Chatty’s Review: Silvervine Chapter 1, First impressions

This post is part of a series that tackles the reading review of a yet unpublished RPG called Silvervine. The 1st post, explaining what the review project sets to accomplish can be found here. Please note that game is still in development and my feedback is part of the creators’ efforts to make this the best game they can.

I was going to tackle Chapter 1 to 3 but as I sat down to read it all, I noticed that Chapter 2 (Character Creation example) was barely written and Chapter 3 (Game mechanics) was over 25 pages long.

Since I don’t want to botch this up, and since Chapter 1 deals with the Introduction to the game and offers an example of play, I thought I’d focus this part of the review on what can make or break a game: the potential reader’s 1st impression.

In those measly 4 pages, the game’s writers have to catch the attention of the readers and make them want to play the game and read on what is shaping up to be a 500+ page document.

A word to the wise, while I know that the Dungeonmaster’s creed mentions only 1 rule book, Silvervine’s 500+ pages is a LOT (The last version I have sits at 432 pages and it’s incomplete).

Monte Cook pulled it off with his 700+ pages Ptolus because he managed to make this one of the most well-organized, and well written piece of gaming supplement. If Silvervine really needs that page count, I strongly suggest to make every word count toward a clearly defined goal:

• Giving vital information on game mechanics or Setting.
• Clarifying a harder to implement rule.
• Making the reader want to read more.

More on this later.

Chapter 1- Introduction

Silvervine’s introduction showcases the four core philosophies on which the game is built:

• Unlimited Character Creation
• Theme
• Narrative
• Cinematics.

Then follows a very brief summary of the game’s mechanics on which the three core ideas rests and a 2 page example of Play/fictionalized description.

Core Philosophy #1: Unlimited Character Development

Silvervine advertises itself as a ‘You think it, You play it’ RPG. In that regard, it’s not unlike Generic Systems like GURPS (Which I played for many years) and the Hero System.

It’s a point-buy system, so armour wearing mage, Samurai poet, animal-man Sniper… it’s all there.

It tells the reader that:

Players are not limited to classes or specialized lists of skills and powers. Instead, they are given equal access to every skill, ability, power and specialty without limits from arbitrary molds. Players are capable of putting together their unique vision in innumerable ways. The only limits are the world setting and the player’s vision of who the character is.

As an aside, while I don’t find it nearly as bad as Planescape’s original Setting, I am somewhat annoyed by the text’s multiple oblique references that ‘this is a better way to game than…’ which might be completely subjective on my part.

But do note that this passage and a few others puts me on the defensive, which might not necessarily bode well for a potential client with my particular tastes in RPGs.

Core Philosophy #2: Theme

Silvervine then sells itself as a game whose theme is also in the player’s control. By ‘theme’ I think they mean the actual fluff on which your character concept is built on.

This is a good idea, however at that point, the introduction still hasn’t told us about the game’s genre or implied setting.

Only basing myself on the images I’ve seen up to that point can I infer that the setting is some sort of Magic Steampunkish setting where animal-people co-exist with more classical RPG races. That should be addressed in a later revision.

The example given about the theme is armour. You read that players can buy their amour with character points (like BESM and GURPS Powers’ Damage Resistance). It then explain those armour points actually mean whatever you as a player want it to look and feel like.

This makes me think that significant possessions and equipment are going to be abstracted into character concepts (and points), an idea that works rather well in BESM and Mutant and Masterminds, the d20 Superheroes game.

This brings me to a point that just occurred to me, Silvervine has interesting ideas, but how different from BESM will it be to mark itself apart?

Core Philosophy #3: Narrative

Right off the bat, Silvervine sells itself as a shared-narrative game. While this nomenclature is still somewhat new to me, I take it to mean that description of actions and atmosphere is not the Game Master alone to bear. The players are expected to take an active part in shaping scenes and stories throughout a session.

We read that the GM’s role is to take charge of the game’s world and interact with the game’s mechanics to set difficulties and successes of challenges. If a GM establishes a success or (I assume) a failure, it is up to the player to describe to the GM and his fellow players how exactly, in-game, the character achieved that result.

I think this can be summarized by this excerpt from the rulebook:

Two important elements of achieving this rapport are in the questions: “How is your character going to do that?” and “You’ve succeeded on your roll, tell me how your character does that.”

I assume this is the bread and butter of storytelling games, but were I to ask these to most of my players on any given night (unless they are really ‘into’ it), I’d get a blank stare and a ‘Well, hummm, I hit him with my sword?’ or ‘I jumped over the pit’

At this point I’m wondering if the game can work and still be cool without the shared-narrative element. And if it is, I’m wondering if such a narrative must be part of the game’s core philosophy instead of one of numerous play-style that the game’s engine could support. But I’m giving is it the benefit of the doubt and I’ll make up my mind on this when I dig deeper in the game.

Core Philosophy #4: Cinematics

Silvervine wants to allow players to do outrageous maneuvers and allow throwing the rules of physics out the window if properly replaced by coolness (at least that’s what I get as a vibe). This is a very promising philosophy and I am looking forward to see how the rules tackle this.

Game Mechanics

I won’t actually discuss mechanics here as that’s what Chapter 3, the subject of the next post, will be all about. Suffice it to say that the core mechanics are crystal clear with only 3/4 of a page of text and look promising.

Example of Play

Follows a short example of play, presented like a discussion between GM and Player, written side by side to a Fiction-like description of what the example of play is about.

This, I must say, annoyed me a lot. At that point I already know that as the potential GM, I will have 450 odd more pages to read if I want to show this game to my pals and I get the same information in 2 ways… I somehow fail to see the added value of re-telling what the GM and player already described in what I take it to be shared-narrative mode.

If I go back to my earlier comment of making every word count, I would consider cutting this out unless that fictionalized text is a core story of the game’s setting (which I doubt since it’s mostly a Perception check, followed by a physical challenge not to fall from an airship). At the very least, I suggest to fluff-up the GM/player exchange to convey the same info if it must be maintained.

So after writing 2 pages of review for a 2 page introduction (don’t worry, that ratio will not be kept), I conclude that:

• The game’s mechanics and most core philosophies look promising enough to read more.
• I’m not yet convinced that storytelling/shared narrative is essential to the game (but that’s my Crunch Overlord talking)
• I don’t know what the game is about yet, setting wise, except that it will allow my pals and I to share stories about the exact characters we want play.
• I’ll base my further comparison to BESM and Gurps… 2 systems I’m familiar enough and seem more closely related to Silvervine than, say, the d20 games I’ve read/played.