I agree that especially at lower levels the game focuses more on the players then the characters , so it's a big shift from "DnD heroic protagonist" most RPG players expect. The only point i disagree with is the "ask the agency is the ability to beg the GM for something to happen". In actuality it's the power to narrate literally anything into existance as long as it doesn't contradict something the DM already described. You don't beg the DM to do stuff, you take over as the DM and whatever you say happens (as long as you succeed on the roll).
Definitely going to get hate for this, but your main issue seems to be the "you cant do anything unless you beg the GM for it to happen, or use your powers" but that's incorrect. The game encourages the GM to make players roll because the GM can't do any direct actions against the players without Chaos, so give ample opportunities for Agents to use the Reality bending powers they're given (if not, why are you playing this when you can easily do Monster of the Week instead?) The bit about not being able to do anything else being incorrect is because its specified that Agents are prone to being clumsy when trying anything *completely mundane*. The GM can let you do anything but the risk of failure is higher because you're doing normal people things as a no-longer-normal person. Talking to a bartender is fine, but sneaking past a bartender into the owner's private office just by crouching like a Skyrim character won't work without a power or ability in play. (This is a direct example from a mission.)
No, you're entirely correct and Anon is just wrong about that angle - and spending time on Reality really hammers that home. That said, the game fails for me as a game because once you've had it's content spoiled (even lightly) there's really just nothing much to it. The first time you go through a campaign blind the surprises and uncertainty about what choices to make might keep it interesting, but without that it falls flat. And in a way that's a shame, because the legacy stuff is a neat concept. But when there are already exhaustive analyses of how to spend your time optimally to produce any given character outcome who's going to bother playing multiple campaigns to experience those legacies? The game's barely out and people have already "solved" it, which makes discovering it for yourself feel rather pointless - and there isn't enough else there beyond those discoveries to keep my attention, although YMMV.
If anything it reminds me a lot of Mork Borg, in the sense that it's clear writing a decent game was much lower on the dev's priorities than creating a "mood" and giving the right "vibes".
Getting the same feeling, especially came through when listening tonthe creator on podcasts to talk about it really leaning into how they wanted the players to "feel" while playing it and not so much hownthe game is actually played.
I'd bet money he hasn't even played it. i'm two sessions in and my group is having a blast. Most other groups i've seen are too. This video feels like it's trying harder than the game to be unique
This is basically "we have Mage the Ascension's Technocracy at home." Down to the Paradox mechanic. Except worse because instead of encouraging meta learning it encourages meta clowning.
Holy fuck. Control being mentioned made me think "Oh that's a game. The Epic Game store has a different free game everyday around Christmas. I wonder what today's game is," and it was Control. What are the odds?
Triangle Agency is one of those games that follows the tradition of the many other indie darlings that came before it. You go looking for actual info on it. Tangible, thoughtful examination of the mechanics that can honestly tell you literally anything about the game. Does it have all the mechanical pieces it requires? Do its systems and subsystems and the intersection of thematic elements actually work in a satisfying way that people will enjoy? *Does it accomplish the things it is attempting to do?* And there is none of that to be found. Instead you get directed right to Polygon or Dicebreaker (which is just polygon again) where they have an entire PR puff-piece article about how great and cool and BUYABLE the game is right now. The other articles they have on it are about how great it is and how it is one of the best products released this year, which you can buy right now. Want a second opinion? Your options are a couple podcasts that run several hours long and exist solely so a channel or podcast with an abysmally small audience can stay relevant by playing the latest trendy thing. Of course, they've already done videos and actual plays on all of the other trendy games of the year, too. None of them actually review the game in any direct way. All that to say, I appreciate you and what you do, Notepad anon. You are concise, you are direct, and you actually talk about games as the things they are and not as the nebulous circlejerk of journos and wannabe e-celebs promoting their affiliate links
A large part of that stems from the fact that most of the game's value (such as it is) stems from the process of revealing "playwalled" mechanics during your actual playthroughs. It's easy enough to review and analyze in detail (and several people have done so at this point) but it quite literally spoils the game for you in the process. The designers were trying to sell the novelty of discovery combined with legacy effects that will only really become meaningful over multiple campaigns - but knowing too much about the game destroys the replay value in short order, and full spoilers make even playing it once feel pointless. Without a modern internet this game might have worked the way it was intended for quite some time. As it is, it's barely out and people have already "solved" it for whatever character outcome you want to have happen, making it feel kind of pointless to try to discover those pathways yourself - and without that, there's not enough gameply to bother with, at least IMO.
Don't know why but this reminded me aboit Paranoia ttrpg. The part about players being incompetent and begging a higher authority to fix things for comedy. Except paranoia is supposed to be a comedy game instead of whatever this supposed to be.
Good to know, will use delta green instead if i ever wanna run a SCP game, tho now that i think about it delta green would be better for runing a UiU game in the scp setting but I'm getting ahead of myself
I know you aren’t the fondest of Mork Borg, but they did a supplement called Corp Borg which is better than Triangle. Think Office Space meets The Devil’s Advocate….
after reading the game in its entirety i fear i must agree with notepad's assessment. i do like the vibe a lot still but the fundamental mechanics of the game are awful in a way thats really tough to rework without just making a new game. maybe i will!
sorry for treating this comment thread as a game dev long but i guess we doin game dev now i wonder if exploding the "ask the agency to modify reality" mechanic out into something like this would be better and work given the rest of it - you actually have skill rolls now, based on the skills that are already in the game (frankly bizarre that they're in the game now as a measure of what youre good at if it doesnt fucking matter as is) - QAs are now a direct quantification of the Agency's intervention in a scene, allowing you narrative rewrite potential if you use them (and indeed explain why you flip a failure to a success based on a conference with your table a la the old mechanic) - you have baseline 1 QA in every skill and 2 in the three you start empowered with (this will break the neat 3 allocation, but i don't really care at all if it makes playing the game feel better) im not sure if this will have the players rolling MORE than they do right now, but it definitely wont have them rolling any less. as it stands, the book says that the players are in control of the rolls, but i dont really agree. its not quantifiable, but it seems pretty closely related to the amount of obstacles you put in their way. the game's fundamental assumption is the players will fail at anything they try without a roll, so the trickier you make a mission, the more rolls are required. in my mind the only thing this rule change will change is the ability of characters to impact a scene directly instead of relying solely on the bad red triangle or the funny blue circles. yes i know that crushes a part of the metanarrative but it makes the game worse by existing, so i dont care. the chaos table also probably needs a rework, but that's a big undertaking
I want to congratulate triangle agency for being the first TTRPG for those sociopath DMs that want yesmen instead of actual humans at the table. (that's the best I can come up with for this dull game. Someone hand me the enkephalin ampoule)
The overall concept of an RPG that has legacy elements that we've heretofore only seen in board games (Eg Risk Legacy, obviously) is an idea that deserves salvaging, although the execution here doesn't bode very well for that happening.
I love the custom padsonas each video
I agree that especially at lower levels the game focuses more on the players then the characters , so it's a big shift from "DnD heroic protagonist" most RPG players expect.
The only point i disagree with is the "ask the agency is the ability to beg the GM for something to happen".
In actuality it's the power to narrate literally anything into existance as long as it doesn't contradict something the DM already described.
You don't beg the DM to do stuff, you take over as the DM and whatever you say happens (as long as you succeed on the roll).
ngl, games great. Different strokes I guess?
Why I always call these things opinions and not completely objective reviews (tm) (c) (r).
@@NotepadAnon There's always going to be a "but I liked it, though'. It's a law at this point.
Definitely going to get hate for this, but your main issue seems to be the "you cant do anything unless you beg the GM for it to happen, or use your powers" but that's incorrect. The game encourages the GM to make players roll because the GM can't do any direct actions against the players without Chaos, so give ample opportunities for Agents to use the Reality bending powers they're given (if not, why are you playing this when you can easily do Monster of the Week instead?)
The bit about not being able to do anything else being incorrect is because its specified that Agents are prone to being clumsy when trying anything *completely mundane*. The GM can let you do anything but the risk of failure is higher because you're doing normal people things as a no-longer-normal person. Talking to a bartender is fine, but sneaking past a bartender into the owner's private office just by crouching like a Skyrim character won't work without a power or ability in play. (This is a direct example from a mission.)
No, you're entirely correct and Anon is just wrong about that angle - and spending time on Reality really hammers that home.
That said, the game fails for me as a game because once you've had it's content spoiled (even lightly) there's really just nothing much to it. The first time you go through a campaign blind the surprises and uncertainty about what choices to make might keep it interesting, but without that it falls flat. And in a way that's a shame, because the legacy stuff is a neat concept. But when there are already exhaustive analyses of how to spend your time optimally to produce any given character outcome who's going to bother playing multiple campaigns to experience those legacies? The game's barely out and people have already "solved" it, which makes discovering it for yourself feel rather pointless - and there isn't enough else there beyond those discoveries to keep my attention, although YMMV.
If anything it reminds me a lot of Mork Borg, in the sense that it's clear writing a decent game was much lower on the dev's priorities than creating a "mood" and giving the right "vibes".
Getting the same feeling, especially came through when listening tonthe creator on podcasts to talk about it really leaning into how they wanted the players to "feel" while playing it and not so much hownthe game is actually played.
Well at least it's not another game powered by the apocalypse right? Rite?
Damn... this is true hate right there...
I'd bet money he hasn't even played it. i'm two sessions in and my group is having a blast. Most other groups i've seen are too. This video feels like it's trying harder than the game to be unique
This is basically "we have Mage the Ascension's Technocracy at home." Down to the Paradox mechanic.
Except worse because instead of encouraging meta learning it encourages meta clowning.
Holy fuck. Control being mentioned made me think "Oh that's a game. The Epic Game store has a different free game everyday around Christmas. I wonder what today's game is," and it was Control. What are the odds?
Triangle Agency is one of those games that follows the tradition of the many other indie darlings that came before it. You go looking for actual info on it. Tangible, thoughtful examination of the mechanics that can honestly tell you literally anything about the game. Does it have all the mechanical pieces it requires? Do its systems and subsystems and the intersection of thematic elements actually work in a satisfying way that people will enjoy? *Does it accomplish the things it is attempting to do?*
And there is none of that to be found. Instead you get directed right to Polygon or Dicebreaker (which is just polygon again) where they have an entire PR puff-piece article about how great and cool and BUYABLE the game is right now. The other articles they have on it are about how great it is and how it is one of the best products released this year, which you can buy right now. Want a second opinion? Your options are a couple podcasts that run several hours long and exist solely so a channel or podcast with an abysmally small audience can stay relevant by playing the latest trendy thing. Of course, they've already done videos and actual plays on all of the other trendy games of the year, too. None of them actually review the game in any direct way.
All that to say, I appreciate you and what you do, Notepad anon. You are concise, you are direct, and you actually talk about games as the things they are and not as the nebulous circlejerk of journos and wannabe e-celebs promoting their affiliate links
A large part of that stems from the fact that most of the game's value (such as it is) stems from the process of revealing "playwalled" mechanics during your actual playthroughs. It's easy enough to review and analyze in detail (and several people have done so at this point) but it quite literally spoils the game for you in the process. The designers were trying to sell the novelty of discovery combined with legacy effects that will only really become meaningful over multiple campaigns - but knowing too much about the game destroys the replay value in short order, and full spoilers make even playing it once feel pointless.
Without a modern internet this game might have worked the way it was intended for quite some time. As it is, it's barely out and people have already "solved" it for whatever character outcome you want to have happen, making it feel kind of pointless to try to discover those pathways yourself - and without that, there's not enough gameply to bother with, at least IMO.
Don't know why but this reminded me aboit Paranoia ttrpg. The part about players being incompetent and begging a higher authority to fix things for comedy. Except paranoia is supposed to be a comedy game instead of whatever this supposed to be.
I think it's a comedy game disguised as a 9 to 5 office job
This is also a comedy game. So you’re right on the money
Good to know, will use delta green instead if i ever wanna run a SCP game, tho now that i think about it delta green would be better for runing a UiU game in the scp setting but I'm getting ahead of myself
Square Agency when
Seems like a weird game to choose design. Delta Green is one of the best designed games in the hobby, why would you even bother going up against that?
Maybe If all the Player Are High the game May be more Fun
+1 for Hee Ho.
I know you aren’t the fondest of Mork Borg, but they did a supplement called Corp Borg which is better than Triangle. Think Office Space meets The Devil’s Advocate….
Campaign idea: I guess we doin circles now.
it's funny cause it's not that far off the truth
the aesthetic of the game absolutely rips. good thing i dont have to use the rules to enjoy that
after reading the game in its entirety i fear i must agree with notepad's assessment. i do like the vibe a lot still but the fundamental mechanics of the game are awful in a way thats really tough to rework without just making a new game. maybe i will!
sorry for treating this comment thread as a game dev long but i guess we doin game dev now
i wonder if exploding the "ask the agency to modify reality" mechanic out into something like this would be better and work given the rest of it
- you actually have skill rolls now, based on the skills that are already in the game (frankly bizarre that they're in the game now as a measure of what youre good at if it doesnt fucking matter as is)
- QAs are now a direct quantification of the Agency's intervention in a scene, allowing you narrative rewrite potential if you use them (and indeed explain why you flip a failure to a success based on a conference with your table a la the old mechanic)
- you have baseline 1 QA in every skill and 2 in the three you start empowered with (this will break the neat 3 allocation, but i don't really care at all if it makes playing the game feel better)
im not sure if this will have the players rolling MORE than they do right now, but it definitely wont have them rolling any less. as it stands, the book says that the players are in control of the rolls, but i dont really agree. its not quantifiable, but it seems pretty closely related to the amount of obstacles you put in their way. the game's fundamental assumption is the players will fail at anything they try without a roll, so the trickier you make a mission, the more rolls are required. in my mind the only thing this rule change will change is the ability of characters to impact a scene directly instead of relying solely on the bad red triangle or the funny blue circles. yes i know that crushes a part of the metanarrative but it makes the game worse by existing, so i dont care.
the chaos table also probably needs a rework, but that's a big undertaking
Jfc, glad I dodged a bullet on that. Thanks for the heads up
Notepad malding over horrificly designed games is always a highlight.
UmU
Oh look, another game that's just a setting I'm going to steal all the good ideas from and run in GURPS.
this hurts but i did laugh at the breakdown
I want to congratulate triangle agency for being the first TTRPG for those sociopath DMs that want yesmen instead of actual humans at the table.
(that's the best I can come up with for this dull game. Someone hand me the enkephalin ampoule)
I hate scp
itsa lotta powa packed int 4:28.
This game is a step below free form roleplay in terms of rules and that’s an accomplishment
My Life with Master made D4 die pools work. This does not.
Lol. This review made me laugh. Good job!
It almost feels like this game was scientifically designed to piss off Notepad. Only thing to make it worse is if it was PBTA.
Notepad going all out on the hate for this one - good job!
Sounds like Polish Warhammer
Yeah. I don't even think there's a salvageable idea in this game to build on.
The overall concept of an RPG that has legacy elements that we've heretofore only seen in board games (Eg Risk Legacy, obviously) is an idea that deserves salvaging, although the execution here doesn't bode very well for that happening.