dogma '01

[Jared A. Sorensen]

You guys are probably familiar with the dogma movement of cinema.  An agreement to shoot with natural light, use only found objects and locations, to not use music unless it's in the scene, etc.

I'm wondering what kind of conventions would be forbidden or desired in an RPG equivalent?  I know my first pick: no "named" systems or generic game systems.  Another would be (perhaps) to only use materials in the game that are easily obtained (ie: no polyhedra except d6's).

Anyone else?  Does anyone care?

[Mytholder]

Oh hell. Some gang of European larpers posted their version of a dogma-style manifesto a while back. How we laughed.

Er. I suspect, bizarrely, that this would come down to GURPS or Fudge or something. The basic idea would be to run with the simplest "classic*" simple possible, no meta-game or setting-specific mechanics, and make sure that as much as possible was created by the GM's descriptions and the player's roleplaying. No system-based crutches, no splatbooks, no personality mechanics, just STR DEX CON and a few d6s....

*: y'know. Stats. Fortune mechanics. Nothing fancy.

[Damocles]

On 2001-07-23 16:53, Jared A. Sorensen wrote:
You guys are probably familiar with the dogma movement of cinema.  An agreement to shoot with natural light, use only found objects and locations, to not use music unless it's in the scene, etc.

As I recall, one rule is also not to do any genre work, which, in rpgs, would rule out most of them, except for...
Um. I'm sure there must be some.

Anyhow, how about this:

Don't use any gimmicks or props of any kind. No music, no handouts. In fact, let go further and say: No written materials of any kind, not even character sheets.

No magic. No sci-fi stuff.

The setting is the real world, possibly a historical period, but not an alternate history.

No weapons. In fact, no combat at all.

PCs must be "normal" people. That is, not have any extraordinary capabilites at all. A bit over the average is fine, but nothing that could get you into a non-local newspaper. Same for NPCs. Additionally, PCs may not have any noteworthy secrets.

No PC or NPC may have amnesia.

For the GM: Don't do _any_ prior preparation. At all. Let a (randomly determined player) decide on the setting and maybe a bit of premise at the beginning of play. You can try to think up stuff while the players make their characters.

For a system, use maybe SLUG. Or Over the Edge if you want to be fancy. (Diceless doesn't quite seem right, for some reason.)

Yeah, it's kind of arbitrary and awfully limiting, but so are the dogma rules.

[James V. West]

Hmmm..

The most "dogma" oriented game I've ever been in, if I'm getting this right, was to play the role of me. The "gm" just guided me through a situation and I played the role. No dice, or rules, or anything. Total ad lib roleplaying. It was kinda fun. Pure.

But I like my games nice and jaded.

Jvw

[Max Tangent]

Where's the fun in that? --MT

[Ron Edwards]

Hi,

I believe we have the equivalent of the Dogma in gaming already, or more properly, several of them.

1) Cheapass Games. The very first game they did, Give Me the Brain, stated a little manifesto about how they would and would not publish games, and why. A great deal of it involved production costs, and reflecting reduced cost with reduced price.

This is strictly an economically-based Dogma, but it corresponds to at least that aspect of the film version.

2) The Turku/Elayjitist website. If I'm not mistaken, the presentation of this mode of play is based overtly on the film movement.

This one seems strictly a behaviorally-based Dogma, as I'm unaware of any economic side to it ("We shall not buy this or that game, or pay more than X").

There are probably others.

Best,
Ron

[gizem]

The first larp manifesto came from a group of Norwegian larpers (who happen to be friends of mine), in 1999. It is structured in a similar fashion to the Dogma wow of chastity (cinema one Jared wrote about), in style and intent;
Http://fate.laiv.org/dogme99/en/index.htm">
Http://fate.laiv.org/dogme99/en/index.htm


The same group of people were also involved in Fate-play, a form of larp in which the characters are given 'fates' by the playwrights, which are instructions like 'you will fall in love with the woman who calls you 'little man' and fight a duel with her husband on the second night. You will lose the duel and die.'

The Turku manifesto came later, and in a way is a critic of Dogma99. Actually I believe that it is more a critisism of fate-play and Narrativist attitudes of Norwegians than Dogma99 rules themselves. Thus Turku people wrote 'In Norway dramatists are re-inventing theater' in their manifest.

In fact, they have a lot in common, because the Dogma99 people also advocate immersive roleplaying (at least for their last game) and seriously limit the use of non-diegetic elements. Thus have simulationist attitudes also. They may be realising that they have common points because a cooperation is planned.

Three more points and I am done;
1. The Turku manifesto is mostly, the Norwegian one is strictly intended for live action role playing. Since there is a huge difference between larp and tabletop, these cannot be applied directly to table-top.
2. Role playing theorists in the Nordic countries are mostly in the Larp scene. (Or so it seems to me.)
3. If you think Dogma99 is something to be laughed at, I recommend the website of their latest game, Europa. Downloadable material includes GM's and Player's handbooks which in turn include excellent articles on larp theory.
http://fate.laiv.org/dogme99/en/larp4.htm">
http://fate.laiv.org/dogme99/en/larp4.htm


Kindest regards,

Gizem Forta
-reporting from the heart of Europe