While working up some ideas for a game design, I crystalized out something that I have been trying to get out of solution since I started reading and posting here on the Forge.

It's that jazz is a good analogy for what I like to see in a good roleplaying session. The players are the musicians, and the GM acts as either the sound guy or the guy who sets the set playlist (or, in some cases, both). The group should know the playlist and the typical solo order, and they should be willing to "go with the flow:" if someone's hot tonight, they need to bend their usual style and let 'em blow. If someone's trying to bring in something that goes against the usual style of the group, it needs to be hashed out in practice so no one slips the gig.

This can be extended, but hopefully not to the point of absurdity, to other aspects of the "actually playing" part of RPG's.

Run a search for "band metaphor" and you'll see where this has come up before. In this little corner of the world, Ron is particularly known for it using/originating it, though historically I think they've traced it back to the old time Chaosium crew.

As metaphors go, it's pretty cool - I especially like Ron's "GM as bass player" embellishment.

Gordon

EDIT - So I gave the band metaphor search a try . . . not as simple as I thought (no phrase searching). Anyone have good pointers to "band metaphor" posts? There was the "Orchestra metaphor" too . . .

Oh, and Mark - there may be an interesting insight into play styles in the fact that you put the GM as sound/playlist guy, but Ron puts him in the band along with everyone else. That Orchestra metaphor had the GM as the conductor, as I remember. We can stretch any of these metaphors too far, obviuosly, but - food for thought .

Hey,

The first people to use the specific metaphor of role-playing:jazz in print were the authors of the Avalon Hill edition of RuneQuest. I don't know for sure which member of The Chaosium wrote that part of the text.

To clarify my use of the metaphor, there are actually two, not one.

Band metaphor #1 refers specifically to the social elements of role-playing and dates back to the Sorcerer mailing list (see "Playing in the band" in the archives on the Sorcerer site).

Band metaphor #2 refers specifically to Narrativist play. That's where the GM/bass analogy holds, as well as the ideas of trading off solos, of riffs, and of repetitive choruses or melodies. (I recognize that not all songs are stories, however, a good song has a satisfying "open" and "closing" quality that has its analogies in a good story's content.)

Best,
Ron

Mark,

Your version of the metaphor is much like Ron's, and that would sugest Narrativist play, I think. Given your post about your game, I think that's the indication there are well. The one nuance to your version that's interesting is the "hot mike" concept. It sounds like a good idea at first, I mean, how else to get the best play than to let the best player do his thing more than the others.

The problem is the subjectivity of the decision. First, it requires that some players subjugate themselves, and as this is not required traditionally, it may grate on some. Most are used to games that try somehow to allow for "equal" player participation, including equal time in the limelight. So that may be a difficulty.

Second, players may not agree on who is doing the best job. This would lead to two or more players trying to solo at once. Which would be problematic, I'd think. Some of the other players might be playing in support of one player while others support the other. Or does the GM decide and make this explicit? How does he make that decision?

Because, in the end, I find that there usually is one best player in the group (especially obvious because each player is "playing the same instrument" to follow the metaphor). Given that won't he be selected more often than the others? Also, you have to make a distinction between the player and the character. In your description of your game it seems as though you might mean that it's the hot character that gets followed, and not the hot player. That is, the character who the game seems to be focusing on best. But again, that asks the question, what if the best character is always the same? I've seen this happen too.

IOW, most RPG players believe in equity in play, which requires ignoring who is best. How do you expect to get them to buy into this method?

Mike

OK, a few more things on this analogy/thought experiment:

I was discussing this with one of my players last night, and he was complaining that he preferred an analogy of a string quartet to a jazz analogy. With chamber music, expression is important, but if you slip up on even one note of the music as written you are considered to have flubbed the performance. This sounds almost like a simulationist priority – does anyone else agree with that assesment?

Back at the jazz analogy (and holding firmly in mind that it is only an analogy), I see the main difference between the playlist guy (who is usually one of the members of the band) and the bass player as GM is that we're probably looking at different things – I'm thinking of one game session being a gig, Ron sounds like he's thinking of one game session being one piece performed.

The sound guy analogy really goes with the “hot mike” concept, and I think I need to explore that more thoroughly. Mike Holmes (who may or may not be the hot Mike depending on weather) has a really good point that pulls into gamesmanship theory – how do we make sure that everyone gets a chance in the spotlight, as it were? If someone is consistantly a better player, do they deserve to be the front man? I'll note that, no matter who else is playing with him, Miles Davis's records say Miles Davis on the jacket. If it says Ella on the cover, and it's jazz, you're expecting to hear Ms. Fitzgerald. For those of you who are around my age or older, you may remember George Harrison's Cloud Nine – it wasn't untill I got to the fine print inside that I found out that it was Elton John on piano and Ringo Starr on drums. I think that Paul McCartney even sang backup on one of the tracks.

This may sound like I'm pushing for the “best man in front” paradigm, but I'm not sure that I am. I think I'm pushing for a re-evaluation of what needs to be customary in RPG's....

Oh my God.

The lightbulb may have just gone on in my pointy little head.

We're talking about ROLE-playing games. Shouldn't we be emphasizing role when we set up games?

This is a third topic – I'll now wander off and do searches on both gamesmanship theory and metagame roles and possibly start new threads, depending ou what I find.