Looney Labs Icehouse Mailing list Archive

[Icehouse] Re: [Event] Pyramids and Werewolves by David Artman

  • FromDavid Artman <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • DateMon, 12 Mar 2007 14:15:49 -0700
In a couple different posts, Bryan wrote:
> Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. We're Rabbits not because
> we're professionals, but because we're amateurs; we love Looney

Oh, sure, I can appreciate that. I am only a BIT hard on myself,
really--plain text can't quite convey whimsy, without emoticons every
line, huh?

BUT, on the other hand, even being an amateur, I feel like I poorly
represent LL when I bungle games during demos. Unless I make sure
everyone knows that I am not an "Official Rep"--which I do, when asked,
but I don't make a point of clarifying with every person--there will be
people who see me as such and, thus, do not se LL in the ideal light
they deserve.

And on the gripping hand... I guess you haven't read my Rabbit Profile

> Some specific advice: for things that absolutely need everyone
> to be in one place at one time (like Werewolf), just set a
> specific time to begin with.

Well, to be clear, that's pretty much what the con sign-up sheets and
schedule said, initially. It was only in response to having almost no
one at 8pm, that I began to pitch it as "just come by."

But, sure, next time--though I hope never to be quite so off base
again--I will just pick a time, if I am having to push it back for
popular other events or, generally, because few show up at the
advertised start time.

> Also, you might want to try a floating tournament instead of a
> fixed one. That way people can just drop by, play a game or two,
> and then go to whatever other scheduled event they had.

Very interesting idea; I'll consider it.

SO... maybe I could have done it as some kind of "aggregate score"
tournament, based on wins in games played all session? That would
actually incentivize folks to stick around, too: the more they play,
the more wins they can rack up. Hmmm... and I could even let each
pair/triplet/quad of players choose what they wanted to play, and
weight the points award for a win based on relative play time
differences between the games (ex: a win in 4-player Martian Coasters
would be worth two or three points, as compared to a win in 4-player

> This all makes me feel that we really ought to try and get the
> Rabbit Wiki that we have discussed up and running, so we can
> actually document whatever suggestions and conclusions we reach
> about the best ways to run events.

Well, what's to stop us from doing so on the Icehouse.org wiki? Tag all
the Rabbit Advice with a [[Category:Demoers]] tag or
[[Category:Rabbits]] tag, and the wiki will auto-sort all such pages
into that category listing. Add a new section to the Home Page,
introducing and pointing Rabbits to that category, and I think it would
be more than sufficient. I'd certainly add my 2¢ to any pages created to
discuss pyramid game demoing--oh. Oh, I see why that might not work:
some Rabbits demo things other than pyramids! (I forget, sometimes, so
strong is my obsession.)

Oh, well... yeah, we'd want to have a game-independent wiki, wouldn't
we? Anyone know if the icehouse.org site admins--or LL themselves--can
add a new folder and another wiki install, for us? I am becoming
wiki-happy, lately: it's SUCH a great way to publish  group proceedings
online that I am pretty much shifting my own site and any with whom I
have pull to that mode of operation. The bulletin board is dead!

And finally:
> You know, I seem to recall something similar happening at the
> last Con I demoed at. If I remember correctly, someone was
> looking at them in a vendor room, and I told them before they
> bought them, but it may be a somewhat more widespread problem.

OK, glad I'm not the only one who sees/worries about this.

> My solution? Come up with a spiffy game for a Treehouse set
> and volcano cap set. Maybe we need to revive the Icehouse
> game design competition, and have this be a theme for the
> next one.

Yep, and that would be a very nice way to re-brand the VCs. But a
packaging change would still occur--to pitch them as "supplements" for
the single-stash game you propose. And, of course, clarify that they
enable Volcano to be played, too! (Shift focus from *only* for Volcano
to *also* for Volcano.)

And if you get any kind of game design contest going, let me know! I am
already trying to come up with game, in general, that really leverages
opaques (check out my flagellation on "RPG" at the wiki).

Using only smalls would be a bit tougher, but I'm game. (heh)