’ve never had to choose between multiple games I've played and liked. I don't think I'm looking forward to that day.)

“An Invitation”, I thought it would be fun to play with Rachel. Monarch, seemed like a fun departure from everything we’ve done so far. As for Archive, not really my interests, but again I’m willing to try anything.

because Evynrude doesn't like integers

I don’t like it when I don’t have at least 5 choices, so I use fractions. Although, I could have done a better job of it this time.

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

I had way too much information in my head to make the decisions. Which is in part why I took me so long to make my choices.

In that case you can just give everything a 2. That's the default "I'm just happy to play" vote. If you had done that both Monarch and Trek would have tied at a 15 and tiebreaker would have gone to Trek because it had the least number of low votes. (it would have had one vote of 2 as opposed to Monarch's two votes of 2).

I don't want the players to be approaching the prospectus with the dread of somehow spiking someone else's preferred choice. Oddly enough, Kriz1818 said that she now had guilt because her vote of 2 kept Monarch from winning when two other people had given it a 4. This isn't the attitude I want in the voting - I want to know what you want to play, not having you second guess what you think would make other people happy. If you honestly don't care, just give them all a two and bring those decadent pastry thingies to the next session.

I've never had to choose between multiple games I've played and liked. I don't think I'm looking forward to that day.

That's one reason why I keep trying to pitch limited run games; they just keep not being voted in (or when they do, like Psi-Men, there are logistical difficulties and they don't work out). I'd like to be able to bring at least some of these games to a conclusion, but there are at least 24 more Star Trek 'Episodes' for example, and a whole bunch more in the D&D game and Feng Shui. My instinct is for the long term. Oops. Maybe if we dedicated the next 2 years to Trek we can get that concluded...

I don’t like it when I don’t have at least 5 choices

Duly noted. I'll try to include at least 5 next time.

[evynrude.livejournal.com]

I don't like it when I don't have at least 5 choices

Duly noted. I'll try to include at least 5 next time.

I didn't say that very well. I was talking about the scoring. But, after thinking about what I meant with my comment I've changed my view on how I would use your scoring system. Because you use 0-4. And I would never use 0. I'm left with 4 options. Previously in my thinking 1 & 2 seemed like a very low score since I'm willing to give everything a shot. So, I used fractions. But, Maybe I just need to suck it up and actually make decisions.

I look forward to the next prospectus to put my new understandings toward it.

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

I think I see where you're coming from, but look at it this way - if there *are* 5 scoring options (and there are, and I might well develop something you'd really rather not play at all than play in) then a score of 2 is actually middle of the road. (if the rating system were 1-5 it would be the 3, after all.) Hence the 2 being "I'm just happy to play", which seems to be the situation you're in.

But making decisions is good.