GM-task: Test to Extremity

[lumpley]

Know what I'll bet, Tony? I'll bet that Capes isn't providing negative feedback at all. I'll bet that people get better at putting forward juicy conflict because Capes rewards them a little bit for trying and a lot for getting it right.

-Vincent

[TonyLB]

Aw man, you're undermining my whole "negative reinforcement fosters learning" motif.  You may be right though.

[LordSmerf]

I'm not entirely sure Vincent.  The big negative reinforcement thing to me is that your miscalculation doesn't go away.  It sits there in front of God and everyone, mocking you.

Also, you are not garuanteed an Inspiration just for starting something that no one likes.  In fact, anyone could get that Inspiration.  It's been my experience that it's won by someone else at least as often as it is won by the originator.

So the only thing that the Inspiration does is provide a way for that lame duck.  Without some reason to pick it up it would just sit there, useless to everyone.  So, I think that this is a form of negative reinforcement, but that the negative side is not proportionate to the positive side.  That is, it's a minor little negative, almost a slap on the wrist, vs. a big reward on the positive side...

Thomas

[TonyLB]

Setting aside the Capes talk, and the question of whether it's negative reinforcement or just "not-as-positive" reinforcement:

You can look at the mechanical results of some systems (notably, Capes and DitV) and they tell you whether or not you've successfully provided adversity to another player.  In Capes I know it when I get Story Tokens.  In DitV I know it when the players are rolling huge piles of Fallout.

That mechanical feedback is a teaching tool.  It helps people cut through missed social cues and courtesy and trust and false enthusiasm and all the similar BS that can prevent them from realizing when they're boring another player.

[Sydney Freedberg]

In Capes I know it when I get Story Tokens.  In DitV I know it when the players are rolling huge piles of Fallout.That mechanical feedback is a teaching tool....

Aha. I think Tony's nailed a crucial point. (Sydney-Tony mutual feedback loop - GO!)  Mechanics are good, and explicit System (as opposed to implicit system where "yeah, we always do it this way") is good, because they provide clarity of focus upfront and reinforce it with feedback after.

So turning back to one of the questions Tony asked about "test to extremity" as a GM-task: Tony phrased the question in terms of having power to do the job in the first place. Maybe every bit as important is having feedback to do the job well.

[Brendan]

A thought:  the term "GM" has some pretty heavy connotations already.  And we've pointed out repeatedly that "GM-tasks" is a bad term.

There's already a good term for someone who creates adversity for a protagonist.  Rather than saying "there can be as many GMs as players"--a great idea, but slippery in definition--why not say "any player can be an antagonist?"  Or, if you're helping to expand the character in a non-directly-oppositional manner, "any player can be a catalyst?"

[TonyLB]

I've been battering my brains out on the question of "What is the right term" since about ten seconds after you posted it.  It's a really useful question, and appeals intrinsically to the word-smith in me.

I'm not thrilled with the following, but it's the best I've yet wrung from english:

Coaching tasks:  A set of vital tasks in the game.  For each character, some person or persons must:[list=1][*]Understand the character's drives, issues and limitations.[*]Deduce a specific challenge of Theme (for Narr) or adversity (for Gam) that the character can uniquely answer/rise-to in-play.[*]Present that challenge in the SIS.[/list:o]Coach:  The participant who is, at the moment, performing coaching tasks for a given character.

GM-gated Coaching:  A specific, common, division of Coaching tasks whereby players undertake tasks 1 and 2 for other players's characters, then present that information formally or informally to the GM, who then undertakes task 3.

Direct Coaching:  A division of Coaching tasks whereby the successful undertaking of task 2 reliably gives the same player power/authority to undertake task 3.

Coaching Dysfunction:  Any situation whereby coaching tasks are not appropriately performed for some character in the game.  This includes, but is not limited to:

[*]Games where nobody undertakes coaching tasks[*]Games where players undertake coaching tasks for their own characters[*]Games where players attempt task 3 without anyone having completed task 2.[*]Games where players attempt task 2 without anyone having completed task 1.[*]Games where players, having completed task 2 cannot cause an attempt at task 3.[/list:u]