Mechanic for Narrative Control

[Andrew Cooper]

With my current group of players in which we play either 3e D&D or Alternity things progress pretty much as I feel the authors of the game intended.  Our group is pretty much Gamist in nature where I develop scenarios to challenge their PCs and they buy into the scenario and have a lot of fun working it out.  All in all, fun is accomplished.  However, I'd like to improve a little on our current set up and take some of the "work" of developing plot off my shoulders and put it on theirs.  I've been thinking of adding a mechanic to our game to allow the players to purchase Narrative Control from time to time.

Essentially, my system (and this hasn't been tested or even well thought out yet) would work something like this.  I'd give each player 3 Narration Points (NP) at the beginning of a session.  Then throughout the session they could spend those points to grab Narrative Control for a short while.  I was thinking 1 point would buy a minor plot device where 3 points would purchase a relative major plot device.

Has anyone ever put something like this in place in a primarily Gamist system?  What pitfalls or traps should I watch for?  Any advice for someone trying to come up with a workable system?

<<Edited>>

I just realize that I'm mixing up my jargon a bit, I think.  What I'm actually doing is trying to create a mechanic that distributes Credibility a bit differently in the game...  I think... now I've gone and cornfused myself...

<</Edited>>

[Andrew Norris]

I did this with "Plot Points" in D20 Modern, and it's been somewhat effective.

I give three per session, and allow them to be used to narrate success for a given action or scene. In the four sessions I've run so far, they've been used mostly for things like shooting a piece of furniture to have it fall and pin an opponent or letting a PC do the old "I jump out of the window just as the bomb goes off" thing.

I've been pushing the fact that you can narrate more than just the character's actions with this mechanic, and it's starting to sink in. One of my more Gamist players used a point to describe a perfectly executed bootlegger turn onto a back-country road, and when I asked him "Okay. What does the road look like?" he had a bit of a blank look until I explained that he could choose the terrain for a tactical advantage. (Once I put it in those terms, he was set.) As the scene played out the fact that the road was narrow and windy was essential to the outcome, and I could tell he felt he made the 'right' choice.

Another player (who's very Sim/Actor stance) used one to narrate failure -- he was playing a particularly incompetant NPC in another PC's flashback sequence, and wanted to add a complication to the scene by having to be saved from near-certain death (he tripped and fell right next to a land mine).

My experience has been that if you introduce this with a few examples highlighting the player's ability to gain a tactical benefit from a clever description of the scene, you get Step On Up reinforcement and the gamists stay happy. It's always been satisfying for that type of player to "solve" a situation; this just adds another way in which they can do that. And making it a limited metagame resource helps avoid the feeling they might get that there's no risk of failure.

[Valamir]

Andrew, great advice for Andrew...heh.

Actually Gaerik, I don't think you've really confused things at all.  You were pretty precise in asking about "narrative control" which is not at all the same thing as "narrativism", or "narrativist".

Andrew N's points helps distribute some of that "narrative control" in a manner that is certainly not "narrativist" but would probaby serve to help reinforce the natural gamist tendencies of the group.

Do a search on Directoral Power and Directoral Stance, and you'll find a good number of discussions on handing some authority to the players.

[Andrew Cooper]

Here's a draft of the Narrative Rules that I've come up with for my game session (Alternity) this Sunday.  I borrowed heavily from so many sources on this site that I can't even begin to name them all.  The Pool and Universalis come to mind immediately.  Anyway, I'd like comments on them and suggestions, if anyone has any.  I'll let everyone know how the experiment works out.

Narrative Control Mechanic

Each player at the table starts the session off with 4 Story Points (SP). Players with less than 3 SP at the end of a session start the next session with 3.  Those who have more than 3 points at the end of a session start the next session with that many.  SP allow the characters to gain temporary Narrative Control of the game by spending their points.  The number of points spent determine how major or minor the scope of the narration can be.  Everything added to the game via SP must be narrated into the game in a way that makes some sort of sense.  No pulling a 10' ladder out of your belt pouch unless you have a bag of holding, then you could spend a point to have a ladder in there.

With 1 SP you may not narrate any changes beyond the scope of a single action or combat.

With 2 SP you may not narrate anything beyond the scope of a single scene.

With 3 SP you may not narrate anything that reaches beyond the scope of a single session.

5 SP will buy you narration that may cross several sessions.  This is where some judgement on the part of the player and the DM comes into play.  Exactly how much can be added or changed with 5 SP is a decision made by the DM.  Generally, the DM will allow the character to begin narrating and then stop him when he feels it is appropriate.

10 SP will purchase a player narration rights within the scope of the entire campaign.  This includes major plot lines and NPCs.  Think it would be cool to save the Princess from the evil dragon, Gargarax?  Want to track down the nefarious Kestrel, Prince of Assassins and bring him to justice?  Think a mysterious artifact would be an interesting plot twist?  Then with 10 SP you can narrate them right into the game.

Restrictions on Narration

Thou shalt not negate another's narration.

No one, including the DM may simply pay SP to narrate out of existance what another player just narrated into the game.  For example, if Bob pays his 10 SP and narrates, "Barry the Bard opens the door to the slain dragon's treasure vault and there, lying partially in shadow on a mound of coins, he finds the fabled Armor of Pelor!"  No one is allowed to simple pay 10 SP and say, "No, he doesn't."

However, someone may pay 10 SP and narrate, "Yes, but just as Barry reaches for the Armor, a brilliant light flashes and the golden mail disappears and in it's place are three ancient parchments which upon opening contain maps to several unknown locales." Paying to alter what someone else has narrated into the game must keep the prior item, event,  etc in the game and tied somehow to the story and the character/party.

Thou shalt not kill.

This one is easy.  You can't spend points to kill an oponent or another PC.  There are already rules for combat in the game.  You can spend point to creatively narrate a tactical advantage of some sort.

Thou shalt not remove thy companion's significance.

This is easy in concept but requires some wisdom on the part of each player.  You can't spend points and then narrate something that removes another PC from being significant in the story.  In other words, you can't remove another PC protagonism (for lack of a better term).

Getting more Story Points

You get more SP by narrating Complications for your character.  The scope of the Complication determines the number of SP awarded by the DM.  Complications do not have to be "bad" things but they must provide obstacles that must be overcome in order for the character to achieve his goals, personal or corporate (ie party goals).  Complications that don't provide something to overcome, aren't considered Complications and aren't worth points.

[clehrich]

You might think about whether InSpectres-style Confessionals would be worthwhile, as something you have to pay for (in this case) but which would allow you that strange sort of total/not-at-all control.  Once people get the hang of them, they start using Confessionals to create a nightmare situation for themselves, and actually find that fun, where if you did it to them they wouldn't speak to you.

Chris Lehrich

[Andrew Cooper]

In haven't looked at InSpectres.  I'll take a gander at it.  Thanks for the input.

[Green]

Gaerik:

No, no, please! Not Story Points!  There are already enough people not playing Kathanaksaya.  Please don't take Story Points from me!

[/jk]

[TerroX]

i think if you take another read through the Alternity GM guide, chapters on running the game. it might help you out as it seems to allude to letting players take over sometimes.

[Andrew Cooper]

I feel like I should let everyone who contributed to this thread know how the session went.  We were playing Alternity in the Stardrive setting.  The gaming group already had characters made and came to the table ready to go.  Everyone was pretty stoked about the new campaign.  I took a few minutes to explain the Story Point system (listed above) that we would be using and everyone thought that would be cool.

At this point I'd like to tell you how all the players just jumped right in there and started using the SP system and taking Narrative Control to move the game in unforseen but interesting directions.  I can't though.  It isn't that they didn't like the mechanic.  It's just that only one person even thought to use it.  The Mindwalker character spent a point to Narrate using his mind to open a secured door.  It wasn't really inspiring but at least he used the system to do something.

I think my players are a little confused as to how to use the system and how exactly Narrative Control works.  I tried to give examples and explain but I'm not sure it helped.  If anyone has advice on how to explain this technique to players in a simple way, please, enlighten me.  I think I'm going to keep the SP system in the game, since no one complained about it.  Perhaps, they'll start using it more as time goes on.

On the plus side, the game went really, really well.  Everyone thought it was awesome and a couple of the players said it was the best session they'd ever been in.  Of course, their experience was limited but I took it as a complement anyways... especially since Sci Fi isn't really my thing.  All in all, a good time was had.