What are the tools of pacing?

[TonyLB]

Except that the tension-building works in situations where there is absolutely no fear of losing the character (like most serial TV shows, and all Capes games).

Which is not to dispute that tension-building occurs as a warm-up process to future events (while, simultaneously, other plot-threads might be integrating in the same scene).  It's just to say that I think the psychological process is probably somewhat more subtle than simple fear.

The other problem I have is that none of this is reflected terribly well in the SiS.  It's all at a meta-game level of concern for the perceptions of the "audience" of players.  Which makes integrating it with the in-SiS actions that prompt it (the telling of jokes, etc.) a very strange proposition.  Does that make sense?

[Bankuei]

Hi Tony,

The relationship between Zak and Kettridge doesn't need to be further developed. The characters are known, and do not need to develop further at this moment.

Really?  I'd say that its utterly necessary to reinforce what is important in regards to a character's personality and relationships.  A good media example is to grab the DVD of the Incredibles and listen to the commentary by the directors and the animators- they keep coming back to re-expressing certain themes or aspects of characters as an important part of the movie.  I'd say that it's probably an important part of play overall.  

In your scene, if we're talking a quick joke or such, it shows a bit about the characters' personalities and the style of the game overall.  If it's a long scene with the characters, then its about their relationship, and where it meshes and where it conflicts.  Assuming that they're actually discussing anything at all, other than, "What do we do?" "I don't know" type stuff that fills empty play.

Chris

[John Kim]

Particularly, what does a slower scene contribute? What type of tool is it? When is it appropriate, when is it not?

I think I've got a pretty good grasp of what big, climactic, conflict-ridden scenes contribute. They contribute resolution of issues, address of premise, rising to challenges, all that jazz. I see how they contribute to the fulfillment of CA.

You can make a game where every climactic scene, by resolving some issues, raises others. Therefore there is no need to "prepare" for a climactic scene by doing other, less conflict-fraught, scenes. The climactic scenes can be self-perpetuating.

Of course, all other things being equal fast-paced scenes are better than slow scenes.  You have (say) three hours for your session.  You can get a certain amount of satisfaction by (say) posing and addressing conflicts.  If you can do one of those in three hours, or ten of them in three hours, then you get ten times the satisfaction by going faster, so long as you're fully posing and addressing each.

Now I actually believe that fast scenes aren't inherently better than slow scenes.  But I think that's because "all other things being equal" doesn't apply.  I just can't figure out what it is that slow scenes do that makes them worth the investment of my very limited gaming time.

Well, if your satisfaction really comes from number of conflicts resolved, then I'd have to say that there is no point.  Only fast-paced climactic scenes are worthwhile.  Since you're not quite convinced of that, I'd say the thing to do would be to try out what you say -- i.e. do a game of only self-perpetuating climactic scenes.  See how it works for your own style.  

I can tell you what I get out of slower, non-resolving scenes -- but it's not necessarily going to apply to you.  I can say for myself that if something were only climactic resolution scenes, I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't care about any of it.  To me, the most fascinating thing about role-playing (and about many stories) is understanding the different points of view of different characters.  To me, the more interesting scenes are the ones which express character.  I'm thinking of the discussion of tipping around the table in "Reservoir Dogs", or Vince discussing McDonald's in Europe in "Pulp Fiction".  

From my own internal sense of pacing, I generally have slow scenes with more fast-paced scenes for the turning points and climax.  I generally think that a turning point (and thus conflict scene) is needed once the current state of things has been tapped out.  I think of it as needing to move to a new angle in order to see more of what is there.

[Bill Masek]

TonyLB,

There is no one universal reason why you would want to run non-conflict resolution scenes.  It depends entirely on the type of game you are running and the type of people who are playing it.  Here is a list of reasons why you might want to run a non-resolution scenes.


1.  You want to build on some aspect of the character(s) present in the scene.  These aspects could be relationships with other characters, personal values, etc.  These aspects you are want to build on are important and you do not want them to be undermined by only showing them during a resolution scene where they will not be the focus.  This would be a narrativist reason.

2.  Real life is not a constant nonstop roller coaster.  It is more realistic to stop and take a break once in a while.  This would be a simulationist reason.

3.  The party needs to plan their next move perfectly.  One mistake and everything will go to hell.  This is a gamist reason.

4.  Players only have so much energy.  After a really intense conflict they might simply need to recover.  This reason works in any type of game.


These are not the only reasons why you could use scenes other then ones which resolve conflicts.  Many other very good reasons (and at least one of the above) have already been suggested in this thread.

The type of scenes you include in your game will determine the type of experience your players have.  If your goal is to design a game about a futuristic cyber hell where life has accelerated so fast that people no longer have time for human interaction you might want to completely remove all non-conflict resolution scenes.  If your game is an RPG Noir focusing on suspense then more non-resolution scenes should be in order.

Best,
       Bill

[C. Edwards]

The Graduate. You know, the movie with Dustin Hoffman, Anne Bancroft, Katherine Ross. Made around 1967. Watch it. Pay attention to the scene structure, to the scene content.

As far as such things go, The Graduate is not a fast paced film. Nor is it a slow paced film. BUT! There is one, maybe two scenes in the entire film that are not either filled with conflict or dripping with the delicious tension of blossoming conflict.

I hadn't seen the film in years, and I had forgotten the beauty of it. Last night I watched it again. Just the dramatic structure and pacing of the film had me laughing with joy. There are no "wasted" scenes, no filler or fluff, yet there is also no sense of haste. (The acting is top-notch too, but that's not applicable here.)

The film is an incredible example of tight pacing that focuses equally on conflict and tension-laden scenes, of various "speeds". The character development takes place within that structure and is done superbly.

It's a must watch.

-Chris

[Marco]

In an online game that I came from (last week) we made an intentional decision to "slow down the action."

Two new players had just come onboard (literally and figuratively--it was on a space ship) and there had been some tension between the existing crew and the new characters. Because this was IRC it was not clear to anyone how much tension was IC/OOC (although clearly some was both in some cases).

So we had a "slow things down" scene. The GM asked us each to make up a 1pg story about our characters that we'd reveal IC in the next session. We all did so and ran a session of sitting around the galley and drinking and telling our stories.

I would say:
1. This worked-out some issues that existed between players through the conduit of their characters (i.e. the stowaway robot-cat came across to me as much more sympathetic once it's story was out).
2. There was no conflict but there was (at least for me) some tension in, for example, the telling of my story In Character.

If, instead of the slow-scene, we had gone to the next "fast scene" (the delivery of illegal cargo) there would not have been the same opportunity for integration of the new characters that we had.

-Marco

[Alan]

I think that pace of a scene and the nature of conflict in a scene can can actually be separated.

I agree with timfire and others that there are build up and conflict scenes.  My model (with liberal borrowing from fiction theory) would be:

Build-up scene - puts the characters on a path (like pieces on a game board or ships in space).  Character(s) may face obstacles or undertake activities, but the choices they make establish character traits and desires, and also the metacharacter elements like topic and premise.

Conflict scene - when one or more characters collide.  The established character traits and metacharacter elements conflict.  Choices made by characters at this point are generally expressions of stuff established in build-up scenes.

Integration scene - (I like the term "integration," timfire) - the characters process the results of the conflict scene and take new actions that set them on altered courses - usually a variation or deeper exploration of the character and premise traits they started with.  Integration is very similar to a build-up scene.

Pace

By pace, I assume we mean the speed at which significant challenges are presented.  Faster pace is usually achieved by increased detail.  Fast pace usually occurs in conflict scenes because there are a lot of challenging details coming together.  Build-up and integration have fewer challenging details (they may deal with a lot of details though - activities or thoughts.)  So, build-up and integration scens tend to be slower paced.

However, I point to the openning scene of almost every Bond film.  These are fast paced build-up sequences - the function is not to process real conflict that's important to the story of the movie, but to demonstrate Bond's skill and determination.  

So I think build-up (and, I suspect, integration) scenes can be slow or fast-paced.

Can a conflict scene be slow-paced?  I think so, though writers tend to make them fast-paced in order to emphasize their importance, so we don't experience them very often.  Also, slow-paced conflict scenes tend to show up in emotional or mental conflict, rather than physical conflict - also less common in movies.

Having said that, I don't have an example that comes to mind.  I do think what I've said applies to roleplay as well as writing.  Can anyone think of a game example of slow-paced but important conflict?