Solo Uni

[hix]

I've played Uni solo twice over the last couple of years; both times as a tool to kickstart some storylining ideas for a TV show pilot. Going in, I typically have a rough idea of the story direction. I was using Uni to flesh out the conflicts and characters.

Things I found:

It's hard work. I'm the only one providing input. If I get stuck on an idea for a complication, nothing's going to happen.

The process of playing definitely changes my preconceived ideas of how the story would/'should' go. Usually for the better. The new direction gets fully integrated into my vision of the show.

Adding traits (through narration and complication) is a really good way of exploring facets of a character.

To stop myself from just narrating all my ideas without being challenged, I kept coin refreshes for scenes low, which meant I had to initiate complications at least once a scene. Often more frequently if the dice rolls didn't give me a big payout. At the end of an act, as I cut to commercials, I topped up the coins in full.[/list:u]
Anyone have any similar experiences? Anything you'd like me to expand on?

[Valamir]

Interesting.

I'm curious as to the mental process behind your solo play.  Do you play completely solataire...meaning there is only you at the table using the mechanics to organize your thoughts and Complications as a randomizer to generate ideas.

Or do you actually envision multiple players at the table each taking turns and interrupting each other but each played by you...with a slightly different agenda.

The latter is probably how I'd play it if I were playing solo (which is pretty much what I did to come up with the running example in the book)...I gave each "player" a sketchy personality and then mentally switched seats and played each position "as them".

Which is kind of a neat experience actually.  Its you, playing a character...player a character.

[hix]

Hey Ralph,

I hadn't even considered your 'multiple character players' idea. Interesting stuff.

My playstyle was more 'me as author' - but Uni did provoke a distinct shift from my writing style at that time. By writing all those traits down, I was cycling through each of the characters in the scene; looking at it from each of their points of view - using their traits to focus on what they wanted out of the situation.

I guess in that sense I was doing what you're talking about, because it was very much about having a sense of ownership of each character in turn and trying to get the best result for them. So maybe I was playing 'multiple character players', but unconsciously and definitely without a firmly developed personality/agenda for each of them.

... using the mechanics to organize your thoughts and Complications as a randomizer to generate ideas.

That's certainly how it started, but in one case the end position was very different to what I expected - and what I did was just follow the story that was emerging without trying to impose my original vision on it. I felt comfortable doing that because the traits I'd added to the characters were appropriate, and the complications resolved with consequences that were true for them.

[Tony Irwin]

Anyone have any similar experiences? Anything you'd like me to expand on?

Wow, can you give us a quick run down of what happened in one of these games you played?

Cheers,

Tony

[Christopher Weeks]

And dude!  Did they get filmed?

Do you think there would be any value for your professional application of the game to actually having other people there?  What would you have to do to teach them to be useful?  And are TV shows usually written by one person alone or some kind of small committee?

[hix]

Hey Tony, quick rundown, eh?

**
We open on a Kitchen scene. MAC and MARISSA, their teenaged son and Marissa's NANA sit round the table. There's a lot of pressure on Mac to look after Nana today as the other family members are busy. Mac refuses.

This causes some family tension - and we see that there's an acerbic relationship between Mac and his son.

Mac has refused because he has a job interview to get to today. He's been employed in crappy jobs for a while now. But this refusal is the final straw for his wife – who wants a separation. Mac begs for an extension and they agree to talk about things pending the results of his interview.

The job is as a comedy writer on a sketch show. And the REVEAL is that he's competing against his son for the job, and his son is a natural comedic talent. I don't think I knew this going in.

Act 2 is all about Mac trying to complete his spec assignment; his competition with his son, keeping the fact that he's competing with his son a secret from his wife and – finally - that all the technology he's using is working against him

The resolution is that the TV show will hire both Mac and his son – but his son is the boss in that writing partnership. Mac keeps this arrangement secret from his wife, who agrees to take him back – as long as he moves out into the separate flat in the backyard to look after the grandmother. That's the status quo for the rest of the series.

**
Things about that: It's totally mainstream.

The pacing was much slower and in-depth than I expected. This was related to the fact that limited coins meant it was more efficient to reincorporate existing characters than to introduce new ones.

Example:
In the beginning Kitchen scene I didn't have enough coins to establish a new setting or characters ... so I closed the scene down and opened the next scene in the same time and place. That still didn't give me enough coins to break into a new area of the world. So my strategy was to keep adding traits and create complications with them. It created a solid introduction to these characters and the expectation that scenes with them would be quite long (Everybody loves Raymond style).

[hix]

And dude! Did they get filmed?

I am sad to report that they totally did not.

Do you think there would be any value for your professional application of the game to actually having other people there? What would you have to do to teach them to be useful?

Yes, I think there's value there. PTA would be another useful tool. Let's see ... I actually got the guys I wrote my TV series lovebites with together with the lead actor from that show and we played out another idea I'd had. In this case, I gave them a starting Situation and the relationships I saw.

Two problems: 1) At least one of the players/writers didn't like the coin and complication system and pushed for us to play more free-form. This was fine - Uni provides a great way of structuring input and conversation but it diminished that randomisation element I like.

2) Another player/writer reset the show in the 1980s. This was cool because the economic revolution in NZ during that period gave the show a great thematic backdrop, but it was such a huge shift from what I had in my head that I wasn't able to respond to it or incorporate it.

As for the 'what to teach', I'll think on that a bit.

... Are TV shows usually written by one person alone or some kind of small committee?

I'm blogging about that at the moment. Short answer: I like to come up with the idea myself, gather people who are keen on it - and then the writing is done by a small team (I like about 4-6 people) who 'get' the idea.