"Story," Actor stance, and My Guy-ism

[Ron Edwards]

Hey Mike S,

I get it! I really, really think we came to an accord on this one. Damn, we're good.

That last paragraph speaks volumes. It may lead to some re-phrasing in the essay.

Best,
Ron

[Mike Holmes]

Sullivan,

Illusionism is a GM thing, IIRC. It means essentially working to give the semblance of free-will to the players regarding their decisions as to their charater actions, while still getting the story to go to a predestined conclusion (the characters defeat the bad guy, for example). You might think of it as sneaky railroading.

From what you described, it sounds more like you try to create a story from whatever actions the players do decide for their players. This would not be illusionism. I personally try to ride the line between occasionally letting the characters run around free and directing them towards a plot element. Do you ever orchestrate things, or do you just have new stuff occur that looks like a story wherever the players go?

The latter would be closer to Ron's Impossible Thing if I understand it correctly.

Holmes

[ This Message was edited by: Mike Holmes on 2001-10-18 15:02 ]

[Epoch]

Holmes...

(Side note:  Did you ever get into calling people by their last name in real life?  For a significant portion of college, my friends often called me "Sully," 'cause there were multiple Mikes among us)

I may be mis-aligning names with values.  Isn't Illusionism where the players pick up subconscious cues from the GM or other players, and go along with the railroading?

In that case, it's both a player and a GM behaviour.  I'd distinguish it from a GM who's railroading but consciously hiding the railroading from the players, since the latter doesn't require players who are on the same wavelength -- in fact, it requires just the opposite to be succesful.

[Epoch]

Ron -

Sounds good to me.

[Mike Holmes]

On 2001-10-18 16:06, Epoch wrote:
(Side note:  Did you ever get into calling people by their last name in real life?  For a significant portion of college, my friends often called me "Sully," 'cause there were multiple Mikes among us)

Wisconsin Army National Guard for fifteen years. So that'd be Sergeant Holmes in that case. :smile:

We once had four Mike's. They were Atlanta, LaCrosse, Computer, and Homey.

I may be mis-aligning names with values.  Isn't Illusionism where the players pick up subconscious cues from the GM or other players, and go along with the railroading?

Not as I remember the original discussion. I can't remember who originated the term (Landis maybe?), but the idea was that this was a GM tactic. This may have changed since then. I don't know that it was ever formalized. Is it in the FAQ?

Moot point. There are two behaviors here. Do you railroad sneakily, or do you let pleyers do whatever they want and try to make a story of it? Or both alternately as I do?

...I'd distinguish it from a GM who's railroading but consciously hiding the railroading from the players, since the latter doesn't require players who are on the same wavelength -- in fact, it requires just the opposite to be succesful.

Well, I wouldn't say requires. And I fully admit that players playing in an Illusionist game may be aware of the fact and simply not letting on that they are aware. My players are generally aware that I use Illusion to move the game on, but since I only use it intermittently, they are often unaware of when it is Illusionism, and when it is not. Therefore they are able to suspend disbelief more easily because any particular moment could be of their own design...

Mike