“I’m sorry, did you say street magic?” is the first TTRPG I have ever played, and I played it with my teammates for Game Project 2. This was a simple introduction to TTRPG because of its simple game rules and mechanics.
A city-building story game
Self-described as a “city-building” story game, this is a game that brings its players together to create a new city and imagine its character, situate events, figure out the kinds of people who live there, etc. in order to explore life in that city. As such, the game is collaborative, and the play experience is highly dependent on the players. The game is DM/GM-less which, to make up for, the game comes with a long rule book detailing the city system, event system, etc. Each player takes turns setting the event for a round; then, during the play of the round, each player gets to either create a neighborhood, landmark, or character in the city, related to the round’s event. After all players have contributed to the event, the round ends, and the aftermath of the event remains. If players wish to consider this aftermath in the following rounds, they may – but it is but up to the players. The game ends whenever the players feel satisfied about the city they’ve explored/built, and there is no winner.
Evocative Storytelling
In class, we have discussed that games act as a 3rd dimension in storytelling, adjacent to and separate from media such as film, music, and books. Games put the user directly into the experience, and, especially with role-playing games, the user takes on a character central to the storytelling process. This may enable the user to experience the story in a richer perspective than film, music, and/or books, as they get to explore the story unfold around them, rather than have it be presented to them. If done right and well, games possess the ability to invoke more emotional responses in users than other storytelling forms.
“i’m sorry, did you say street magic?”, as a collaborative, player-driven TTRPG, puts the idea of evocative storytelling to the best use. Since the game has a simple ruleset – no pre-defined characters, no pre-defined city, no pre-defined events – the players are entirely left to their own devices to immerse themselves in the city. This may seem daunting! However, since the game is collaborative in nature, and the rule book spends time providing examples and encouragement to promote players’ creativity, this game structure plays out well in practice. Furthermore, the structure allows the players to build their own narrative, making them more engaged in the game and potentially offering a richer play experience.
Lack of conflict/tension
By some definitions of what makes a game a game, or an interesting game, we have often discussed conflict/tension as a central component. A weakness for this game is that there is a lack of real conflict. The game keeps going until the players decide to end it, and there is no structural build-up of conflict. While the game is collaborative, simple, and cozy to play, it places heavy trust on its players to construct their own tensions through the events, neighborhoods, landmarks, and characters, and leaves its players to resolve those conflicts in a meaningful way just to the narrative themselves as well. I view this as a central weakness because in addition to making the game play potentially boring when there are shy/less engaged players, this makes the game implicitly inaccessible to new gamers who are unfamiliar to building good narratives, performing improv, jumping in as NPCs if needed, etc. Because I played the game with my teammates who were more experienced with TTRPGs, and who I felt reasonably comfortable around, I had an enjoyable play experience. However, this may not be the case for everyone.
Overall, despite its limitations, I recommend this game to gamers who are relatively new to TTRPGs because of the simple game rules and mechanics and the collaborative play structure.
Author: Antrita Manduva
