Scene Economies

[theboeh]

I just wrote an essay on my blog talking about my thoughts on scene economies. I compare my experiences with classical roleplaying games to recent experiences with a more story driven game--Burning Empires. I would be interested to hear what you think about my opinions. The essay can be found here:

http://jeffkingdom.blogspot.com/2007/09/scene-economies.html

--Jeff King
http://jeffkingdom.blogspot.com

[ChrisLane]

I think control over the number and types of scenes is one aspect of the larger issue of the balance of power among the participants in a game (including the GM.)  I'm no authority, and haven't even really solidified my own opinion - but here's my current hunch....

The root of the issue is the desire to be entertained and the desire to be entertaining.  I am thinking 'impossible thing before breakfast' texts were written on the assumption that the GM primarily wants to entertain, and the players primarily want to be entertained.  I'm also thinking that many people in this community operate on the assumption that anyone participating in an RPG session are looking to entertain at least as much as they're looking to be entertained.

If everyone is primarily looking to be entertaining - the group will benefit from Burning Empire's system.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi guys,

Chris, those are good points.

However, what we're looking at in this thread is merely a link to a blog article. It's not a discussion topic stated here for purposes of resolution here.

Jeff, can you fix this for us? Discussion at your blog is one thing, and that's fine, but for this thread to continue, it needs to be its own topic for this place and for this forum.

Best, Ron

[theboeh]

Ron, you are absolutely correct. I didn't really think and realize it before but it was a little rude of me to post this the way that I did. I apologize to you and to the forum at large.

I would still like to have a discussion about this topic so please allow me to copy my essay into this thread here.



There seems to be a lot of new games coming out that have rules regarding scenes. Generally these rules limit the number or types of scenes that your character has. I'm not sure that I like the style of gaming that these rules encourage.

My experience with these mechanics are limited to one game--Burning Empires. In Burning Empires the game is divided into maneuvers. In each maneuver a character can have three scenes:

   1. A color scene--this allows a player to describe something in the world
   2. An interstitial scene--this allows the character to have a discussion with other characters
   3. A building scene or a conflict scene--a building scene allows your character to make mechanical roles and a conflict scene allows a character to fight someone

To add one more issue to this mix experience in Burning Empires is done by counting the rolls you make. The only time you make rolls is during a building scene or a conflict scene. A building scene allows for 3 rolls. The conflict mechanics allow for a larger amount of experience to be gained based on your choices within the mechanics.

To me it seems that Burning Empires has these scene limit to maintain a balance among characters' experience levels. I can understand this. A character can only have one building or conflict scene to every other character's one build or conflict scene. This creates a balance among character so that one character does not become too powerful and takes over the game.

The issue is that these mechanics encourage you to go all the way to your limit in what you can do. You end up using a rolls in a building scene not because they are important rolls but because you want experience.

This same logic also extend through other experience mechanics to interstitial and color scenes as well. You sometimes end up trying to come up with ways to use these scenes not because it enhances the plot but because you feel that you need to use all that is allotted you.

I can definitely see how this can sometimes create something very cool. In practice for me it doesn't feel that way. It feels much more mechanical and forced.

There is another scene model that is found in many "classical" roleplaying games where the GM has full control of the scene distribution. The GM decides who gets a scene when and the action tends to flow from the GM.

These games require the GM to balance the scenes himself to make sure that the experience is balanced. To ease this these games generally encourage player character's to stay in a group so that their scenes are shared with the other players.

The benefit to this system is that it allows for scenes to flow more organically. It does not force a character to have a building scene when what he wants is a series of interstitial scenes. Likewise this also allows for a character to have a series of building scenes immediately before a conflict scene.

To simulate this Burning Empires allow scenes to happen at any point in time--so you can have a series of building scenes chronologically happen just before a conflict. However because of their discontinuous nature they tend not to feel like they are happening in chronological order.

There is an argument that since the scene flow from the GM the players loose the ability to drive the story. There is a potential for this--if your GM is not very good. In general I would think that if a player said "I want a scene where I ," the GM will normally agree. So players can still drive the stories in this style of scene economy. Checking with the GM ensures that there remains an experience balance. In games that I have played in it was not uncommon for a scene to be requested but the tabled till after another player had a scene.

It just seems that a game the has a scene limiting mechanic forces a character to use that scene. Games that do not have a scene mechanic do not force that scene to happen. They allow for a more organic flow to the scenes. This organic flow is more important to me than a manufactured scene balance.



--Jeff King

[Ron Edwards]

Cool!

Jeff, I appreciate that. No apology is necessary, however. That's like apologizing for accidentally backing into a stanchion; the officer who helps you and society at large do not care whether you apologize. We can just move on without it, for the better.

Tell more about the Burning Empires game. Did you and the rest of the group play out an entire saga, through the three big chapters and all that? What sort of world did you make? Were you the GM? If not, what sort of character did you play, and what happened to them that illustrates the unique features of such structured scenes?

Best, Ron

[Luke]

It just seems that a game the has a scene limiting mechanic forces a character to use that scene. Games that do not have a scene mechanic do not force that scene to happen. They allow for a more organic flow to the scenes. This organic flow is more important to me than a manufactured scene balance.

Just to be explicit: You're right, that is the intent of the design. It forces players into the spotlight. And it's meant to be played like a game with a limited number of moves before the end. Players try to use those moves as efficiently as possible before time runs out and the other side wins.

Thanks Jeff!

-L

[Callan S.]

Hi Jeff,

I can definitely see how this can sometimes create something very cool. In practice for me it doesn't feel that way. It feels much more mechanical and forced.

Have you initiated a game of the burning wheel? Either as GM or as enthusiastic player?

I'm wondering if the mechanics feel forced, because the game was forced on you. Well, perhaps not directly forced, but the traditional gaming night came up, but people kept insisting you use mechanic X and Y from the book they'd brought with them.

After all, the player ability to drive the story starts with the system they'd choose to do it in. If you don't get to choose that, ironically any 'story drive' mechanics will just end up feeling like force.