The Alexandrian

Spookshow - Aaron Rosenberg

Originally Published in Games Unplugged Webzine – December 27th, 2000

Spookshow is one of those games which has a really great concept – ghosts are real and they’re working as spies – which then utterly fails to develop that concept in any appreciable way.

Adding to its sin, Spookshow seems eerily aware of its limitations: An oversized, double-spaced font dominates the entire presentation. A number of interesting elements which could have taken this sketchy concept and given its real legs are, instead, presented into a section of two paragraph “wouldn’t it be nifty if we’d developed any of these ideas?” grab bags.

In general, I think Spookshow’s overriding problem – of which the pervasive lack of development is merely a symptom – is that it is a sloppy job carried out in a lazy fashion. For example, the game’s system is based around the Bearing mechanic: Each ghostly character is assigned a d6 that represents their mortal nature and a d10 which represents their “ghostly” nature. When entering any new situation, and at the beginning of every round of combat, these dice are rolled for the character to “get their bearings”. So long as neither side is a 1 or a max for that side, you can use both sides without penalty. If both dice roll the same number, then you can only use one side (which you choose). If you roll a maximum number on one die, then that side of you is at a +1 bonus to actions on that side. If you roll a 1 on one of the dice, you can’t use that side. And if you roll a 1 on both dice you freeze up completely.

It’s a good idea… totally screwed up because they didn’t spend three seconds thinking the probabilities through. Instead of fulfilling the stated intention (with the ghostly side having a greater importance because, after all, they’re ghosts), it’s the physical side which dominates the situation. Think it through: 1/6th of the time your physical side is going to be dominant (receiving a +1 bonus); while the supernatural side will only be dominant 1/10th of the time. Plus, its the physical die which has the most impact on almost every other element of this system – from when you freeze up, to when you need to decide on one side or the other, and so forth.

But then they make it even worse: Your Bearings roll is also added as a modifier to your action resolution attempts (creating a confusing situation in which “terrestial” and “noncorporeal” – for some reason they can never settle on just one set of terms to distinguish between the physical and ghostly worlds in the system – tasks have a completely different difficulty scale). You then take the “free die” and roll it (so if you’re doing something noncorporeal you add your ghostly Bearing modifier, and then roll your physical die). This grainy, inconsistent mess again emphasizes the physical existence over the noncorporeal existence.

The designers of Spookshow are also guilty of one of the cardinal sins of game design: They let their game terminology constantly leak over into the game world. For example, all the intelligence organizations in the world – apparently – use the names of the Spookshow archetypes (hitter, hacker, etc.) to describe their agents. They also engage in the unpleasant phenomenon of “needless binding” – in which, for example, all the ghosts who share a similar philosophy also have the same mystic abilities. For example, a Will o’ Wisp is a ghost who believes that the afterlife affords them a chance to visit all the places and do all the things they never could during life. According to Spookshow all Will o’ Wisps have the ability to Levitate (because it “enables them to travel more freely and quickly”). But why couldn’t a ghost with this philosophy develop (or possess) the Morphology ability (which would allow them to easily pass themselves off as a wide variety of different people)? It’s the classic D&D “only thieves can learn how to pick a lock”, without even the excuse of game balance lying behind it. It’s rules for the sake of rules, and restriction where there doesn’t need to be restriction.

Don’t get me wrong, there are some interesting things to be found between these covers: A fairly solid first level primer on the intelligence organizations of the real world. An interesting breakdown of character creation into Relic/Specter/Persona (who you were, what you are, and who you’re pretending to be).

Ultimately, though, Spookshow is a game which should’ve gone in one of two directions: Either all of the non-essential fluff and endless expanses of empty space in this rulebook should have been stripped away to create a tight package that could’ve have marketed around $10; or the current material should’ve been radically expanded to give us something more than “a neat concept which we’ll develop in the supplements”. Unfortunately, Spookshow does neither of these things – and is inexorably trapped in a middle ground of questionable design and nebulous worth.

Grade: C+

Writers: Aaron Rosenberg
Price: $25.00
Page Count: 208
ISBN: 1-892544-10-5
Product Code: CLK0020

This was a strange review to come back and re-read for the first time in twenty-five years.

I suspect my overall assessment of the mechanics and underdeveloped premise were likely correct, but the primary thing I’ve thought about when looking at this book over the years is, “That had a really great primer on intelligence operations!” In fact, there have been numerous occasions when I’ve cracked the cover to review that material. As a result, when I cracked open this file I was honestly expecting to read a positive review and was surprised to find a pretty harsh judgment.

Aaron Rosenberg has gone on to do a lot of great stuff, in both fiction and roleplaying.

I think I should revisit this one. It would also be interesting to compare it now with Night’s Black Agents, which is kind of playing in the same ballpark.

One Response to “Games Unplugged Review – Spookshow”

  1. Graf says:

    > The designers of Spookshow are also guilty of one of the cardinal sins of game design: They let their game terminology constantly leak over into the game world. For example, all the intelligence organizations in the world – apparently – use the names of the Spookshow archetypes (hitter, hacker, etc.) to describe their agents.

    Realizing this is 25 years ago. Is *this* the cardinal sin? 😉

    Especially for onboarding new players having terminology overlap is pretty good but I also think that having shared terminology can help with word building. It’s easier IMHO to follow Mage the Ascension (old game but whatever) if everyone knows what spheres are. It’s nice that you can say 1000 years ago the Akashic Bros and the Hermes (or whatever) had different names but now that technocracy has taken over everyone calls this sphere Forces. But it would not be an easier game to play or to role-play in if there was a game term and then a different term for each of the wizard types.

    The fact that DnD has levels, but somehow nobody notices they exist or you get them by killing things, makes everyone in most F20 worlds seem like an idiot.

    And there is the rise of rpgLit, which is not normally my thing, but the people who are into it seem perfectly nice ;).

Leave a Reply

Archives

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Copyright © The Alexandrian. All rights reserved.