Since my current campaign I'm running isn't enough to fulfill my gaming hankerings, and since one of my players would like some practice GMing, we're going to have some occasional one-on-one gaming. He's said I can basically choose whatever setting I like. But I know the guy, he won't do a lot of reading, so we need something that everyone knows like run-of-the-mill fantasy or the modern world.

My own taste is for realistic-themed game worlds. Not realistic, but realistic-themed.  So for example Prison Break or NCIS or Jericho are not realistic, but their themes are. People remain human, just the events are a bit crazy.

I also enjoy game worlds which let you have character relationships be significant. Doesn't have to be roleplaying out your character's whole marriage, but something like "go here, do this mission, come home, rest and heal, the go here, do this mission..." would be a bit bland for me. I like having my characters have people they love and loathe, with good reasons for their loving and loathing.

So, I've got my pick, under those constraints. Ideas?

Ghost Dog?

Not sure if it's easily available, but it seems in the right kind of area thematically, and it's intended mainly for one-on-one games.

Ninja JimBob? Surely not!

Vice Squad: Miami Nights (or any other cop game) would be ideal since your partner could be a GMPC and you wouldn't have to worry about what the rest of the PCs were doing while you were deep undercover (or doing criminal things if you decide to play GTA-style).  I'm looking for established reviewers for VSMN so if you're interested I'll comp you a copy.  Just PM me.  

Other than that, I think a spy game (a la James Bond) or Old West-type game (a la Eastwood) are the easiest fits for 1-on-1 real world gaming.  

Pete

I'd ask what system he's using, but I don't want a lecture on how the people are more important.

Don't worry, no lectures! I think setting's more important than system, but for what it's worth, we're almost certainly going to give Active Exploits (free pdf download, which I've a POD copy of) a go. By the looks of it, it's pretty thespy - hell, it's diceless! - we've not played it before, but when there are just two of you, you can easily pick systems up, then later put them down and change them if you want to.

We wanted something with a laundry-list of abilities to choose from, but which wasn't too crunchy. The GM's also keen to try some new systems, he's not a forum junkie like me so he only knows about games that up on the game table in front of him

The game's not got any themes built into it, so we can have our own, or none. It seems to be essentially character-driven, in that characters are expected to have individualised fears, desires, and goals.

How about Torchwood?

Doctor Who itself obviously wouldn't really fit your standard milieu, but torchwood has a more down-to-earth quality to it that would seem to fit more with the kinds of games you usually seem to play.

there's a supernatural element sure, but it's still a very character driven show, with a heavier emphasis on how Torchwood affects you life and sanity, than there is on the actual supernatural baddies and things jutting about.

Might want to skip Jack "I Can't Die" Harkness though, obviously, but the rest of the cast were just normal folks, and even Jack was technically human besides his whole immortality schtick.

I don't know Torchwood at all. Seems we've not got it here Down Under. Is there a wiki or something for it, telling us all about the setting and episode summaries and so on?

A 1930's pulp style game would be fun. Being just one on one. It would be fairly easy to run a shadow and phantom style game.

Quote from: JimBobOzI don't know Torchwood at all. Seems we've not got it here Down Under. Is there a wiki or something for it, telling us all about the setting and episode summaries and so on?

Wikipedia's page should be a pretty good reference actually:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torchwood

For some reason, any of the articles relating to Doctor Who and it's related topics seem to be the most extensively well-referenced sources on Wikipedia.

The official website on the other hand, is completely worthless to anyone outside the UK, as it's all jsut a bunch of video clips and interviews that are blocked to anyone outside UK borders.

Quote from: J ArcaneFor some reason, any of the articles relating to Doctor Who and it's related topics seem to be the most extensively well-referenced sources on Wikipedia.

Weird, huh? It's like internet is full of geeks or something.

Quote from: Christmas ApeWeird, huh? It's like internet is full of geeks or something.

You'd think that, but oddly, the same doesn't hold true for some of the other geek favorites, like Star Trek, whose articles are by and large just copy and pasted from Memory Alpha (big ST fan wiki), and generally without any references or sources.  There's a lot of info there, sure, but it's not as well documented as Doctor Who's is.

The Who articles meanwhile, are even more exhaustively sourced than articles on far more important topics than a show about some dude who travels through spacetime in a phone box.  There's some of them where I swear there's literally a footnote for every bloody line in the article.  

I'm not sure what conclusion can be drawn from that difference, but there it is.

I'm actually fairly certain that Doctor Who is much more popular in the broader spectrum of geekdom, particularly with those who are old enough to have seen the first series. The guys who turned into the first wave of real IT professionals, who used modems you put the phone receiver on and wrote the first MUDs. The ones who would in fact research an article, rather than generate an 8mb Talk page of arguments about Voyager minutiae.

Quote from: Christmas ApeI'm actually fairly certain that Doctor Who is much more popular in the broader spectrum of geekdom, particularly with those who are old enough to have seen the first series. The guys who turned into the first wave of real IT professionals, who used modems you put the phone receiver on and wrote the first MUDs. The ones who would in fact research an article, rather than generate an 8mb Talk page of arguments about Voyager minutiae.

I tihnk you might be right actually.

While TOS Trek had a fairly wide appeal at the time, post it's cancellation it's popularity fell off with the mainstream.

Meanwhile, Who was on for some 30 bloody years and the whole of Britain young and old watched the show.  It's part of the culture in a way that I don't think Star Trek quite is over here.  References to it in other shows and films and things pop up on the kinds of shows you'd never expect to see a reference to Trek, and in a very nonchalant fashion, not like here where there's always that "silly geek" angle to it.  

I just found it odd that the Who articles are all more well referenced than most scholarly papers I've read.

Ahem. Any more suggestions of realistic-themed settings...?