Plot is the Wake of the Characters' Desires

[Kubasik]

HI all,

In this post, Ron lays out some thoughts I had about the "origins" of Sorcerers.

I've had some more thoughts on this since then and I thought these notions might be of use for others. It's not a definitive way of thinking about Kickers, but it might help people phrase Kickers in a powerful way.

Step 1. Every character has a Desire.  (This is what Ron referred to as Passions in the linked post.)  A character might desire to transcend his mundane suburban life. A character might want to keep the peace. A character might want to earn back her innocence. A character might want to control other people.

Note that there's NO PLOT in this Desire – no bad guy to kill, no one to avenge, no one to save. It's a completely self-contained agenda. This is completely contrary to most expectations of RPG character creation and "storytelling" where the agenda of the Plot ismotivation and is the story.  (And usually, if there is some sort of Passion or Desire, it doesn't drive the story, but folks work hard to weave it into the Plot by backstory or subplot elements.)

In the examples above, I've drawn from the movies Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Jaws, Silence of the Lambs, and Casablanca.  Note that even when we talk about movies we tend to think mostly about the Plot.  But if you look at the opening moments of character behavior in these movies, the Protagonists Desire is revealed even before Roy sees his first UFO, before Brody sees his first half-chewed shark victim, before Clarice is on the trail of Buffalo Bill, before Rick sees Ilsa again for the first time in years.  I bring this up because to understand this approach, you really have to let go of the idea of Plot – Players and GMs alike.  But the PCs still have a drive that's there even before the story begins.

The Desire is the empty hole in the character's heart the character wants to fill.  He's tried real hard to do this, but so far hasn't succeeded.

Step 2. In Sorcerer there's an extra step.  The binding of the demon.  I'd offer that the binding should be an attempt to get the desire met. Having the demon might even bring the character closer – but hasn't really closed that Desire.  Here are some non-Demon attempts of Protagonists trying to get closer to their desires: Roy says, "Let's go see Ponnochio!", Brody moves to a pleasant beach community where keeping the peace will be easier, Starling becomes an FBI agent to help those who can't help themselves, Rick runs a casino in a desperate place where desperate people are under his thumb.

Of course, summoning a demon is a pretty dramatic step.  But it's not enough to get the desire met.

Step 3. A threat or opportunity arrives to the Desire. Roy sees and UFO. A shark arrives and starts killing people. Starling is asked to help find a missing girl. Ilsa arrives, the one person who might be able to control Rick.

I offer that these are the Kickers.

Notice that this is different than the presentation in the Sorcerer book.  In Sorcerer the Kicker is, "....and then this happens." Here, the  "and then this" is the very thing that can lead to the Character's Hopes and Dreams being met or squashed. This is it. The chance to manifest an opportunity into a desire.

(BTW, there's no reason it should be this way the Sorcerer Book.  First of all, it's not the only way to do it. Second, the phrasing doesn't preclude this. I'm simply hammering this one specific approach.)

Now Ron has suggested in recent posts he allows some "set-up" time before the Kicker strikes.  I think he called it, "Preparing for the date," or some such, where the players and GM get to hang out with the character before the Kicker arrives.  I'd offer that in these pre-Kicker moments, the players will get to manifest behaviors that make sense for PC's with strong Desires.  (Starling training hard, Brody trying to placate everybody, and so on.)

The key is, that by having a strong Desire unconnected to Plot, and then introducing a threat or opportunity for that Desire with an undeclared outcome, we're ready to play with full-blow, where-the-hell-are-we-gonna-end-up Kickers.

In this formula, The Plot is the Wake of the Characters' Desires.  Only by pursuing the Desires will be find out what the Theme is. And whatnot.

Step 4. I'd offer here that the resolution of the Kicker is also the Biggest Test for the PC. The test is, how far will you go to meet your Desire? Will you go that far? Will you back down?
Roy ends up getting to choose to step onto an alien space craft. Nothing he could have anticipated when he first begged his children to go to a Disney movie with him. Starling has to fend off a serial killer in the dark to save the girl. Brody's gotta face the gun and become a violent and focused man – something he would have been incapable of doing at the start. Rick backs down from his need to control everyone.

I'd offer as well that the final Test proves what the Character Needs. We all have Desires. But the PC reveals what he really needs in that last moment of Kicker Resolution.

*****

To review, all that backstory stuff isn't Story. Story begins when the Opportunity for or Threat to arrives to the Desire.  (And often there's both a threat and an opportunity.) But you can have play before the Story proper starts.  This lets us see the PC in action before the test or opportunity arrives. This let's us see why the PC's doing what he or she is doing, what's stake, even if it's very subtle at first.

In Sorcerer the Demon might help or hinder the PC in pursuing the desire. (Probably both).

The Kicker (as Threat or Opportunity) is the start of the really big choices.  This is it! "My guy's biggest challenge." How it will turn out, no one knows. That's why the Desire isn't connected to plot elements. How the Desire will be met – or if it will be met at all – is still an issue that needs to be discovered.

Now, much like Premise, the Desire might not be fully articulated. But if the Player says, "My guy's the kind of guy who wants to go see the old, terrific Disney movies while my kinds just want to sit around and complain... He's a dreamer in a world of mundane suburbanites who just want not to rock the boat," we might well end up with something like, "One night, while on the job, he sees a strange light flying like a strange aircraft in the sky."  This doesn't mean he's going to be racing to meet the Mother Ship at a government controlled landing site.  Who knows what actions he'll finally be taking. Maybe in a game he'd insist on getting his whole family to go with him.  Maybe just showing them the alien mother ship would be enough to make him feel he could go home – cause they'd be on his page now.  And Starling: if a player came up with the Slaughter of the Lambs / I Stole One story, and "She became an FBI agent to make sure that never happened again." And she's summoned onto a case where there's a serial killer skinning girls not much older than her... Or Brody. "He was (I'm just making this up), a New York Cop who meant well but couldn't hack it. He wants to help keep the peace, but decided he wanted to do that in a place that was already peaceful..." Well, you get the idea.

It think this helps (again) distinguish the Kicker from a Plot Hook.  The Desire is independent from Plot, but drives the Plot. The Kicker is what the Desire is all about, not what the Plot is all about. The Plot is revealed by the Desire meeting the Kicker, not the method (a Plot Hook) that connects the PC to the story, irrespective of who the PC actually is, what burns most important in the PC's heart.

Best regards,
Christopher

[Trevis Martin]

Wow, Christopher, what a great post.  I'm saving this one.

best,

Trevis

[John Kim]

Step 3. A threat or opportunity arrives to the Desire. Roy sees and UFO. A shark arrives and starts killing people. Starling is asked to help find a missing girl. Ilsa arrives, the one person who might be able to control Rick.

I offer that these are the Kickers.  

Cool.  I have a recent essay called http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/plot/proactivity.html">Proactive PCs and Related Issues which covers similar ground.  There I describe the use of "kickers" or "prods" (as I term them) as one type of middle ground between reactivity and proactivity.  I'm curious if you see them in the same light.  i.e. A proactive PC may act on their desire without a distinct external event which kicks them.  However, a kicker is a useful technique to move a less proactive PC towards her desires.

[TonyLB]

Is a Kicker inherently external?  I would think "I was saying mass yesterday, when I suddenly realized that I can no longer remember what it felt like to really believe" is as well formulated a Kicker as "Brazilian drug lords killed my family".

And if you can have internal Kickers then is that what proactive players are generating for themselves, out of a desire to move their character into a premise-addressing mode?

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Tony,

I wrote the Kicker rules in Sorcerer specifically for that exact purpose.

I suggest that the distinction between internal or external Kicker is irrelevant in comparison to the all-important purpose of the Kicker, which is exactly as you describe in your final setence.

John, one thing worth considering is that in Sorcerer, the player authors the Kicker. If it acts as a "prod," then the GM is the prod-ee.

Best,
Ron

[Judd]

John, one thing worth considering is that in Sorcerer, the player authors the Kicker. If it acts as a "prod," then the GM is the prod-ee.

Best,
Ron

Ron, sorry to mince words here but the GM isthe prod-ee or the prodded?

I feel like Kickers are the player's way of screaming, "This is what I'm interested in.  Explore it with me!"

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Judd,

In this day and age, in which "standees" are now supposed to be people who are standing rather than people on whom others are standing, my sentence is much less clear than I'd hoped.

In Sorcerer, the Kicker mechanic allows the player to prod the GM. That is what they are for. Conflicts, issues, characters, etc, are provided to the GM. The key point is this: whatever the GM was already bringing to the scenario is expected to be supportive, over time, of whatever conflicts were brought in by the Kickers. The Kicker takes creative precedence in the GM's prep for play. It is not merely a means by which the character is "supposed" to get interested in whatever the GM is providing.

Best,
Ron

[Judd]

Got it.  Thanks.

Sorry to pick at nits.

[Kubasik]

Hi John and Tony,

Those are great questions. Ron's already touched on answers. I've got more to say. But I'm moving today, and covered in grime and hustling against the clock. but here's my quick break/response.

I want to make clear that everything I wrote presumes the full definition of Kicker as presented in Sorcerer and clarified (a gazillion times) here and at RPG.net.  

The tweak I'm making is simply to slide the Desire before the Kicker. It might be presumed in the Sorcerer text, but isn't explicit. Moreover, the text suggests a Kicker might just up and jump at a character. I obviously don't have the book in front of me, but there's a sentence along the lines of, "Until the Kicker, your character's just this guy -- and then this happens. This is fine. But I'm massaging it a different way.  I'm saying NO protagonist is ever just some guy.  Even before the Kicker, the protagonist has a Desire of some sort, and he or she is alert to the possibility of getting that desire met -- and working to get that desire me.

This presumes that while a character might not be up to a full-boil as a "proactive" character, he's active to the degree he's desiring *something*. His efforts might be clumsy, useless, and might even look like he's just haning out before the Kicker arrives.  But I would offer, for my my way of looking at it, no.

Brody doesn't rush out to go kill the shark.  This confounded me for a long time (one example of this), because I'm certainly not bored whatching his character on screen. Why? Because he *is* doing something.  He's Trying to Keep the Peace.  He's trying to do that the whole movie: first with dealing with the Karate fence chopping kids, then with nodding in agreement when the coranor says the mutilated body died in a motor boat accident --"No need to make a big deal of this," is the attitude, and he agrees.  Rising to taking violent confrontational action.

Shrek is another example.  He has no desire to go on an adventure. No desire to rescue a Princess.  He's NOT a hero.  His Desire? To be left alone.  Everything he does propels him in that direction -- till he finally gives up the desire at the climax.

So John, I think ALL characters are proactive. And I think all characters need the opportunity or threat to their desire (in the technique I'm suggesting).  That's what let's everyone at the table know what the story is about, and when it will end.  This is one of the thing's the Sorcerer Kickers do -- the provide a beginning, a middle and an end to a story.  The threat or opportunity is the thing the character encounters that set the Desire off in the direction of fulfillment or abandoment.  This is the "And then this happens moment.  If one doesn't want a Kicker, then that's cool. But you loose one of the Kicker's cool elements -- it gives everyone at the table a sense of where we're going, what resolution means, and can cue tempo and climax resolution.

Back to work.

Christopher

[John Kim]

I suggest that the distinction between internal or external Kicker is irrelevant in comparison to the all-important purpose of the Kicker, which is exactly as you describe in your final setence.

John, one thing worth considering is that in Sorcerer, the player authors the Kicker. If it acts as a "prod," then the GM is the prod-ee.

Well, my terminology of "prods" and "hooks" refers to the characters.  So a "prod" is an external event which forces the character to action but doesn't determine direction.  A "hook" is an external event which draws the character into a particular storyline.  I think that internal vs external makes a considerable difference.  I had thought of Kickers as external to character based on the examples, but I'll accept that they can include internal as well.  In which case, though, I think it's important to distinguish between "internal kicker" and "external kicker".  

It isn't clear to me where the line is between an "internal kicker" and general character motivation (such as what Christopher calls "Desire").  I'd be curious to probe this.  To me, the natural dividing line is between things internal to the character's personality, and events in the outside world.

So John, I think ALL characters are proactive. And I think all characters need the opportunity or threat to their desire (in the technique I'm suggesting).  That's what let's everyone at the table know what the story is about, and when it will end.  This is one of the thing's the Sorcerer Kickers do -- the provide a beginning, a middle and an end to a story.  The threat or opportunity is the thing the character encounters that set the Desire off in the direction of fulfillment or abandoment.  This is the "And then this happens moment.  If one doesn't want a Kicker, then that's cool. But you loose one of the Kicker's cool elements -- it gives everyone at the table a sense of where we're going, what resolution means, and can cue tempo and climax resolution.

OK, here you are discussing "threat or opportunity" -- which fits with my prods but not with internal kickers.  The distinction between a proactive and reactive character is what they will do without such a threat or opportunity.  i.e. Let's say nothing abnormal or unusual happens to produce a threat or opportunity.  What happens?  The key here is to look at relation to status quo.  

A proactive character doesn't need this extra element.  Her desire is to oppose the status quo.  So if she walks into a sleepy town, she turns it on its head.  Now, hopefully we can agree that having a sleepy town be there isn't a Kicker. In stories, the pattern of resolution is generally to restore the status quo.  That restoration is what defines the climax and produces closure to the story.  

So I agree with you in this sense.  A proactive character is fighting for a large or open-ended desire (i.e. gain personal power, create world peace, etc.).  Because his story moves away from status quo, there is no clear endpoint to it.  So there is no clear endpoint or resolution.  However, I think such struggles are still interesting to play.  For example, this was the case with my HarnMaster character http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/harn/baraud.html">Baraud Valain.  His desire was to advance the Order of Eight Demons and their philosophy, and he was ambitious and ruthless.  So even if you just drop him into a sleepy village, he will move into action.

[Alan]

A proactive character doesn't need this extra element.  Her desire is to oppose the status quo.  So if she walks into a sleepy town, she turns it on its head.

Hi John,

Heck, with a character like that, nothing would be safe.  Doesn't their desire to oppose the status quo have some boundaries?  What are those boundaries?  And what did they encounter in that sleepy town that fell within them?

[Ron Edwards]

Umm, I'm confused. It seems to me that a proactive character could be opposed to the status quo or actively engaged in preserving it. I really don't understand why he or she would automatically be construed as doing the former.

Trollbabe as a game is actually predicated on this idea.

Best,
Ron

[John Kim]

Umm, I'm confused. It seems to me that a proactive character could be opposed to the status quo or actively engaged in preserving it. I really don't understand why he or she would automatically be construed as doing the former.

Maybe this is a word definition clash?  Status quo is by definition the current normal state of things.  So if things are normal, then a status-quo-preserver won't do anything interesting.  In other words, he'll be a part of the status quo.  In order for him to take interesting action, someone else has to take the first step and break the status quo.  Then the status quo preserver will take action to restore the norm.  

Can you give some examples of proactive status quo preservers?  The simplest examples of the difference are superheroes and supervillains.  A superhero is generally a status quo preserver.  Until someone does an unusual crime (i.e. murder, armed robbery, hostage-taking, etc.), the superhero just sits around looking for such.  He'll live his secret identity and fly around on patrol.  A supervillain, in contrast, may go ahead and take action even if there is no break in the status quo.

[Kubasik]

Hi John,

We're simply talking about two different ways of setting up "story" here; two different ways of playing.

To wit:

In my view there is no such thing as a workable character that is "proactive" as opposed to "reactive". Nor is there such a thing as a character that is "reactive" as opposed to "proactive."  All workable characters are both proactive and reactive.  In my view, they need to be to be workable.

Moreover, as I've defined Desire in my first post it is explicitely not attached to any a priori plot element.  So I'm not saying the example you gave of the guy with the desire to advance to the Order of the Eight Demons.  I'd call that a Task.  (I'm not being pendantic here, I hope. That's now a technical term for me, in organizing my thinking about story. The Task his how a character is physicalizing the need to mee the Desire.)  Taking over the world, creating world peace are not Desires (as I'm defining them.  You probably know this, I'm just pointing this out to be clear.)

And, in my view, there's nothing generalized about a character's Desire. The whole point is to make the character specific through a specific and unique Desire.  

As for not having a clear or specific end point still being interesting to play -- well, exactly!  A Kicker has no clear or specific end point! Kickers have no clear or specific end point? And Desires, as I've defined them, have no clear and specific end point.  That's the point.

I understand what you're saying about status quo and such... in years past I put a lot of thought to such matters... And I finally chucked this way of thinking. In the four movies I referenced above two retain the status quo (Silence and Jaws), and two toss it overboard at the end (CE3K and Casablanca).  I bring this up not to challenge you about how you want to play, but to point out that you and I are approaching these matters from very different points of view.

I'll state again, ALL charcters are in action if they're interesting at all.  Even before the Kicker.  And every story involves turning up the heat on the Protagonist so the choices get harder, the search to resolve the Kicker and the Desire rise in tension and no one knows what the resolution is.

I'd offer Brody in Jaws as an example of someone who might be considered a "status quo" character. But a summer town in summer is by definition chaos.  If his Desire is to keep the peace, he's working against that chaos. Otherwise you'd have nothing interesting happening.

Remember, in my view there is no "objective" reallity out there for the Protagonist to bump against (or not).  I don't care about "real" life or people who have no ambition or desire. It's all designed as a testing ground for the Protagonist's Desire. That's the focus for me.  Will the protagonist manifest these Desires into something concrete.  Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Again, this is clearly not the point of view you're working from. We're coming from different places.  I don't passive characters exist.  Shrek may not look like he's doing much at the start of "Shrek," but we know he's managed to build a home far away from everyone else.  He's actively gotten away from everyone.  He built his shack. This is what he's done. He's worked toward that. When the other fairy tale creatures show up, he tries to get rid of them.  Just because he's not out trying to dominate the world doesn't mean he's passive? Right?

You and I are working from different spots, I think, in terms of what we mean by Character, Story concerns about Plot and such. The fact that you can't see the difference between an "internal Kicker" and what I call Desire makes this clear.  The Desire is.... well, the Desire.  The Kicker (internal or external), is a sharp threat to or opportunity for, the Desire. It ramps up the issue of the Desire immediately, throws the desire into a clearer focus, and begins what will later be called, The Story.  It is the change in circumstance that makes a story possible.  (In the internal Kicker example offered above, the devotee feels a loss of god's presence.  Well, that's a change.)

No big deal at all.  But I wanted to be clear where I stand.

Christopher

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

I'm with Chris on this one. "Status quo" doesn't work for me as a concept - it breaks down into stuff that I do understand, like "power structure" and "peace" and so forth, or (depending on the situation) "oppression" or "injustice."

Best,
Ron