|
I set up an experiment to try playing A Penny for My Thoughts without any preparations, not even reading the book beforehand. The main point about this was to see if it would be possible to learn the rules of the game while playing.
Note! If you would like to do a similar experiment yourself (and happen to live in Finland near Helsinki), I'd be glad to help. I could borrow all the material needed so the only things you'd need would be a couple of friends and some time together. Contact me through this blog entry. And stop reading right now as it wouldn't count as an experiment if you would know how to play the game beforehand.
Truth be told I did make some preparations. I had read the book a bit so I knew what handouts and so on we would need. I had copied all the handouts and forms and I laso had brought enough paper, pens and pennies with me.
We started playing early in the Sunday evening at Simo's place. Ari-Pekka and Laku were the other players besides me and Simo.
Next I'll describe how the session went and what the game is like. Then we comment how it went: first me (Antti), then Laku and finally Simo.
The Session and the Game
First I told everyone what the experiment was all about. Then we started to study the book and the handouts. I showed everyone the process of therapy chart and the explanations of the symbols used in the book to facilitate reading the book while playing. The symbols beside passages of the text tell the players which chapters are read aloud to the group, which chapters describe a procedure that is to be performed right now and when toskip to another part of the text.
We went through the game's starting situation: we were amnesiac patients in the Orphic Institute trying out a new treatment involving an experimental new drug mnemosyne. The drug enables sharing of memories between patients. As a form of group therapy we try to help each other recollect memories from our past and figure out how we lost our memories.
Then we read the handouts. There were two of them: the facts and reassurances document and the patient questionnaires. The fact document establishes the game's milieu -- the mundane world of 2000's in the vanilla version. The questionnaire gives a framework to the patients' memories.
The game itself consists of series of metaphorical journeys to the patients' memories. One patient (the traveler) recollects one memory in one journey and the other patients assist her in the role of guides. Memory triggers form a starting point to a journey. Memory triggers are short descriptions of people, places, objects etc. created by players and randomly chosen by the traveler.
These starting points are then elaborated by the guides who can ask a yes-or-no question from the traveler about the memory. The traveler is restricted in her answer so he can only add to the assumptions presented in the questions, not block them.
After creating the starting point for the journey the traveler starts describing the memory in more detail. The guides help by describing the actions of the traveler's former self in the memory.
Comments by Antti
Every journey is played with the same system. The system is simple and elegant. We did not have any difficulties to learn the rules while playing. We only faced two challenges worth mentioning. First, reading aloud the passages of text and simultaneously translating them to Finnish was cumbersome. If the text would have been in Finnish things would have of course run much smoother. Anyway the consistent terminology used in the text lessened this problem somewhat.
Second, we had difficulties in interpreting one particular passage of the rule text. The chapter that describes who asks the extra guiding question in the memory starting point elaboration phase. The text points out that if one of the players has given the traveler a penny in the Choosing the next traveler phase, she can ask the extra question. We had trouble finding the rules for giving pennies in the Choosing the next traveler phase and for a while we thought if we had missed anything. After a short while we found the rule in question in a text box at the bottom of the same page and found out that it wasn't relevant to our situation at all. Our conclusion was that the pointer about the penny-giving guide receiving the extra question in the main text about the question rules was a bit misplaced and a better place could perhaps be a text box similar to the other one in the Choosing the next traveler section for consistency.
But all in all these were minor hiccups and didn't affect our enjoyment of the game much.
The system of Penny consists of modular elements that were reused throughout the play so our play became more fluent as the session went on.It was a pleasure to notice that the system was simple enough that we could start reaping the rewards and enjoying the gameplay right away. In many games getting accustomed to the system takes time, sometimes so much that the first session is all learning the ropes and very little fun and feeling comfortable with the game. Not in Penny's case; I was comfortable with the game right from the start, even though I did not have a holistic view of the game.
We played a full session, three memories for each of the four patients. The stories and events were quite varied. I was engaged with the stories of all patients for the whole time. On occasion the new memories brought quite interesting contrasting viewpoints to the life of the patients before amnesia and shifted the meaning of earlier memories. In the end three of the four patients decided to remember and only one chose oblivion.
Mechanics-wise only the number of pennies accumulating to the patients during the latter part of the game seemed less than optimal. Most of the final memories were prolonged unnecessarily as a result of this effect. I was silently in agony because of it during my own final memory. I haven't double-checked if the intention is to use all the pennies you have to your memory or if you can stop after the required amount of pennies. I think it would be better to be able to coclude your final memory after using 4 pennies. That's a house rule worth considering for future sessions.
The experiment was a very pleasant experience for me. It was refreshing to bring a new game to a gaming group with no preparations and an open mind. Figuring the game out together was fun. usually I have the rules well rehearsed beforehand and an image in my mind about how the process of play should play out. One thing I certainly learned from this experience is the idea that I could try to bring this kind of attitude to any game where I'm in the facilitator role bringing the game to the group. If successful it could be a real win-win situation.
All in all A Penny for My Thoughts was a really great acquaintance. I would love to play it again. I don't doubt for a moment that anyone (with some English reading comprehension skills ;) could take the game and play without any preparations. I consider this a major accomplishment by the game's designer.
Comments by Laku
Like Antti my experience of the game was enjoyable. However,this was because of the overall game experience and not due to a new game and new rules. That is because my approach to new games is usually coming unprepared and without expectations and because of that the story that evolves through the game and the game experience as social event influence me more than the rules themselves.
I also agree with Antti that with four players and three memories the game was of the right length, although barely. In the end it was close to the edge ofgetting too long a session. Antti's suggestion of limiting the pennies used could be good at least in the end. The other thing that effects the length of the game is the desire of the players to tell stories. In our game the memories of players stayed short enough for my liking.
In fact I really likedalmost all of the stages of the game: the random note as a starting point of a single memory, the fact that the other players could influence the traveler's recollections. Especially the short yes-or-no questions (to which you had to answer yes :) ) and the two versions that the two guides came up with to the detailed recollection, from which the traveler could choose one, were to my liking. Creating the patients' recollections was nice and in places fun (Antti: Laku is doling out the praise with the large scoop here :) ) co-operation.
The clear game system created a good framework for fluid storytelling, wherein every player had a change to participate all the time. Very nice.
I'm not sure about how the game would feel after a couple of sessions. I suspect that some of the awesome can vanish after a while. The first timehad its charm in the freshness and I guess that ould last for at least a few sessions. I'm afraid that at least if played with the same group the players might develop a bit desperate urge to come up with something new and excellent -- and come up short. I think that the game offers different kinds of setup as a solutionfor this potential problems. I'm not sure if they would help.
But anyway, I recommend Penny too (and I hope to play it another time)..
Comments by Simo
in my opinion the tension is created in these kinds of games by different visions that each player has and the transformation and breaking down of these visions. By this I mean that in the first recollection a certain image of a character and her background is formed, but this image can be completely reversed in the next one. In this sense this game has stronger contrasts than traditional long campaign games, where the character is largely fixed and in extreme cases this fixation is considered a crucial aspect of the game.
Contrasts are also formed on the memories sometimes having camp elements alternated with more serious elements. In this sense also the nature of the story transforms while playing and the fun is partly the product of changing between different registers and the dissonances resulting from that.
Briefly on the system: I join Antti and Laku on noting that the system worked surprisingly well. I was a bit skeptic because the concept seemed like an extreme experiment, but the structure of the game served the contruction of the stories very nicely.
|
