Should I love Tales from the Loop? I’m child of the 1980’s. I turned double digits as the
decade began, so it includes my formative years, from grade to middle to high
school to college. But I’ve never watched The
Goonies, Explorers, or even
finished Stranger Things on Netflix.
I hadn’t given much thought to the “Bike Kids and Weird things” genre. But
something about TftL hit me and hit
hard. Though I’d only run one session (and that only half an adventure) I took
it with me to Origins for Games on Demand.
And yeah, now I love Tales
from the Loop.
I dug it before, but each of the three times I ran Tales, I uncovered something new. I saw
different player interactions, the kinds of stories it could tell, how cool a
longer campaign would be, and how well the system supported everything.
In Tales you play 1980’s
kids, 10 to 15 years old, dealing with the strangeness in your town. You’re
friends and have a hideout. The Loop of the title is a massive supercollider
project which seems to draw the weird to it. It encircles your hometown. It is
and isn’t the 1980’s of our memory. Certain tech exists—autonomous robots,
levitating industrial vehicles—but cell phones are still massive and people
still drive Ford Sierras. The setting comes from a series of illustrations by Simon Stålenhag.
Tales from the Loop spells out play six principles:
- Your home town is full of strange and fantastic things.
- Everyday life is dull and unforgiving.
- Adults are out of reach and out of touch.
- The land of the Loop is dangerous but Kids will not die.
- The game is played scene by scene.
- The world is described collaboratively.
It uses the same d6 pool system as Free League’s previous
rpgs Mutant: Year Zero and Coriolis,
with a few changes. You still buy additional effects with extra successes, but
those are even more spelled out. Damage has been simplified. Like Coriolis, it sticks with a uniform dice
rather than splitting them by type. Here it makes sense to dispose of Gear Dice
as a thing. Pushing for a reroll simply imposes one of the four possible
conditions which in turn give a cumulative die penalty. All in all it’s smooth,
simple, and easily explained. Even more than the earlier games, Tales from the Loop leans into indie, Fate, and PbtA-style play. It’s easy to
adapt approaches from those. TftL abstracts some elements (like big
confrontations, mystery arcs) even more than I usually do.
YOUR LOOP MAY VARY
The core book includes two settings, the original Swedish
locale and one set in Boulder, CO. They do a nice job of providing alternate
names to make the material interchangeable. A few things don’t quite work
(American kids hanging out at the “kiosk” for example). But I grew up in the
Midwest, so that’s what I know. I shifted the setting to Wayward, Ohio, a
relatively rural city, boosted by the influx of money and attention from The
Loop.
In my version, The Loop hasn’t been completed. Massive
construction happens all around the city—drawing in workers, creating enormous
dig sites, and suggesting a world that’s the changing. Wayward itself has
boomed and expanded with the promise of the project. But it’s struggled with
delays; many subdivisions and businesses stand empty or half-completed.
Despite The Loop’s incompleteness, it still affects the
area. It draws in spies, grifters, saboteurs, mad scientists, and weirdos. More
importantly the influence of The Loop reaches across time. It will be completed,
so its paranormal effects can be felt in the past.
PRESENTING THE GAME
To present my new locale I reworked a Google map, clearing off
labels and adding details. I used the names from my youth to make things easier
to remember. While we didn’t use the map much at the table, it was nice to have.
I also went through and reworked the character archetypes into “Playbooks”
which include all the steps and choices of character creation on one sheet. I
made some changes to terminology and names in a couple of places. I also put
all of the game’s stated Principles on a sheet. On the reverse side, I listed
the Top 25 singles for 1985-87 as well as a list of college radio bands. That
gave a nice touchstone and several players appreciated it.
Though I didn’t really reference it at the table, I also
made up a GM cheat sheet with a ton of lists and details. Some of the NPC
relationships have cross-connections so I put those on there for reference. You
can see that here. I also used the really nice cheat sheet someone put together
online. I dig it, but I think you could cut that down significantly and
increase the font size. As it stands, it makes the game look much more
complicated than it actually is.
Jason Cordova’s shown me the importance of setting out a
game’s concept and theme at start. I told players we would spend the first hour
or so doing characters, establishing connections, and answering my leading questions.
After that we’d do a home scene, set up the mystery, and play that out. I
mentioned our break and the fact that if we hit the last half hour, I might
start compressing events to wrap things up. Before character creation I
stressed that all the characters would be friends. Figuring out why can be a
challenging, especially when you mix awkward and popular archetypes. I walked
through walked through the six principles, and then had them pick archetypes.
The first session I skipped doing home scenes at the start
and moved right to the mystery incident. I made a mistake there. In the latter
two sessions I saw how strongly that framed the characters. I have to remember
that for the future.
The high-tech elements show up in the pitch and book images,
but it’s easy to forget about those. At least for the story I told, they served
as a backdrop: one Hick had a robot hauler; another robot popped up in a mad
scientist’s lab. I need to think about how to integrate those elements into
play. The original art has a subtlety to it: a mixture of industrial design and
everyday mundanity. I might bring that forward by printing out some of most
relevant images and just having those on the table. They could point to the
backdrop of automatons, flying freight vessels, and even dinosaurs. And they
could do that without getting in the way of play.
THE MYSTERY
I wrote up my own scenario. Someone online mentioned they’d
played one of the core book adventures as a demo at a con. I didn’t want to risk
of putting something out there players had already read or experienced. I developed
a basic inciting incident and a flexible set of directions they could go. I tried
to leave the perpetrator(s) and cast open enough that I could slot in NPCs from
their relationships. That worked decently, though I didn’t hit all of those
NPCs in play. After the first session, I realized we didn’t need to have the
players pick two NPC connections. That ended up being too much. For session 2
& 3, they picked one and I managed more references and appearances from
that pool.
I don’t want to give away the mystery, since I might use it
again. But I managed to have three completely different solutions and
perpetrators for each session. Each came from the NPC picks from the session
start. That made me pretty happy.
SOME PLAY THOUGHTS
In Trouble: If you have a Troublemaker, they will dramatically
set the terms of play. I think that’s good and interesting. This archetype
determines the limits of “bad behavior” and tense interactions with adults.
They also usually drive or pressure the group as a whole. As a GM you’ll want
to keep that in mind.
Skill Limits: Though Tales from the Loop only has twelve
skills, they do require the GM stop to explain them. The Physical ones are self-explanatory
(Force, Move, and Sneak). The Tech ones are a little odd. Tinker’s clear: build
and repair machines. But Program and Calculate feel like they could overlap.
The GM needs to define those limits. Program’s successes can be used to write computer
programs, but the skill’s described as manipulating electronic devices. Just computers
or something else? On the other hand, Calculate is “the ability to understand
machines and other technical systems.” I almost think “Operate” might be a
better term here. The GM needs to clarify those and convey that to the players.
The Mind skills are clean- though you’ll still want to define what Investigate
does vs. Empathize (human perception) and Comprehend (research). I think the
latter should probably be call Research, Dig Up, or something similar.
Finally Heart has the skills that require the most explanation.
Charm’s easy. That’s all soft forms of manipulation. Contact’s a little
strange—it’s about knowing the right person to get something. So maybe to get
access, an item, or a piece of info. How does that overlap with Investigate—could
you sub one for the other? Finally Lead is one of the most useful skills,
allowing players to bank successes and clear conditions. It really needs an
individual shout-out. The rules leave one question open: does the lack of a
“hard” social skill mean that kids can’t intimidate? Should you use Force for
that? Maybe Lead?
Pressure: While it holds true in many games, I love the way Tales stresses that if you roll,
something always happens. It suggests connecting failures and fallout to each
character’s Problem. It definitely feels like GM Moves without saying as much.
In some of the sessions I did a better job of hitting conditions and putting
the pressure on. The existence of the Lead skill (which can clear these) and
Anchors (NPCs you can have a scene with to recover) means I should be more
aggressive. Since I don’t go to the dice that often, I reduce that pressure.
That’s something I need to take into account. I also let the players use both Luck
and Push to reroll the same roll, I have to check if that’s in the rules.
OVERALL
Anyway, I think Tales
from the Loop is awesome. This hasn’t really been a review, I haven’t even
talked about what’s in the book and how well put together it is. It has been
immensely satisfying to run and its something I’m going to come back to again.
No comments:
Post a Comment