A Swiney game if ever there was one...and I mean that in a descriptive way, rather than a judgmental one.  

The basic concept of Shock is that there are 2 Technologies and 2-3 Issues which all play centers around.  Each player creates a character that centers around the intersection of an issue and a Technology, and defines who the Antagonist for their character is, and what their character's story goals are.  The player to their left then creates the Antagonist's details.  

We chose Technologies (Extreme Longevity, Hiveminds) and Issues (Insanity, Identity: Individual vs. Social).  My character was Doktor Doktor Helmut von Nussbaum, a member of the team that developed the longevity treatments.  Dr. Nussbaum has been retired from medical research for several hundred years now, though, and his day job is as a member of the Tirolean Senate.  I chose the intersection of Extreme Longevity and Insanity, and my story goal for Dr. Nussbaum was to have him completely obliterate the memory of his less than satisfactory family life with his ex-wife and children -- or go insane trying.  I declared that his antagonist was his family (son Dieter, daughter Christiana).  

The next step in the character creation process is for the group as a whole to define 2 'Praxis' scales.  We chose Status vs. Resourcefulness, and Intellect vs. Intuition.  I rated Dr. Nussbaum an 8 in the first scale, and a 7 in the second -- which meant that whenever he tried to roll against Status (d10), he less than 8 to succeed -- but if he tried to roll against Resourcefulness, he needed more than 8 to succeed.  After each PC is rated in these categories, each Antagonist is rated in them as well.  There is no fixed GM; each PC's antagonist is played by the player to their left.  

Play proceeds in a series of scenes.  In each scene, the PC's player and the antagonist freely narrate until a conflict arises.  The conflict is then resolved as follows:  both the PC and the Antagonist state their intents, which must be orthogonal (it is possible for both to succeed or both to fail).  Each player (the PC's player and the Antagonist player) rolls against an appropriate stat of their choice.  In one scene Dr Nussbaum was in the bar after work.  My goal was for Dr Nussbaum to seduce the waitress who looked surprisingly like his ex-wife (aiming toward replacing his memories of his ex-wife with memories of the new woman).  The antagonist had Dieter show up, and his goal was to force Dr Nussbaum to pull some strings to get Dieter off the hook on some reckless driving charges.  

I chose to roll against Status, using my position and fame to impress the waitress.  Steve, playing the antagonist, chose to roll against Intellect, using Dieter's cunning to manipulate Dr Nussbaum.  We each had a small die pool to choose from -- a beginning PC's is 3 dice.  I chose to roll 2 dice for success and 1 die to thwart Dieter.  Each success die is a d10; each opposition die is a d4.  Your best d10 is used to roll over/under your stat; the opposition's best d4 counts against you.  So, I'm rolling against Status and my lowest d10 is a 5; the Antagonist's best d4 is a 1.  So I'm succeeding, 6 is less than 8...but now the other players get to intervene.  A tie is an Escalation.  The other players get to roll 'minutae dice' -- d4s, one per player.  So Melissa thinks Escalation would be cool, and she has dibs...she uses her result of a 2 on a d4 to bump my 6 up to an 8.  To use her minutae die, Melissa must make up some 'minutae' about the setting...this one involves hive minds and cell phones.  The adjusted value of 8 ties my Status value: Escalation!  Now I state that not only does Dr Nussbaum seduce the waitress, but she moves in with him.  Now I reroll all my d10s and Steve rerolls all his d4s.  The other players keep their minutae dice, but Melissa's is spent.  I end up failing the tie-breaker; the winner narrates all results, so Steve gets to tell us how Dr Nussbaum strikes out with the waitress.  Dieter also loses, so I get to tell how Dr Nussbaum blows off Dieter.  

The scenes rotate around the table.  Each PC's story comes to an end when the Antagonist runs out of 'budget' -- budget is spent in each scene to roll dice for the Antagonist -- ie, spend 3 budget to roll 3 dice.  

I thought the Issue/Technology matrix was a great way to frame issues and set up the game -- and it could be profitably imported into other SF games, even for players who don't find the resolution system appealing.  One of the bigger flaws, I thought, was that it's easy to get the game well underway before any of the players really has a handle on the setting -- there's not really any process for developing the setting in much detail before the game gets rolling.  In an SF game with no setting provided as background, I think this can be a major issue.

EDITED for clarity.

Dr. Dr. Nussbaum, his son Dieter, the waitress, the cook and her lover.

This is a spoof, yes?

Did you think overall the game achieved its objectives?

Also, was all this fun to play?

Cool post, thanks.

Pierce -- No, not really a spoof.  You're right, it kind of looks that way, but that's only because we're taking this one scene in insolation.  

Balbinus -- We did this in 2 sessions.  I did have fun, but there were also unsatisfying elements about play.  For me, the nebulousness of the setting was an issue (though that's something we could fix with more time dedicated to talking about the setting).  I'm not sure I'd find the mechanic satisfying in a more long-term game, but I'm certain this would be an issue, either.  The game does have mechanics to handle long-term character development.  We didn't use them, but they do seem reasonable -- and something I've found missing in many similar games that I have tried.  The resolution mechanics seem adequate for the task of resolving social conflicts (which is their stated purpose), but I think they would fall down if you wanted to do a game that was heavy in combat or in espionage/intrigue.

Quote from: Lee ShortThe resolution mechanics seem adequate for the task of resolving social conflicts (which is their stated purpose), but I think they would fall down if you wanted to do a game that was heavy in combat or

Or what?

Quote from: joewolzOr what?

espionage/intrigue.  Edited back into original post.

I've seen it suggested that it could work well to use Shock to create a cool setting, then use a more traditional rpg to actually play in it.  How does that strike you as an idea?

Quote from: BalbinusI've seen it suggested that it could work well to use Shock to create a cool setting, then use a more traditional rpg to actually play in it.  How does that strike you as an idea?

Just from Lee's description, I do see how Shock would be an interesting and useful tool.

Quote from: BalbinusI've seen it suggested that it could work well to use Shock to create a cool setting, then use a more traditional rpg to actually play in it.  How does that strike you as an idea?

I think that has lots of potential.

Quote from: BalbinusI've seen it suggested that it could work well to use Shock to create a cool setting, then use a more traditional rpg to actually play in it.  How does that strike you as an idea?

That's the impression I got from the lite version pre-release, from the current site and threads like this one. Use Shock to work out what you want a science fiction campaign to be about & perhaps to meta-game the arcs, then use some other game for the actual roleplaying. You could accomplish some of that just from the free matrix chart on the site.

I want to see the actual book somebody, very orange from the pictures.

Quote from: Casey777That's the impression I got from the lite version pre-release, from the current site and threads like this one. Use Shock to work out what you want a science fiction campaign to be about & perhaps to meta-game the arcs, then use some other game for the actual roleplaying. You could accomplish some of that just from the free matrix chart on the site.

I want to see the actual book somebody, very orange from the pictures.

Well, I'd hate to see the mechanics of Shock dismissed totally.  I'm not sure  they're my cup of tea, but I'm sure they'll work for some players.  And I think that they'd work fine for me for some games -- but not for some others.