Cults and Gaming -- suggestions?

[clehrich]

I dunno, M.J.  That's getting a little reflexive and recursive even for me!

Interesting idea, though.  I'll think about it.

---
Incidentally, it occurs to me that what I'm trying to capitalize on here is just exactly what makes the dreadful Da Vinci Code so popular, which is the "gee, do you think it could really all be true?" effect.  For some reason, that sort of thing seems to be in right now -- I suppose it never really goes out of style -- and that's what I'm playing with.  Besides, everyone's convinced that all the cool stuff happened in the Renaissance, and I'm certainly emphasizing the early modern bases of Victorian magic, so I suppose there's "grip" there.  Anyway, just in case a reader out there is looking for another more concrete example of the effect I'm talking about.

Don't get me started on the DVC, okay?

[Jonathan Walton]

Couple thoughts:

What you're really talking about here, in my mind, is what Neel once talked about as the creation of shared symbolic language.  Example: in the game world, butterflies are the spirits of the dead, with all this neat context wrapped up around it (maybe they emerge from people's mouths when they die, maybe killing butterflies condemns the souls to hell, whatever).  So, whenever the players encounter a butterfly, it instantly brings up all these other unspoken connotations and communicates a vast horde of meaning all at once.  This is what the best arcane, developed game setting's do. The players spend a whole session just to determine that the Prince is, yes, a Malkavian.  And then they collapse into a fit of reactions ("That explains so much!"  "How could you do this to us?!"), based all this pool of shared opaque-to-the-unfamiliar knowledge.

What you want, then, I think, is to facilitate ways that players can collectively develop their own symbolic language, but a certain type of language that mimicks the kinds of occult stuff that you're interested in recreating.  This, I think, will instictively draw them into the kinds of cultish activities that you're looking for.

[clehrich]

Jonathan,

Have you read the most recent draft of Shadows in the Fog?  There's a section near the end called "Why this way?" which goes into the theory behind it.  Shared language of symbols -- way ahead of you, man.  The question is whether this creates that effect, which I think it does but we'll have to see.

[daMoose_Neo]

Actors do this a fair bit, where the character and actor seem to disappear and become one. Only had the happen to myself once, and it was really weird. It was easy enough to, because the character dealt with some situations I'm very accustomed to myself, so it wasn't that much of a leap from territory that was distinctly "me" to territory that was distinctly "him". Character's name was Nick, his grandparents called him "Nicky", and my girlfriend is Nicole and goes by "Nikki"...got so bad near the end of the run I was responding to "Nikki" when someone said her name! Other character quirks crept in though were erased once I got back to "Nate", but the cast had the same kind of thing you're talking about - the in-jokes, the feeling that there was more to this world outside of our own, what was displayed on stage, the feeling that you're unsure where the character stops and the person begins.

Incidently, that was the best performance I think I've ever done. In a city where musicals are all that sells because of the huge cast of little kids bringing their extended familes, we were a straight show that sold out almost every night WITHOUT the benefits of adverstisement...just word of mouth "You HAVE to see this play!".
Hm...theres an idea for you. Try to get in on a local theatre act as part of the tech crew or something. A mine of that kind of social interaction! To this day, I still greet one of my 'grandmothers' from the show as her character (Ada) and she me as her 'grandson' (Nicky!), and no one realizes we're NOT related.
So yea, it can be done, and easily. Just need strong characters, strong players, and a strong, compelling world behind it. Wouldn't even say rules or 'rewards' are explicitly needed.

[John Kim]

Compare this to Nephilim or Unknown Armies, two games I know fairly well.  They create a fictional background world, the Nephilim or the Avatars, and set up a character world that participates in it.  That's fine, but you have to like the background world as presented.  Note that games like this (CoC is another example) sometimes -- often -- stress a difference between what the GM knows and what the players know, so as to create the mystery: they have to figure it out, you see, but the GM knows all about it.

What I'm trying to do is construct a play-mode in which all that background world is generated in play.

Hmm.  From my observation, having a background world created in play is quite common.  I mean, I constantly see massively detailed backgrounds that groups have created for their games.  I am often fairly stunned at the level of detail which people put into their worlds.  The "problem" is that such people will also usually have their own ideas about system as well -- making their own independent system, homebrew, or variant of a popular system (i.e. D20).  Though, as the quotes indicate, this isn't a problem per se.  

Really, telling people "Create lots of cool stuff for this game" isn't much of a motivation for people to do so.  Not that they won't create cool stuff, but they'll probably do it for their own game rather than for your game.  In general, I think cult game status comes only from the game creating a bunch of cool stuff at base -- which inspires players to further creation.  In other words, I think a strategy like "Don't write cool stuff, get the players to do that for themselves" is pretty limiting.  You need to provide at least a solid base of cool stuff for players to build off of -- and my guess is that the base should be pretty big.  

Then again, my bias is that I generally like super-detailed backgrounds (i.e. a fantasy world like Harn or real history which is overwhelmingly detailed).  However, I know that some other people feel constricted or restrained by them.

[John Kirk]

What I want Shadows in the Fog to do is get players to make this stuff up within play, then get deeply into it as a small-group dynamic. This creates insularity and isolation, but it also creates (I hope) a kind of weirdly inbred, paranoid, claustrophobic sense that "we're the only ones who really know the truth." And that's exactly the mood I want for the game, you see.

That is one interesting set of requirements you've dreamed up.  What you want is essentially to create a cult atmosphere around your game that, after a while, makes the players wonder if it is all really a game after all.  Do I understand you correctly?

Well, if you're looking to establish a cult phenomenon, then you might want to take some lessons from actual cults.  I've done some research on the Hashashim, the Templarians, the Gnostics, the Mithraists, and various other mystery cults.  Brief descriptions of several of these are written up in The Handbook of Hazards and House Rules that you can download from my site here.  (You'll have to navigate to the Downloads page).  The cult descriptions are found in the Spiritualist section of the book.

Most of these cults work by first establishing a hierarchy of secret knowledge.  To learn the secret knowledge of the cult, you must earn your way up through the ranks.  The higher in rank you become, the more you learn.  And, you are expected to keep your secret knowledge secret, on pain of death.

You could mimic this strategy by only selling the basic rulebook of your game to the masses.  Additional supplements will contain more knowledge, but only individuals that have "earned the right" can buy the supplements.  So, you write half a dozen supplements representing various levels of secret knowledge.  The "highest ranking" supplement gets sold to only a few individuals.  All of these are written (or at least outlined) before the basic rulebook is released.  That way, the entire mythos you are creating is self consistent and you don't have to worry about writing an endless string of supplements.  You might even want to base your game off of a real-world cult (or, say, the Illuminati).  That way, you can demand players do real-world research to answer certain questions as a way to earn the right to buy the additional supplements.

You might want to draw the line at the "keep this secret on pain of death" clause, though. ;-)  Perhaps the threat of ostracism and automatic blacklisting from all secret knowledge would keep people in line.

[contracycle]

Hasn't Greg Stafford already achieved this with Glorantha?  You've certainly got all the references for those who are in the know, even more obscure references that lurk in the collective memory, and the blessed hand-carved tablets of Greg himself.  The whole thing appears to exist in a sort of existential dubiousness half-in and and half-out of the state of being "a piece of fiction", and contains, to my eye, a quite strong anti-scientific, 'relativistic' message which is in large part projected into the real world.

[Adam Cerling]

I dunno if this will be helpful, but I've had a minor experience like what you're describing. It wasn't exactly connected with one game in particular: it was just connected with a bunch of gaming friends.

In the city where I went to college there was a building near the apartments where several of us lived. Its name was "the Terrence Building." It was about twelve stories tall and abandoned. It was down the block from the psychiatric hospital. A suspicious cluster of high-tech radio antennae crowned the building.

My gaming friends and I began speculating about how this building was really some secret CIA intelligence base. That led us to do some research. Turns out it used to be the psychiatric hospital.

We explored the grounds in person. The front lobby was chained closed, and through glass panes we could see it had fallen into conspicuous disrepair. But when we went behind the building, we noticed a sleek black satellite dish on an upper story. Approaching the back doors triggered some kind of mechanical noise, like a mechanism failing to open. We found a sign on one side of the building that told of a nuclear fallout shelter beneath: and on the other side, we found a crack in the boarded-up windows. We could just make out some flourescent lights in the room beyond. They were on.

We fled the grounds when a police cruiser rolled by.

Naturally this all led to more wild theories: was the Terrence Building still used to house some of the worst mental patients? Was it haunted? Was there a cult inside summoning some Chthuloid elder god? The Terrence Building cameoed several times in our one-shot horror games and in our World of Darkness LARPs.

It was an in-joke, but it was funny partly because we really didn't know how much of a joke it was. If at all.

[Mike Holmes]

Actually, John (Kirk), you'll find that Chris is probably already quite familiar with the workings of cults, as I think it somehow pertains to his field of study. See his article on Ritual Discourse, for example, in the articles link at the top of the page.

That said, Chris, is there something that you can tell us about how this works that will give us an idea of how to help you facilitate what you're looking for.

I do agree with John, that, from what I know of cults and such, that the idea of being in possession of knowledge that is in limited circulation would be cool. The thing is, given that we're talking about single games, with limited groups, I think this is default - but won't feel special because there'll be no percieved demand for the information. I think that's key, actually, what makes information special is that it's a theoretical bargaining chip, or token of coolness.

But I have an idea. :-)

First, there seem to be two levels upon which we're operating, and two ways to look at either of those. Some people have picked up on it from one POV - the idea being to have people be involved with it as though it were somehow real, vs the information only being in-game. But also, the comment about blogs makes me think that we're also talking about information from the inside of the game being shared with a somewhat larger community.

Here's what I'm thinking. And I so get a design credit for this if you put it in! Players can contact players in other games being played of SitF, and incorporate data from those other games as though it had happened in thier own game. Essentially all SitF characters in play everywhere are all in the same game. London is large, and can handle this as long as the game doesn't become as popular as D&D (you should be so lucky).

So what happens is that this information becomes something that's local to your group, but has a potential value outside of it. So the players, knowing thier own information, now have that bargaining chip to deal with other players.

Now, of course this is going to cause tremendous continuity problems in theory. That's where the GM comes in. He gets to veto anything that's brought in that doesn't make sense to the game's continuity. What this means is that a player can't just bring in any bit of info, he has to get stuff that matches his game.

The neat thing is that, the more this happens, and the more that information changes hands, the more all games will start to have similarities, and seem like each other. Continuity problems from game to game then just become "rumors" in effect.

What do you think? I'm so excited about this, I'm going to go off immediately and start a blog. I want to be the first source of information on the game worldwide... :-)


This said, I agree with others that, while not all games produce the effect desired here, that you've designed for this effect, and that I think that it'll happen (even if you don't use my idea). That is, I think you've already got the design that will do what you want it to do. Only playtest will say for sure, but I'm pretty confident.

In any case, BTW, all of this has given me even more of an idea of what the game should be like, and now I'm pretty much raring to go. I have very little of that original vision problem that I was having. Consider putting information from some of these threads into the game text.

Oh, one more thing. You're going to at least need a disclaimer - I know it's ugly, but given what you're looking at doing, I think you'll have to have one. But here's the thing - overdo it. Make a big deal out of the disclaimer. The more you do so, the more the conspiracy theorists will grab onto it as an attempt to hide the fact that "IT'S ALL TRUE!"

In fact, for those who want to remain sane about the whole thing, include material on how to deprogram and such. :-)

This indemnifies you while making the atmosphere more what you want.

Mike

[John Kirk]

Players can contact players in other games being played of SitF, and incorporate data from those other games as though it had happened in thier own game. Essentially all SitF characters in play everywhere are all in the same game...So what happens is that this information becomes something that's local to your group, but has a potential value outside of it. So the players, knowing thier own information, now have that bargaining chip to deal with other players.

Excellent idea, Mike.  But, I still think the game needs a hierarchical structure to the secret knowledge.  Otherwise, each group only has one bargaining chip.  The key here is that the game would have to provide rules on how to construct the "secret knowledge database".  When one group interacts with another and obtains its "rank 3" knowledge, the receiving group can respond in one of several ways:

1) Accept the information as-is and incorporate it into its own "rank-3" knowledge base.

2) Alter the "rank-3" knowledge to make it logically consistent with its own secret knowledge base, and possibly negotiate the changes with the providing group.

3) Reject the information outright due to irreconcilable differences and publicly decree the heresy of the providing group.

The rules would have to ensure that any information incorporated into a group's low-ranking knowledge bases would have to make logical sense from the higher-ranking knowledge bases' perspectives.  Thus, negotiations between groups would involve changes to make the conformity happen without either group actually knowing why the other group wants the changes.

[M. J. Young]

In fact, for those who want to remain sane about the whole thing, include material on how to deprogram and such. :-)

Sample game text from this section:

Keep repeating to yourself, It was only a game, right? It was only a game....

--M. J. Young

[clehrich]

Actually, John (Kirk), you'll find that Chris is probably already quite familiar with the workings of cults, as I think it somehow pertains to his field of study. See his article on Ritual Discourse, for example, in the articles link at the top of the page.

Yes, actually the whole problem of "esotericism" is pretty central to my professional work.  But that doesn't mean at all that others' views and perceptions aren't helpful.  So, thanks John!

Here's what I'm thinking. And I so get a design credit for this if you put it in! Players can contact players in other games being played of SitF, and incorporate data from those other games as though it had happened in thier own game. Essentially all SitF characters in play everywhere are all in the same game. London is large, and can handle this as long as the game doesn't become as popular as D&D (you should be so lucky).

I'd think the best way to do this would be a special board or forum on the web somewhere for SitF games, where people can share information, play events, etc.  I'm no web guy -- I don't have the remotest idea how to set up a board or whatever -- but I can look into it.  This would also make excellent sense in that you could have a subsection of "references and links" where people post websites and bibliographic material, and I'd start this off with things like the online Booth maps and notebooks, the one really excellent Ripper site, and so on.  Cool!

Now, of course this is going to cause tremendous continuity problems in theory. That's where the GM comes in. He gets to veto anything that's brought in that doesn't make sense to the game's continuity. What this means is that a player can't just bring in any bit of info, he has to get stuff that matches his game.

I'm not sure how much veto stuff would really be necessary.  The only thing I think would require this is material that is definitely fiction.  Anything historical, for which there is some kind of reasonable evidence, is automatically non-veto-able, barring a discussion within the whole group and an overwhelming majority decision to block it.  That, of course, would ipso facto make the use of credible historical evidence more powerful, because it can't be stopped or blocked by fiat.

The neat thing is that, the more this happens, and the more that information changes hands, the more all games will start to have similarities, and seem like each other. Continuity problems from game to game then just become "rumors" in effect.

Eek.  This is getting creepy....  :-)

What do you think? I'm so excited about this, I'm going to go off immediately and start a blog. I want to be the first source of information on the game worldwide... :-)

What do I think?  What do you think I think, Mike?  YAY!

This said, I agree with others that, while not all games produce the effect desired here, that you've designed for this effect, and that I think that it'll happen (even if you don't use my idea). That is, I think you've already got the design that will do what you want it to do. Only playtest will say for sure, but I'm pretty confident.

Cool.  I'm hopeful -- I look forward to hearing about people's playtests.  If you do put up a website or blog or Wiki or whatever, anyone, let me know.

In any case, BTW, all of this has given me even more of an idea of what the game should be like, and now I'm pretty much raring to go. I have very little of that original vision problem that I was having. Consider putting information from some of these threads into the game text.

Yes, you're completely correct about this.  No question, there needs to be a chapter -- a short one, but an important one -- that discusses this issue and explains how it's supposed to work.

Oh, one more thing. You're going to at least need a disclaimer - I know it's ugly, but given what you're looking at doing, I think you'll have to have one. But here's the thing - overdo it. Make a big deal out of the disclaimer. The more you do so, the more the conspiracy theorists will grab onto it as an attempt to hide the fact that "IT'S ALL TRUE!"

Thank you.  Excellent point.

[clehrich]

Excellent idea, Mike.  But, I still think the game needs a hierarchical structure to the secret knowledge.  Otherwise, each group only has one bargaining chip.  The key here is that the game would have to provide rules on how to construct the "secret knowledge database".  When one group interacts with another and obtains its "rank 3" knowledge, the receiving group can respond in one of several ways:

I'm not sure what you mean by "rank 3."  What does this mean?

The rules would have to ensure that any information incorporated into a group's low-ranking knowledge bases would have to make logical sense from the higher-ranking knowledge bases' perspectives.  Thus, negotiations between groups would involve changes to make the conformity happen without either group actually knowing why the other group wants the changes.

Hmm.  The thing is, I'm not convinced this is necessary.  I understand where you're coming from, but I think that the obsessive nature of conspiracy-theory/occult-history stuff is likely to obviate the need for such clear ranking.  The only thing I think is really necessary is for me to comb through the Wiki (or whatever) periodically to put flags on material that is poorly documented or unreliable historically.  Perhaps there could be a graded set of such flags, ranging from "rumor" to "known."  This would mean that a player doing research through the website would have a strong basis from which to evaluate which material could be incorporated without argument as opposed to which stuff could only definitely be included as a rumor, not as a known fact.  Something like that.  I very much don't want to construct a system of certain knowledge that is secret and only available to the cool kids, as it were; it seems to me that this constructs exactly what I don't like about V:tM and Mage and such, where there is a "real secret history" that is exterior to what could be researched independently.

[clehrich]

Sample game text from this section:

Keep repeating to yourself, It was only a game, right? It was only a game....

That's sick, M.J.  I like it.  :-)

Yes, both of you make an excellent point.  By overstating the degree to which this is all fiction, no matter how much maybe it looks like history, it's really all fiction, so don't deceive yourself, blah blah, you provoke exactly the kind of paranoid conspiracy stuff that I want.  Nifty!

Hmm.  This cult thing really seems to be getting at the core of what this game is supposed to be about.  Pity I didn't notice it earlier, eh?  But I suppose it's good that I finally got there!

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Chris,

You're familiar with De Profundis, right?

Best,
Ron