Jump to the new rules, and skip the pretentious bologna.

---

Today we look at the elegantly simple survival horror game Grin, and describe a hack of the rules to allow for variable outcomes in resolving action, while automatically creating small microcosms of tension within the greater dread of impending death.

Grin's a pretty cool game. Besides having the most kickass title font ever devised, it's simple, incredibly easy to play, and eminently pick-up-able. It solves some (perceived) problems of Dread — breaking immersion, player skill as a determinant, loss of players as the game continues — with some simple mechanics and a deck of cards. As it is, the mechanics do a nice job of baking in the survival horror narrative structure. Plus, it uses a deck of cards! How cool is that. I realize it's hardly the most innovative source of randomness, but darned if it doesn't feel novel to me.

Now, this isn't a review, it's a proposed hack. We wouldn't be here chatting about it if there weren't (perceived) room for improvement. Here's what I would like to see done differently:

• Difficulty: get rid of it. Doesn't seem crazy-relevant to survival horror as a genre (speaking out of ignorance, here, so take this with a barrel of salt). It makes the game rely on the GM for pacing and stability, which has its place, but I'd sooner avoid it where possible. If we need something to determine how many cards are drawn, consider the raw danger of the situation, or even physical proximity to the bad guy. Better yet, let the mechanics handle it for you.
• Unary resolution: let's try binary.¹ Right now, Grin has you succeed or die. I quite like this, and doubt it needs "improvement", but good/bad/die might be a useful set of outcomes for some games.
• PvP (through spending Aces) seems to be an expression of competitiveness, but it might serve the genre better to express vindictiveness. There's no reason you can't be vindictive by using your Ace to force someone to redraw in Grin, but it's definitely, absolutely vindictive when you have to say "why they deserve it" and you suffer consequences yourself.

So considering these design goals, consider the following adjustments.

---

Rules Adjustments

In The Beginning (after character death or when the game begins), the Master will draw the topmost card from the deck and leave it face up between themselves and the deck; this is the High Card. It must always be a pip card (Ace, or 2 - 10).

Ignore difficulty. When a player would have to draw, the Master doesn't tell them to draw one to three cards; the player chooses to draw one to three cards, all at once.

If at least one of your cards is equal to or higher than the High Card, your action resolves positively for you. Place the lowest such card on top of the High Card, replacing it. That is, of the cards you drew that beat it, the lowest becomes the new High Card. Discard the rest.

If none of your cards do the job, your action resolves negatively for you. Discard them all, for they have failed you.

Keep to the Face Card rules: when you draw one, discard it and draw another.

A player will still keep a drawn Ace, but they will now spend it by:

• Placing it on top of the High Card to reset it. Aces are low, so everything beats it. This may be done immediately to convert a missed draw into a successful draw. When they spend their Ace this way, they should say what they do (or did previously) that restores hope.
• Discarding it to force someone else to beat the High Card twice. This should be done right after they've beat it for the first time, so they'll have to decide if it's worth drawing again for a chance at success. When they spend their Ace this way, they should say why the character deserves it.

Players with dead Characters may do the same with their four cards.

---

Does It Work?

Well, after extensive testing (basically just me screwing around with cards by myself for 10 minutes like a lonely little nerd), I can confidently say I'm not sure.

What will happen is that the High Card steadily increases until it hits 10, and then resets as soon as a player spends an Ace. Once 10 is the High Card, there's only the three other 10s and the Aces that can beat it, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to draw three cards — you're just gonna fail, anyway. It does if you're fishing for that next Ace, which I think is a strength: players have to buy success by burning their remaining life away.

In fact, drawing more cards will slow down the increase in the High Card's number, while drawing only one card at a time sends it sky high, fast. This is, I think, a weakness. Buying continued success for yourself and your friends with your remaining lifespan nicely reinforces the genre, though.

So, do we meet those design goals?

• Difficulty successfully disposed of. Players now choose how many cards to draw, based on their priorities in the moment.
• Unary resolution converted to binary resolution, though unconventionally. The game will tend towards increasing failure (and, in theory, increasing despair/tension) until the High Card is reset, and then the microcosm of tension restarts.
• PvP is more interesting now. I will admit that Aces in Grin, as it stands, is my least favorite bit of the game. Now, you have to say why the other character deserves your attack, and you may suffer the consequences yourself if the High Card increases with their second draw.

I strongly encourage everyone to go and buy Grin at DriveThruRPG. It's a smart game with slick ideas, and a worthy addition to your emergency game bag.

--Karaktakus the Final Girl

Cover photo: Kickstarter