Truth, stranger than fiction: Building a map

[Tim Alexander]

Hey Folks,

So I'm gathering resources for my Ordinary Tragedies game prep and was considering various material for a relationship map. Since OT is set in vegas, I've been mulling over the concept of using the Ted Binion murder as the basis for most of the map. It's got all sorts of family upheaval, sex, drugs, gambling, murder, and mayhem. All of that sounds pretty good to me, and with a few additional shadings I think it'll shape into a nice grabby map. My question becomes whether anyone has ever used real events as a map and backstory?

Basically, since it's such a great fit for the setting I don't see much reason to change the personalities involved at all. Some of the real relationships will be modified etc. but by and large the material released to the public from the ensuing trial and the books written since (Positively Fifth Street) are all functional for the game world as I see it. Is there a potential gotcha in handling it this way that I'm not seeing?

-Tim

[Mike Holmes]

First, I'm guessing by the resounding silence that nobody has tried this, Tim.

For the life of me, though, I don't know why. I'm not sure why it is that we've only considered fictional sources for R-maps. Because it strikes me that this is brilliant.

See, for a book, you'd be considered to be "ripping off" the story of the real life case - it'd be considered derivative at best. But for RPGs, well heck, we go so far as to rip off fiction. So ripping off the primary sources should be more than fine.

I think you've got a real winner here. And I think it's you who's going to have to let us know whether or not there are any hiccups on the way.

Mike

[ivan23]

My question becomes whether anyone has ever used real events as a map and backstory?

Yeah ... I use people I know in real life and their own relationships as models for relationship maps from time to time, and I've always enjoyed pulling story or character ideas out of old primary sources. Works really well for Western and/or Pulp games, since it's easy to find stuff online that works well for it.

[Tim Alexander]

Hey Folks,

I'll be introducing Sorcerer to the group this evening, and after discussing the one-sheet and bringing folks up to speed we'll be going through chargen. I wanted the beginnings of an r-map in mind as we begin character creation, and the result can be seen here: r-map. There's a lot of vague stuff at the edges of the map in my mind that I expect to solidify after characters are made tonight. The gist of the NPCs on the map though is:

Benny Binion was the patriarch of the Binion family, and the man who really made the casino a success. Since his death he's been left as an echo of the thing he loved so much in life, Binion's Horseshoe Casino. He's a nasty immanent who's thriving off breaking the folks that gamble in his belly. While I haven't statted anyone yet, Benny's a cinch for taint.

Ted Binion is the favorite son, and a Sorcerer to boot. Teddy cut a deal with 'dad' after his death and has been ensuring the immanent has a ready supply of victims, while Benny makes certain the coffers stay full. Unfortunately for Ted, he got involved with a stripper by the name of Sandra Murphy, and he's got an ugly heroin habit. After a while Ted's roller coaster became a bit much for Sandy, but Ted wasn't letting go and summoned up a possesor to inhabit the woman (note: I realized in writing this that I need a name for this demon, and need it on the map seperate from Sandy, who should still be around if currently subsumed by the possesor) and feed his 'needs.' Ted was never much of a giver though, and even the new Sandra grew tired of his abuses. It wasn't too long before she got her lovely hooks into a close friend of Ted's; a fellow Sorcerer by the name of Rick Tabish.

Rick was into the mob for gambling debts, and he'd been in and out of the can for petty crime in the past. He's always been a bit of a loser with a winning smile, and Sandy read him early as an easy mark. She knew about a fairly large stash of silver that Ted had hidden out in the desert, and it could be the answer to all of Rick's cash flow issues. So, Sandy arranges a rebellion against Ted, binds with Rick, and Rick and Sandy cuff Ted and force feed him several ounces of heroin before smothering him to death. Nasty business, and all in all a decent plan with no witnesses, except for "Fix." He's an object demon of Ted's that was manifest as a syringe, and for some reason (as yet to be determined) was unwilling or unable to aid Ted. Neither Rick, nor Sandy are aware of Fix, and now he's slowly starving to death and desperately wants to find a new Sorcerer.

So now the ownership of the casino is up in the air, and the remaining members of the family are squabbling to pick up the pieces. Nick Behnen is a smalltime wiseguy married into the Binion family through Ted's sister Becky. He's got a pretty clear idea of where Rick got the money to pay back his debts to the organization came from, but he hasn't mentioned it to his wife. The way he figures it Ted being gone is an opportunity to get hold of the family business, and he's not interested in jeapordizing that chance. Becky doesn't need the information much anyhow as she never liked or trusted Sandy, and she's convinced her sister Brenda that there's something fishy going on. Jack, for his part, isn't thrilled at the death of his brother. That said, he's unconvinced that Becky and her thug husband and son have any chance of keeping the casino afloat. He's got his own contacts in Nevada gaming, and he fully intends to make his play for ownership.

That's about where things stand at the moment, and as you can probably see there are a lot of angles to hook the players into the map. Best of all,the vast majority of this is all straight from the real case at hand; down to the big load of silver in the desert. There's an awful lot going on, and there aren't many innocents in this web. I'm wondering if folks have any comments, or questions? Any concerns from more experienced r-map builders? Also, I'll plan on posting the updated map that will evolve after character creation tonight.

Thanks,

-Tim

[Mike Holmes]

Huh. Usually when you steal a relationship map, you come up with new names for the characters, etc. Do you intend to do that, or just run it with the real life people as characters?

Mike

[Tim Alexander]

Hey Mike,

That was the big part of my initial question actually. I intend to run it as is, with the legitimate names. I considered changing the folks involved but I didn't really see much of a compelling reason to do so. In the case of most stolen maps you're changing names for the purposes of setting, or to obfuscate the source. In this case the names are completely appropriate for the setting and most of the basic facts of the case are mostly irrelevent to the interesting elements in the map.

In some ways I think having all the real names is a benefit. I'm willing to believe I've missed a reason to change them though, that's part of why I posted it initially. While I don't expect my players to have intimate knowledge of the case, it's within reason they've run into it, especially via the McManus book. Since this instance of the game has a lot of Sorcerery grounded into reality my thought is that the real people and a real event helps that grounding.

Thoughts?

-Tim

[Mike Holmes]

Well, I have to admit that I like the name Benny Binion. The allitteration is neat.

But, given that you are using the characters as they are, why not file off the serial numbers, just to avoid any problems?

One potential problem is that it might do, once you've seen the PCs to substantively change the map. Having the characters as "themselves" makes it cognatively harder to do that. Or, if you do change them, then they are no longer "themselves" anymore, so why keep the original monikers?

It just seems cleaner to me to convert the real people into characters, and then use that as a tool. Rather than trying to make the real life stuff fit perfectly as is.

Mike

[Tim Alexander]

Hey Mike,

Well, I have to admit that I like the name Benny Binion. The allitteration is neat.

Yeah, I gotta admit that the real names are awfully evocative to me, Benny especially. I think the fact that Benny, and the real casino are both sort of Vegas iconography that fit the game really well and it's doing a lot in driving my reluctance. Also, the Behnen's marrying the Binions, and having a son named after the grandad... it's pretty priceless.

One potential problem is that it might do, once you've seen the PCs to substantively change the map. Having the characters as "themselves" makes it cognatively harder to do that. Or, if you do change them, then they are no longer "themselves" anymore, so why keep the original monikers?

This is a really valid concern, and if the map changes substantially after tonight I think it's a foregone conclusion to change the names involved. However if the problem becomes that I'm so wedded to the map that I'm inflexible then I don't think changing the names will help me. I don't think I'm at that point yet though.

-Tim

[Mike Holmes]

Yep, really sounds like we're jumping the gun here. Really no use till chargen happens. :-)

Mike

[Tim Alexander]

Hey Folks,

So we've done character creation and it's going to induce a lot of changes in the map. The names are going out the window along with at least a fair amount of the backstory. Also, Now that I have all these additional NPCs that have been brought into existence by the players and are staring me in the face from the diagram on the back I have a question for people. When tying folks into the map, how tightly do you generally involve those secondary NPCs that the players have created? Do you make an effort to get the majority of those folks into the map in one way shape or form, or do you allow them to hang around the periphery?

-Tim

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Tim,

These is a strictly aesthetic judgment on your part, and it's an important one.

What's your personal tolerance for how tightly characters are intertwined in a story? When the fourth character is revealed to be "... he's ... the NEPHEW!", does it make you go, "Hey, that's taut!" or "Oh, fuck, how contrived."

You'll have to make that judgment now. It's one of your duties as Sorcerer GM. It doesn't matter whether we're talking about revelations for later in play, or connections ff that characters & players already know. Just look over it all as a "knot" and decide whether, in each case, you are staying away from over-contrivance when you keep a given NPC out of the direct map.

My relationship maps are actually quite loose - more than one NPC is just floating there, unconnected.

Remember that IMPORTANCE of an NPC is dictated by player preference as revealed through play, not by his or her presence in the map. That presence only helps you as GM in the role-playing, not in the emphasis, of any given NPC.

Best,
Ron

[Tim Alexander]

Hiya Ron,

What's your personal tolerance for how tightly characters are intertwined in a story? When the fourth character is revealed to be "... he's ... the NEPHEW!", does it make you go, "Hey, that's taut!" or "Oh, fuck, how contrived."

This is interesting. My initial reaction was 'contrived' but upon reflection I realize I find it to be taut as long as it's not necesarily done as a reveal. I don't like the relationships sprung on me, but like tightly woven stories. Does this make any sense? I suppose it implies it's a pretty fine balance.

My relationship maps are actually quite loose - more than one NPC is just floating there, unconnected.

Do you put those folks on the map at all in a literal sense? If so is it just as a secondary purpose on the map to keep them present in your mind?

-Tim

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Tim,

You'll find that the taut/contrived reaction is highly localized, both from scenario/story to scenario/story, and from group to group, and from game to game. All I can tell you is to be mindful of it, and to "loosen" when it seems too contrived, and to "tauten" when it seems too disconnected.

I don't understand your last question very well. The choices look identical to me.

Best,
Ron

[Tim Alexander]

I don't understand your last question very well. The choices look identical to me.

Basically I mean do those folks that aren't directly connected to the map end up on the physical piece of paper where you've drawn the map, or are they respresented only in the accompanying prep/notes/charsheets? In a lot of the r-map threads and in Soul you make a point to talk about the r-map exclusively in terms of the sex/blood relationships. You make allowances that other stuff can end up there (colors and shading etc. etc.), but that at some point layering too much on the physical map can dilute it's usefulness. You also make the point that the r-map's not the end all be all of prep and you can't forget the other stuff. So, I'm wondering if in your prep do you use your map as a central organizing piece (therefore include even the indirectly connected folks on there) as well as a representative of the blood/sex ties? It sort of sounds like it, but I want to make sure I'm not misreading.

Does that help?

-Tim

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Tim,

It clarifies what you're asking, but I don't think people are going to like my answer. It goes:

Whatever you'd prefer.

Which in the case of my own prep, means, "whatever I feel like or seems to work best in this particular case."

My discussion of kin and sexual-contact ties refers to the actual primary lines on the map, in its early stages. Other kinds of lines, other "bubbles," little twig-lines, and so on, are all good. My advice from the beginning has been to start with kin and sexual contact, and then to move on to whatever additions you want from there.

These are such powerful ties that when present they should be given primary visual emphasis in map-making. What this means in terms of NPCs that are not tied in, and what that means in terms of which NPCs' actions get emphasized during play itself, are left up to individual taste.

The common misperceptions that I say "draw kin and sexual contact only, ever, and amen," and that I therefore must think "only kin and sexual contact matter to anyone, ever," are both mistaken.

Best,
Ron