The Forge Reference Project

 

Topic: I got to be the audience.
Started by: Levi Kornelsen
Started on: 5/10/2006
Board: lumpley games


On 5/10/2006 at 6:29pm, Levi Kornelsen wrote:
I got to be the audience.

Had a Dogs game last night where my players decided to have their characters sort out their internal problems.  They spent all night, and fought like...

...Well, like Dogs.

I was, frankly, not necessary, for the whole night, and it was cool.

Has anyone else ever had something like this happen to them?

Message 19800#207383

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Levi Kornelsen
...in which Levi Kornelsen participated
...in lumpley games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 6:31pm, Vaxalon wrote:
Re: I got to be the audience.

Dogs is always at its best when the Pack starts to fracture.

Message 19800#207384

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Vaxalon
...in which Vaxalon participated
...in lumpley games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 6:37pm, Levi Kornelsen wrote:
RE: Re: I got to be the audience.

Hmm.  Well, they appear to have patched things up temporarily, but they do have a bunch of new grudges.

One of my players had an interesting comment - his opinion was that the dice mechanics, which keep asking how far you're willing to push something, will often naturally lead players into pushing things farther as time goes on, because the players want to win, even if the issue is a small one.

His opinion was that once the group starts calling actual conflicts, it's a natural progression when people push on - to larger grudges, stronger conflicts, and an eventual group explosion.

I thought that was pretty notable.

Message 19800#207386

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Levi Kornelsen
...in which Levi Kornelsen participated
...in lumpley games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 8:02pm, oreso wrote:
RE: Re: I got to be the audience.

the idea of using 'successive commitments' to make folk do unreasonable things is psychologically sound too. the participant goes, "just this little more, and then I'm done", because the more they've invested in the conflict the less likely they'll let it go, regardless of whether its actually worth it.

Message 19800#207398

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by oreso
...in which oreso participated
...in lumpley games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 8:19pm, khelek wrote:
RE: Re: I got to be the audience.

Very cool,

I had a game this week with only one player, his first time. The others (who also have never played) could nto make it. I might be running a gam ethis coming weekend too... It will be very interesting to see how the Dog who acted without censure last time deals with th rest of his group.

the group dynamics are soo interesting to watch in dogs.

Message 19800#207404

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by khelek
...in which khelek participated
...in lumpley games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/10/2006 at 10:22pm, greyorm wrote:
RE: Re: I got to be the audience.

Levi wrote: One of my players had an interesting comment - his opinion was that the dice mechanics, which keep asking how far you're willing to push something, will often naturally lead players into pushing things farther as time goes on, because the players want to win, even if the issue is a small one.


Heck, Levi, go have an argument with your wife/girlfriend/whatever and then take a look back at it a week or a month later...that's when it hits you you didn't really need to say this thing to her, you could have stopped there, compromised, said something else, etc. That's when you realize you pushed it further than you should have, you were stupid for saying this, even if she was stupid for saying that, that you really shouldn't have started throwing things, slept around, etc. If anything, the Dogs mechanic is actually modelling basic human behavior on some level: it's all about how far you push things, when you're willing to give, and what you're willing to give on.

The mechanic taps into that instinctual urge to argue to win, to be right, to "go for the gold" that immediate human interaction is colored by for most of us. It really showcases the idea that though we know the fight is not worth it sometimes, we fight anyways, and that many times we don't always realize right then that it isn't worth it because of that "win" desire. And in the long term, it shows how we set ourselves up for increasing long-term failure by following this conflict model. To me, that's cool; the game can be a teaching tool, in a way, because it so perfectly models exactly that stupid argument with the girlfriend over the toilet seat that eventually destroys the relationship.

Message 19800#207423

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by greyorm
...in which greyorm participated
...in lumpley games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/10/2006




On 5/11/2006 at 1:30am, Dev wrote:
RE: Re: I got to be the audience.

The last session of our game was just like that too. I had a town planned and everything, but I promised to give them some time to have some arguments IC first, to resolve some issues, just because there was *so much* that went unspoken for a while. So the camped a day away and we had the Big Discussions in scenes between the characters, and they hammered things out to a final conclusion before they ever reached town. (Final conclusion was that two Dogs give up their coats and walk the land together in exile, while the other two split up, disgusted with each other.)

I did a little bit of work on my part, particularly interactions between one player and the NPC/romantic interest, but for the most part I just let the players drive it and blow it up, and they did.

Message 19800#207438

Previous & subsequent topics...
...started by Dev
...in which Dev participated
...in lumpley games
...including keyword:

 (leave blank for none)
...from around 5/11/2006