Partcipationism as a defined mechanic?

[Drew Stevens]

Just a thought, inspired by Riddle of Steel. :)

What would be the results of a mechanic which defines a Theme (or set of Themes) for both a story arc and individual sessions thereof, which provides a bonus similiar to the way the Spirtual Attributes of Riddle of Steel do?  Would this be a simple example of Participationism on the player's behalf?  What if they define the Themes used, either for the story arc or individual stories?

Themes would be brief, two to four word descriptions of a thematic motiff which, when illustrated through a player's actions in some clear fashion, garners said bonus.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Drew,

I know this can fly in a Narrativist context quite easily. Humanity is an excellent example in Sorcerer, although it doesn't operate in the bonus method that you describe. However, in the games of Universalis I've played, terms of this sort have been included into the "setting stuff" list, such that conflicts which invoke the terms gain dice based on the terms' Importance. That seems to me to be exactly what you're describing.

As I understand it, Participationism applies to the actual decisions made by players relative to an intended outcome of the GM's. The idea is that the players see "what the GM is up to," but appreciate its quality and raise no objections. We used to call this "shut up and get in the death-trap" back in the Champions days, with the strong implication that it was both fun and necessary - the phrase was applied from player to player, not from GM to player.

Best,
Ron

[Marco]

As I understood it, participationism (and it was coined for me ... at me) is about the players having no choices at all due to the situation. The black-room with one door was used as an example.

I hope the definition has changed to the one Ron's using--it's far better--but, again, it's another made-up word that changes like a chameleon wherever it's used.

-Marco (get that glossary project going again, Ron!)

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Marco,

I was under the impression that the thread Illusionism: a new definition and new approach had settled the terminology for both illusionism and participationism.

I've been using them in that strict sense, as cleared (as far as I know) by both you and Mike, so I don't think the "chameleon" comment applies at all.

Best,
Ron

[Marco]

Sounds right. I think I recall it now. How about protagonization (and we still need an expanded glossary).

-Marco