coxcomb wrote Thu Feb 05, 2004 7:43 pm:
> Context (the way that I have defined it) has to do with character. It is something that
> helps you play the character you have chosen. But what I didn't realize until now is
> that context comes in a variety of flavors, each of which acts a bridge for the player
> between character and one of the other elements of exploration.
>
> To expand on that:

System Context: Relates the character to the system for the player. Stats act as system context in every game I have ever played. If Joe is playing D&D, chooses a fighter, and rolls his attributes, he has system context. That is, he has a good idea what kinds of actions at which he is likely to succeed and what kinds of actions are best not attempted. You need system context to relate to the story being told because your character can do all sorts of things that you, the player, cannot.

Setting Context: Connects the character to the fictional place where he exists. Where System Context relates to the probability of success for game actions, Setting Context has to do with the way those actions affect the setting. If Joe decides that his D&D fighter is a member of a mercenary company established in the campaign setting, he has some setting context.

Situation Context: Informs the player as to the character's personality. That is, outside of the context of setting and ability, how the character would logically respond to a given situation or plot point. If Mary is playing Champions and chooses the Psychological Disadvantage: Claustrophobia, she has some situation context.

Color Context: Provides detail that makes the character more "real" to the player. If Mary's Champions character has an energy blast that she has described as "shimmering blue lightning", she has some color context. When she uses that power in the game she (and everyone else) has some extra detail to aid visualization.

How do you treat Character, Setting, Situation, System and Color in Narrativist game design vs. Simulationist vs. Gamist, is that what you're asking?

After setup, what a game's rules do is control how you resolve one situation into the next. If you're designing a Narrativist game, what you need are rules that create a) rising conflict b) across a moral line c) between fit characters d) according to the authorship of the players. Every new situation should be a step upward in that conflict, toward a climax and resolution. Your rules need to provoke the players, collaboratively, into escalating the conflict, until it can't escalate no more.

Character creation in a Narrativist game might work by creating characters who, in some key way, have nowhere else to go. Life o' Crime, the rpg: create a character who owes somebody more money than he can repay.

Setting in a Narrativist game might work by applying pressure to that key point in the characters. Life o' Crime: there's recession, few jobs, no way up or out, but worse class difference than ever before anywhere. You see wealth but no opportunity.

Situation in a Narrativist game works by increasing the pressure. Life o' Crime: Someone depends on your character to bring home groceries and pay rent. Someone else has just been evicted and is facing homelessness. Someone else asks you if you know where to get drugs. Someone else just got beaten by the authorities. Someone else just got beaten by the guy you owe money to. Someone else offers to cut you in on a job. Someone else wants the whole take for himself. Someone else knew you'd never amount to anything. Someone else can't be trusted. Someone else can be.

System in a Narrativist game works, again, by resolving one situation into the next. Life o' Crime: what do you do? How does it work out for you? Does it a) hurt? b) give you breathing room? c) piss someone else off? d) hurt someone else? and/or e) set you back? How does it increase the pressure? Remember the moral line defined by your Premise, and remember that the players are the authors!

And Color permeates a Narrativist game same as any other. Life o' Crime: is it Thatcher's England? Victoria's England? Shakespeare's England? Bush's US? Hoover's US? Colonial Massachussetts? Mars? The Kingdom of Thringbora? The details change, but the core of character situated in setting - the fit characters locked into conflict defined by a moral line - doesn't.

I've had fun writing this! I hope it's at all an answer to your question, and I should probably make clear that it's just how I think about it, and other people no doubt think about it in whole different ways.

I imagine you could break down Simulationist and Gamist games in a similar way.

-Vincent

I'd love to respond more, but it pretty much answers my questions!

^_^

Doctor Xero

I have to say, I think it's a very nice essay, as well.

- James

Excellent! Happy dance, everyone, and let's close this thread, pending anyone who really needs to weigh in with major objections.

Lotta threads going on these days; I'm trying to keep them nice and tidy.

Best,
Ron