The great game store “EndGame” in Oakland hosts a “miniCon” a few times a year. I signed up for one last year, but ultimately chickened out and didn’t go. One of my goals for this year was to attend a gaming convention and actually play in a game. I arguably already met that objective in January when I attended FiascoCon at Endgame, but I really want to spend a day or two playing in several different games at a convention this year. I didn’t meet that objective, entirely, by attending this MiniCon either, but … one step at a time.
I attended some gaming convention in, I think, Alameda, back in the early ’90s. But I didn’t muster up the courage to actually join any games. I just wandered around and watched what people were doing. Even as a geek, it’s intimidating to join a group that you don’t know.
I drove all the way to Endgame, rather than taking BART as I usually do, mostly because I wanted to be able to get home as quickly as possible. The last session was slated to go until 7PM, and with light traffic that’s about a 90 minute trip by car. BART probably adds 45 minutes to an hour to that trip, which meant I was going to be getting home pretty late. Driving, though, led to the hassle of parking, which ended up being more stressful than I expected. Next time, I think I’ll just do BART.
There were some pre-session announcements from Chris Hanrahan and others. Chris let us know that he had almost pulled the plug on MiniCons, due to the amount of work. He mentioned that someone else (someone who most people seemed to know, but I didn’t — a recurring theme as you will see) had helped out with the registration process, which had allowed this MiniCon to proceed. I was just glad I hadn’t missed out.
My first session was Fiasco. Everyone at the table knew everyone else. I, of course, knew no one. That wasn’t a big challenge, but, combined with my novice-status as a Fiasco player, made me the odd guy at the table. Everyone was nice and generally tried to include me, which goes a long way in this type of situation.
We played a custom setting created by the GM. The focus was a political campaign. We used a new (to me, anyway) element called Moments; key emphases of a scene, like Locations, that get assigned to a relationship and create an expectation that the chosen Moment will occur during the game and have some particular significance.
It was fun, as Fiasco almost always is. The story was a bit disjointed and seemed to lack a bit of momentum. Ezra, who ran the game did a good job of filling in whenever an NPC or extra was required. That’s something I haven’t done yet in Fiasco but should feel empowered to do whenever a scene calls for it. I think I feel that I’m intruding by just jumping in as a waiter or clerk or whatever the scene calls for.
One of the players (one of two Erics in the game) did something clever with the aftermath, where, on his next-to-last montage scene, he showed his player doing something with an unnamed third party, then when it came back around, revealed that his character had taken a job with Santorum’s campaign. It was a nice touch, and something to think about.
In fact, that’s a key thing that I haven’t really worked out about Fiasco: how to really setup later stuff. Again, I think that in part is related to not imposing myself too much on the game; I don’t want to overly dictate how things should go. But when a game needs some narrative thrust, it needs it. I should just jump in when it’s called for.
We got done a bit early with Fiasco, plus there was an hour break between the morning and afternoon sessions. I took a walk, ate my lunch, then ended up at the decent brewpub across the street from Endgame. Yes. Endgame has a brewpub next door. Doesn’t your FLGS?
I had a couple beers while reviewing “Godlike,” my afternoon game. I’d never played Godlike, and it’s different enough that I felt a bit intimidated by it. The more I read it, the more I became apprehensive about the game in front of me. What if I was the only one who’d not played Godlike before? What if I slowed everyone down? What if, after a couple beers, I couldn’t grasp the rules well enough? What if we had to do character creation and I messed it up? I was about 50-50 on whether I should leave or actually go play.
Ultimately I got up the nerve to go play. As it turned out, out of the six of us at the table, only two had played before, and I was apparently the only one there with the book other than the guy running the game.
Godlike was fun. The GM pointed out that there are some holes in the mechanics, and some key issues, especially related to things like physical scale and range that are missing or ill-defined. But the key mechanic of the One Roll Engine (ORE) is pretty nifty. I enjoyed it and playing Godlike made me remember that “Monsters and Other Childish Things,” which I also own, is ORE-based. I should try to run that once or twice.
I have to say that, even for a gaming convention, this was a pretty geeky group. I’m not going to try to describe these guys, but a “Big Bang Theory”-style sitcom could be crafted using these guys as the characters; replacing physicists and engineers with (I’m guessing) software developers and itinerant World War 2 history “experts.”
Again, the group seemed to know each other; perhaps not as well as the Fiasco game, but I was definitely the outsider.
I enjoyed both games. I’m glad that I got a chance to play another Fiasco game. I’d like to at least play it a few more times. I’d be interested in playing Godlike again, though perhaps the more updated version of this system in a Supers setting, “Wild Talents” might be a better choice. The Supers in WWII angle is really cool, though.
I’m not ready to check the box of “Attended a con”, yet, but this is really the closest I’ve gotten.




Recent Comments