Nathanael wrote a great ap report of the Classroom Deathmatch game we played at Gamestorm this weekend. Read it below below. You can also see the full report and comments at the Forge. This was a small game consisting of Nick, Wilhelm, April Nate and myself. we played for just over 3 hours and I think we all had a lot of fun.
Last night I had the privilege of playing in a convention-style demo game of Classroom Deathmatch, the new tabletop RPG by fellow Portlander Jake Richmond. In this game, we all sat around the table and took on the roles of multiple Japanese high schoolers yanked from their schools and forced to participate in an all-out mass slaughterfest to the Last Man Standing, in a vein quite similar to the movie Battle Royale. Unlike all the RPGs I’d played up until this time, I didn’t get much opportunity to grow attached to the character I started with, as we very quickly started killing each other off so fast that sometimes we didn’t even finish writing down the character information before we had to select a new one. In my opinion, that kicked ass.
There were five of us at the table, and I didn’t really know any of them – which is how I prefer my demos. Jake ran us quickly through the rules before we started, an act which I both liked and disliked. On the one hand, we needed to know them, and thankfully they were amazingly easy to pick up. On the other – and this is entirely due to my nature as a hands-on learner – I always prefer to just start playing and let the rules come out as they are needed. But I tend to find myself the too-picky minority in this, and my slight dislike here is in no way due to any faults in the game or its presentation.
The game opened with all of us randomly drawing characters from a stack, randomly rolling the weapon given to us, and quickly adding some personal touches via Traits. Some of the weapons were hilarious in their apparent uselessness (the frying pan, for example, or the low-battery laser pointer); I lucked out and started with a Katana, and thus my carnage-driven approach to the game was sealed. After that, Jake set the first scene and we mostly took over from there. Whenever I play a new game for the very first time, I like to go balls-to-the-wall with the rules, and this game was no exception. I used dice left and right, and took as many opportunities as possible to test mechanics which had not yet entered play. Given the premise and the general theme, I decided to ham it up with over-the-top “Vohl-KAY-noh PUNCH-uh!” accents, but I think this annoyed some of the others, so I stopped fairly early on. Good thing, cause I could have really annoyed them with my second character, a geeky catgirl anime buff. Teehee.
The mechanic for resolving conflicts was pretty intuitive, and the deceptively simple way of raising dice by pleading your character’s traits was a lot of fun. Devising a way to convince the rest that my character’s knowledge of Quentin Tarantino movies should allow her to deliver a bloodier-than-usual death blow was quite amusing. However, my favorite aspect of the system would hands-down be the mechanic for determining the results of success and failure. When I succeeded, the player I had written down as my “best friend” dictated the outcome, and when I failed, that task was instead handled by my “rival.” Throughout the course of the game, we had some awesome descriptions of success, but those were greatly overshadowed in magnitude by the absolutely gruesome descriptions of our failures.
According to the rules, a character can pretty much be killed at any time when the outcome of a conflict is being dictated. However, in order for the character to die, the speaking party must actually use a variant of the phrase “and they die” during this dictation. Characters could even be killed during the outcomes of completely unrelated conflicts. Whenever a character got killed, the player randomly drew another and rolled for their weapon, and we kept going. At various moments, players had the opportunity to start a new scene, framing it with creative input from those involved. I got the notion that the game encourages this at many moments, but due to the carnage approach of this particular session, most of the new scenes that got started involved the introduction of a new character.
The game ended after three hours, but I could have gone on for many more. While the game seems to be geared towards one-shots and demo play, I can see it facilitating multi-session play with a close-knit group and/or a house rule or two to limit the fatalities. I’m told that Jake’s previous games were not nearly as murderiffic, though, so perhaps I was just a tad too bloodthirsty (heh). Having the ability to casually whack a character with an off-hand remark during any conflict outcome probably fueled that thirst, but I think on the whole it really helped with the flow of dramatic license.
I look forward to playing this game again, and I think it would be pretty simple to use as a fun way to introduce my mostly traditionally-minded regular gaming group to some different styles of tabletop RPGs. Sadly, I did not get to purchase a copy from Jake, because printing delays ensured that the books were unfortunately not present. Next time, gadget… Next Time!
Thanks for the great report, Nate!
