RTJ Guidelines
The Following is a direct copy of Unlimited Heroes RTJ Synopsis written by Lord Siembieda. I have had similar experiences and actually share the same vision and outlook that they do.
quote:
So here's the thing. I don't want to recruit characters. I want to recruit players. Get the right players together and it'll be great no matter what they're playing. Get it wrong and it'll crash and burn no matter what.
In my experience running Palladium games both on-line and around tables for Lo these many years, is that people who enjoy Palladium games come in two broad camps (plus or minus X amount of over-simplification and Y amount of overlap).
The first group seems to show up mainly for the crazy, gonzo flood of wacky ideas and in-world funhouse craziness that Palladium games do so well. This group tends to be mostly concerned with what fancy RPG's call “Following the Fiction” and see the system and rules the way one might a well-loved B-movie you watch with friends just to snark off about it.
The second group often seems focused on simulating a realistic, detail-oriented, tactical war-game-like experience. This group tends to play military or military-adjacent characters and they tend to see the rules either as a puzzle for which there is a single correct solution or as a mini-game within the main game that they can use to gain advantage in encounters. This group also tends to be the most interested in the equipment-related minutiae ("gear porn") that Palladium also does so well.
The first group tends to enjoy 'kitchen sink' games where there's lots of colorful, crazy things happening and everyone is mostly reacting and improvising. The second group tends to enjoy 'tower defense' style games with lots of planned, measured incursions into impregnable fortresses.
As a GM, I am good at (and enjoy) kitchen sink. I am not good at (and do not enjoy) tower defense. And so people of the first group tend to have fun in the games in I run (and I tend to have fun running games for them). People in the second group tend not to have fun in the games I run (and I tend to have less fun trying to run games for them). [I hate doing this, but this is important, so please put your favorite breed of dog somewhere in your RTJ so I know you read this.]
No judgment stated or implied in either case. Everyone should have the fun they want to have. This is just a pattern I've noticed over time, and trying to accommodate both kinds of player in the same game has caused difficulty in the past.
So, when applying, please just be aware that, if you're often concerned about tactical distance and sight lines and black market prices and guard shift rotations and adequate cover along probable attack vectors, that's all awesome, but you might find this game frustrating.
- Give me a short, punchy, high-energy character sketch that highlights what's exciting about this character. What's so cool about them that we want to spend a year or more telling a story about them? Imagine you're in an elevator with a Netflix executive and you have until it reaches the top floor to convince them to greenlight a mini series based on this character. What would you tell them? That's what I want to hear. (Keep this short and simple for the RTJ. Roughly 50 to 150 words.)
Uncle Ben's Wisdom...
Answer One or Both Of These
- With Great Power. Tell me one thing your character did (or failed to do) when they were just starting out that went totally sideways. Something that they will regret forever. Something they would do anything to take back.
- Comes Great Responsibility. Tell me one large, powerful, intractable commitment or obstacle in their life that made their life really, really hard (over and above how hard it would be for anyone).
Into the Sunset...
- Tell me one overwhelming goal or motivation that drives the character. Something so important that, if they ever achieve or resolve it, their story would be over we would fade to black.
What do you mean NO?
- Imagine we're in the middle of combat and you have a great idea that's just going to SMASH this encounter in two. And halfway into it we hit a tricky rules thing and I make a call and say the plan won't work. Now you're boned. Just boned. You might get killed. You might lose a really important piece of gear. You might use up that thing you've been saving for just this kind of occasion. Further imagine my decision was a bad call. An objectively bad call. So bad that you wonder if I don't understand the rules. So incomprehensibly bad, in fact, that you suspect I just don't want you to crush my sweet encounter. You politely bring up your concerns, I don't agree. My reasons for not agreeing are terrible. I suggest we just move on. But we're still in combat and you remain totally boned. What do you do?
- Imagine we've been playing a while and I PM you and say that this thing your character does, while perfectly within the rules, is causing a problem for me in the game (messes up the story, trivializes a common obstacle, I just don't like it). And I'd like you change it for something else or agree to stop doing it (or change the way you do it). What would you say? What if it was the thing you really wanted to do, and was the entire point of playing that character to begin with? (Note: There are some abilities ie: Invulnerability and Karmic Luck, that are supremely powerful by themselves, without adding in additional capabilities. They were designed to BE all that the charcter needed to be effective. This question would definitely be a possibility when these powers are combined with others...even themselves. Be aware, in order for there to be a challenge...a story, failure has to be a possibility. Otherwise, it isn't a story, it is a fact)
(Note: the NO questions are scenarios of the worst kind. Answering them now sets up an exchange baseline for conversing difficulties. The answers need to be honest and truthful to the core. Open Communication is a MUST.)
