Televised MRQ

J

JohnLokiBeard

Mongoose
So, I was watching poker on tv last night and I wondered if something similar could be done with MRQ. [Or any Mongoose game, but I'm restricting the question to MRQ because rpgs interest me more than minis, and D&D makes more sense as a starting point for televising d20 rpgs - and if this idea has worth I'd prefer Mongoose to get the first bite at the cherry].

I'd quite enjoy watching a commentated game...

Commentator: "...and the trollkin's rolled 01; a critical, but even so that shouldn't worry Rurik the Runelord with his 250% dodge.. OH NO HE'S FUMBLED!"
 
:oops: Oh Rurik would be watching just as I posted that...

Anyway, I think the idea might work, but Glorantha could be a bit of a steep learning curve for 'civilian' viewers so a Fantasy 12th Century Earth could be a better setting. Or if it were on the BBC then some sort of 'Beebworld': "OK, we go to the temple of Palin, god of travellers to see if they have any useful maps..."[/quote]
 
JohnLokiBeard said:
So, I was watching poker on tv last night and I wondered if something similar could be done with MRQ.
Click to expand...

RPG's aren't necessarily great spectator sport - although I'm sure with the right players, GM and setting you could get something interesting out of it. I'm not sure about commentary - I suppose if you are trying to teach the system (or maybe the setting) some commentary might be necessary, but Poker without commentary is long periods of people looking thoughtful and contemplating their hands in near silence. Commentary for a RPG session would tend to obscure what was actually happening!

I think if I were to be running such a project*, recent "fakeing it" scandals not withstanding, I'd want to film the entire session first then put together the show (along with any "commentary inserts") in the edit suite


*No that I would be, since I don't work in TV, lest anyone assume otherwise
 
duncan_disorderly said:
RPG's aren't necessarily great spectator sport - although I'm sure with the right players, GM and setting you could get something interesting out of it. I'm not sure about commentary - I suppose if you are trying to teach the system (or maybe the setting) some commentary might be necessary, but Poker without commentary is long periods of people looking thoughtful and contemplating their hands in near silence. Commentary for a RPG session would tend to obscure what was actually happening!

I think if I were to be running such a project*, recent "fakeing it" scandals not withstanding, I'd want to film the entire session first then put together the show (along with any "commentary inserts") in the edit suite


*No that I would be, since I don't work in TV, lest anyone assume otherwise
Click to expand...

Yeah, the latter was what I had in mind, the same way they edit 6-hour poker sessions down to an hour of key hands.
 
You should do a search for 'kurt weigel' (I think) or gamegeek.com on you tube and see his rpg reviews. I reckon he'd do a bang up job of hosting it. As for it being televised... I think you'd be lucky to get it on the net!
 
You all want to chip in and pitch "The RPG Channel" to cable? They always need something to fill up 1000 channels.

I can see them showing the battlemap with the analysists drawing on an overlay, just like on sports shows.


"We know the Truestone is hidden in the secret compartment behind the altar, but will Rurik use his Search skill? And can Rurik avoid the trapped squares on the map?"

"I don't know if the traps are going to be the problem, Gary, just look at that statue next to the altar. It's a ten foot tall, image of a trollkin, cast in lead. Do you think it could be enchanted to protect the Truestone?"

"Good point Steve, and Rurik already used his Sunspear spell on the Zorak Zoran Rune Lord earilier, and is running low on magic points. We'll return with the concuslion to this weeks session after this word from Nysalor Games"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"How do you roll a d1?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Okay, we're back and it's all over! What a surprise twist!"

"Yeah, Gary, I didn't expect that the stature was hollow."

"Me either, Steve. And I certainly didn't expect it to contail a trollkin Rune Priest of Emal!"

"Yeah, certain a snaky move by the GM. Well so long for now. Don't forget to tune in on next week for our Argath semifianlists. Stay tunred for Dragonnewt Gladiators-is it live or a rerun?
 
atgxtg said:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"How do you roll a d1?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...
I gave this some thought. Then some more.

Now I realise that good and evil are subjective viewpoints. My reflection in the mirror has changed to something altogether darker and my local vicar can no longer see me.

What's happening to me?
 
Actually the more visual the game is the better it is for "spectator sports". That way either a roleplaying game using miniatures or just a skirmish scale miniatures game would work better than if the commentators would have to tell the viewers what that star in the map is (the statue).

Another thing that might be required would be some sort of limited resources to GM as well (like in Spycraft). In that way it would really be GM vs. players and no longer a real RPG after all.
 
SnowDog said:
Actually the more visual the game is the better it is for "spectator sports". That way either a roleplaying game using miniatures or just a skirmish scale miniatures game would work better than if the commentators would have to tell the viewers what that star in the map is (the statue).

Another thing that might be required would be some sort of limited resources to GM as well (like in Spycraft). In that way it would really be GM vs. players and no longer a real RPG after all.
Click to expand...

Hmm, but these are also the things that make it less interesting to spectate. One of the things that RPG's are sometimes compared to is "Improvisational Radio Drama". Another comparator used to explain long campaigns with no winners or losers is "like a soap opera". If your show is focusing on moving miniatures around on a battle mat, or concentrating on the minutae of the rules then you are distracting from the story and the drama.

According to the paper yesterday, Hasbro have sold the film rights to "Monopoly" - No ons essms exactly sure what the film will look like, but it is unlikely to consist of just shots of dice rolls and a little metal dog walking past red pladtic hotels...


Obviously if, rather than presenting an entertainment show you want to produce a "RPG Training Video" that will replace/complement the examples in the rulebooks for those people who prefer to watch clips than read books, then the opposite will largely apply.
 
atgxtg wrote:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"How do you roll a d1?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------



I gave this some thought. Then some more.

Now I realise that good and evil are subjective viewpoints. My reflection in the mirror has changed to something altogether darker and my local vicar can no longer see me.

What's happening to me?
Click to expand...

LMAO :lol: :lol:
 
I see your point. In fact I could very well "see" it as an audio drama rather than in television or even in as a video clip in net. I have personally been an audience of exactly one session and I couldn't stand it. It was so outrageously humorous that it probably embarrased me even more than those who were playing. Let's face it playing looks pretty stupid if you're not part of it. There are a bunch of people with papers and weird looking dice. Occasionally one of them (the GM) describes a situation and then others (the players) will describe what they do or ask something or better yet stat to argue (with each other or with GM or both). Suddenly the GM starts to describe some monter with more or less graphic detail and the dice starts to fly. Maybe figures will be moved, something will be drawn to piece of paper or in worst case scenario (for the outsider's point of view) everything happens in the imagination of players and GM. That's just the way I see it, I am glad to be proven or pointed wrong.

But my main point is that you can follow a game of poker because you are suppose to know the rules (or commentator tells them). With modern technology you can even see the player's cards. There is money involved etc. Good show. Heck, there are even people watching how a match of chess is going on. But all of this is possible because it is a visual thing.

For RPGs to be viewable (is that a word?) you need a very good GM, visual aids (good maps and counters/miniatures maybe even computer generated) and good players who can get into character almost like actors. Their (electronic) character sheets should be able to be shown etc. otherwise the drama will be lost because noone can bother to watch a slow tempoed game. Maybe there should be a recap at the end of the show that tells and or shows major points in plot or something.

I have not heard of the Monopoly film but I think that it would be a story of buying and selling etc. There was this film called Dungeons & Dragons and I didn't see many dice in that film :)
 
I listened to the first 2 parts of the 'masks' audio game and when they were'nt pratting about they were arguing. It felt like a game of paranoia than anything else. I just kep thinking "If that's the atmosphere for cthulhu in their group then id wouldn't play. I'd get up and walk."
Sorry, but that's how I see it.

My players immerse themselves in atmosphere...not mess about.
 
steffworthington said:
I listened to the first 2 parts of the 'masks' audio game and when they were'nt pratting about they were arguing. It felt like a game of paranoia than anything else. I just kep thinking "If that's the atmosphere for cthulhu in their group then id wouldn't play. I'd get up and walk."
Sorry, but that's how I see it.
Click to expand...

...Which is why I said you'd need the right mix of players/GM/adventure.

Fairly simple storytelling can work on TV - Jackanory at one end of the spectrum, or Mike McShane doing "Damien Runyon's Broadway Tales" at the other. (as a barely related tangent , I always thought that given that Griselda was written in homage to Runyon, the Griselda tales would work quite nicely in this format). If you are telling an interesting and exciting story then you will draw your audience in, even if they initially know nothing about the game or the setting. If you show lots of dice rolling and jargon you will drive away even hardcoew Role-players who would rather "do" than "watch"

Chess and Poker work as spectator sports because the rules are quite limited and we can pit our wits against the players we are watching. Can we see the move that will counter the one just made? Would we raise or fold if those were our cards? With poker as well, we get the suspense of knowing more than the players - we know that player A has the best hand, because we have seen the others, but will his nerve hold or will player B's large raise cause him to fold? Roleplaying is much more open to interpretation - we can (try to) do almost anything, and mch if the suspense is in the dice, which is lost somehow when we are removed from them
 
Seriously (something that probably doesn't suit this topic).

several good points have been raised on the difficulty in televising RPGs.

It needs to be acessable to the audience, it needs to be visual, it'st needs to have game aspects so the audience can second guess the players, and it needs to be interesting.

I see two possibly ways to do this.

1) "Pick a Path" style adventures, where the audience can have otpions and information flashed on the screen that the players don't see. Like in game shows where they used to put the answer on screen.

2) COmputer RPGs, have the visual and dynamic components required, and usually an easy to follow storyline that an audience can follow (Find the magic sword so you can kill the dragon and save the pricess, check).


But, the one thing the game would need to succeed on TV would be "professional" quality players. Spectator shows work in part because people who are into a hobby/sport/whatever like to see people who are much better than themselves at it.

Otherwise, anyone who gets interested in RPGs could and would play instead of watch.
 
OK, what I’m envisioning now:

One scenario [about 6 hours playing time, but probably 4-5 hours actual play not counting snack/toilet breaks and off-game nattering] = 6 x 1-hour episodes.

Split-screen: on the left we see the players around the table, miniatures etc; on the right it switches as appropriate between PC stat sheets, GM info [maps with the traps marked, NPC stats etc], and some actors on a bluescreen set.

As the game progresses, right half of the screen shows what the gameplay is describing. Sometimes the combat can be in slow-mo, if it’s deemed important to show the effect of individual rolls; sometimes it’s just shown at ‘real’ speed.
Commentary like atgxtg described above.

Players are a mixture of experienced gamers [Mongoose playtesters?], newbies, and maybe some celebs who can be trusted not to just show off/take the piss [so not professional comedians/Jonathan Ross/Robbie Williams etc].

No limit to GM’s resources and no scoring/league ranking system among players, so it’s proper ‘not a competition’ roleplaying for pleasure.
 
Lets not forget. Prizes. Like if a PC gets a magic sword, the player gets a LCD TV or something.

Carry that over so that people in the audience and viewers at home can win prizes too. Maybe if they write in and pick stuff like "who will deal the final blow on the dragon?" or "Who will get the magic sword?". Maybe even some "vote to see who will marry the princess" sort of stuff.

They could even have cliffhanger endings.





WHO FIREBALLED J.R.? :wink:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Solo Traveller - thoughts
Replies
8
Views
3K
maddormo
maddormo
MongooseMatt
  • Locked
The State of the Mongoose 2012
Replies
0
Views
18K
MongooseMatt
MongooseMatt
H
So I finally gave in...
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
12K
Dave Chase
D
MongooseMatt
  • Locked
The State of the Mongoose 2010
Replies
0
Views
17K
MongooseMatt
MongooseMatt
P
The 16 Book Syndrome
2
Replies
32
Views
8K
warzen
W
Back
Top