-----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.