Migrant Stories - a hack about immigrant experiences

Hi! I've been working on a hack on my own for the last few months, and am comfortable enough with what I've got to start soliciting feedback. The hack is called Migrant Stories, and it strives to tell the emotional truth, if not the historical truth, of the immigrant experience. I designed the game mostly in a vacuum, having run just two short playtests with close friends, so I'm anxious to hear what others think.

Here's the Google Drive folder with rules and sheets.

Here's a peek at what's inside:

Innate Traits: Strong, Nimble, Wise, Clever, Gracious

Perceived Traits: Dark, Exotic, Accented

Basic Moves: Observe, Remember, Beat Feet, Resort to Violence, Aid, Intervene, Appeal, Create an Association or Tie

Peripheral Moves: Toil, Trade, Prepare, Seek Shelter

Desperate Moves: Blend In, Reinforce a Stereotype, Beg a Favor, Make a Stand

Playbooks: The Artist, The Devotee, The Exile, The Homebound, The Hustler, The Laborer, The Refugee, The Street Urchin

I realize there hasn't really been any interest in the here, but in case someone might be I thought I'd share a "lite" ruleset for this game that I've been tinkering with lately. You can find it here.

awesome, I'll take a look tonight

Hey Neal,

I read over the lite ruleset last night. A couple of tiny typos I can highlight if you want.

Rule wise - in the lite rules, I'm not seeing how you set your starting stats - innate and perceived.

I'm also not sure why a player would 'choose' the firebrand playbook (or similar). The desire to create an interesting story crashes right up against the desire not to shoot yourself in the foot from the start. My only power would be the ability to get into trouble faster.

Hi cromlyngames,

Thanks for taking a look!

I don't know how I missed the starting stat assignments, but I fixed that and the document at the link should now show "Assigned these numbers at will: 0, 1, 2 or 1, 1, 1" on the character sheet.

I see what you mean about the Firebrand. Here's what I had intended with that: For anyone else, advancing Suspicion normally means you failed your roll, which means you failed at trying to do something. The Firebrand can get around that, though, and automatically succeed at something, as long as it fits the narrative trigger and they're willing to take the Suspicion hit. They succeed where others fail. Does that make sense, and if so, does it just need to be made clearer? Or if not, what could be a better balance?

Also, the Pragmatist and Firebrand roles are meant to give players the ability to do smaller versions of the Appease and Subvert moves, so I wonder if you have similar feelings about those.

Ahh, alright.

This is all the lite rules say for the firebrand:

"The firebrand: If you don't make a stand, no one will.
When you do something small to subvert the powers that
be, advance the Suspicion clock by 1."

The thing you said they can do isn't there.

Thanks, cromlyngames!

I'm thinking:

"The firebrand: If you don't make a stand, no one will. When you do something small to subvert the powers that be, you can choose to succeed at a roll as long as you advance the Suspicion clock by 1."

P.S. Changed two things outside the game:
1. I changed my username; anyone should be able to check my post history if they want to confirm it's really me. I go by Nell (she/her/hers) now.
2. I'm hosting the  game else where now: https://goo.gl/1hZYki

Cheers!

In a further attempt to reduce this game concept to its essentials, I've done away with everything except for:

• innate and perceived traits (3 each)
• clocks (acceptance, assimilation and suspicion
• basic moves (one for each clock)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EACrsBTq96JKBoR9PAe2y_IgsuJvgi3QIgvG9vvMr1M/edit

However, as it is, the game is a race to midnight which doesn't have the most natural feel to it. It's missing post-midnight moves, which is where I'm going to focus next.