Well i'm a newbie regarding premises.

I read a lot about it here on The Forge, but still, it's not that clear to me.

This morning i had some ideas about possible premises, and i would like to know if in your opinion they're premise as Ron put it or no, and why ?

For à CoC-like game:"Is the quest of knowledge worth madness ?"

For a Memento based game: "Is revenge worth the price of killing the wrong man ?"

and a though one "Is the curse of vampirism placing you abouve morality?"

Well these are exemples that came easely. But i don't know if theu're premise at all or just some questions.
Right now i feel this will greatly help me and the players focus on one particular theme for the story, so i think: " woa ! if they're not premise, think about what a good premise will bring to the game !!!"

Bye,
Fabrice.

Hi Fabrice,

I think the main thing is to recognize that Premise has FIVE meanings, nested inside one another in certain ways.

The most inclusive meaning is simple: "what interests me about this game."

The second meaning takes it to the act of role-playing: "what interests us about this game to the extent that we all want to play together."

The other three meanings, all nested on an equal level inside the second one, correspond to the separate concepts of Gamism, Narrativism, and Simulationism. Mike H did us a bit of a disservice with his term "Edwardsian Premise" - it was a joking way of saying Narrativist Premise.

Must run; more about that soon.

Best,
Ron

Mea Culpa.

But, in fairness, there has been some debate about the nature of Narrative Premises of late, and I wanted to indicate that I meant "Narrative Premise as Ron would have it". Once again in trouble for trying to use shorthand. Oh well...

Nicky, if what you are looking for is this sort of Narrative premise, then some of what you have work, but others do not. Can you identify which? The key is to look for ones that have issues that can motivate the characters in two directions simultaneously.

So, "Can we escape the end of civilization?" is an interesting question, but not a Narrative Premise as there is really only one thing the characters can do. "Is money worth steping on people to get it?" Gives you two distinct things to work for, money and friendship. It's the conflict caused by the juxtaposition of these things that drives the potential for conflict.

Or so the theory goes.

Mike

Hi there,

Good points, Mike.

Fabrice, looking at the three premises you suggest, I think you're very much on the right track in terms of Narrativist play. The important thing to recognize is that all three can be addressed across a wide variety of settings, characters, and situations.

For example, "is vengeance worth it" can be addressed from a victim's point of view, a perpetrator's point of view, or a third-party's point of view (especially one who represents the larger society). The setting can also be an SF thing, a fantasy thing, a historical thing, or a modern thing - with each one, of course, providing local tweaks or twists that affect the issue.
And perhaps most importantly, the answers can vary widely based on the players' reactions and desires as authors.

The GM's job is to make sure the issue is presented in the most engaging, affecting, and "charged" way possible (ie something is going to happen), and also to make sure that the players have enough "rights," regarding their characters' decisions, to address the issue in their own way.

I strongly, strongly want to emphasize that none of this has to be discussed openly with the players, unless they want to. Considering those who like this sort of play very much, some like the abstract or ethical discussion very much as well, and others dislike it intensely.

Best,
Ron

Hi Ron,

Here's where it gets a bit confusing to me:

Premise: Is love worth death?

That's a premise--if it's addressed in a game with narrativist mechanics then it's a narrativist premise.

If it's addressed in simulationist play then it's a simulationist premise.

Or is your assertion that it wouldn't/couldn't be a simulationist premise?

-Marco

Hi Marco,

Take a look at the whole concept of Simulationist Premise - to ramp up the level of Exploration of one or more of the imagined components (Setting, Character, Situation, Color), most especially in terms of in-game causality. That's it. We are talking about first priorities of play, and if the first priority is to imagine/experience those things, it's Simulationism.

Therefore, by definition, to address the Premise you describe as the first priority cannot be Simulationist. I am totally not discussing whether the issue you describe is present in play (it may well be inherent to the Situation, e.g.), but whether the point of play (according to the decisions of the people involved, at the time of play) is to resolve it.

This gets us back to why Narrativism is different from Simulationist with a high emphasis on Situation - yes, the issue may be present, but that's not the point.

Best,
Ron