Subject:
|
Re: Gaming at AFOL cons
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Feb 2002 03:15:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
18 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.fun.gaming, Frank Filz writes:
> Christopher Weeks wrote:
> > I've been thinking about this since last summer's Brickfest, actually. I don't
> > want to miss out on the other stuff, but I'm really there to play LEGO games.
> > I think that the length of time that we played was on the border of being too
> > little to justify the set up and take down time. So I think some thought needs
> > to be given to how to keep the gaming space operating.
>
> Definitely. Of course we had intended a longer play time but my awful
> work schedule conspired against us. Clearly one thing to do is to not
> rely on a single person for the game. Even if folks wanted to wait for
> me to actually run the game, the setup could have been completed Friday.
That's definitely true. If we'd had more cargo space, maybe I could
have brought some useable ships--but in the event our islands and
MOCs took up the available space. I wouldn't be surprised if the
fleet provision falls to me this coming Brickfest year; I've been
buying on BrickBay and retail with that exact concern in mind since
before I heard you (Frank) might be heading out West, but I accelerated
that process afterwards.
> I would also like to seriously suggest Brickfest change how the outlet
> shopping runs. Having everyone trek out to the store Sunday morning
> effectively kills Brickfest for Sunday.
I don't know when else it would be possible to do it, though--
unless we were to do it *after* hours, which might raise protest
from those who normally have to leave at a decent hour of the day
to get home for work on Monday.
> > > An AFOL con needs a significant amount of unstructured "play" time.
> >
> > What do you mean? Like pawing through the K-8 and building, or just doing
> > other stuff more generally?
>
> K-8 playing, train playing, just spending time with other AFOLs showing
> off features of each others models. I'm thinking of Friday evening at
> Brickfest 2000 (and probably all day Friday at Brickfest 2001).
> Basically time where there aren't specific things scheduled (other than
> games).
And I'd feel much better without the pressure of building closing
deadlines, but I'm preaching to the choir on that. Having MOCs in
close proximity to their themes was a good plan, though when you're
off the beaten path you can be overlooked.
Ideally, if there could be one or two enormous ballrooms/convention
halls, that would be perfect. There's something about being in one
place where *everything* is going on, separated only by linear
distance, that I find attractive.
> > If everyone wants that, then maybe the answer is to have more than one person
> > "running the gaming" so that they can take their unstructured time at different
> > times and the game can go on for those that want to continue. Only a few
> > things (like the session with Brad et al) would really strip the game of
> > players.
>
> Multiple GMs certainly would allow GMs to flow in and out. With a 12
> hour plus game session, that would even be necessary to avoid GM burn
> out. The key then is to get enough players to be able to support 3 or 4
> GMs.
See above. If the spatial layout can be improved, a lot of the
desire for intermittent wandering can be accomodated without "shifts"
of GMs. Personally, if we can have the equivalent of our peak Pirate
Game attendance at BrickFest 2000 (I think it was 16), I don't think
3 or 4 GMs is a problem--especially if two of them are also running
ships, or if the "neutrals" are parceled out among them for role-
playing.
(I still like that latter idea--one GM is the blue Imperials, one
is the red Imperials, one the independent Merchants, and one "master
GM"--others taking over new roles as breaks are taken, etc.)
Having a dinner hiatus with ordered pizza also helps break up any
exhaustion. :)
> > > An involved game like the Pirate Game or Mike Rayhawk's BricksWest Brick
> > > Wars scenario really requires the gaming to have a dedicated secure
> > > space (it need not be independently lockable at an AFOL con so long as
> > > general security covers the space). This allows setup to occur without
> > > delaying the start of the game, and allows the game to span multiple
> > > non-contiguous time slots.
> >
> > Agreed. Also, I'd like to see a central staging supply area, with -- when
> > demand suffices, more than one game going on based out of the central supply
> > pool. The whole thing secured appropriately.
>
> Hmm, do you foresee multiple simultaneous Pirate Games? Or were you more
> thinking of multiple simultaneous Brickwars games?
I'd bet more like one Pirate Game and one BrikWars concurrently--
though BrikWars can probably fit three or four scenarios into a
weekend, some themselves overlapping. (Also: One should try to get
general security that doesn't pick its toes on camera.)
But what would you (Chris) see as the nature of this supply pool?
Just a place where gear is kept, or things that may be used in common
by both games?
> > > It is worth encouraging some less structured gaming. I think all the
> > > Brick Wars games at BrickFest have been less involved scenarios which
> > > could be quickly set up.
> >
> > You mean, like a pile of elements that everyone can build from and then just
> > fight?
>
> I was thinking of the Brickwars game I saw at Brickfest 2000 where there
> were a few scenery/structure items placed around, and everyone supplied
> their own armies (with perhaps a couple people supplying armies for
> those without).
>
> Of course Mike's scenario did have the advantage of pre-built armies so
> the only setup time was the actual play area setup, and then introducing
> players to their armies. A "bring your own army" scenario will require
> some amount of time to establish capabilities and points value followed
> by some balancing act to get the diverse armies into something of a fair
> scenario.
If my experience playing BrikWars with NELUG is any indication, the
amount of time needed to get people up to speed with that system is
a lot less than you'd think. Now, we *did* have a balance problem,
but that wasn't a matter of not taking enough time to fix it. We
took maybe four hours to get everything ready to go, set-up, table
building, and everything included.
Admittedly, most of the armies *were* pre-generated by Shaun, so
I'm not sure how much longer it would have taken if we had only
the base rules and base weapons--but somehow, I don't think it would
have been that much longer.
A benefit to a lot of the BrikWars that has been played, though,
is that the "brought armies" have been discussed between the players
before the con, and most everyone knows the rules (or defers to the
assignments of those who do, because they want to learn). The Pirate
Game is a little different in that regard, but if the rules are made
available and a census taken, and people talk about it, we can shave
some time off of startup.
> > > There needs to be management of expectations for the gamers. Somehow
> > > Steve was expecting 25 players or so.
> >
> > It might take a more dedicated pirate fest to field those numbers since there
> > would be fewer distractions. I'd also expect BricksWest to substantially
> > increase the turn out next year. These numbers might be easily attainable
> > given an event at a game con rather than a brick con.
>
> I would guess that expecting more than say 10% of the attendance in a
> particular game is wishful thinking unless the event is game specific
> (i.e. at PirateFest I think we could count on at least 50% participation
> in the "big game").
How many people attended BricksWest? I get the impression that,
while large, it wasn't quite the size of Brickfest (this year).
A Pirate 'con would increase the percentage of people who would
play the Pirate Game, but it might not give us much more than
12-16 people. A lot of AFOL go to Brickfest/Brickswest because
of the overall draw; they might not bite on a Piratefest, because
their weekends are already spoken for. A general LEGO gaming con
would be one possible solution, though.
> > > I would also like to see a dedicated LEGO gaming con.
> >
> > Cool! So when ya' going to put it together?
See above ^^^ I'm in favor of the idea.
> Well... Unfortunately I'll have to re-build my contacts since I will
> soon be on the West coast. I think an East coast LEGO gaming con would
> still be possible. Doing it in NJ might make it attractive to the NELUG
> Brickwars contingent, and is certainly convenient to most of the known
> Pirate Gamers on the East coast. If you folks put it together, I'll try
> and make it. I won't be supplying quite so many ships, though clearly
> packing for a gaming con would allow me to bring a good sized fleet,
> Steve Jackson brought 20-30 cutters in his luggage, it would be easy to
> bring 10-15 cutters and several larger ships, I brought 4 cutters, a
> class 2 (The Green Menace), and a class 7 (The Red Seas Barracuda), but
> no extra goodies, to BricksWest and didn't even use half of my big box.
See wayyy above. I can probably supply a fair number of ships,
provided I have a couple of months to build them beforehand. If
we game in NJ, my attendance and my transport of ships is made
indescribably easy.
A BrikWars/Pirate Game gaming 'con would indeed threaten to attract
folks from NELUG (at least the Mass/Conn/NY contingents) and LUCNY
(and of course the loveable GardenSLUGs); who knows, maybe we could
even drag folks from the Toronto community down. It's only 9.5 hours'
drive!
The downside, from a LEGO viewpoint, is that I may be in South Africa
from August until God-knows-when. I've already passed the US side
of the Fulbright competition, so if South Africa finds nothing
objectionable about me or my application I'm going to be off on
Fulbright this coming year. Back to the storage unit with you, LEGO. :(
> I suspect the first LEGO gaming con would be fairly small, but I see a
> lot of growth potential. I think there is a lot of interest but when
> faced with a choice, many people settle for the familiar. Someplace with
> a decent population which can drive to the con will attract folks.
> Making the cost (registration and hotel) modest will help also.
> Advertising that pizza orders will be taken will also let folks know
> they need not budget a small mint for meals (BricksWest required serious
> meal budgeting since there just wasn't a way to get a $5 meal without a
> car).
We'd have to figure out where to have it--if it were much more than
20 people, Chris's long room might not do (and his cats would probably
go insane). Rutgers function space just plain isn't available, and
I'm not sure where else we could find space at a reasonable cost.
> > Also, what makes something LEGO gaming? If we're playing Car Wars and building
> > our little vehicles from LEGO, does that count? If so, that might be an
> > appropriate way of spreading Steve Jackson's participation around multiple
> > events.
>
> I think Car Wars would be an ideal game to adapt for LEGO play. Steve
> Jackson actually mentioned something about a group using LEGO for Car
> Wars. My thought would be to do it in super mini-fig scale (like do most
> cars as 8-wide) so that the models can be decently detailed (6-wide
> might be enough and certainly would be smaller).
That would be an interesting thing to explore, if not for the fact
that I really don't like Car Wars. I'd suggest Ogre, but if you know
anyone who can build 160 armor units' worth of vehicles in scale,
then you're more well-traveled than I.
(The K-8 box, however, is ideal for "Turtles, Turtles, and More Turtles.")
> It would be nice to feature some of the simpler LEGO games also (heck,
> even have some tables running some of the commercial titles, and perhaps
> some computers with the computer games running).
I dunno about that. Too much distraction, to my mind.
> > > I do suspect that AFOL cons are not yet big enough to have a significant
> > > number of paid guests and this is something for con organizers and
> > > potential guests to consider. I'm not sure that Steve Jackson draws
> > > enough additional con membership to buy an airline ticket, meals, and
> > > hotel room (input from Matthew and Steve would be appreciated here).
> >
> > I think with proper planning and marketing, it would be at least close, for an
> > event around here. It sounded like we had a substantial number of people
> > willing to come if he were here and I had several (5-10) gamers who wanted to
> > come to a pirate fest.
>
> Yes, we were close, but recall that that was also based on being able to
> get free space.
Yes indeedy do. I'd be inclined to write off importing Steve for the
first gaming 'con or two--the revenue just won't be there (sorry Steve!),
but if he wants to come anyways, we'd surely be hospitable (I'd be willing
to foot free pizza!). ;)
best
LFB
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Gaming at AFOL cons
|
| (...) Oh good! I was wondering what we were going to do. (...) They could bring any special sale stuff and a cash register out to the con site and people could otherwise go whenever they wanted. I too would volunteer to (un)load the truck. (...) (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.gaming)
| | | Re: Gaming at AFOL cons
|
| Ok, just read seven messages and decided that each justifies some response. As a result, I may repeat comments others have already made... (...) I'm really not worried about having enough stuff for a game. The only time we've ever been short on (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.gaming)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Gaming at AFOL cons
|
| (...) Definitely. Of course we had intended a longer play time but my awful work schedule conspired against us. Clearly one thing to do is to not rely on a single person for the game. Even if folks wanted to wait for me to actually run the game, the (...) (23 years ago, 24-Feb-02, to lugnet.gaming)
|
27 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
