The Litterary Gamers Guide To...

[jburneko]

Once again, I find myself with a topic that doesn't really fit a specific forum.  This time I find myself torn between Indie Game Design and Publishing.  What I want to duscuss really isn't a game design per se, it's more of a game aid but I'm also not interested in discussing the technicalities of how to actually get it published.  Since I'm interested in focusing on the actual content of the product rather than the details of publishing it, I figured I'd put this here.

The other day I was browsing through my gaming library and I came across the few GURPS books I own.  Now, I don't play GURPS but like most people who own GURPS sourcebooks I bought them for the non-system specific information.  The two that I own are "Horror" and "Steampunk."  Now, while I've found these books relatively useful I've always found them lacking.  While, they contain lots of historical, technological, and other erm, well, simulationy things I find them lacking in the very thing I was hoping to find in them when I bought them.

What I find lacking is proper analysis of the given genre.  Ron has often said that "genre" is not a very useful term for roleplaying because it generally encompases several combinations of the more "fundamental" elements of Premise, Setting, System, Color etc.  But certainly when I say, "Horror" or "Steampunk" what comes to mind are CERTAIN Premise elements, CERTAIN Setting elements and CERTAIN Color elements.  What I'd like to see are role-playing sourcebooks that analyize these various elements and their more common permutations.  I agree that, "genres" evolve over time but I would be thrilled to at least have an analysis from a historical perspective.

But to keep these from just being litterary analysis/criticism books I'd like for these sourcebooks to show specific techniques that can be used to really milk these elements in play.  For example, a lot of the Horror games I own give a nod to Isolation as being a key element.  Then these books usually explain that social isolation is just as valid as physical isolation and that's it.  There are no specific techniques given to actually bring this into focus in the game.  And there is no analysis of exactly what purpose Isolation serves in the genre as it relates to other kinds of elements.  I'm think of modular rules and techniques that are relatively system independent.  System can be brought in by saying things like, "to encourage X give players a bonus to Y types of resolution roles."  Since the concept of a "bonus" is pretty universal to resolution systems.

For example, I think the technique used in Dav's(?) Little Fears game of writing a tragic future that gets modified through actual may have more broader applications than just a game about kids.  But I'd like a sourcebook which not only lists this technique but provides an analysis of just what elements this techinque enhances, colors or downplays.  

I'm thinking that such a line of books would be titled something like, "The Litterary Gamer's Guide To..." Although this title is a bit pretentious and perhaps insulting so something that conveys the idea without being 'elitist' in feel might be better.

I think these books might have two effects.

1) I think it would be of great interest to the group of players out there I call, "Simulationist-By-Habit."  These are the people who constantly affirm that they play RPGs because of the story elements but really have no idea exactly what that means or how to achieve it.

2) I think as a side effect it would draw more non-gamers into the hobby.  I don't mean this in the sense that a non-gamer would pick up one of these books and be drawn into the hobby.  I mean that as more and more Simulationist-By-Habit players start incorporating these elements and techniques their non-gamer friends will start to see more clearly that role-playing isn't all about "killing monsters" and might start taking a stronger interest.

So what do you think?  Would you buy such a sourcebook?  Do you think a lot of gamers would find such a book interesting?

Just thoughts.

Jesse

[Joe Murphy (Broin)]

Great thoughts. =)

When players come to me and ask me for advice on specific genres, or when conversations appear like 'what exactly does 4-color mean?', I tend to have to do a few Google searches to dig out examples. In rare situations, I can refer them to a roleplaying book (because RPGs usually mix setting/premise/mood when describing their gameworld and the muddy description does not aid analysis).

I also own some GURPs books. I love the mood in Reign of Steel, for example. I'm quite fond of the example settings in Mecha, and the premie behind Black Ops. I was bitterly disapointed when Steampunk turned out to be much, much more about the technicalities of the technology than the setting. Perhaps I was expecting Falkenstein.

(who needs to know *that* much about an antigravity drive's physics? Aiee!)

I _definitely_ think there's a market for describing elements of a genre/setting/premise, and how to play those settings.

One thing that came to mind. I wouldn't call the books 'The Literary Guide...' because not every piece of source material would be a book. Am I confusing your intention? :smile:

One example I thought of is the space-military game. Movies such as Aliens and Starship Troopers, along with a lot of anime, a whole bunch of SF novels, and a few tv shows describe a potentially interesting 'genre'.

But I know I've run into trouble running games where the PCs have different ranks. Should the player with the most leadership skills play the officer? What's the difference in running a game themed around WWII to Vietnam, or the Gulf War? What if players want unique, rather than mass-produced equipment? What's the difference in running a game where the enemy is reasonably sympathetic (Space: Above and Beyond) to Staarship Troopers (the movie, at least)?

It might even be interesting to divide up the material into more specific genres than gamebooks usually examine. For example, instead of 'Horror', one could have 'modern urban horror', 'body horror', 'surreal horror', etc.

Great stuff, my mind's a-buzzin'..

Joe.

[jburneko]

On 2001-12-18 19:11, Joe Murphy (Broin) wrote:

One thing that came to mind. I wouldn't call the books 'The Literary Guide...' because not every piece of source material would be a book. Am I confusing your intention? :smile:

No, I don't think you're confusing the issue.  I refer to anything that is of 'critical merit' as being 'litterary.'  Star Wars is litterary and so are some of the better episodes of Buffy The Vampire Slayer.

It might even be interesting to divide up the material into more specific genres than gamebooks usually examine. For example, instead of 'Horror', one could have 'modern urban horror', 'body horror', 'surreal horror', etc.

Actually, I was thinking that these would be chapters in the general 'Horror' book.  I was thinking of things like Gothic Horror and Lovecraftian Horror and Psychological Horror and so on.  Also some elements of comparing and contrasting.  For example my recent thoughts on Madness would be excelent material for the kinds of books I'm thinking of.

I was thinking about the difference between Gothic Madness and Lovecraftian Madness.  Madness in general is a result of realizing something you are unable to rationalize with your perception of the world.  But what 'realizations' can't be 'rationalized' are VERY different in these two generes.  In the Gothic genre Madness is a romantic notion.  It comes from a realization that you can not EMOTIONALLY rationalize such as coming home to find your whole family slaughtered or having your only son and heir die on his wedding night.  In the Lovecraftian Genre madness is a scientific notion resulting from a realization you can not INTELECTUALLY rationalize such as coming to understand that Euclidean Geometry only aplies to your petty human perceptions.  Gothic Madness is a stab a man's heart.  Lovecraftian Madness is a stab at man's ego.

The books I'm thinking of would also provide historical context for these outlooks as well as a detailed descriptions of the kinds of scenes, rules and techniques that promote each kind.  Finally there would be an explination of when and why one would be appropriate over the other probably by tying it to certain kinds of Premise and Color elements.

Jesse

[Le Joueur]

jburneko wrote:

...What I find lacking is proper analysis of the given genre.  ...When I say, "Horror" or "Steampunk" what comes to mind are CERTAIN Premise elements, CERTAIN Setting elements and CERTAIN Color elements.  What I'd like to see are role-playing sourcebooks that analyize these various elements and their more common permutations....

But to keep these from just being litterary analysis/criticism books I'd like for these sourcebooks to show specific techniques that can be used to really milk these elements in play.  For example, a lot of the Horror games I own give a nod to Isolation as being a key element.  Then these books usually explain that social isolation is just as valid as physical isolation and that's it.  There are no specific techniques given to actually bring this into focus in the game.  And there is no analysis of exactly what purpose Isolation serves in the genre as it relates to other kinds of elements.  I'm thinking of modular rules and techniques that are relatively system independent.

You mean like the convention in superhero comics that no one ever really dies?  (Not an intentional convention, but by practice, they have become quite good at it.)

Sometimes it amazes me how often I see people coming up with ideas so similar to what we are putting into Scattershot.

I completely agree with you on the "to keep these from just being litterary analysis/criticism books" part.  Except from what I have seen, 'system independent' gaming materials don't sell well at all (and yes I am looking at the retail-ready idea).

Way back when we began designing Scattershot, the very first goal was to make a game that handled magic and superpowers well together.  At the time, I liked GURPS' Magic, but hated its Supers; I liked Champions' "super-powers," but hated the Hero System's magic.  Right away it was obvious we were on our way to making a 'general system.'

My opinion on game settings that virtually drip with 'character' is 1) they have to have limited appeal on the shelf, and 2) they weren't terribly 'general.'  So that meant that 'Fish or Sofa' (our original working title for Scattershot) had to also treat settings in a 'general' fashion.

When I began compiling a list of the rough settings I wanted to support, two things became obvious.  First, it wouldn't all fit in one book and still have a reasonable price.  And second, I had to approach them as being 'examinations' of genres as opposed to 'general' settings.

The next thing that occurred in our design was the realization that for a 'general' game, the whole point in treating several genres was for crossover potential.  This meant not only would we have to parse out genres as you suggest above, but also to discuss how components of one genre could be 'brought into' another.

I think these books might have two effects.

1) I think it would be of great interest to the group of players out there I call, "Simulationist-By-Habit."  These are the people who constantly affirm that they play RPGs because of the story elements, but really have no idea exactly what that means or how to achieve it.

Me too!  In the same way that GURPS sells as a 'reference book,' I saw this as a selling point for Scattershot.  (I also imagined future customers asking why we brought out such a cool gaming product with no system in it.)

Scattershot's mechanics actually appears Simulationist to most of the playtesters at first, but when they begin using the techniques that come with the mechanics and discover how the mechanics are designed to 'give way' to more 'vanilla Narrativist' play (without having to be ignored), it becomes obvious how the game is written to support a huge amount of 'drift.'  Combined with the explicit examinations of genre, this creates a product very like you describe.

2) I think as a side effect it would draw more non-gamers into the hobby.  I don't mean this in the sense that a non-gamer would pick up one of these books and be drawn into the hobby.  I mean that as more and more Simulationist-By-Habit players start incorporating these elements and techniques their non-gamer friends will start to see more clearly that role-playing isn't all about "killing monsters" and might start taking a stronger interest.

This is our opinion too.  So much so that a cornerstone of Scattershot's market approach has to do with bringing out products that are timed to coincide with popular cultural events, so much so that we want to license a few properties.  (Imagine bringing out a 'Harry Potter' book for Scattershot last fall.  My partner/wife suggested pursuing the license for 'Potter' back in 1999 when it was so hard to get any of the books in the 'States - yes, she's good.)

(Regardless of the economics, that means more people playing.)

My point is getting a product out that, by its license and the craze, would have every bookstore in the country ordering it for no other reason than the branding.  (And getting that product into places that the flagship was sold in.)  That way, possibly whole entire markets of "non-gamers" (who are actually 'soon-to-be gamers') would be exposed if not indoctrinated.

(Our plan is also to have each of these licensed 'satellites' carry only the simplest derivative of Scattershot's mechanics and genre examination, offering more in the core products, which would carry the genre 'crossover' material described above.)

So what do you think?  Would you buy such a sourcebook?  Do you think a lot of gamers would find such a book interesting?

I sure hope so.  (And I hope that I can communicate this potential to whomever we offer the publishing to, we do not want the joys of running our own company.  As a labor of love, we have decided that 'breaking even' is our only goal.)

Later:

Actually, I was thinking that these would be chapters in the general 'Horror' book. I was thinking of things like Gothic Horror and Lovecraftian Horror and Psychological Horror and so on. Also some elements of comparing and contrasting.

Or how about sections within one chapter?  Addressed thus, I don't see Ron's usual argument about the impreciseness of 'genre' holding much sway.

The books I'm thinking of would also provide...a detailed [description] of the kinds of scenes, rules, and techniques that promote each kind. Finally there would be an explanation of when and why one would be appropriate over the other probably by tying it to certain kinds of Premise and Color elements.

Don't forget some discussion about all people playing 'being on the same page' with their collective expectations for the genre.

I stay away from making "rules" about genres because they fixed them too well in playtest.  Making genre stuff more about descriptions and techniques for consideration allows more consumer flexibility.

I am curious what you think of Scattershot's approach to your idea and look forward to your response.

Fang Langford

[ This Message was edited by: Le Joueur on 2001-12-19 09:40 ]

[Marco]

Hi Jesse,

I do think this is a good idea. I'm not sure they'd stand alone: Is there a whole book worth of horror advice (I recall the horror-isolation discussion on RPG.net--it was valuble--but short). But a few real gems like the Little Fears idea would go a long way towards making them valuable and they'd be a good adjunct to the GURPS-style books in any case.

Speaking of the GURPS books and their being "simulationy:" I smiled when I read that. If you saw the movie Throw Momma From The Train, there's a scene where a woman in a writing class is reading a story she wrote that takes place on a submarine and she's saying things like "the captain spoke into the thingy." Billy Crystal (the creative writing teacher) suggests she do some reading on submarines before setting a story on them. History, background, and hard facts are essential to many stories and extremely useful for lots more. The GURPS books are astoundingly well done in this regard.

For lots of groups I suspect the RPG-mechanical side of it is personalized to the group already and they probably have their own ideas as to how to run various genre aspects.

As a final note, I wouldn't worry about the title being pretentious or elitist--I might, however, steer away from labeling anyone a Simulationist-By-Habit: a soul who "claims" to do something but seems to have no idea how to do it (or is, perhaps, 'doing it wrong?') ... and whose games seem to consist entirely of killing monsters (and yet would still be interested in buying the book). That strikes me as little elitist.

-Marco