I was having a very similar situation as Ignotus, but decided to start a new thread because I do not want to take away from his questions (which were really helpful).

We have now had three sessions on our TV show and we are all new to the co-narrative style of roleplaying. All kinds of things have gone wrong, but we are still having fun. I believe I know some of the problems, but the two questions I do have is:

• Is the Producer supposed to not only come up with the "problem" at the beginning of the episode, but also ad the two complications?

• If I do come up with the problem at the beginning of the episode, are the other players required to have to come up with scenes? I know that they are supposed to do that in theory, but it is not working, so I was curious if there is a way to ease them into doing that?

I have been struggling to teach my players this style of roleplaying, but it has resulted in out-right defiance to people blanking out to utter confusion to what they should be doing. I know this game works. I have heard two recordings of The Sons of Kryos games and have read play reports.

It is not only my players that are having a hard time, this is really new to me also, so I am taking some of the blame (although it would have been nice if someone else would have looked at the rules too). I was hoping this would go a lot better and then try out Nine Worlds next, but I am not sure this is going to work.

Cooper wrote:
• Is the Producer supposed to not only come up with the "problem" at the beginning of the episode, but also ad the two complications?

Cooper wrote:
• If I do come up with the problem at the beginning of the episode, are the other players required to have to come up with scenes? I know that they are supposed to do that in theory, but it is not working, so I was curious if there is a way to ease them into doing that?

Cooper wrote:
I have been struggling to teach my players this style of roleplaying, but it has resulted in out-right defiance to people blanking out to utter confusion to what they should be doing. I know this game works. I have heard two recordings of The Sons of Kryos games and have read play reports.

Judd, the problem and complications come from the TV show act model Matt describes in the book: each episode of the show is split into four acts, often coinciding with the commercial breaks. First act introduces a complication, the second and third postpone resolution and often introduce a secondary plot-line, fourth act resolves everything. It's proffered as a producer aid in the book, not as a rules-system per se.

As for Cooper: the problem and complications are specifically "gamemastering instructions", so if the produces uses that model for his show, it's up to him to use the structure. It's not even necessary to bring it up to the players, that stuff is indented solely for the benefit of the producer's.

For your scene framing problems, I suggest constructive dialogue. Ask the player leading questions and proffer suggestions. Make it clear that you're there to catch them if they can't think of anything particularly good. Make it clear that the whole group is there to pitch in if somebody has a problem. I usually start the wrangling by asking the whole group for suggestions before moving in myself, actually. Ideally I also have a ringer in the group who I can trust to suggest something good, just so the players don't perceive me as controlling the whole process.

All of that won't be useful if the group is outright hostile about the game, though. If that is the case, there's not much to be done except talk about why the players don't like it. It might be that they hate television, who knows.

And don't forget -- only the Producer frames scenes. Players take turns setting the agenda and focus and may suggest what's going on, but the Producer has final say.

In PTA, the concept of scene framing or narration rights allows anyone to make suggestions but in the end it's one person who decides whose ideas to use and in what combination. Any time the player or producer are stuck, they can ask for suggestions. Sometimes, it's a good idea for the producer to encourage suggestions.

As for problem and complications -- the Producer gets the first scene so he can intro the thrust of the episode (the "problem"). Basically, it's the episode premise -- base it on the Issue of the character who's in the spotlight, or if no one has a 3 screen presence, focus on the premise of your series. I wouldn't plan much beyond this first scene, some NPCs, and some ways you can complicate things later. But don't try to force your complications into existance -- treat them as ideas you can use if the flow of the game goes that way -- a bandolier of ammo to use when the opportunity offers.

I realized that I hit return before putting something other that PTA in the subject. Sorry about that.

Eero wrote:
Judd, the problem and complications come from the TV show act model Matt describes in the book: each episode of the show is split into four acts, often coinciding with the commercial breaks....

Eero wrote:
As for Cooper: the problem and complications are specifically "gamemastering instructions", so if the produces uses that model for his show, it's up to him to use the structure. It's not even necessary to bring it up to the players, that stuff is indented solely for the benefit of the producer's.

Eero wrote:
For your scene framing problems, I suggest constructive dialogue. Ask the player leading questions and proffer suggestions. Make it clear that you're there to catch them if they can't think of anything particularly good. Make it clear that the whole group is there to pitch in if somebody has a problem. I usually start the wrangling by asking the whole group for suggestions before moving in myself, actually. Ideally I also have a ringer in the group who I can trust to suggest something good, just so the players don't perceive me as controlling the whole process.

Eero wrote:
All of that won't be useful if the group is outright hostile about the game, though. If that is the case, there's not much to be done except talk about why the players don't like it. It might be that they hate television, who knows.

Paka wrote:
I promise that your players have framed scenes before but they just didn't realize they were doing it.  But it is a skill, a muscle that we just aren't used to using in this way.

Paka wrote:
Hope this feedback helps.

P.S.  The game we have recorded has some problems with the way I handled the resolution of conflicts and stakes setting but that is for another time.  First things first: get everyone scene framing.

Also, if they get stuck, they can ask for help but make sure that doesn't turn into everyone just looking at the Producer for the next scene again and again and again.

Good luck.

Alan wrote:
And don't forget -- only the Producer frames scenes. Players take turns setting the agenda and focus and may suggest what's going on, but the Producer has final say.

Alan wrote:
In PTA, the concept of scene framing or narration rights allows anyone to make suggestions but in the end it's one person who decides whose ideas to use and in what combination. Any time the player or producer are stuck, they can ask for suggestions. Sometimes, it's a good idea for the producer to encourage suggestions.

Alan wrote:
As for problem and complications -- the Producer gets the first scene so he can intro the thrust of the episode (the "problem"). Basically, it's the episode premise -- base it on the Issue of the character who's in the spotlight, or if no one has a 3 screen presence, focus on the premise of your series. I wouldn't plan much beyond this first scene, some NPCs, and some ways you can complicate things later. But don't try to force your complications into existance -- treat them as ideas you can use if the flow of the game goes that way -- a bandolier of ammo to use when the opportunity offers.

I really appreciate all of this advice so far. Even Matt wrote to me with a little advice to. So, I figured I should share with you my game:

It originally started out with Firefly, but all it took was one player to get rid of that idea (I found out he was the only one who did not like that idea). All of use have been performers at Renaissance fairs in the tri state area (Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas), so we came up with a TV show that was about a bunch of disgruntled Ren Fair entertainers that have been fired or kicked out of the local big Ren fair. Even the co-owner was tricked out of his part of the management.

So, the disgruntled co-owner hires all of the PCs to start up an opposing fair. All the players were some of the stereo types of these things: Fairy girl, Mermaid, Period Nazi, busty wench and a looser in a very short kilt that buys the all season pass just in hopes to get a job there (he was the best character).

The show's camera work was supposed to be a cross between Reno 911 and The Office. The name of the show was "The Last Huzzah."

Now, I did ad one thing to the premise, but asked the players permission and that was the owner owning a copy of the Necronomicon that he bought off of e-bay. He was getting the rest of his staff from some hell world. I was hopping it would ad that Army of Darkness feel to it also.

Anyway, it turned into me having to re-explain the rules over and over again (I really tried to get them to read the book...it is not very long). Like I said before, two of the players were not happy, two were confused (but enthusiastic) and one was very shy and would come up blank when it was time to suggest a scene.

My biggest problem was trying to figure out how the flow of the game works, and teach them how to bring in scenes (and basically help with the story).

I just think that half of the people were not bought in on the game. I am going to end this game, but now when we get back to another game of PTA, everyone will know what to expect. I really like the rules for this game and want to play this again.

Thanks so far for the advice that everyone has given!

Hi Cooper,

High card narrates, not the winner. You can lose and still narrate.

Narration rules start at the bottom of page 65 and run to page 68.

PTA takes a different approach to roleplaying. Most traditional play involves "being" the character, but PTA asks the player to think about author-level things too. You might find that the players say that the mechanics are "intrusive" at first. But it's just a different approach and it can take time to get familiar enough so it doesn't intrude any more. Things like experiencing what it's like to be a character or being completely accurate about the setting have to take a back seat. The object of PTA play is to make great episodes--together, in the moment, on the fly. Don't sweat the planning; see what comes up at the table.

Between scenes, you might try asking your players "If this were a really cool tv show, where would you end up next?"

Caveat: PTA will never give the deep-character-concentration that some players prefer. Maybe they'll find other rewards in PTA, maybe not. Encourage them to stay with it for a season before they throw it away -- but if they do have a big negative reaction don't force it.

Oh, and you might do a "pilot" like it says in the rules. Focus on the mechanics not the story structure advice. Go around the circle letting each player request a scene. Aim for one conflict draw in each scene. Once the conflict is over, you usually want to end the scene and move on. Producer also gets to end scenes, too. Use your budget and encourage them to give Fanmail. Let the pilot stumble or not into a story.

Hope this helps. Have fun!

About Producer preparation: when I go to the game table, I have the first scene thought up, and a vague (two sentences or so) idea of what the melodrama of the episode will be about. Note, melodrama, not drama; the dramatic relationships of the characters will be determined during the game, but the fact that the characters will have to deal with an alien invasion in this episode is often enough predetermined by the Producer. The book discusses this too, when it distinguishes between high-drama and low-drama series: some series will have an intricate melodrama going on, with lots of plot twists and a plot that leaves the audience speculating about the outcome, while some other series will be all about the human relationships, with little in the way of plot.

So when you're the Producer, you principally need to only prepare the melodrama, which often enough includes the first scene (as the first scene is traditionally used in tv series to introduce a given episode's plot topic). You might want to use the first scene for some character drama, too, if there's nothing particularly pressing going on with the plot, but in that case you the Producer need to have some sense of which characters might actually have some drama between them, or which players would like the opportunity to create some for their characters. During the session proper the players will signal this by their frame requests, so you don't have to worry about it.

Shame about your show, by the way. The idea of a renaissance fair comedy with the Necronomicon would be right up my alley.

Cooper wrote: Now, I did ad one thing to the premise, but asked the players permission and that was the owner owning a copy of the Necronomicon that he bought off of e-bay. He was getting the rest of his staff from some hell world. I was hopping it would ad that Army of Darkness feel to it also.

Alan wrote: Caveat: PTA will never give the deep-character-concentration that some players prefer.

Paka wrote:

Cooper wrote: Now, I did ad one thing to the premise, but asked the players permission and that was the owner owning a copy of the Necronomicon that he bought off of e-bay. He was getting the rest of his staff from some hell world. I was hopping it would ad that Army of Darkness feel to it also.

Cooper, could you describe how this detail got added in?  Those few sentences give me a gitchy feeling.

Paka wrote:

Alan wrote: Caveat: PTA will never give the deep-character-concentration that some players prefer.

Alan, I disagree entirely.  In a few of the games I have played we really got into our characters and gained deep immersion.

For what it's worth, I definitely participate in the pitch sessions as a regular participant even when I'm going to be the Producer. So that's not a problem at all as long as you're working as a participant, not an authoritative leader-type.

Cooper wrote: Oh..... wow, I must have been really tired. What I was trying to say was that I asked the players if I could add in a supernatural element to the story: That the owner of the fair (Scott) had a copy of the Necronomicon (sp?) that he purchased off of e-bay. He had found out it opened a portal to some sort of hell world and was summoning up people and creatures to use as the rest of the staff for the fair (since he needed people to sale turkey legs, funnel cakes and to also clean up the litter).

I was not completely happy with the TV show's premise, so I wanted to add something like that to give it an Army of Darkness feel. I am not sure if the producer (me in this case) has an equal say in the premise, but they liked the idea.

Chris wrote:
Did you ask them and they agree, or did you suggest it and they go "Oooh, cool!"?

It sounds like this is a bit late to be useful, but these are some of the things I thought about as a player when I was setting an agenda or framing a scene in PTA.  Obviously they reflect the sorts of things I enjoy and my group's play style -- if other people approach scene framing in significantly different ways or see major holes in this (not enough about conflict?), I'd be curious to hear about it.

Building on what's already happened:
-Based on what just happened, what's the most interesting thing that could happen next?  What potential conflicts are raised by what just happened?  How can I make a seemingly dry event more emo?
-Something just happened that surprised me and raised questions about why a character acted in a certain way.  What sort of circumstances or conversations would let me find out more about that?  (I particularly like this for when I feel like I messed up my previous scene somehow.  Now let's find out exactly why Lena was so lame!)
-My character has an internal dilemma, an intense emotional state, or a decision to make.  How can I depict it to the other players, show context that illuminates it (e.g. through a flashback), or otherwise put myself in a position to explore it?

Plot teleology:
-How can I set up scenes to get toward my next-time-on?
-What can I do to advance my character's goals?
-I have this idea for something cool.  What scenes do I need to set up to get there?  Otherwise, do it now.
-It's my spotlight episode next time.  What do I need to do to set up my issue for crisis and resolution?
-What can I do to drive along along the series' overarching plot?  What threads are still hanging that we need to resolve?  What threads can I dangle now so that I have something to pick up later?

Premise first: 
-What sorts of activities are characteristic of the show's location or premise?  Choose one that intersects with your issue.  (Despite the phrasing, this isn't a question for me, so much as it is a matter of picturing the location vividly and seeing what might happen there.)
-It's someone else's spotlight episode.  Which of their connections would be interesting to talk to or mess with?
-Go fishing.  Especially after you've been playing for a while, you may have a hunch that there are interesting things for two characters to talk about, without quite knowing what they are.  See if whoever would be playing the other character shares your hunch.  (This only worked well with two players for us.  More than that, and people tended to wait for someone else to do something)
-What do I -- as a person, not a character -- find frightening?  What makes me angry?  What do I fantasize about doing? etc.  Think of elements that you personally have a visceral reaction to and see if any of them can connect to your character's issue or current situation. (this is probably better for generating next-time-ons than scenes themselves, though)

Ideally I want a scene that tags more than one question, but the thing is, which set of questions I start from makes a real difference in how easily and quickly I think of a scene.  I haven't been playing games with player scene-framing for all that long either, and I have almost no experience GMing.  Especially when I first started out, scene framing from each of these three different perspectives felt like different, almost unrelated activities.  Scene framing as building on what's already happened draws on the sort of things I think about during / between scenes anyway, so it flows reasonably well as long as everything's fresh.  Situation-first draws on a more intuitive, visual sort thinking and IME leads to stronger scenes than you'd suppose from the apparent aimlessness of the questions.  But I'm still annoyingly slow coming up with scenes when I start out by thinking about plot direction.  I imagine that someone who spends a lot of time during scenes thinking about their character's goals might find scene framing from that perspective easier and more intuitive.   

So my advice to someone who was just starting with scene framing would be first, to try different approaches along these lines, especially if you can figure out one that's continuous with whatever you're thinking about during scenes already.  Then branch out.  And second, before I show up to game, I like to have a loose set of ideas for how I can reach my next-time on and what other sorts of scenes and plot lines I'd like to see.  This may be a touchy thing to recommend as the producer, but as a player, I think that daydreaming about this sort of stuff without people staring at you is genuinely fun, and also makes the subsequent game better.  One of the reasons this worked was because our episodes weren't heavily focused around producer-produced problems, but it seems odd to me to assume that the producer will do most of the prep in PTA -- not in your particular situation, but in general.

Hey people, sorry this is slightly off topic.  I wanted to reply to something Cooper said, but apparently you can't send personal messages until you've got 3 posts.  Since I only wandered over here because I'm starting another game of PTA now, I'm not inclined to find enough other threads to post to in order to send personal messages.  Besides, this way someone else can interrupt if they think I'm giving bad advice, or if they have better suggestions for games that might make playing PTA feel more natural to non-GMs. 

Cooper -- I'm glad it looks helpful!  If you do end up using it, can you let me know whether the players think it's useful or not?  I'm curious about either reaction, since I'm not really sure how much of this is my own process and how much is more general.

I don't know if this would work with your group, but playing Mountain Witch right before PTA helped me get the hang of narrativist scene framing.  (also, yay, Mountain Witch is back in print!)  When you play Mountain Witch, you start to treat the other players as an audience that's interested in your story (like in PTA) and focus on gradually revealing your character's dark secret and probable dark fate to them.  Players aren't obligated to frame their own scenes at any point, but they can do so if they think of something good, or simply incorporate details into other scenes that hint at their dark fate.  Oversimplifiedly, in most roleplaying games GMs supply an event or detail and players give it meaning through their characters' reactions (e.g. the GM describes the content of the letter, and the player decides that it makes his character really angry).  In the Mountain Witch, the GM sometimes gives the meaning first and has players fill in the concrete details based on their dark fate (e.g. the GM says, there's something in the letter that makes you angry -- what is it?).  This approach apparently drives some people nuts and can be really slow if you don't have a strong sense of what your dark fate is, but it's good practice for the style of scene framing where you want to show your character's internal dilemma or emotional state to other players, or in PTA, where you have an Issue and want to create a scene that explores it.  On the other hand, if you're shy, Mountain Witch can be a lot of pressure, because ultimately the responsibility to do justice to your character's dark fate is yours alone.  I've never been so nervous about a game as I was about our final session of Mountain Witch.   

Hey, I have been looking for an excuse to buy that game anyway (and Universalist and Story Engine and the list goes on). I am not going try these co-narative games with two of my players (the D&D gamers*), but the shy one (my wife) can be brought into this side of gaming. My two remaining players are open for any game. We are going to get back together next month and I am going to play it safe and run an Esoterroist game for them. After that, I am hoping they will want to try PTA again (or Dust Devils).

Thank you again, everyone, for your advice.

* (ironically the two that are big into D&D love Sorcerer)