Topic: Inertia
Started by: List
Started on: 6/22/2004
Board: RPG Theory
On 6/22/2004 at 4:48am, List wrote:
Inertia
I've noticed that it frequently happens that, because games are based around action, PCs end up jumping to action fairly easily.
We picture starting a game with:
GM: "You come home and find that your parents have been killed! You quickly realize the deed was done by the wizard who just passed through your village."
Players: "Okay, we cry a lot. We have a funeral. Then we pack all our things and go looking for the wizard."
This is all right and proper for the beginning of an adventure. However, realistically for most people, it takes a lot to completely turn from the home they've lived in for years, maybe grown up in, and Go Out Into The World With Nothing But Backpacks, Swords, and Determination. The overcoming of that inertia is generally a crucial step that gets completely skipped over.
This also applies to things other than plot-launching events, obviously. PCs generally do things like quit jobs, spend savings, and irrevocably insult longtime acquantances, and the like quite easily.
Of course, plenty of the time you have a character who just Really Is Rash, or a situation in which he really might as well dump everything because his entire life and priorities have changed. But more frequently, it's just a hump we ignore for the sake of progress.
So, what is a good way to actually simulate inertia? Do we even want to simulate inertia? Roleplaying it is pretty straightforward-- should it ever be worked into system? It seems to be an obstacle that PCs get to defeat 'for free', but is there a way to let them fail to defeat it and still get the plot happening?
On 6/22/2004 at 5:18am, Andrew Martin wrote:
Re: Inertia
List wrote: This also applies to things other than plot-launching events, obviously. PCs generally do things like quit jobs, spend savings, and irrevocably insult longtime acquantances, and the like quite easily.
That's because most conventional RPGs, the players and their PCs have no consequences for making these kind of choices. In real life, we have the consequences applied to us.
List wrote: So, what is a good way to actually simulate inertia? Do we even want to simulate inertia? Roleplaying it is pretty straightforward-- should it ever be worked into system? It seems to be an obstacle that PCs get to defeat 'for free', but is there a way to let them fail to defeat it and still get the plot happening?
I think the best way would be simply to apply real life consequences to the characters and their players, and remove the conventional RPG rewards of the GM fudging for the players, the PCs encountering quantifiably evil opponents, murdering them, stealing their money, valuables, belongings and disposing of the rest through merchants who don't mind dealing with blood stained goods. So, quitting the job gives the consequence of no more income and lack of respect from others. Insulting family and acquaintances looses friends and creates enemies. Spending all the savings means facing starvation.
On 6/22/2004 at 5:43am, M. J. Young wrote:
RE: Inertia
Yeah, those would work.
I'm not sure that the idea of inertia is ignored so much as you suggest; in most of the games I've played, it is suitably addressed.
In Original Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, the starting point of the game was stated to be, "You have just finished an apprenticeship in an adventuring career, and are now stepping out on your own in search of adventure." That pretty much assumes that you're going to make your living doing this, so you'd better get started on the doing.
I recall in the several games of Star Frontiers I played, there was always a starting point that gave adult characters adult reasons for what they were doing. In one case, we were new hires in the security department of a major interstellar corporation, and most of our "adventures" started as assignments or investigations. In another, we were cadets at the military space academy, and we had our assignments to complete, which included hands-on training.
In Legends of Alyria, the story begins with the characters already in motion, and an explanation for how they got where they are and why they're moving that direction. Of course, the player characters generally represent all the major heroes and villains and their chief cohorts, so any time any player character starts to settle down into the idea of not doing anything, another is there to push him.
Multiverser solves the inertia problem pretty easily. You died. Now you're alive in an alien world. What are you going to do? You can't really do nothing for very long. It isn't that it's boring--it's that you'll starve to death if you don't find something to eat, and at this moment you have no idea what's edible.
So I think it's a misrepresentation to say that games just gloss over this. They frequently do address the problem, even if the way they do so doesn't suit every adventure you might wish to have.
--M. J. Young
On 6/22/2004 at 12:55pm, TonyLB wrote:
RE: Inertia
Interesting issue! I agree that I see far fewer heros who have to be prodded into action than are represented in literature.
I think it may be partly a matter of technique. It's hard to see inertia when the scene framing is even mildly aggressive.
If you frame your scene to the next interesting thing then the inertia will (and should) only get screen-time if it is somehow of interest. Now there are a lot of ways that could happen. There could be consequences of the inertia (like more murders). The characters paralysis could show something about their personality, or interact with important themes. Lots of ways that inertia could be fun for scenes and scenes.
But if none of those are the case then many GMs are going to cut to the chase.
I think I (at least) would be better able to brainstorm ideas for how to address your concern if I had some sense of what role you want inertia to play in the game, such that skipping over it is a loss? Is it a question of psychological realism and immersion? Or do you want to explore themes of entanglement and paralysis? Or (like me) do you just find yourself fascinated by the Campbellian trope of a hero called to adventure who refuses the call? Or something else?
On 6/22/2004 at 1:25pm, beingfrank wrote:
RE: Re: Inertia
List wrote: So, what is a good way to actually simulate inertia? Do we even want to simulate inertia? Roleplaying it is pretty straightforward-- should it ever be worked into system? It seems to be an obstacle that PCs get to defeat 'for free', but is there a way to let them fail to defeat it and still get the plot happening?
Well, the unhelpful solution is to play Every. Single. Thing. Out. That soon creates an impression of inertia. But it doesn't get plot happening (except that it almost becomes plot and takes over the whole game and the players are swamped by the fearsome beast that is Inertia and never do anything at all).
Ok, I'll stop being unhelpful now. I may even stop being silly.
I also tend to create characters with a fair amount of inertia, but then I like exploring 'What would it take to get you to give up your old life?' Many GMs find it extremely frustrating, because I'll actively avoid the plot they set up and make the Inertia the plot, just so I can explore that.
On 6/22/2004 at 2:30pm, captain_bateson wrote:
RE: Inertia
Also, I think a lot of players who might otherwise roleplay a certain amount of inertia are discouraged from doing so by the GMs and groups they play with, so they don't. It's always a crap shoot for me when I play with a new GM to see whether or not the little roleplaying touches I put in will matter or not. If the GM and other players don't work with and take your character's difficulties in packing up and shipping out seriously, then they start to see it as a drag on the game, and you start to feel left out. So, now, the player avoids it.
On 6/22/2004 at 3:44pm, simon_hibbs wrote:
RE: Re: Inertia
List wrote: This also applies to things other than plot-launching events, obviously. PCs generally do things like quit jobs, spend savings, and irrevocably insult longtime acquantances, and the like quite easily.
One possible way is through quantified personality traits, relationships and such, such as you find in Pendragon, HeroQuest and some other games. If you can quantify something in game mechanical terms, and use it in the game then the players will automaticaly include it in their narration and hence in the way they play their character. If the character had an ability 'Love of Home and Kin', then if that home and kin are lost forever then suddenly the way that ability is brought into play radicaly shifts.
Simon Hibbs
On 6/22/2004 at 8:02pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: Inertia
Ooh, Simon beat me to it. Basically, System Does Matter. Do you want players to have their characters value their relationships and such? Then involve them mechanically. In HQ, as Simon mentions, a characters support comes from his family. If you're out on the road, away from these folks, then you'll feel it in not being able to appeal for community support and the like. So the players are informed that this is something that they have to think about.
In fact, you can make this the source of actual conflict if you like - more than just color. For example, Mom could ask the PC to stay home. Leaving becomes a matter of actually rolling well enough to get out from under Mom's influence (which, if large, are what Hero Points are for).
Mike
On 6/22/2004 at 8:03pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: Inertia
Ooh, Simon beat me to it. Basically, System Does Matter. Do you want players to have their characters value their relationships and such? Then involve them mechanically. In HQ, as Simon mentions, a characters support comes from his family. If you're out on the road, away from these folks, then you'll feel it in not being able to appeal for community support and the like. So the players are informed that this is something that they have to think about.
In fact, you can make this the source of actual conflict if you like - more than just color. For example, Mom could ask the PC to stay home. Leaving becomes a matter of actually rolling well enough to get out from under Mom's influence (which, if large, are what Hero Points are for).
Mike
On 6/23/2004 at 12:39am, Noon wrote:
RE: Inertia
Oooh, I'd slow down on the 'what ever is in reality can be ported into the game and automatically makes it better' angle. I mean, for gamist it doesn' work that way because reality doesn't have a good game structure in it. For narra, its the same...life plods on, rather than prompting address of premise. For sim...well your actually dead on for supporting that, IMO. So much so that if your porting in reality at whim, your drifting your design toward sim.
On 6/23/2004 at 8:25am, M. J. Young wrote:
RE: Inertia
captain_bateson wrote: I think a lot of players who might otherwise roleplay a certain amount of inertia are discouraged from doing so by the GMs and groups they play with, so they don't....If the GM and other players don't work with and take your character's difficulties in packing up and shipping out seriously, then they start to see it as a drag on the game, and you start to feel left out. So, now, the player avoids it.
This picks up rather subtly on a key problem with playing that inertia. What does everyone else do while you're in the midst of playing out doing nothing? What do the dwarfs do while Bilbo insists they've got the wrong hobbit? What does Samwise Gamgee do while Frodo is agonizing over his quest? How is play kept even modestly interesting for those players who are stuck with nothing to do while you're so actively focused on doing nothing?
This is probably why so many games push past that point. This is such a personal decision for a character that barring some disaster that forces everyone to face the same issues at the same moment (your village is under attack; your ship is sinking; you've just been taken hostage by terrorists) it's just not the stuff of corporate play. Yes, tell us about how you made that decision in your background story, but don't bore us with watching you act it out. Just how many days do we have to watch your character go to work and be miserable doing what everyone does before he realized this wasn't the life for him and chucked it all to take up the call of the missionary?
That's one of the big hurdles, I think. It's probably a great internal struggle, but it's an individual one as well, and put together internal and individual and you've got exactly the sort of thing that no one wants to sit through in the theatre, at least not more than once in the same movie.
--M. J. Young
On 6/23/2004 at 12:14pm, simon_hibbs wrote:
RE: Inertia
Noon wrote: Oooh, I'd slow down on the 'what ever is in reality can be ported into the game and automatically makes it better' angle. I mean, for gamist it doesn' work that way because reality doesn't have a good game structure in it.
To take a wild guess, I don't think List asked fr advice on how to introduce 'inertia' into an RPG to further a gamist agenda. I'm not sayig this will automaticaly make the game ebetter for anyone, but that if you want to experiment with introducing this kind of thig to the game, this is one way to do it.
For narra, its the same...life plods on, rather than prompting address of premise.
It seems to me the premise List is working in is focused on characters overcoming their natural tendency to lead ordinary lives. Surely that's implicit in the first post?
For sim...well your actually dead on for supporting that, IMO. So much so that if your porting in reality at whim, your drifting your design toward sim.
Sure, it's a simulationist approach. I suppose you could construct purely metagame mechanics that achieve a similar result.
Simon Hibbs
On 6/23/2004 at 1:21pm, Halzebier wrote:
RE: Inertia
Is it a given that the inertia will be overcome? Or should there be a real chance that the character essentially delays forever?
If the latter is the case, I see a bunch of practical problems, at least if in many traditional games approaching a traditional party (Ars Magica etc. might work better).
Regards,
Hal
On 6/24/2004 at 9:32pm, Doctor Xero wrote:
RE: Re: Inertia
beingfrank wrote: I also tend to create characters with a fair amount of inertia, but then I like exploring 'What would it take to get you to give up your old life?' Many GMs find it extremely frustrating, because I'll actively avoid the plot they set up and make the Inertia the plot, just so I can explore that.
If you were my player, and you had told me that was what you wanted to explore, and I knew how to game master this in a way which did not detract from the enjoyment of the other players, I would love it!
But if you had already agreed to a more action-oriented campaign and then decided to surprise the other players and me capriciously with your personal plot of Inertia, I would feel used and the players would feel disrespected, and if after one warning you still chose to continue imposing your agenda, we would jointly decide that you can no longer be trusted within the Social Contract and thus the pleasure of your gaming company was no longer required.
Either way, there would no frustration beyond those sought as part of the joys of gaming.
Doctor Xero
On 6/24/2004 at 9:40pm, Doctor Xero wrote:
RE: Inertia
Several responses :
List wrote: We picture starting a game with:
GM: "You come home and find that your parents have been killed! You quickly realize the deed was done by the wizard who just passed through your village."
Players: "Okay, we cry a lot. We have a funeral. Then we pack all our things and go looking for the wizard."
It may also be that the players genuinely have no interest in dealing with that sort of sorrow. For example, some players simply have no interest in dealing with mourning dead family, not in character nor as a thematic bang nor as a way to win the game.
After all, how could a gamer enjoy a classic James Bond game if the game master insisted that player and/or character dwell over how every single one of the evil mastermind's henchmen you killed in that o-mi-gawd-its-so-kewl! explosion had a mother, a father, children, old friends from school, etc. . . .
Mike Holmes wrote: In HQ, as Simon mentions, a characters support comes from his family. If you're out on the road, away from these folks, then you'll feel it in not being able to appeal for community support and the like. So the players are informed that this is something that they have to think about.
I once began a campaign in which each player's character interacted with his or her siblings throughout that day's scenario before setting off on "the adventure" at the beginning of the next day's game. The NPC family members never showed up again, yet that single day's playing made them forever a presence in the minds of both the players and the characters, and this influenced their actions even unto the final episode of the campaign.
TonyLB wrote: Or (like me) do you just find yourself fascinated by the Campbellian trope of a hero called to adventure who refuses the call? Or something else?
When I have been asked to run more plot-oriented campaign (which can be done Gamist, Narrativist, or Simulationist), I often ask players whether they want their character's involvement to be voluntary or conscripted.
I had one player of a more gamist bent who asked that part of the game be a competition with me over how much improbable coincidence I would have to muster up to coerce his character into involvement with the rest of the party. Since the player wanted me to coerce as part of his enjoyment of the game, I agreed, and for him winning meant that I had to resort to absurd lengths to keep his character entrapped within the adventure. He loved it, the players loved watching the two of us play this out, I enjoyed it even though I lost most of the time, and the characters benefitted as well since it added a tincture of surreality (and occasional farce) to an otherwise dark, dark campaign.
Doctor Xero
On 6/25/2004 at 10:07am, beingfrank wrote:
RE: Re: Inertia
Doctor Xero wrote:beingfrank wrote: I also tend to create characters with a fair amount of inertia, but then I like exploring 'What would it take to get you to give up your old life?' Many GMs find it extremely frustrating, because I'll actively avoid the plot they set up and make the Inertia the plot, just so I can explore that.
If you were my player, and you had told me that was what you wanted to explore, and I knew how to game master this in a way which did not detract from the enjoyment of the other players, I would love it!
Yeah, warning is necessary. *grin* It's not fun if it pisses people off. But some people will take a warning and not really take it in. So I must warn them lots and check that they really mean it when they say it's ok.