thread: 2011-06-07 : Concentric Game Design
On 2011-06-13, Vincent wrote:
Now, Ron, I don't think that really answers your question. This is just an image of the game's design, not of the game's play. The real-world chronology of play isn't in this picture.
I have semiformed things I want to say about Apocalypse World's text and setup vs Sorcerer's text and setup! Both game texts tell you all about the bulb and all about the table, of course. But Sorcerer's text tells you more about what's possible than Apocalypse World's, and when you sit down to play, there's a process of narrowing Sorcerer down to this time's Sorcerer. Humanity means this; there are these kinds of demons and this is the assortment of powers available to them; these are the stat descriptors you can choose.
Bulb, table & room. In Apocalypse World, when you sit down to play, you get the bulb and the table, you make characters, and you can consider whether and when to bring things in from the room. In Sorcerer, when you sit down to play, you get the bulb and the room, you narrow it down to the table, and you make characters then.
It's neat.
Sorcerer's supplements expand or explore the room of Sorcerer - multiple humanity definitions, relationship maps, pacts, new demon types, the gender rules from Sex, for examples off the top of my head. They aren't just like new Apocalypse World playbooks. New playbooks are just more Apocalypse World, where a new Sorcerer supplement is new Sorcerer.
Does that make any sense at all? Am I completely raving?
Do Sorcerer's minisupplements provide narrowness mostly instead? That would be tidy. Does Demon Cops take the room of possible Sorcerer and say "when you want to play Demon Cops, here's how you narrow Sorcerer down to it"?
