*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 05, 2014, 10:20:56 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4283 Members Latest Member: - otto Most online today: 56 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Author Topic: [Primetime Adventures] The Heel, episode 3  (Read 2882 times)
lumpley
Administrator
Member
*
Posts: 3453


WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2005, 08:41:01 AM »

My group sometimes does and sometimes doesn't. I made a little animated diagram of it!

http://www.lumpley.com/images/syspta.gif

When we don't play by the rules as written, we tend to badly and unhappily pre-play the scene.

-Vincent
Logged
Eero Tuovinen
Acts of Evil Playtesters
Member

Posts: 2591


WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 15, 2005, 08:42:52 AM »

Quote from: Ron Edwards

Does anyone play PTA strictly following the textual rules for scene creation?


I do. We've now played, what, three sessions (including the pilot) of that Jesus+disciples thing, and we go pretty much by the book in scene framing. It's a neat structure for the job, even if it's not strictly necessary for a functional group. It's the same with many other rules in games, actually; while some rules are required functionally, some others are there for psychological and aesthetic reason. This is one of those: I like the scene framing structure mainly because it's a change of pace from a more freeform scene framing.

I guess that the reason for our sticking by the book is that the group is overall more reticient than overbearing, so they're benefited much by having these simple, solid rules. Most players have no trouble answering simple questions like who's there or whether the scene should be about the plot, but they find it almost impossible to take a high perspective and describe the scene themselves from start to finish. GMing issues and hang-ups about creativity, mostly.
Logged

Blogging at Game Design is about Structure.
Publishing Zombie Cinema and Solar System at Arkenstone Publishing.
Alan
Member

Posts: 1012


WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 15, 2005, 09:39:25 AM »

I've only played in playtests last year, with Matt as a player, but we did focus pretty much on the rules as you lay them out Ron.  As Producer, I found the distinctions useful for preventing the turn player from just describing the key parts of the conflict, and so blowing the whole purpose of playing a scene.

Also, our players didn't grab opportunities to drive their agendas as much as I would have liked.   That might be lack of familiarity with the PTA approach, or a lack of interest in the narrativist agenda.  I'm always surprised when people don't grab the powers given to them by rules like PTA and protagonize their character (or the spotlight character).  When I (rarely) get to play instead of GM such a game, I enthusiastically drive with those kind of mechanics.
Logged

- Alan

A Writer's Blog: http://www.alanbarclay.com
Ben Lehman
Member

Posts: 2094

Blissed


WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2005, 07:10:07 AM »

For instance, Ben and Matt, I cannot tell from your posts whether you do this. Do you?

Best,
Ron

I do, with the addition of some kibbitzing from the other players.

yrs--
--Ben
Logged

Matt Wilson
Acts of Evil Playtesters
Member

Posts: 1121

student, second edition


WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 20, 2005, 06:39:50 AM »

Quote
I do, with the addition of some kibbitzing from the other players.

I consider kibbitzing to be a natural part of play (as opposed to 'be quiet, Carl's talking!'), so I would consider what you describe as "playing as written."

And yes, I play it as written. Wouldn't that be kinda dumb if I didn't?
Logged

Pages: 1 [2]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!