Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by matthijs, June 18, 2004, 02:25:54 PM
QuoteI want to start out the campaign exploring what it is like to be a superhero the way they are portrayed in the comics, and then once I have done that, I want to explore whether it is ever good and right to kill someone and explore what a particular answer to that question really means and what its effects are, et al.
QuoteThe difference between this situation and Narrativist play is that this form of Simulation thrives on enforcing and reinforcing the stereo type while many times Narrativist play is about establishing those stereo types and then breaking them.
Quote from: matthijsPerhaps one could say that setting premise is narrativism's answer to metaplot? Instead of having a greater pre-planned story arc that adventures must hook on to, there's a dynamic story arc, created in real time during play, that adventures organically tie into. Meaning that they grow together, and affect eachother....This could also make for an Aria-like game. Instead of defining the GM as "the one in control of setting", different players could have different parts of the environment and/or individual characters. Then, the GM would be defined as "the one supplying the bangs for the group".
Quote1) What is "dramatic plotting" in an RPG? (by John Kim <email@example.com>)......1) What does it mean to pre-plot a game? (by John Kim <firstname.lastname@example.org>) Much discussion has been on the subject of "dramatic plotting", based on certain formulas from dramatic theory. The basic concept is that the GM should prepare lines of tension which will specifically engage the PC's. In short, the GM looks at each of the PC's, and the PC's as a whole, to determine what will engage them: what is interesting and meaningful to them. The GM then prepares background on elements which will lead to this engagement, and arranges for the PC's to get an inkling of what is there. (This is often called a "hook" in some circles, or the "plot-premise"). The key is that once the PC's have committed themselves to a line of tension (or perhaps even before), the GM prepares a series of scenes -- his prediction of how the conflict will be played out (using both his knowledge and communication with the players on what they plan to do). The sequence is designed as one would write a dramatic plot: with twists, climax, and so forth. During the game, the GM may have to abandon particulars of his prepared plotline, of course, when the PC's do the unexpected. The theory is that his preparation will still be useful, because even though the particulars of the second plot twist have changed, the GM can still arrange for there to be a second plot twist, and thus retain his scene structure.
Quote"simulationist": is the esthetic of games where effort is made to not let meta-game concerns during play affect in-game resolution of events. That is, a fully simulationist GM will not fudge results to save PC's or to save her plot -- and will not add forces to the game world just to make things more challenging for the PC's.
Quote from: Ron EdwardsAnd furthermore, a lot of snap "oh that's Sim" responses, even from people who should know better, are assuming that the play is coherent enough even to gain a single descriptive term.
Quote from: matthijsInstead of having a greater pre-planned story arc that adventures must hook on to, there's a dynamic story arc, created in real time during play, that adventures organically tie into. Meaning that they grow together, and affect eachother.Now, if I were to try to focus on addressing setting premise as a GM - wouldn't it be fun if there were setting bangs? As history unfolds during play, sometimes strange twists and dilemmas occur that can be turning points for the flow of events. Players could perhaps make such bangs for the GM, perhaps one per session or once every few sessions, and in this way make life... interesting for the GM.