Blood Red Sands pitch

Blood Red Sands is an a game by Ralph Mazza. Here's the only play report of it on the internet. It's an asymmetrical competitive gm-ful game with hidden information, shifting authorities, and formal conflict resolution. Probably nobody but the author has ever run it.

Front cover of the pdf. No longer for sale anywhere

BRS is grim and gritty swords and sorcery, psychedelic, as edgy as you can make it. The world is a wasteland dominated by witch kings who killed the gods and sucked up their power. You play the heroes attempting to destroy the witch kings. You also play the witch kings. You also play various third parties, who may or may not be sympathetic to the witch kings and to the heroes. You also play the storyteller recounting the legends of the heroes a thousand years in the future.

This game is genuinely competitive, on every single level. It is jam-packed with layers of strategy. If it works at all, it is probably really good. Let's find out!

The rest of this post is information about the game. It gets more complex and fine-grained as you go down, but reading it is entirely optional. You probably already know if you're interested in tackling this beast.

Campaign structure overview

Ok, here's the 10 thousand foot view: five players take turns playing heroes opposing the witch kings. One hero per session. When you're not playing a hero, you're playing a faction with its own goals and resources. Some factions also oppose the witch kings, and others support the witch king. Hero and factions are each scored on their successes in conflicts and their ability to achieve their pre-set objectives. As we play through multiple sessions (nine in total) heroes are eliminated based on their score. Eventually only one remains.

That final hero challenges a witch king. Of the four remaining players, the one with the highest score plays the witch king. In the final session, the hero is stronger or weaker depending on their successes and choices within the prior sessions, and the witch king is stronger or weaker depending on the successes of the factions within the prior sessions. Meanwhile the other players play factions as usual.

At the end of the session, either the hero has won, and the witch king is dead, or the witch king has won, and the hero is dead. The hero may or may not have become the new witch king.

  • If the witch king won, their player gets first place. The second highest-scoring player gets second place. The lowest-scoring faction player gets last place and is the loser. Nobody else is a winner or lower.
  • If the hero won, the their player gets first place. Nobody else is a winner or loser.

More detail on role selection, hero and faction players

In the first session, it doesn't matter who plays the hero, but it's going to be me. In the second, third, and fourth sessions, the player who scored the most points in the previous session only and hasn't played a hero yet plays the hero. These four sessions are called a "cycle". After the first cycle, one player won't have played a hero, and isn't going to get the chance. In the next three rounds (5-7), the same process is repeated with the returning heroes, and one more is eliminated. We repeat the process in a third cycle, which brings us down another hero, and only two remain. The two heroes fight, and only one remains to challenge the witch king.

To review, from session to session you get to play the hero if you scored high in the previous session. But in the final session, you want a high total score, to play the witch king.

Let's talk about faction and situation creation. 

We have five players. One plays the hero. The other four, faction players, meet in private. They roll up components of the situation like so.

Example components of situation generation

Then the faction players take turns assembling the components into a setting and four factions; the players assemble in order from the player who scored the highest in the previous session, to the player who scored the lowest. By the end, the factions are all different. They have different scales, different objectives, different loyalties with respect to the witch kings and the heroes, and different resources.

The other players (faction players, from here on) then pick a faction to play. You pick in order from the player who scored to the lowest in the previous session, to the player who scored the highest.

When the situation is assembled and the factions are picked, the hero player returns and play begins. The hero player does not initially know anything about the factions, not even which factions are in play.

Hero/faction resources and authority

You have a pool of dice, at least 16. You assign the dice to your fictional resources. You can do that at any time. But you only have situational authority over your faction and the things you have assigned dice to. (All other entities are under the authority of a general narrator; that role shifts, and there's strategy around holding that position.) And others who have spare dice can assign them in full knowledge of how you have just assigned your dice.

When you assign dice, you give traits to fictional entities. You should think about: the fictional entity you're giving the dice to, the specific trait, the die size, and the die's color, which has fancy effects within formal conflicts.

Distribution of authorities

You have authority over the thoughts and actions of the main character of your faction and any resources or traits you have assigned dice to. This is always true.

Otherwise, most situational authorities rest with the Chronicler:

Authorities and formal powers of the Chronicler. Finally some easy-to-summarize info!

You want to be the Chronicler. The Chronicler is not an unbiased GM; they are intentionally trying to steer events in their favor. They'll push your characters and resources into disadvantageous positions and give those disadvantageous formal backing.

You can only trigger formal conflict resolution procedures against the current Chronicler. And you want to get into formal conflict resolution procedures, because that's how you score points and achieve your objectives.

Luckily there are a few ways to switch Chroniclers; see below for some.

Formal conflict resolution procedures

Jesus Christ there are three separate procedures.

First, anybody can try to veto any in-fiction statement that doesn't have formal backing. The group votes to see if this goes through. No abstaining. (Does this work in play? Sounds kind of awful.) This is called a Challenge.

Second, when the Chronicler gives you some bad news, with or without formal backing, you can offer to pay them off with some of your dice. They can accept or not, and if they don't, you dice off to see who gets their way. The winner becomes the new Chronicler. This is called a Contest.

Third, when the Chronicler gives you some bad news as inflicted by one of their components, you can trigger a really long, complicated resolution procedure. That's where you can expect to earn most of your points and achieve your objectives. This is called a Clash.

Flowchart explaining how a clash works. Note that it doesn't get into the die aspects

 In addition to the flowchart above, the game includes a summary section explaining how to Clash. This summary is 4 pages long.

Considerations and complications

No matter what, you want to score a lot of points, and you don't want others to score a lot of points. If you think you can be the final hero, you want factions opposed to the witch kings to win. If you think you can be the witch king, you want factions allied with the witch kings to win. If somebody else (a hero or a faction player) is pulling ahead, either in this session or overall, you want to team up with other players to take them down. But you also want to respect your faction's in-fiction loyalties so you can achieve objectives and earn points. And you have to respect your faction's in-fiction resources.

All of these considerations apply to every player at all times. And these considerations have been caused by just three currencies: the central scoring principles, the faction creation and distribution rules, and the long-term advantages and disadvantages given to the witch king. We also have to consider the distribution of authorities in play, and the formal conflict rules, and your ability to create resources.

In sum, the game is complex and complicated.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Simple downtime maneuvers

 In my Arcade Mode game, players don't take downtime. They freely adjust their resources between sessions. That was the intent, anyway -- most players are unwilling to simply give themselves more resources. So I decided to draft a very simple downtime system. Every real world week, or every session, since your last session with a character, add 1 downtime point. Spend downtime points and (10 * level * points) rupees on downtime actions. (The rupee is your campaign's base currency type, whatever that is. 1 rupee = 1 xp = 1 days' wages for a basic infantryman, roughly.) Here are some simple downtime maneuvers, listed with their costs: 1 point = 1 streetwise check for new hirelings, rumors, rare items, contacts, trainers 1 point = 1 visit to a known sage, library, expert, important contact 1 point = 1 martial art technique learning check 1 point = 1 hireling recruitment roll 2 points = reroll HP, take the higher result 2 points = 1 attribute improvement roll 3 points = train ...
Read more

When do you need a GM?

Image
Traditionally RPGs centralize many responsibilities and authorities in one player, the GM. That's not necessarily bad, but it isn't necessarily good, either, and it's certainly not mandatory. I am going to look at some traditional functions of the GM to see why we put them in one player's hands, and how we might distribute the responsibility for these functions differently. A GM traditionally does a whole bunch of different things: Pitches the game Organizes play sessions, including recruiting players Knows the rules and teaches others Leads creatively Creates the background ("worldbuilding")  Creates the scenario for play Runs dramatic coordination Frames scenes Says "what's going on" generally Plays all side characters Resolves in-game tasks and conflicts Pitches the game, organizes play sessions, knows the rules. If the entire play-group is interested in gaming and excited about games, anybody should be able to do these things. (This or that ...
Read more

Combat overhaul parent post

I'm rewriting the combat procedures from D&D-like games for my fantasy heartbreaker Coup Étrange. Why? I lay out some motivations here. I got a lot of my inspiration from discussions with Eero Tuovinen and the fine folks at the Finnish RPG Theory discord server. I'm playtesting these rules with the fine folks at the Old School Table-Time discord server . Thanks to everybody involved! The overall structure of combat is different in the overhaul. In normal D&D, you roll initiative to see who goes first, then one side goes, and then the other. Rinse and repeat. (Maybe if you're fancy you get alternating phases -- this would be my preference -- or you get to interrupt your opponent's slow actions with your fast actions, as occasionally happens in AD&D 1e.) In my overhaul, melee ebbs and flows, as in a real fight. When you advance into melee, you commit yourself to being tied up in it for a variable amount of time, possibly unable to retreat. The alternating stru...
Read more