<B><I>Primetime Adventures</B></I> is an innovative, rules-light system for creating your own TV series through roleplaying. While it’s not for every roleplayer, the clever mechanics and inspirational material will thrill most story-centered players and have something to offer to almost everyone.
Post originally by Andy K at 2004-12-20 17:32:02
Converted from Phorums BB System
<i>"First, as I said, it is a small object. Depending on your personal budget and the other kinds of things you buy, that may make $18 seem like a lot to pay. You can offset this by reminding yourself that you are supporting an indie game designer, and you really are getting something unique."</i>
F*ck that, man. Seriously, that's kind of a lame excuse to put money down on something like a game. "I'll pay more than I would otherwise, because I want to help Matt with his car downpayment." Sorry to sound like a Ferengi here, but you should pay for what your return (in "fun") will be.
And that, friends, is why spending $18 on Prime Time Adventures will be the best choice you make with your gaming dollar this year.
"I'm supporting Matt Wilson"
Waaaah.
"I'm getting something unique"
I find unique things in my nose.
<i>"Prime Time Adventures inspired one of the best godd*amned roleplaying sessions I've had in years"</i>
Sh*t, well THAT'S news.
<i>"I used Prime Time Adventures to run over 16 hours of fun gaming, probably the best gaming I've done in months. Meanwhile, hundreds of dollars of background fiction disguised as a roleplaying game sits unused on my shelf since I bought it."</i>
Now THAT'S something worth spending a $20 bill on.
I love small press games. I love buying games from their designers. But I do so not because I want to make colorful new friends, or because I want to help them buy beer, but because the works they produce (the ones I chose to buy, anyway) left me with some of the best table gaming that I've done in years. Hell, <i>ever</i>, even.
So, just wanted to throw that out there. Matt's a great guy. But f*ck giving him money for beer. Buy the game because it's one of the best d*amn games released last year, perhaps one of the best games you'll ever play (depending on how your group responds to it). $18 for a spiral-bound bundle of tight ideas and explosive gaming vs $50 for colorful pages full of rules for swimming and hitting sh*t with axes that may or may not inspire you... This is not a hard decision for me. :-)
Post originally by Andy K at 2004-12-20 19:20:29
Converted from Phorums BB System
<i>"The game acknowledges this possibility somewhat, including Gilmore Girls, Six Feet Under, and Sports Night on its list of “model shows” (along with Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Firefly, etc.), but most of its examples imply that you’re “supposed to” create high-adventure, fanboy kinds of shows. More balance in the examples would do a better job of highlighting the flexibility of the system."</i>
Totally agree there. I'm hoping for more things like play examples or sample shows (in the forums) or else a free/cheap downloadable PDF with more sample shows in it.
Personally, I think the high action stuff is there because we tend to like that sort of thing anyway. I used it to run my "Badasses of the Federation" Star Trek game, and with all this talk of Gilmore Girls, I'm thinking next I want to do a show that's a cross between Gilmore Girls and Occult Conspiracy Monster Slayers.
But considering that I've seen it used to play a children's cartoon show (and a fabulous one at that), I'd be really interested in seeing a "TV Guide Supplemental" filled with the kind of "shows" (sample campaigns, or real ones that people recorded) as examples to feed the brain.
Post originally by Alan at 2004-12-20 20:48:08
Converted from Phorums BB System
Hi Andy,
Here's a link to a list of PTA campaigns that I know of:
http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=13753
Most campaigns have tended to be more like TV SF or Buffy, with Moose in the City as an exception. This, however, only reflects the preferences of the players involved.
PTA not only supports games with tech, magic, or other wierdness, it also supports straight drama, an area not widely explored by roleplaying games in gemeral. This last is why Matt and others always mention the potential.
Post originally by Aaron Stone at 2004-12-21 06:57:43
Converted from Phorums BB System
Andy, a good critique of my critique. You're right--really the only reason to get this game is that it ROCKS. I guess I was just trying to give people any possible reason to get past any resistance they might have.
Post originally by Aaron Stone at 2004-12-21 06:59:40
Converted from Phorums BB System
And now, a week later, I've officially played the game. My playtest experience didn't change any of the substance of my review, and if anything I'm MORE enthusiastic about it now. And the game we made was a sitcom with no supernatural powers about pretty down-to-earth people (although the setting was somewhat fantastic), and the game worked perfectly.
Post originally by Paul Czege at 2004-12-21 08:03:50
Converted from Phorums BB System
We just finished the final session of a great five-episode PtA drama last week (about the space race in the mid-60s). And although we have not played a high-adventure show, I'm left thinking an adventure would have been a cleaner, tighter experience in terms of our natural adherence to the rules. The game specifies that going into a conflict the player states "intent," which is defined as what the character hopes to accomplish. In our drama, we often found ourselves stating intents we wanted as players...stuff we wanted inflicted on our characters. "I want to be nonresponsive, so she calls off the wedding." This may seem strange, but handling a character in a drama I better knew the adversity I wanted for him than what he wanted. And it actually felt unnatural to state intents on behalf of him. It felt like a disservice to the character. "He wants to calm her down and make the problem go away." Well, @!#$, I just asked for a scene with the fiancé being all upset, and now I'm going to say that I want that conflict to go away!? The game was great, but a couple of times a session we'd have to step back, rework what we'd stated for intent, and trust the Producer to deliver meaningful adversity. I'm thinking that would have been easier to do if it were a high-adventure show.
Post originally by Aaron Stone at 2004-12-28 06:57:32
Converted from Phorums BB System
I understand why you think high-adventure would have worked more smoothly for you, but I suspect that's because your group (like most RPG groups) is more familiar with "conflict" in the high adventure sense. When I tried it first, we were doing a sitcom in which most conflicts were about trying to persuade someone to do or not do something, and the system worked flawlessly.
Linear Mode
