One of my players is an old wargamer, chess nut and all round tactician. To him an RPG is first and foremost an intellectual challenge. He enjoys the drama and playing a role but his primary interest is in learning g the stystem, crafting a character abd utilizing their abilities and the rules to maximum effectiveness. It is very much a "game" to him and games, even roleplaying ones,have winners and losers.

I'm trying very hard to see if I can run this system the way it is intended and not have him losing his mind the first session.

Thoughts?

I have a player like this, and he's coming along. People call this a narrative game, but it's actually more tactical than some like to admit. It might take a while for him to wrap his head around some of it, but he can start with the chart for spending Advantage and Triumph, learning how and when to pass boost dice and upgrades. It finally clicked for my player when he missed a shot with 2 Advantages. "You missed your shot, but he flinched and dodged the wrong way, exposing himself to your friend...to whom you pass a boost die." This allowed him to start seeing the tactical opportunities with every shot or action.

Yep, there goes know it all Whafrog again!!!

Also, there are great support role specs that some of players use that really help out in the game, for the whole party, or just for themselves. I have one player who is a Hired Gun/(The one with Fearsome) and Politico. What a combo! So this guy is a Mob Bruiser! He walks into a room, and instantly the mooks just cringe in fear, before he even opens his mouth. Then he starts talking, just berating them! Without ever actually making a true attack he can have a group of minions or a Rival wetting themselves and even having a Wookiee crying for his mommy! I setup a small encounter for him where he was hustling at some holo-pool and he won a couple of hundred creds, out of game, then as he was walking home, he got got mugged. My intent was to show the player how badass his character was and could take a group of minions out behind himself without being a true fighter. By using his support type talents he was able to pack so much setback dice to these guys, that while his attacks couldn't hit, they only thing they could roll was was a ton of threat. So in our narrative, it wasn't him beating them up as much as him just side stepping, countering, evading, grabbing an arm and twisting, pulling a body into an incomplete no blow. In essence they beat themselves up with him choreographing their wild dance. He really felt a lot better about his character after that. But he still looked like a Master working this group over, easily evading their attacks, and turning their attacks on to each other. After we rolled out a few rounds, I then described as very thing from the very beginning, as that everything that just happened was all in his mind as he played out the fight in his head. Where as he imagined the fight sequence in kind of a slow motion detail, plotting out each step, and postition, move, strike, and counter. Then he snaps back into reality, as the first attacker rushes at him, and in an instant, the foes are laying on the ground around, a couple running off off. I was trying to go for the Sherlock Holmes movie fight sequence feel. All the player really enjoyed it.

So,while it is a heavy narrative game, there is still plenty of room to be tactile up to a point. In talking with some other player and some other GMs, it seems that some can find a happy medium, and some like those that Rgrove had, could not. They wanted every meter and every second accounted for I guess. I had a player once who wanted to pour of the Star Wars Hypersapce Galaxy maps and plot out detailed hyperspace routes, and get out rulers, astrolabes, and sextants. Ok, not that bad, but this game isn't about the detailed navigation routes. He was the only one who wanted to do this to. He could spend 30-60 minutes talking about the Hypersapce route!

So for some people there is the happy medium out there, and for others, there is not. I hope you guys can find yours. For me and my current group, we have found ours, and it has been great.

Aye, it's one of those games where your actions are limited and fairly simple. But the ways advantages and trumphs can be spent is what adds to it.

We ran into a few awkward moments during our combat playtest where my descriptive narrative seemed to take more liberties with the situation than he was comfortable with. If something happened directly connected to a threat or advantage he was more agreeable but just throw some color in and he started raising eyebrows. Its funny, the guy has played other RPGs with no problem but he has been reading up on this one and has this preconceived notion that its "not a Roleplaying game, but a collaborated story, theatre of the mind type thing." He has his guard up for sure but I will work on him. He is a great guy and awesome gamer, would hate to lose him.

We ran into a few awkward moments during our combat playtest where my descriptive narrative seemed to take more liberties with the situation than he was comfortable with. If something happened directly connected to a threat or advantage he was more agreeable but just throw some color in and he started raising eyebrows. Its funny, the guy has played other RPGs with no problem but he has been reading up on this one and has this preconceived notion that its "not a Roleplaying game, but a collaborated story, theatre of the mind type thing." He has his guard up for sure but I will work on him. He is a great guy and awesome gamer, would hate to lose him.

I don't know that the "collaborated story, theatre of the mind" description is inaccurate at all. It's how I personally describe pretty much any roleplaying system to people. The FFG system is just more encouraging of the narrative aspect, than the number crunchiness in my experience. Sure it's got it's mechanics, no denying that, but those are meant to be tools to tell a fun story, not the end result/objective of the game itself.

Personally, I wouldn't try and dissuade your friend of his opinion of the system, as I think it's accurate. What you should do is try and color the conversation like. "Yes, you are right, it is an improvisational theater kind of thing, and these are the tools used to determine issues of chance, and this is how they work. You can use these to help direct the story how you want, adding in your own flavor and spice as the scenes progress." Then let him read the rules and see what he can do with the results. But stress that the list isn't a complete list, that you as the GM, and he as the player, can totally decide on some unique and creative uses of the results, based on the specific scene going on at the time.

Maybe remind him of when he was a kid, playing pretend, how they didn't worry about rules, and just imagined whatever was cooler, and ran with it? Then say "it's like that, but with some dice. So channel your inner 6 year old's imagination, and lets play".

and perhaps turn him on to the concepts of "yes, and..." and "no, but..." which are as useful tools for the player as the GM.

I think there is a great place for chessmasters in the system. The ability to creatively contribute via advantage disadvantage and flipping destiny points in impressive ways can be a real boon. The character development options are really rich and making a very versitle and balanced yet effective character will not only help the player have more fun but also help the group succeed.

I'd much rather have a chessmaster then a combat monkey. When you only have a hammer every problem looks like a nail.

When you're playing a role you are essentially engaging in make believe, which is pretty much theatre,and always telling a story. Pretty much RPG defined. So I think I'd congratulate him for finally realizing what an RPG actually is as opposed to what he apparently thought they were.

Don't forget there is a wealth of tactical stuff you can do with talents. Do they want to be the leader giving out manuevers and boost die? There is a specialization for that... Want to hand out setbacks? there is a specialization for that. Point them to the commando, commodore, and other leadership trees. Those should help pacify a chess player.

Given the way Initiative works in this system, there's yet another tactical factor for the Chessmaster to consider. Arranging who goes when can have drastic outcomes in the encounter. Despite the narrative nature of the system, there's still a bunch of rules in the foundation, and as a system, they can indeed be analyzed and once understood, put to great effect.

has this preconceived notion that its "not a Roleplaying game, but a collaborated story, theatre of the mind type thing."

Umm... buuuuut, that's kinda what a Roleplaying game IS, to be fair.

I mean, to him it isn't. To him an RPG is a game where you vie for tactical advantages in a narrative setting. (as it is for many others)

But the thing is that at its core, an RPG is a collaborated story. That is why you can have an RPG without any dice-rolling.

Why would you want to pacify who's probably the most active player in your group?

Set him up with challenges that don't have a defined solution or a way to get there. Force the player to think out of the box and cooperate with other players on a common goal. He's bound to come up with solutions and storylines you haven't even considered.

Statement: Quest selection is critical. Set up quests with a lot of stealth, negotiation and planning. That way, the player will do most of your work for you, and won't spend his downtime plotting against the players or figuring out how to derail the plot.

Why would you want to pacify who's probably the most active player in your group?

Set him up with challenges that don't have a defined solution or a way to get there. Force the player to think out of the box and cooperate with other players on a common goal. He's bound to come up with solutions and storylines you haven't even considered.

Statement: Quest selection is critical. Set up quests with a lot of stealth, negotiation and planning. That way, the player will do most of your work for you, and won't spend his downtime plotting against the players or figuring out how to derail the plot.

I think he's using the term "pacify" to mean "player buyin" for the system in general. That the player is perhaps, less than enthusiastic about this system as a whole, and he's trying to win him over to trying it out with an optimistic viewpoint, instead of a "I don't like this" mindset. Could be wrong, but that's the impression I got from the OP.