Topic: Story roles
Started by: Ville Takanen
Started on: 6/18/2004
Board: RPG Theory
On 6/18/2004 at 9:40am, Ville Takanen wrote:
Story roles
Story roles
I have been using a mechanic I generally call "roles" in my bi-monthly
(tabletop) fantasy role playing game. The idea behind the mechanic is
that every character has pre-defined role in the ideal story of the game.
The frpg uses my own rules mechanic that could be described dramist-gamist
(a bit like narrativist-gamist) in the words of "As LARP Grows Up". The
game is centered on the story that players and I share, and these roles
are general roles of characters in that story. In the gameworld all stories
are seen as meta-entities, having subconcious controll over all men.
Having that in mind, character developement (ie. experience) has been tied
to the characters acting in accordance of the predefined role, in our story.
(Of course characters may also learn things by... learning, in addition, to
more freely used role based "experience").
Some experiences I've had from the system:
- The idea of limiting character to have single pretty well defined role
is not as limiting as it seems.
- The idea of pre-defining the story role for a character is pretty
hard to grasp.
- Using roles, that players know for their characters has really made
us play in more narrative way.
- To make the mechanic usable, there should be good example roles, and ways
to define meaningfull roles for characters.
- The feelign that player owns character, gm owns plot has dimnished, thus
leading us to co-ownership of the story.
My point for posting this, is to ask - are there any games using mechanic
like this, or does anyone have any experiences on similar mechanics?
Scriptum Post
This whole idea of story roles was started as a kind of a white-wolf
heartbreaker thing. As a replacement for the nature/demeanor/consept
thinking. Now it has a life of its own, pretty independend from its roots.
On 6/18/2004 at 11:11am, Eero Tuovinen wrote:
Re: Story roles
Ville Takanen wrote:
I have been using a mechanic I generally call "roles" in my bi-monthly
(tabletop) fantasy role playing game. The idea behind the mechanic is
that every character has pre-defined role in the ideal story of the game.
I designed a similar idea some time ago, based on opera buffo tradition. The roles in those plays were very stratified, so it's a natural backdrop - the players play actors who tour Italy and play again and again essentially the same characters. Although the stories change, old Jakob always plays the jealous old father/husband. That kind of thing. Never got it to playtest, though (my common problem).
I seem to remember that Unknown Armies has a similar idea in the highest level of campaign - players take on an archetype and try to gain a place in the pantheon of human archetypes, something like that. Get powers for acting towards the expectations.
There's a couple of unfinished designs around here that come close to articulating this idea. I'm thinking of one right now, but can't for the death of me remember what it was. Anyway, even the last IGC included a couple of games where the roles of the players were predefined (Polaris maybe the best example, but even my Battle of Frozen Waste did it.
Then there are the spiritual relatives of the idea, all the games that take the players out of their roles and give them a degree of detachment. There's the superhero game Bullpen, which to my understanding is rather about the act of making a superhero magazine instead of being a superhero, for example. Humble Mythologies (where is it, by the way?) is the nuclear exercise, with the roles being freely defined by the players in a tarot-like way. A couple of others which I'm too lazy to think about right now.
So the idea is definitely in the air, so to speak, but I cannot say that anyone would have written the definitive game yet. I'd assume that such a design would include this as only one feature, blending other particulars of metagame into the experience at the same time. Like my opera buffo game, where the definition of roles is given a in-game rationalization.
As the above intimates, I'm thinking that defining a character role beforehand belongs into the big family of "metagame mechanics", which all handle the game as cooperative storytelling instead of immersive exercise. The common point of all these mechanics is that they tend to lose the sense of being there and exhange it for stronger possibilities of crafting the story. Games that do this cooperative storytelling (and the roles too, in a way) have been popping up and laying groundwork in the last years. I give two examples: My Life with Master and Universalis are both games where the players are more of storytellers than immersing. MLwM predefines the player roles in a way - you can play the "loyal despite the horror" minion or "good heart but doomed to horror" minion, but that's it. Universalis does not define anything beforehand, but the players are given all tools for doing so: just take a character and slam in a trait of "third fanboy from the left", and there we go.
On 6/18/2004 at 11:15am, Jonathan Walton wrote:
RE: Re: Story roles
Eero Tuovinen wrote: There's a couple of unfinished designs around here that come close to articulating this idea. I'm thinking of one right now, but can't for the death of me remember what it was.
Are you thinking of "Humble Mythologies"? You helped me nail many of the mechanics for that, though I haven't done much work on it since.
Opera buffo is a great place to draw roles from, by the way.
On 6/18/2004 at 11:56am, Ville Takanen wrote:
RE: Re: Story roles
Hi - and thank you for your answer.
Eero Tuovinen wrote: I designed a similar idea some time ago, based on opera buffo tradition.
Humm, I have to find out more about the "Opera buffo" tradition. Any sources?
And I'll try to check out some the games you mentioned
(Unknown Armies, Polaris, Battle of Frozen Waste, Humble Mythologies... MLwM, Univwersalis)
Eero Tuovinen wrote: So the idea is definitely in the air, so to speak, but I cannot say that anyone would have written the definitive game yet. I'd assume that such a design would include this as only one feature, blending other particulars of metagame into the experience at the same time. Like my opera buffo game, where the definition of roles is given a in-game rationalization.
If you want to check my finnish (heartbreaker?) material for the campaign I am GM'ing, feel free
to visit it's site . The idea of using roles is incorporated heavily to the game-engine itself, to see how such an idea works. I do not think, I use any other meta-game techniques atleast yet but I would like to know more about the possibilities such mechanics present.
Eero Tuovinen wrote: As the above intimates, I'm thinking that defining a character role beforehand belongs into the big family of "metagame mechanics", which all handle the game as cooperative storytelling instead of immersive exercise. The common point of all these mechanics is that they tend to lose the sense of being there and exhange it for stronger possibilities of crafting the story.
Hmm... Yes, I agree. I'm drifting more and more away from the immersion is cool school, and the "story role" thinking is a by-product of the phenomenom.
On 6/18/2004 at 11:58am, Ville Takanen wrote:
RE: Re: Story roles
Jonathan Walton wrote: Are you thinking of "Humble Mythologies"? You helped me nail many of the mechanics for that, though I haven't done much work on it since.
Is it possible to get more information about your "Humble Mythologies"?
On 6/18/2004 at 12:51pm, Eero Tuovinen wrote:
RE: Re: Story roles
Ville Takanen wrote:
Humm, I have to find out more about the "Opera buffo" tradition. Any sources?
A good book on history of theatre is the best bet, obviously. For a quick fix, check out http://www.commedia-dell-arte.com/ for a short precis on the post-renaissance Italian theatre. I just now found out that although commedia dell'Arte is also called opera buffo in Finnish, making it an umbrella term for all theatre of the period, the word is used exclusively for the related opera style in english. Well, live and learn. Obviously the people's opera of the time (which is what in English is solely referred to as opera buffo) is just as instructive as far as stock characters go. I just wonder what strangenesses I've visited on people here and elsewhere by mixing up the words.
And I'll try to check out some the games you mentioned
(Unknown Armies, Polaris, Battle of Frozen Waste, Humble Mythologies... MLwM, Universalis)
If you're interested in seeing new designs that skirt these issues, there's probably more than the above. Anyway, here's a list of where they can be found:
Unknown Armies is in Fantasiapelit, rough versions of Polaris and the Battle are to be found in the IGC directory courtesy of Walt Freitag, Humble Mythologies is here.
MLwM, Universalis and other great games can be bought from your's truly in Ropecon. We'll also have most of the other classic "Forge games", so be sure to visit my table in Kaubamaja ;)
If you want to check my finnish (heartbreaker?) material for the campaign I am GM'ing, feel free
to visit it's site . The idea of using roles is incorporated heavily to the game-engine itself, to see how such an idea works. I do not think, I use any other meta-game techniques atleast yet but I would like to know more about the possibilities such mechanics present.
The guy has rules where the players can take the "narrative control" (his words) by spending a hero point, and he says there's no meta-story rules in there ;) I also like the karma and waste attributes.
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 10885
Topic 9535
On 6/18/2004 at 3:15pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Story roles
Hi Ville,
I think you're working with a very important and powerful issue. Here's an older thread which I think you're going to enjoy reading: The class issue.
Best,
Ron
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 2802
On 6/18/2004 at 7:13pm, neelk wrote:
RE: Re: Story roles
Ville Takanen wrote:
I have been using a mechanic I generally call "roles" in my bi-monthly
(tabletop) fantasy role playing game. The idea behind the mechanic is
that every character has pre-defined role in the ideal story of the game.
My point for posting this, is to ask - are there any games using mechanic
like this, or does anyone have any experiences on similar mechanics?
Greg Porter's EABA game has an optional mechanic in which each of the players can assign their PC one of the stock roles of heroic adventure fiction, like the Wise Mentor, the Chosen One, the Dirty Hero, and so on. Each role is an advantage in the point-buy system, with the proviso that a player can only buy it if the other players buy the other roles, and it gives the characters bonuses when they are fulfilling their role. This is very neat, but I think it's only half of what a proper mechanic for this sort of thing needs -- you need mechanics to direct the GM to apply the right sort of pressure on each type.
Let me elaborate what I mean by "pressure". In literary theory, you get a story when you have a protagonist, an antagonist, a conflict between them, and a crucible. The first three terms are familiar, and the last is less so. The basic idea behind a crucible is that conflict is a repulsive force -- when people come into conflict, they tend to pull away from each other. This means that a story must have an attractive force that pushes the protagonist and the antagonist back into contact, so that they must take action to resolve their conflict. In an rpg, if the GM doesn't apply pressure on the PCs, then it's been my experience that the players will have a great deal of difficulty maneuvering their characters into conflict-resolving situations.
Obviously, each type of character has a different kind of conflict, and needs a different kind of pressure to remain in the crucible. So part of a character role mechanic needs to be a discussion of the sort of pressure that each role should come under.
On 6/19/2004 at 4:37am, M. J. Young wrote:
RE: Story roles
What your saying is reminiscent, at least, of Legends of Alyria; you can find the forum for it in the Independent Game forums on this site.
In Alyria, the group starts with a cooperative Story Map Creation phase, in which as a group they decide what the main conflict of the story will be and who the principle characters are. They then flesh out those characters, and assign each to one of the players. Thus by the time you have a character, you already know who that character is and how he relates to the other characters and the central conflict of the story that is about to be produced.
Names tend to be chosen more as mnemonics than anything else. Thus in our game, our villain was Lucifer, the saintly woman who went around helping poor people was Theresa, the brutish thug who worked for the villain was Bruce, and the young girl who would try to bring light to the situation was Lumina. Characters are very much defined by their roles.
However, the "roles" do not appear on the character papers, and the way the story plays out is usually full of surprises.
--M. J. Young
On 6/20/2004 at 5:28pm, Ville Takanen wrote:
RE: Re: Story roles
Eero Tuovinen wrote: I just now found out that although commedia dell'Arte is also called opera buffo in Finnish, making it an umbrella term for all theatre of the period, the word is used exclusively for the related opera style in english.
I'll be checking if public libraries have some ...
And thank you for the links. I'll try to save some money for your table at the 'Con.
Eero Tuovinen wrote: The guy has rules where the players can take the "narrative control" (his words) by spending a hero point, and he says there's no meta-story rules in there ;) I also like the karma and waste attributes.
Uh, I totally forgot ;-) I just do not see spending "satu" point an meta-game thingie, as all contested rolls lead to possible change of control. The whole thing starts to get too complicated... I have to work more on it to see how it works.
I personally like the "karma and taint/waste" system myself, so my humble thanks for your kind words about it.
And thanks to Ron Edwards, for pointing me to other threads. I think I'll be checking them out in next couple of days.
neelk wrote: Greg Porter's EABA game has an optional mechanic in which each of the players can assign their PC one of the stock roles of heroic adventure fiction, like the Wise Mentor, the Chosen One, the Dirty Hero, and so on. Each role is an advantage in the point-buy system, with the proviso that a player can only buy it if the other players buy the other roles, and it gives the characters bonuses when they are fulfilling their role. This is very neat, but I think it's only half of what a proper mechanic for this sort of thing needs -- you need mechanics to direct the GM to apply the right sort of pressure on each type.
That is something I definately need to know more of, as it sounds just like the thing I'm working with.
On 6/21/2004 at 9:35am, Ville Takanen wrote:
RE: Story roles
M. J. Young wrote: What your saying is reminiscent, at least, of Legends of Alyria; you can find the forum for it in the Independent Game forums on this site.
Thanks. I just red through quite a lot of alyria material. Alyria seems to give a lot more power to the players than my system, which leads to different games imho.
The game's story map creation idea is pretty interesting though. I think I'm too traditional gamer for it. (atleast for now). As per now, the coherence of the "story" is responsibility of the GM and PC's are protagonists. This is kind of easy, when doing heroic-frpg.
M. J. Young wrote: Names tend to be chosen more as mnemonics than anything else. Thus in our game, our villain was Lucifer, the saintly woman who went around helping poor people was Theresa, the brutish thug who worked for the villain was Bruce, and the young girl who would try to bring light to the situation was Lumina. Characters are very much defined by their roles.
Wow! I never tought about that. Choosing character names to present roles seem excellent idea, even if the names are pretty obvious.
M. J. Young wrote: However, the "roles" do not appear on the character papers, and the way the story plays out is usually full of surprises.
You got me really interested on the idea. It sounds really cool.
On 6/21/2004 at 9:43am, Ville Takanen wrote:
RE: Story roles
Ron Edwards wrote: I think you're working with a very important and powerful issue. Here's an older thread which I think you're going to enjoy reading: The class issue.
It seems my "story roles" are type 2 roles ie. "thematic roles", by glossary. Did you ever finnish the "Terms Fest Discussion"?
Forge Reference Links:
Topic 2802
On 6/21/2004 at 1:21pm, Ron Edwards wrote:
RE: Story roles
Hi Ville,
I agree with you - it struck me right away that you were talking about #2. Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on one's outlook, we never did end up with settled terms for the "role levels."
Best,
Ron
On 6/21/2004 at 2:25pm, neelk wrote:
RE: Re: Story roles
Ville Takanen wrote:neelk wrote: Greg Porter's EABA game has an optional mechanic in which each of the players can assign their PC one of the stock roles of heroic adventure fiction, like the Wise Mentor, the Chosen One, the Dirty Hero, and so on. Each role is an advantage in the point-buy system, with the proviso that a player can only buy it if the other players buy the other roles, and it gives the characters bonuses when they are fulfilling their role. This is very neat, but I think it's only half of what a proper mechanic for this sort of thing needs -- you need mechanics to direct the GM to apply the right sort of pressure on each type.
That is something I definately need to know more of, as it sounds just like the thing I'm working with.
There's not much more to it than that, actually. EABA is mostly in the spirit of GURPS or Hero (Greg Porter designed it), so this mechanic is just a regular advantage, and the bonuses you get are generally the obvious ones for the role. IMO, the critical insight in it is that roles don't exist in isolation -- characters exist as foils for one another, and the players need to select characters that contrast and play off one another in order to really highlight a role.
On 6/22/2004 at 8:26am, Ville Takanen wrote:
RE: Story roles
Hi Ron.
To mee, it seems rather unfortunate, that you did not finnish the terms, as I am using the thing, I would like to call it something else than role level 2 ;-)
The Provisional Glossary wrote: Roles, role levels
(1) The player's social role in terms of his character - the mom, the jokester, the organizer, the placator, etc.
(2) The character's thematic or operational role relative to the other characters - the leader, the brick, the betrayer, the ingenue, etc.
(3) The character's in-game occupation or social role - the pilot, the mercenary, the alien wanderer, etc.
(4) The character's specific Effectiveness values - armor rating, weapon attributes, specific skills and their values, available funds, etc. See The class issue.
Wording thematic seems to be broblematic to me as "thematic role" has another apparently widely used meaning ( wikipedia ). Other options by "the class issue" thread were "story role", "character relative" and "characters values in action". I cannot see that any of these would be good enough, as I understand now that there are problems on usage of the word "story".
Some options could be: character role on theme, character thematic role, character role, character class, character relative role (crr), etc... Maybe I choose "character thematic role" for my usage.
Eero: that would be "hahmon temaattinen rooli", right?
Urf, there should be a better (shorter, more clear) way of saying that. Character class, anyone?
On 6/22/2004 at 1:10pm, Eero Tuovinen wrote:
RE: Story roles
Ville Takanen wrote:
To me, it seems rather unfortunate, that you did not finnish the terms, as I am using the thing, I would like to call it something else than role level 2 ;-)
The common way to do this is to use the non-flavourful terminology in theoretic discussion, but to reinvent the terms in writing the game itself. So we can quite well call the roles by levels here, but when you write a game, you can call the second level role character's Soul or whatever. There's no need to keep a correspondense between theory and practice in terminology.
Eero: that would be "hahmon temaattinen rooli", right?
Yep, although I'd just call it "teema" or "sielu" or Meaning or something else simple and straightforward when using it in a game.