International Intrigue rides on

I still dig on this idea. Every time I pick up a little Greg Rucka, I keep thinking “This! This is what I want to be playing.” And I don’t know if this is where I want to go with it, but I really think I’m going to rob Ben Lehman blind, and pull the bargaining mechanics out of Polaris.[1]

Honestly, regardless of what I think of the color text, the basic idea of negotiating the results of a conflict, of using the wonderful fun of a bidding game like Modern Art or Pizzarro and Co. except plot elements are the stakes and the wager really jazzes me. And I think this completely fits into what I’d been pondering for International Intrigue.[2]

I’ve also been contemplating the idea of silent use of the rules of the game, so that all conversation can be in character or action related. And while the “key phrases” idea is interesting, it jars me a little. I’ve been thinking about a system that grows on the simple act of handing someone dice in order to suggest that they need to roll to resolve conflict. Especially if the ultimate characters are spies, some sort of tactical combat hand signals] might be in order.

On thing I’m playing with is the idea that as action moves from back at the home office, M and Q to actual theatre of operations, man in the field kind of stuff, that the number of adversarial bidders will change. I also like the idea of compelling each player to take a role in a scene where he want to bid, and then offer his bids from the mouth of that character.

So at the home office, the best way to represent the schemes of Them⁴ is to take the role of a Moneypenny, or a signals officer, or something, delivering the bad news.

An essential component, and one I still want to play with, is the conflict between the agents personal lives and their work.

¹ And I really ought to get in at least one session of the thing.

² which so needs a better name, it’s sickening

³ or do I mean these

⁴ a la Asimov