TQB Levels of Play

[James V. West]

Hey

In The Questing Beast you are actually playing 3 different types of roles. I'm addressing this in the opening pages of the game and I'd like to present what I've written so far on the subject in hopes of getting some feedback. Specifically, is the terminology and the description economical/clear or does it muddy things up?

THREE LEVELS OF ROLE-PLAYING

As I mentioned earlier, you play many roles in this game. Consider yourself a role-playing acrobat deftly shifting between three different levels of play:

1. BARD LEVEL -You are a Bard. But don’t strap a lute across your back to go adventuring. This just means you’re a storyteller in both the oral and written applications. There is no Bard character sheet or character creation rules. You are the Bard. Take a pen name, think of your audience, and have fun.

2. HERO LEVEL -You are a Hero. This doesn’t mean you have to save princesses from towers, it just means you’re playing the role of the main character in your story. This is the mode of role-playing you’re probably most familiar with. It’s where you “get into character“.

3. MOTIF LEVEL -You control everything else in your Romance. If your Hero is off somewhere in The Narrow Wood but the current scene is in Camelot then how can you take part? Easy. The important elements of your Romance are called Motifs and you get the chance to add narrative flavor to a scene in which any of your Motifs are represented. A Motif can be anything in your story, even a pair of boots. If those boots happen to be in a scene though your Hero is not, you still get a shot at having some effect.


Thanks!

James V. West
www.randomordercreations.com

[Rich Forest]

Hi,

I like how you're breaking this down—making these roles explicit early on should help ease the reader into understanding the language of the game.  In your post, you specifically asked about clarity.  Here's what I saw.

1. BARD LEVEL -You are a Bard. But don't strap a lute across your back to go adventuring. This just means you're a storyteller in both the oral and written applications. There is no Bard character sheet or character creation rules. You are the Bard. Take a pen name, think of your audience, and have fun.

I got the main point of it... but it wasn't completely clear on the first read-through.  I think part of this was due to context—if I'm not familiar with TQB or similar games, the Bard Level is going to be new to me.  The Hero Level, however, is much more accessible.  It's more like what I'm used to.  Would it be worthwhile to start with it, so that you're moving from more familiar to less familiar in explaining the levels?  As far as the text of the Bard Level itself, I think the key points are "This just means you're a storyteller in both the oral and written applications" and "You are the Bard."  Since these are central to understanding what the Bard Level means, I'll focus on them.  The former is strongest at the beginning, but I'm not sure if "oral and written applications" is clear.  If I'm a naïve reader, I could have a hard time interpreting this.  Is there a way to make it more specific?  Even though you want to keep it economical, a short, specific example or two might help here, like the example of the boot in the Motif Level.  The other thing I see in here is a question of emphasis in the line, "You are the bard."  For me, the contrast is clearer if the emphasis is "You are the bard."

2. HERO LEVEL -You are a Hero. This doesn't mean you have to save princesses from towers, it just means you're playing the role of the main character in your story. This is the mode of role-playing you're probably most familiar with. It's where you "get into character".

This one is clear and concise for me.  I like that you use a parallel structure to open it ("You are the Bard," and "You are a Hero.").  Also, for roleplayers, this level is the one that needs the least amount of explanation.  I think you got it just right.  That could be another argument for starting with it.  Of course, this text is not aimed at an audience that is unfamiliar with roleplaying, right?  Because while a roleplayer will have no problem with this, I'm not sure about a novice.  Let's see.  Reading it again, I think someone who doesn't know roleplaying will probably still get it pretty easily, aside from the "This is the mode of role-playing you're probably most familiar with."  Not really a problem.  This line increases the clarity for an audience of roleplayers.  

3. MOTIF LEVEL -You control everything else in your Romance. If your Hero is off somewhere in The Narrow Wood but the current scene is in Camelot then how can you take part? Easy. The important elements of your Romance are called Motifs and you get the chance to add narrative flavor to a scene in which any of your Motifs are represented. A Motif can be anything in your story, even a pair of boots. If those boots happen to be in a scene though your Hero is not, you still get a shot at having some effect.

I like that you give an example (the pair of boots).  Now, as a reader, I know I can affect them if they're in a scene... but how?  It might be worthwhile to take the example even further.  Another thing that might confuse a naïve reader is the use of the term "Romance" here.  Your average roleplayer will probably associate this with "campaign," "chronicle," et al., or maybe with "adventure," but only after they take a second to think about it.  You don't want them to have to think about this—you're explaining the Motif Level here, and that's where you want the reader's focus.  Of course, if you've already explained how you use the term "Romance" earlier in the text, you don't have a problem, and you can ignore the previous comment.  The only other thing that might cause confusion is the opening line of "You control everything else in your romance."  Is the motif level really a catch-all for "everything else?"  "Everything else" is kind of broad and it might be hard for a reader to figure out how to approach it.

Well, that's what I got from it.  I hope some of it is helpful—

Rich

[James V. West]

Hey, Rich

the Bard Level is going to be new to me.  The Hero Level, however, is much more accessible.  It's more like what I'm used to.  Would it be worthwhile to start with it, so that you're moving from more familiar to less familiar in explaining the levels?

Good point. I could take it from Hero to Motif and then end with Bard level. That would take it from the most concrete to the most abstract.

As far as the text of the Bard Level itself, I think the key points are "This just means you're a storyteller in both the oral and written applications" and "You are the Bard."  Since these are central to understanding what the Bard Level means, I'll focus on them.  The former is strongest at the beginning, but I'm not sure if "oral and written applications" is clear.

Indeed, it does need re-writing. When I'm not 100% clear on how to articulate something, my writing gets bogged down. I write and re-write and it starts to read like I'm talking to myself, trying to find the right words.

Of course, this text is not aimed at an audience that is unfamiliar with roleplaying, right?

That's something I have not thought about. No, it isn't aimed at new players, although I'd like for it to be accessible to them. But that isn't really a concern for me yet.

I like that you give an example (the pair of boots).  Now, as a reader, I know I can affect them if they're in a scene... but how?  It might be worthwhile to take the example even further.

Not a bad idea. I'll writing the example a little furthur and trimming the whole thing down somewhat to keep it short and sweet.

Another thing that might confuse a naïve reader is the use of the term "Romance" here...Of course, if you've already explained how you use the term "Romance" earlier in the text, you don't have a problem, and you can ignore the previous comment.

Yeah, the term gets mentioned very early plus there's a short glossary that's going on page one.

The only other thing that might cause confusion is the opening line of "You control everything else in your romance."  Is the motif level really a catch-all for "everything else?"  "Everything else" is kind of broad and it might be hard for a reader to figure out how to approach it.

I agree on this. Still working on a better description. Since we're talking Motif Level, I suppose "You can control the important elements of your story by turning them into Motifs." or something like that.

Well, that's what I got from it.  I hope some of it is helpful—

Very, Rich. Thanks a lot!

[Mike Holmes]

An acrobat deftly shifting between characters.... Hmmm...

I gotta say, whenever I envision this, I see each player with two hats. Yes, two real, physical hats. When I want to be the Bard, I put on the Bard cap (robinhood-esque as I envision it). When I am playing the part of the hero I put on another appropriate hat. Perhaps a helmet. When I am just me I take off my hat.

That way everyone else will be able to folow my deft shifting of charracters. Flakey, I know, but it would help. Perhaps the stand-up/sit-down method (from Puppetland?) Or just a mode of address.

Mike

[Christopher Kubasik]

Hi everybody,

Years ago I ran one night of ADD in the Al Qadim setting.  (Man, wasn't that stuff gorgeous?)

To get the feel and flavor right off the bat, I had all the players set aside their PC sheets and create instantly (they were great players -- in fact Mike Nystul was there that night) prisoners held by an Al Qadim king.  

They were all brought up from the dungeon, given a lovely dinner, and then asked to entertain the king with an tale improvised by the group.  If they failed to entertian the king, they would be executed in the morning.

Each one of these "metacharacters" (or bard, for the purposes of this discussion) then introduced his PCs, and slowly I morphed what they were telling me into the adventure....

We cut at a cliff hanger and returned to the palace where the king was pleased, deciding to let them live another night to finish the tale.

It worked great.

I've asked my gaming group if they'd like to do Arabian style game -- anthropomorphized, of course.  I haven't heard any responses, yet, bit if I get to run it I'll and pull out the same trick.

I think it will really help get everyone in a more Authorial and Narrative frame of thinking.

Christopher

[James V. West]

The Al Quadim game sounds great. Arabian style TQB? Excellent. I'm all for it. Let me know if you do that. I'd like to include a few suggestions for Accords like that in the game.

Its very difficult to articulate the idea that you're playing the role of a bard, and telling a story about your hero. I find myself thinking that the Hero character is the traditional PC, while you--the player--are in the main role as Bard. I suppose you could call that layer live-action.

But in truth, I'm making it more complex than it needs to be. Once I get it written down, give it a week or two, read it again, re-write it, wait, then look at it again...I'll figure out the best way to present it.

[Valamir]

I've never been real clear as to why you want to make the distinction in the first place.  What is it about Player as Bard, thats different from Player as Player with cool Motif director powers?

Perhaps starting with the why and "what is to be gained" will help clarify your rewrite.

[James V. West]

The idea of players calling themselves Bards ties into the whole Arthurian thing. Bards were the original tellers of the tales that later became Mallory's L'Morte D'Artur and so forth. I want players to really put themselves into that mindset. They aren't just players, they are storytellers. To take that a step further, they can adopt pen names, styles of writing, signiture Heroes. Etc.

But I don't want to confuse people into thinking that they are "creating" a Bard in the same sense as they would create a character for a normal rpg session. They really are the Bard. There is no sheet and no stats. Its completely metagame, if that term fits.

I suppose an easier way of approaching it would be to keep it simple by calling players bards, suggesting pen names, using words like "pretend", and then just trusting peoples' common sense from that point forward.

This is one of those concepts that I see very clearly in my mind, I understand it completely, yet I don't trust my ability to articulate it. Thus, I tend to overstate, understate, and confuse the issue. Once I get something solid written, I'll post it and see what you folks think.

[Valamir]

Go with that then:

"Before Mallory, before Tennyson, before White, the bards told tales about a king named Arthur and his heroic deeds in defense of Britain.  It was these tales, past down from generation to generation that Geoffrey of Monmouth first recorded in his History.  Each bard would tell the story from a slightly different heritage, and each would feature the deeds of a local knight, a local hero who would be exaulted above the others.  And so the complex tapestry of Arthurian legend was woven.

"You are one of those bards.  You the player are a weaver of the tales which will one day be part of the legend of Arthur.  Your character is a knight, a local hero, and one of many whose story will be part of that history.  Whether your hero is all but forgotten, or is one day featured as a central figure of the cycle depends on his deeds as a knight, and your ability as a bard to tell his tale".


Something like that.  For the gamist in all of us, you may even want to include some mechanic that measure whether the character is Sir Lancelot or Sir also-ran.