Director Stance: Fun, but is there a Challenge?

[Walt Freitag]

Now, I'm pretty certain that those say pretty much the same thing.

Almost. I had a sort of figure-ground distinction in mind. I find it easier to sum up director stance decisions and actions by what they're not (representations of character decisions) than by the long and varied list of what they can be.

Anyway, the original topic...

As a conceptual illustration of challenge in director stance, let me describe a game a friend and I spontaneously invented (while waiting in a line somwehere, I think) years ago. I still play it occasionally.

The game is a dialog between two characters, originally intended to represent the climactic confrontational scene in a spy movie, though in play it can go in many other directions than that. By tradition, the first line of the dialog is, "The files, Mr. Bond." (Or substitute the player's own name, or a name you prefer to associate with the game).

The objective is creative one-upmanship by establishing the facts of the situation in your character's favor. This is done entirely through manipulating the background, setting, and current situation, never by present-tense action. The issues of contention can involve "The Files" (whatever they turn out to be) or they can drift elsewhere. Nothing is established initiially about the setting, characters, their relationship, or past history, except that the two characters are talking.

The rules, such as they are, are:

-- Dialog cannot contradict facts already established by previous dialog.

-- Exception: vague unsupported statements about the other's situation, like "you lose" or "there is no escape" or "you have failed" are subject to revision by more specific information to the contrary.

-- Reasonable loopholes are encouraged. If it's established that there's an airlock, you're not necessarily on a spacecraft. It could be a submarine. Or an airlock manufacturer's showroom.

-- Absolutely no present action whatsoever is narrated. I can reveal that I'm holding a gun on you (which must have been true since the start of the scene), if it's not inconsistent with established facts (such as, I'm tied up). I cannot draw a gun, or shoot you with the gun. I can threaten to shoot you, but I can't carry out the threat. I can, if circumstances permit, reveal that you were shot before the scene started and you're now bleeding to death, but you cannot actually bleed to death during the scene.

-- It's considered bad form to try to establish too much in one line of dialog. The sentence structure should never become forced, and the line should never turn into a soliloquy.

-- You get bonus points for working in the line, "I am your father," if your opponent wasn't expecting it. ("You're madly in love with me" is also good.)

-- Playing in real time is difficult. Allow pauses, at least in your first few tries.

So, how do you come out on top, when the characters never move? By changing which way is up. A quick example:

The Files, Mr. Bond.

You're too late. By now they're safely in the hands of my superiors.

Rather foolish of you, considering that your superiors have been working for me all along.

Well, in that case you already know the data in the files is worthless. It was all a ruse to trick you into coming here.

Interesting. Just out of curiosity, what would have happened if I had gone there, instead of using this video link?

The same thing that's happening now. Your transmission has already been traced. If I give the order, in ten seconds you're incinerated.

Too bad you can't give that order, since you don't know where I've hidden the doomsday mine.

... And so forth. This brief example sticks to the conventional, but real games can go in very interesting directions.

It's all director stance, even though it's conveyed through dialog.

- Walt

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Walt,

Yes, you're describing Director stance, but I really really want to emphasize to people that again, it's one possible application of the concept, not a defining example.

What you're describing is improvisation, which pretty much requires a certain amount of Director stance as new "things" are being constantly invented into the setting, both in the past and in the present. However! One can very well be using Director stance in far more traditional, non-winging-it play.

Best,
Ron

[Blake Hutchins]

Ron's correct, of course, in pointing out that my use of the bottle example omits discussion of the accompanying social contract.  Sorry if I confused the issue.

Two quick comments:  First, I always establish with my group prior to starting play that this sort of player-derived stage/scene setting is A-OK, hence the example of my particular experience.

Second, it's clear my group's use of Director Stance isn't the most expansive.  We suggest new scenes or insert minor props as desired, but "bigger" plot-related elements like "the horses are waiting outside, saddled up and ready to ride" aren't part of our repetoire.  I have no objection to that sort of power delegation, just haven't tried it yet.

Damn, I'm enjoying this thread.

Best,


Blake