Convention Game question

[Tauman.EXE]

Man im nervous. Im going to GM a convention quest in the champins setting, I decided to use the premade quest presented in Digital hero 9. But where to start, how do I introduce the game to a group of noobs in a good way and how do I let them know what to expect and what I expect out of them?

Could any one of you share some experience on this?

[OddHat]

Well, a few points that help when I run games at conventions:

Playtest the game at least once, preferably 2-3 times, before game day. Take notes on what bits worked and what didn't. Adjust as needed.

Break the adventure down into acts (Act 1, Act 2, Act 3) and scenes (Act 1 Scene 1), and decide which scenes can be dropped to keep the adventure moving.

Combats are usually a good choice for a scene to drop. You'll probably want at least one or two for a Champions adventure, but don't worry if that's all you can fit.

Keep a record of everyone's DEX and SPD, including phases, and keep a combat crib sheet in front of you.

Know the PC's sheets backwards and forwards, and keep them fairly simple. Complicated PC builds will slow things down as players try to figure them out.

Don't be afraid to cheat to keep things moving.

Have something for the PCs to chase, or something to chase a PC. A big monster for everyone to pound on together is always good.

Short, three or four sentence summaries of each character are much easier to read through than complete character sheets when picking characters. Have enough on hand to allow all the players to take a look.

[bigdamnhero]

There've been a few other good threads on this topic recently:

Characteristics of a Con Game?:
http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40354

What makes a Good One Shot / Con Adventure?
http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47129

Con scenarios
http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52012

Convention Game Descriptions -- What attracts you?
http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51235

[Dust Raven]

BDH list some good resources.

Some important bits:

Keep the characters simple. Keep a full, gritty, crunchy, mechanics filled character sheet on hand but only hand it to the player if he asks for it. Use a number's light version that just lists the Power's name/descriptor and the amount of dice/effect/roll. Avoid using Frameworks. Keep the characters simple and identifiable; i.e. use standard archetypes like Brick, Mentalist, etc. and unless the idea turns your stomach, make full set that's stereotypical for the genre.

And let players know that you're intending this for newbies if that's what you're doing. It sucks if 5 veterans and one newbie shows up, and the newbie gets lost in the jargon. It's better if 5 newbies show up and 1 veteran joins in. He'll end up help teaching the rules while you continue to run the game.

[bigdamnhero]

Keep the characters simple. Keep a full, gritty, crunchy, mechanics filled character sheet on hand but only hand it to the player if he asks for it. Use a number's light version that just lists the Power's name/descriptor and the amount of dice/effect/roll. Avoid using Frameworks. Keep the characters simple and identifiable; i.e. use standard archetypes like Brick, Mentalist, etc. and unless the idea turns your stomach, make full set that's stereotypical for the genre.
I totally agree with keeping the character sheets as clear and simple as possible. But for what it's worth, I don't necessarily agree that you have to use all "standard archetypes." In fact I typically go out of my way to make one or two characters that are a little outside the norm, just to show off the versatilty of the Hero system. Let's face it, one of Hero's biggest assets is that you can create characters in Hero you just can't create with other systems. Not that the primary goal of con games is to "recruit" new Hero players, but still it doesn't hurt to play to the game's strength.

The key IMO is you need characters that play smoothly; but that's not always directly proportional to the complexity of the build. For example, I don't have a problem using simple Frameworks. The key is to explain it as "These are your Magnetism Attacks; you can use any one of them one at a time," rather than trying to explain what a Multipower is. (Unless they ask, of course.)

All FWIW, YMMV, XYZPDQ, QWERTY, etc. :)

[bigdamnhero]

I recently helped playtest and critique a friend’s convention scenario; going through my notes brought a few additional thoughts to mind. Many of these are also true for home campaigns, but the nature of con games makes them even more relevant. Many of them may seem obvious, but I can’t say I’ve never made any of these errors my own self:

1. If the point of the adventure is to find out Who Killed Fred, give the players and their characters some reason to care that Fred is dead. Ideally, let them get to know (and hopefully like) Fred, even if only for a few minutes, before you kill him off. Yes, simply saying “You’re being paid to find out” works mechanically, but providing an emotional link almost always makes for a stronger story.

2. Remember that the story is supposed to be about the PCs. Having NPCs discover crucial pieces of information should only be done as a last resort. I’m not talking about roleplaying encounters where the point is to persuade an NPC to tell you what he knows. I’m talking about the NPC walking into the crime scene and announcing that Fred was killed by “x.” At least give the players a fair chance to figure this out on their own.

3. Beware of extraneous elements. If the villain killed Fred by draining Fred’s immunity to his own acid blood (cool idea, that) don’t also have the villain poison Fred’s drink just so you have a poisoned cup around for a clue afterward. You’ll probably just confuse the players. When in doubt, simplify.

4. Never assume your players will do what you expect. The one NPC you expect them to befriend is the one they’ll kill on sight, and vice versa. The ambush you expect them to spot is the one they’ll walk into blindly, and the fight you expect to surprise them with is the one they’ll see coming. That’s not a bad thing, really; it just means you need to stay flexible whenever possible.

5. As a general guideline: if you have, say, three investigation encounters and one do-something-else encounter, and you have to drop one of them? You can probably spare one of the investigations. When in doubt, err on the side of variety.

6. By the way, try not to have ALL your attractive female NPCs be total sluts, or worse. Just sayin.

7. The players in your home campaign have probably been gaming with you long enough to be fairly good at picking up what pieces of description are important and what parts are just background color. The players in your con game won’t have that luxury. I’m not saying you have to hit them over the head with each plot point. But if your story depends on them remembering the architectural details of a building from Act I, be prepared to remind them of those details in Act III.

8. If your scenario is set somewhere other than the “real world” (or a close approximation), don’t assume that your players will understand and/or agree on what is/isn’t illegal/immoral/etc. This applies even if your game is set in a well-known setting: sure as deathandtaxes, you’ll get one player who’s never actually seen the show but thought your game sounded interesting. ("What Prime Directive?" :) )

9. Not every encounter has to be roleplayed out extensively. Feel free to just narrate some bits if the encounter doesn’t add anything significant, or if you’re running behind schedule. Similarly, not every mook smackdown need to be resolved with a full-on combat.

10. Entangling PCs that have no way to break out may be a valid tactic, but can be very frustrating for the poor player. Same for any other one-shot trick. It’s not like a home campaign, where there’s always next week.

11. In general, Act III is not the time to be introducing important new NPCs and interesting new plot elements. Remember Chekhov’s* Dictum: If you have a rifle on the wall in Act I, you must fire it by Act III; if you’re going to fire it in Act III, you must show it in Act I.

12. If the PCs save the Princess’ life, they get to have her hang a medal around their necks at the end. Or whatever. Five seconds worth of closure buys a lot more than you might think.

13. Ask yourself: at the end of the module, what have the players (hopefully) accomplished? In the case of my friend’s scenario the heroes did everything right (more or less), but were unable to prevent two murders; “saved” another NPC but were later told he would’ve likely survived anyway; told a VIP some important information that it turned out he already knew; and stopped a serial killer from…committing suicide. Granted, not every adventure has to be The PCs Save The World. But still…


* That’s Anton, not Pavel. ;)

[teh bunneh]

6. By the way, try not to have ALL your attractive female NPCs be total sluts, or worse. Just sayin.

Aw, dangit! Now I have to re-write all my scenarios for Genghis Con! :mad: ;)

[Karmakaze]

I totally agree with keeping the character sheets as clear and simple as possible. But for what it's worth, I don't necessarily agree that you have to use all "standard archetypes." In fact I typically go out of my way to make one or two characters that are a little outside the norm, just to show off the versatility of the Hero system. Let's face it, one of Hero's biggest assets is that you can create characters in Hero you just can't create with other systems. Not that the primary goal of con games is to "recruit" new Hero players, but still it doesn't hurt to play to the game's strength.

It depends a bit on what you mean by archetype. You don't need to have one (1) brick, one (1) patriot, one (1) martial artist, one (1) energy projector, etc. On the other hand, it's a good idea not to make the character motivations too complex. The "naive kid", the "fastidious princess, the "grizzled veteran", etc are often convenient shorthand to let players get into character quickly.


The key IMO is you need characters that play smoothly; but that's not always directly proportional to the complexity of the build. For example, I don't have a problem using simple Frameworks. The key is to explain it as "These are your Magnetism Attacks; you can use any one of them one at a time," rather than trying to explain what a Multipower is. (Unless they ask, of course.)

I have one convention character with a VPP. It either goes to the most experienced person at the table, or the least. (The least experienced player gets to tell me generally what they want, and I provide the appropriate power.)