Why this game? | Gnome Stew

For the most part, I pick the games I am going to run by, as the kids today say, vibes. It has always been instinctual. I hear about a game, the right ones set off my Spidey Sense, and I am hooked. That has been my method for the last 43 years. At different points during those years, I have thought to myself, “perhaps there are no more interesting games to play”, only to find time and time again something that I was excited to bring to the table.  

Last week, I thought I had hit rock bottom. For the first time in 43 years, I struggled to find a game to bring to the table. One of my game groups reorganized, and I lost a few players, so I was looking for a game to offer up, and my list was empty; the well was dry. I spent several nights wandering my PDF collection and scrolling through DriveThruRPG looking for something that would vibe, that would create that spark. Nothing. I started to worry that perhaps this was the end, no more games to interest me. 

I then did what I often do when I get stuck on a problem, and started to break the problem down into parts I could name, so that I could try to get some kind of control over what was going on. I learned some things about that “vibe”.. Oh, and I found a game too. 

What was I vibing on? 

My attraction to certain games had to be a combination of different factors. When it comes to understanding the larger parts of what makes up a game, I think that Jason Pitre did best with their Four Structures. Read the article for details, but in a nutshell, the four structures are: 

• Setting – the world that the characters inhabit.
• System – the rules of the game.
• Situation – the things the characters do when you play. 
• Subtext – the hidden message or theme of the game. 

When I looked back at past games I have been excited about, I can identify which structures excited me the most. Some games may be just one thing, and others may be multiples, with the best fits being all four structures. When I think about Forbidden Lands, my initial attraction was through the System, because of its rules for travel. For Night’s Black Agents, it was a combination of System (Gumshoe) and Setting (Jason Bourne vs Vampires). For Blades in the Dark, it was the Situation (doing jobs), more than the setting or system. While initially, I liked Underground’s Setting, what really got me was the Subtext of when all you have been trained for is war, how else can you solve any problems? 

Those are broad categories. It is entirely possible to like things in a more granular way. My interest in Forbidden Lands was for just one subsystem, not the entire mechanics of the game. There is a point of diminishing returns in granularity; it would be hard for me to be excited to get a game to the table just because I think one character class is interesting. For me, there needs to be a preponderance of interest in one of the Structures for me to connect. 

Another thing I observed upon reflection was that the more I connected with one Structure, the less I needed to for the others. I really don’t love the setting of Blades in the Dark, it’s ok. But I really like the Situation of a gang doing jobs to raise their status in the underworld. 

Also, if one structure supports another, that is a multiplier for me. In the case of Night’s Black Agents, the Setting and Situation are superbly supported by the System. That is to say, there are rules for all the parts of the Setting and Situation (investigations, combat, chases, vampires, etc). Specifically, I want the System to reinforce the Setting, Situation, Subtext, or all of them. I find that when the System is not tightly coupled to the other structures, it makes it less appealing to me. 

Novelty and Predictability 

Thinking about the four structures and games I enjoyed in the past gave me a framework for looking at games and trying to understand why I was not finding anything I vibed with. While scrolling through lists of games, I now found myself saying things like, “I have played that system before”, “I don’t like to run fantasy”, “What do the characters do in this game?” It made looking at games more ordered, less vibes, and now more formulaic. 

During this exploration, I began to uncover two other factors in play. I love to run things I have not run before. I love the novelty of things. I rarely play the same game twice; I would rather play something totally new than run something I have played before. At the same time, I do have favorite game systems, because they are predictable. I like the feel of a PbtA system, and I have recently grown more comfortable with Forged in the Dark games. 

As I thought about these two factors in conjunction with the four structures, I realized that there was some nuance. Not every structure had to be novel, but they could not all be predictable. At least one structure had to be novel. Also, I found I get hesitant if everything is novel, meaning I like something to be predictable. For instance, a system could be totally novel if the setting (or genre – a component of setting) were predictable. 

Just what was I looking for? 

This added information about novelty and predictability provided some nuance to my searches, but more importantly, I was finally able to articulate what I was looking for, for this group for this game.

I wanted a predictable system. Where I am right now, I did not want to take on learning a new system. But I need some novelty, which eliminates replaying any past games. The game I was looking for was going to be a system I am comfortable with, but a setting and/or situation that was novel. 

This made searching much more efficient. I was now able to eliminate systems I was not comfortable with and games I had played in the systems with which I was familiar. Quickly, a short list of candidates popped up, and within a day, I settled on the game I wanted to try: 

Transit by Fiddleback Productions.

Transit is a PbtA game. Very predictable for me. I knew I would have no problem learning the System and being comfortable running it. The general Setting is SciFi, which is also familiar to me, but the characters take the form of AIs embedded into spaceships; a novel Situation! This was a solid combination for me. A System that I was comfortable running, in a general Setting that I am comfortable running and am well versed in its tropes, but a very novel kind of story to tell. I have not, in my 43 years, run a game where the characters were spaceships. 

Just like that, I was excited to get this game to the table. The drought was ended, and the age-old question of “are there no more games I am interested in?” was staved off for another day. 

Use the Force, Luke

The alchemy of why we like games is complex and contains many factors. By giving some of those factors names, we are able to create language for why we are intrigued by and turned off by games. In that naming, we give ourselves the power to move from instinct to rationalization. We no longer have to wander, hoping something will fall in our laps, but rather we can create a set of search parameters and hone in on candidates.

What structures attract you to games? What roles do novelty and predictability play for you? Do you like them in certain structures or not in others?