Why are my rules for Solo?

The above happened in a game this week and made me want to talk about why I wanted to make the Adventure series of rulebooks in the first place. As a solo gamer the point for me is the story. I hear wargamers talk about “swingy” mechanics and not wanting victory or defeat hanging on the rolls of the dice, and for a two-player game I get that, but as a solo player, it’s exactly those moments that make for a great story. The hero’s bow breaking at just the wrong point, a companion going in for the final wound on an Adversary only to get cut down in one hit, the sudden appearance of an Adversary behind the team, are all much more fun when you don’t have an opponent.  

Likewise when the Adversaries seem to be making ‘stupid decisions’ that help the team get the better of them. The team are my team, they are the heroes at the centre of the story, I want them to be victorious, I want to care when one is cut down, and I hope they don’t die. So that’s what I wrote, a set of stories. The rules are specifically designed so you concentrate on what the team are doing and wait to see what the adversaries do rather than having to “swap sides”.  The books are even laid out so that they tell the stories first and the rukes for a battle come at the end.

So what’s the picture about? The past week has been about playtesting the ‘special’ rules built into the individual Story Arcs in the Fantasy edition, and in a game testing a Necromancer controlling animated mindless undead I had exactly one of those story moments. While most of the team were busy trying to deal with skeletons and finding bystanders kept getting in the way, a giant skeleton appeared right behind the Rogue! He turns, realises he’s all alone and decides that attacking is better than just waiting to be clobbered. He rolls a 10, the Monster rolls a 1! The Rogue can’t believe his eyes as one swipe of his sword brings it tumbling to the ground!