-----Premise----- 3 players perform an experiment on an anomalous artefact. AUTHORITY plays the off-site bureaucrat, *and* narrates laboratory conditions. PROCEDURE plays the on-site scientist conducting the experiment. SUBJECT, plays a clueless human assistant, *and* narrates the experimental results. -----Setup----- AUTHORITY gives PROCEDURE a vague prompt. Example: "Good morning. Ready to begin testing the artefact found under the Arctic ice?" PROCEDURE expands on prompt to describe the artefact. Example: "We're ready. Artefact-297 is a small floating cube of obsidian." -----Gameplay loop----- PROCEDURE decides what to do (may consult with others). AUTHORITY may comment/protest, PROCEDURE may proceed/reconsider. SUBJECT(s) narrates results (and controls any replacement assistants, if needed). -Example- PROCEDURE: "Subject-451, please remove your insulated glove and touch the cube." AUTHORITY: *nods* "Go Ahead." SUBJECT: "Okay... %&@#! It burnt my hand!" PROCEDURE: "Interesting... Let's take an x-ray." AUTHORITY: "No; introducing radiation is too dangerous." PROCEDURE: "Sorry, but it is worth the risk." SUBJECT: "Uh, it's starting to glow..." -----Game end----- Game ends when AUTHORITY and/or PROCEDURE definitively declare as such. If both agree to stop, AUTHORITY narrates. PROCEDURE may simply cease working, then SUBJECT(s) narrates. AUTHORITY may call security/nukes/whatever to terminate the experiment, then PROCEDURE narrates. -----
This game of discover and/or horror is inspired by: reading the “The SCP Foundation”; hearing some anecdotes about how “Kingdom” is played; and my experience with one of my favourite 200 Word RPGs from past years, “KillByNumbers”.
I’ve play tested a few versions of this and found it worked fairly well.
I put effort into splitting up the executive power of the three players.
I especially like how SUBJECT controls the weakest character, however they arguably have the most narrative power, for they define what actually happens as the result of experimentation.