[RPG]: Out in the Black, reviewed by countrysamurai (2/2)

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13789.phtml

Ralph Montano's Summary:

Out in the Black offers some Serenity kind of fun in a small mining town but the adventure doesn't quite hit its target.

Go to the full review for more information.

[mitchw]

I was a playtester on this item, but I am not an employee of MWP so these questions are just from me:

You say that you liked the write-up of the town, which is half the book, and you still only give it a 2 for content? What would your score have been if this was a 64 page sourcebook on just the town without the adventure?

In the adventure you seem to say that your players did not trust 'Saffron' so large parts of the adventure didn't work.

My question here is how did your PC's know who Saffron was and that she was a total scam artist? IMO, if you are not using the original crew then the identity of the woman in question would not be known. (If you wait and reveal it to the 'players' at the end of the adventure, it's a lot of fun to see the way they react but the 'characters' should not have that extra info.)

Keep Flyin'

Mitch

[Mechante_Anemone]

Thanks for the review, Ralph, that was pretty informative without giving away all the material in the book.

Originally Posted by mitchw

My question here is how did your PC's know who Saffron was and that she was a total scam artist? IMO, if you are not using the original crew then the identity of the woman in question would not be known. (If you wait and reveal it to the 'players' at the end of the adventure, it's a lot of fun to see the way they react but the 'characters' should not have that extra info.)

If the players know the character and know they're going to be cheated and abused six ways from Sunday, you can't blame them for tiptoeing away. Sure, their characters might not know this (though it sounds like they figured out at least some of Brigit's town-wide scheming), but you can't ask them to just sit quietly through such an adventure if it's not fun for the players.

Now, some players do enjoy this sort of thing and would in fact place themselves in a position to be bamboozled by YoSaffBridg, but a good proportion of gamers don't like it. In this case, they got their satisfaction by knowing they had wiggled out of her snares, and probably felt mighty clever.

[mitchw]

Originally Posted by Mechante_Anemone

If the players know the character and know they're going to be cheated and abused six ways from Sunday, you can't blame them for tiptoeing away.

My question is still how do the players know unless they are told buy the GM or have read the adventure and spoiled it for themselves. The character in the adventure is not called YoSaffBridg (or any variation of that).

I just feel that it’s not fair to criticize the scenario because a spoiler can actually spoil it. Even putting the fact that it is her in the review is a spoiler IMO.

I also want to thank the OP for the review. We need more reviews and reviewers here. (Yes, I know that includes me and I need to write some more as well.)

Mitch

[selenite]

Originally Posted by mitchw

if this was a 64 page sourcebook on just the town without the adventure?

That's pretty much what I think of it as. Given that I picked it up used at half price I'm happy with it. If it'd just been the town at full price I'd've given it a low score for being overpriced.

The adventure is too much of a railroad for me to enjoy running it, and has too many twists smart players would avoid to be useful for a newbie GM. The author seems to understand this, thus the black boxes with advice on forcing the players back onto the tracks sprinkled throughout.

Saffron is a great character but doesn't work in a RPG except possibly as a patron. If players know who she is they run or kill her. If they don't you go through the whole adventure and get a fifteen second "gosh, that was her?" moment at the end. Not worth it.

[Mechante_Anemone]

Originally Posted by mitchw

My question is still how do the players know unless they are told buy the GM or have read the adventure and spoiled it for themselves. The character in the adventure is not called YoSaffBridg (or any variation of that).

According to the review, she's still a redhead and "goes locally by the name of Brigit." That's a dead giveaway for fans of the Firefly series, given that Brigit is the name she used when she "married" Mal's friend Monty (in the episode "Trash.") I have to assume that the writers expected a glimmer of recognition from players, especially once the PCs realize how many schemes Brigit the schoolmarm has going.

"YoSaffBridg" is the derisive nickname Mal uses for her later in the same episode, referring to her many aliases (Yolanda, Saffron, Bridget), and is frequently used by fans of the show since we don't know what her real name is.

[hyphz]

Saffron is a great character but doesn't work in a RPG except possibly as a patron. If players know who she is they run or kill her. If they don't you go through the whole adventure and get a fifteen second "gosh, that was her?" moment at the end. Not worth it.

It's an absolutely perfect example of what you can write in episodes but not RPGs.

A far more likely problem is that the players recognize her but the characters don't, so the players slump in their seats and watch their characters get abused while the GM keeps crowing "you can't act on out-of-game knowledge". I don't know about others, but I'd walk out of a game like that.

[GarrettPLC]

A far more likely problem is that the players recognize her but the characters don't, so the players slump in their seats and watch their characters get abused while the GM keeps crowing "you can't act on out-of-game knowledge". I don't know about others, but I'd walk out of a game like that.

Yeah, that would suck. However, when I've run OitB, I've just changed the name she's using and everything else worked fine.

The problem with the module, then, is her alias, not the actual adventure. I'd agree that the alias should have been changed for publication, but an easily-fixed problem like that certainly doesn't make the book any less usable.

Blessed be,
~Nathan

[Mechante_Anemone]

Originally Posted by GarrettPLC

I'd agree that the alias should have been changed for publication, but an easily-fixed problem like that certainly doesn't make the book any less usable.

It does if the GM doesn't realize the problem ahead of time. Thanks to Ralph's review, some people will now know, but those who don't and encounter the same problem when they run the adventure as-is can't be blamed if they are unhappy with the result.

[countrysamurai]

Originally Posted by mitchw

I was a playtester on this item, but I am not an employee of MWP so these questions are just from me:

You say that you liked the write-up of the town, which is half the book, and you still only give it a 2 for content? What would your score have been if this was a 64 page sourcebook on just the town without the adventure?

In the adventure you seem to say that your players did not trust 'Saffron' so large parts of the adventure didn't work.

My question here is how did your PC's know who Saffron was and that she was a total scam artist? IMO, if you are not using the original crew then the identity of the woman in question would not be known. (If you wait and reveal it to the 'players' at the end of the adventure, it's a lot of fun to see the way they react but the 'characters' should not have that extra info.)

Keep Flyin'

Mitch

Mitch,
First to the Saffron question. My players knew it was "that" red-head because I showed them a picture. We have a multi media game. Everyone is required to find a picture of their character from Internet Movie Database. (Mine is a preacher turned sniper who looks an awful lot like someone named Jack on 24.)
We are playing a game where the rotating GM often tries to work in characters from the series. Its part of the fun. On a timeline, we actually started before the Firefly series and are just getting into their timeline now.

On the other issue of rating, well, we look at rating systems differently. I gave it a two points out of five just because of the town. But its not all the book. Its not even the focus of the book.

The adventure itself I really didn't like. It blows me away that this was nominated for an Origins Award. That just doesn't speak highly of the award to me.

I mean, the problem with the treasure is just not thought out. Am I seriously the only person who realized that if a precious metal coin is tainted with something the first thing you do is melt it down? Its a poor basis for an adventure because the treasure would have been melted down long ago.

Actually, if my players would have gotten there they would have found an entirely different treasure, one of my own creation, because in my version of the adventure the Tong took the money, melted it down into the form of a statue of Buddha that is inside the temple. It is now a cash reserve for hard times.

Thanks everyone for your input. I'm working on my next Actual Play review now on Dennis Detwiller's Future/ Perfect Pt. 1. We have one more session.