In Toulouse, we had a level of anonymity. I had a lot of fun guessing who was playing whom, but I probably knew more players than others. All but two at the beginning I think, not sure about who exactly was still active at the end. I'm not sure if it added much to everyone else's experience, but it may have forced me to think of every character as potentially a powerful rival. I didn't really know who was a PC or NPC, so I think it did positively add to the game.
One interesting option is that the use alias emails and an online management system, the ST could also not know who each player was. This is an intriguing option, but I'm not so sure it would be at all relevant, except that it could nix any complaints of favoritism in making rulings. The downside there is that all communication would have to go through those aliases, which could get excessive. Namely, players wouldn't be able to chat when I was online about a quick rules question, they'd have to use the website. Not to mention these aliases would need to be set up before characters are created and all that nonsense.
Zack has mused that the secrecy really hindered players ability to coordinate and create integrated characters. I think that's a concern, but it might be a surmountable obstacle if we know it's a problem going into it.
Still, I wonder if this could be worth it. No other type of game can really can be played in a double-blind way like this. Is it a gimmick though, or could it be a feature?
One interesting option is that the use alias emails and an online management system, the ST could also not know who each player was. This is an intriguing option, but I'm not so sure it would be at all relevant, except that it could nix any complaints of favoritism in making rulings. The downside there is that all communication would have to go through those aliases, which could get excessive. Namely, players wouldn't be able to chat when I was online about a quick rules question, they'd have to use the website. Not to mention these aliases would need to be set up before characters are created and all that nonsense.
Zack has mused that the secrecy really hindered players ability to coordinate and create integrated characters. I think that's a concern, but it might be a surmountable obstacle if we know it's a problem going into it.
Still, I wonder if this could be worth it. No other type of game can really can be played in a double-blind way like this. Is it a gimmick though, or could it be a feature?
I think you could keep the double blind, if only in part. Like during character creation we could not know each other, and then when groups are chosen those in the same group can know each other. That way there is still some mystery. Though this would enable out of game plotting and scheming, which I don't know if you want or not.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm not sure how important controlling the flow of information between players is. Unlimited communication seems like too much, because if you live with one another and are on the same team, you can develop hella intricate plans and share a lot of info when vampires aren't always that social. But things felt a little limited in Toulouse. Previous experience with online games suggests we need some limit to prevent players with lots of time and constant internet access from gaining an advantage, but even in Toulouse I felt like being proactive with messages didn't always help get me responses before the end of the turn anyway.
Delete