Scene Framing

[Ian Charvill]

Something Jason wrote struck a chord with me, so I'm just going to try emphasising it and seeing if I'm getting him right.

Allowing players time to talk among themselves provides you as the GM with a lot of cues for what they want to happen next - i.e. it's very useful for a GMing style where you're responding to the players desires for the game.  Discussions about 'where do we go next' or 'what does this all mean' are hugely useful for providing those cues.

Jason - is that what you were asking: where do these types of conversations go with aggressive scene framing?

[Alan]

There's a writer's book called Scene and Structure (I can't remember the author or the Forge person who originally suggested it) that uses the model of Scene and Sequel.  

A Scene is where actions happen.  A Sequl follows a scene and is the time when the character ruminates about events and comes to a new decision which leads to the next scene.

In the game I'm writing, I include a formal Sequel period where players can discuss, get clarifications, and make decisions.  I think it fits well.

[Malechi]

Ian,

You're right, absolutely right... I have been lucky enough to have a group where their interactions sometimes put the wise-cracking, character driven dialogue of contemporary cinema to shame.   They provide me with so much more than my own ideas and I usually abandon plans for storyline, detail and setting information because their assumptions, guesses and cues are a lot more interesting.  Also, after you've developed a single world since 1996 pretty much continuously, sometimes players pickup on inconsistencies much more easily than you, as a GM can.  These become patches, fixes or clean-slate changes to my world.  Without the knowledge that they've been involved in an overt Narrative game, I guess our group has been playing this way for a while.  The players get a much greater degree of satisfaction when they discover that their "hunch" about something was dead on the spot, even without realising that they've been driving the Narrative all along.  I'm not sure how this fits into the GNS theory, but I like it.  Its not really Illusionism because I haven't placed them on an invisible railroad that leads to MY planned end-point...They've kind of bumped the train-driver and derailed the train, if I can stretch the analogy a little too far ;)

This kind of inter-character conjecturing is something I'd hate to lose and I'm worried that if I try and fit in a more aggressive Scene Framing technique (it should be noted that I really like the idea of Scene Framing and really think it would add to the game), I might lose some of this.  As Bankuei said, I could interject these exposition/conjecture scenes between the Bangs or aggressive Scene Framed elements.  Also, if anything, perhaps these techniques will give me a more clear-cut transition and allow a more dynamic player-controlled, if not overtly Directorial Stance (i think thats the right term - please don't shoot ;) ) game.  

Anyway, have people noticed a loss in this sort of game element when they aggressively Scene Frame?  Are these sort of character exploration/development segments a more Sim related thing?  Obviously its a pacing-related issue, interjecting more slowly paced character jibber-jabber between exciting Bangs etc, but do others find the swap jarring?

cheers

Jase :)

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Jase,

have people noticed a loss in this sort of game element when they aggressively Scene Frame? Are these sort of character exploration/development segments a more Sim related thing? Obviously its a pacing-related issue, interjecting more slowly paced character jibber-jabber between exciting Bangs etc, but do others find the swap jarring?

The general trend I've seen here at the Forge is for people to express exactly this fear before trying these techniques, then coming back a week or two later raving about how much better their sessions have become.

I'm willing to believe that, instead, some people's worst fears are realized, but no one has reported anything like that yet.

Best,
Ron

[Mike Holmes]

It's funny, but in all my years of Illusionist play, when I asked "What do you do?" basically I was asking a less jarring version of the question, "What scene do you want to have before we get to the next plot scene?" This was to allow for the feel of openendedness.

The problem, of course, is twofold. One, players using the "what would my character do" logic, often don't have a scene in mind, and so respond, "Uh, I get some food." They aren't moving to a Conflict, so much as just doing something everyday. Which is usually not exciting enough to make for fun play. The other problem is that, I had to then inject the information into these scenes, to get to "my" scenes, so players got the feeling that they weren't in control, anyhow. No matter what they did, it wouldn't lead to anything but my scenes anyhow.

So, whatever mode you're promoting, if you want players to have an input into what a scene will ential, make sure that they know that it's some sort of conflict that you're asking for, or other sort of protagonization, and that they'll be allowed to complete the scene in principle. Once they know that, they become very enthusiastic and proactive.

Mike

[Ian Charvill]

Jase

Remember that you can use aggressive scene framing and allow as much time for discussion without any formal "you're in the motel room" framing device for the discussion.

When discussions are going on I chair them, for want of a better word.  I try to ensure they keep moving forward, that group decisions get made that everyone's happy with and that no one's sitting around getting bored.  When I think the discussion's done I'll ask if everyone's happy moving to a scene.  If we come to the end of a scene and I don't think there's any desire at the table to talk about stuff I just get permission for the next scene.

As to the aggressiveness of the scene framing compare these: assume I've asked if everyone's happy moving to the scene with the prince, and everyone is.

"OK, you take the boat across the river and talk to the guard, he says..."

&

"The prince is sitting brooding in his chambers when you arrive, a bottle..."

Notice that the aggresiveness of the scene framing is not related to how much inter-scene gabbing has gone on.

Also note that I tend not to use the word scene at a gaming table.  The word is OK as a metaphor but let's not pretend scenes are going on at the table, any more that there are chapters of a role playing session.  I'll ask "what do people want to do?" and I'll use what they say to determine scenes.  It's actually this question that tends to spark the useful discussions.  When it seems like the groups headed for a scene I'll ask something like "Is there anything people want to do before going to see the prince"  And then I'll cut to the scene with the prince.

Aggresive scene framing is a technique independent of the amount of talk time a group has, is my main point.

[Thor Olavsrud]

There's a writer's book called Scene and Structure (I can't remember the author or the Forge person who originally suggested it) that uses the model of Scene and Sequel.  

A Scene is where actions happen.  A Sequl follows a scene and is the time when the character ruminates about events and comes to a new decision which leads to the next scene.

In the game I'm writing, I include a formal Sequel period where players can discuss, get clarifications, and make decisions.  I think it fits well.

That was me. Glad to hear you're getting some mileage out of it. I think Scene and Structure (by Jack Bickham) is a great book, and it can really help you get ideas about how to think about scenes.

Much of the gaming advice you can derive from it comes down to this:

Each scene exists to answer a question, so the only scenes you need to include are those that ask questions. And these questions must move the story forward.

So if Batman goes down to the docks for information, cut to a scene where that information is at stake. The question is: does Batman get the information? Bickham suggests there are only three appropriate answers to this question that will move a story forward: No... (an answer which in my opinion should be used sparingly because while it narrows the character's options it doesn't do much more than that), No, and furthermore... (an answer which denies the character what he needs and also adds a further complication. i.e. Batman gets captures and is put in a death trap), or Yes, but... (which gives the character what he needs, but also raises the stakes. So Batman learns the information about the villain's plot, but also learns that the villain has planted a bomb timed to go off during tonight's gala event!).

Once you have this, you know that once the character or characters in the scene have gotten one of these answers (and you should let the player's actions determine that answer), the scene is over. Cut to the next scene.