Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(1 edit) (+1)

For starters, I'm a big fan of the fairy tale / kid's story theme. 

One of the first things I noticed as I was reading the doc is the simplification of the engine to make it less crunchy. I think it makes sense to remove some crunch, but I wonder if in play it would feel like there aren't enough decisions to make with your succes dice. It feels like the core gameplay loop for players is 1. Describe What you want to do 2. Roll Dice and see how many successes 3. Describe how successful you were based on the dice. What I like about the havoc engine is the ability to keep a bunch of plates spinning and competing for attention and I thnk some of the simplification of that here may have cut out a bit too much. 

  • quantified stats adding d6 equal to their value to qualitative stats that add a flat modifier of 1d6 to a base 2d6 to attempt
  • Removing limited use items & situational bonuses
  • Removing injuries & resources
  • Removing adversaries threats and resilience & instead treating all adversaries as objectives

That's not to say that I disagree that crunch can be removed. I just think that maybe there's opportunity to add back in some of the competing priorities for the player at any given point between keeping themselves healthy, making progress on the objective, dealing with adversaries, etc. Maybe it's as simple as adding more side objectives or incorporating some environmental aspect. 

Some pieces of this that I really like:

  • I think my favorite thing you added were the list of Challenge Characteristics having different modifiers. That's a really clever way to make each challenge feel unique. 
  • Characters having different stats based on their skills feels like a great way to drive players to think in terms of "what would this character do" rather than just picking the highest value skill. 
  • The Reserve being designed to give you extra dice based on how far you push yourself. I think I'd like to see a different option to refill the reserve, rather than having to skip a turn because in a game of 6 people that feels like a heavy punishment. 
  • The missions being adaptations of classic stories is great, but I think the end credits press conference is hilarious and very fun. 
  • Predefined "Tension Rises" challenges for each scenario

Cool Submission!

Hey there!
Marvin here, one of the three creators.

Thanks alot for your friendly and very detailed thoughts! Some of them we definetly agree with and I think you nailed some things on the first sight, great spot. We worked and tested some alternative ways to fill the reserves (on rolled 1s, on rolled 6s i.e.), but none felt great to play and often ended up overflowing the reserve. With more time and playtests we would have probably found a better implementation, but for now the problem stands, especially with big player numbers; it's less of a problem with 3-4 players (hence the remark at the beginnign of the rulebook). Perhaps something for a 1.1?

While GSU was designed to be an pick up and play ruleset, we tried to mimic the crunch with Challange Characteristics (great to hear, that you like them so much! They just were adding and adding once we started making scenarios). That's part of the reason, why the game is so much about the player agency and doesn't have a real loose-condition. If you want to feel like a badass - you will!

Once again thanks for your feedback, it is greatly appreciated and I am happy that you like the game! Perhaps it (or parts of it) will find the way onto your table some time :)

Much love from Germany
Marvin

Just a quick addition to Marvin’s reply: None of us ever played or ran Eat the Reich (we will have to catch up on that), so we probably just don’t know what we are missing. From reading other Jam entries, I understand some of the complexity that “full” Havoc offers. I am keen to explore that and see whether it ties in with our approach to the challenges.