By all means provide your citation of a game that did so before 1993 (when MET first came out), but actually I don't think there is. I agree with the SJGames Pyramid article from way back that MET was one of the most influential (and underrated) games of the 20th century.
I think it would be easier just to play Call of Cthulhu or Delta Green than to try and repurpose Gumshoe.
I've always thought of that as an adventure design issue rather than a systemic one.
Maybe it is, but completion of the story being funneled through a particular point that relies on a particular outcome is not uncommon in other genres as well. Since I read Gumshoe and thought about that, I’ve sine seen the same advice In many places.
No, there wasn't any meta-currency system in Prince Valiant.
How does he advise you to deal with the time players look for clues that aren't there? You know what I mean, players sometimes latch on to random ideas and try to run with things that don't go anywhere.
Gold Stars and Storyteller Certificates are in the Advanced Game which, I think, were introduced in the latest version of the game (2018) and weren't in the original 1989 edition.
If I recall, he is upfront about just ending a scene when a players have drained it of all clues. It people keep scouring a location that has been picked clean or keep endlessly going in circles talking to someone who had told them everything of value, just bring things to a close. You can just say, "You've found everything." or in the case of an interview, do the Law and Order thing where someone is doing someone is working while they are talking, and when they have given all clues, they need to get back to what they were doing.
Well, I'll have to go and re-read it then. I do have both, but the old version is somewhere in the attic. The core rules when we played it, didn't involve Gold Stars and Certificates - they are presented as optional rules, currently.
I probably won't get around to reading it until I get my physical copy, but I'm glad to hear it gets things right.
I think it's just the angle of the book and the light on the cover, rather than anything do with the font (which is IM Fell, and perfectly readable).
Late to the party, but I'd like to say that I actually kinda like some traits of Gumshoe... but at the end it's just not the kind of game I'm looking for. It's the difference between "I can live with Gumshoe" vs "I like Mythras, tell me more"
!
That pretty much sums it up for me. Why fix a classic game? To end “Investigative Deadends”?
Just curious. You are aware that just because a system has a detailed combat system, the sessions don’t have to be about, or even include combat, right?Intriguing. I suppose that should include really simplified combat rules for non combat oriented games. Lighter than Imperative and maybe lighter than M-Space (or just a different take). A Mythras Lite?
That would be atrocious for RPG forums though. Because with this addition Mythras would effectively cover all the bases.
Yeah, I’m half joking, but only half. Are you really looking for that extreme of a literary replication? Sounds like if no James story included a Webley revolver, a game would have to have an equipment list without one (or have no lists at all if no one ever bought anything) to be suitable.
I'd say that the raison d'etre is related to what you are saying but slightly different. The main purpose behind GUMSHOE is to do away with rolling for clues on the assumption that the players analyzing and reacting to the clues is more interesting than random rolls to see if they find them. The motivation is similar to the pushback against perception checks in the OSR scene, although the way of going about it is quite different.
