I have got to admit that the mechanic in Dust Devils in which the player takes over narrative control of a scene until conflict is resolved troubles me.

The game will force me to do something that I've never had to entirely do in a game before:

Trust.

Could someone write about their experience with a game like this?

Thanks.

I'll write about it. But first let me say that you're getting this from the POV of someone who likes to experiment in RPGs. So it's no surprise that I'm pro Director Stance.

I want to say it's about maturity. There's more to it than that, but, for example, playing Dust Devils with Matt at GenCon, there was never a moment where anyone (and in this I am including the people who were potential customers, and had never seen the game before) seemed at all worried about how the mechanics work. They were too into using them for what the game was about. The reason I want to call this maturity is because, there is a sense amongst the players that the play being produced is for everyone present to an extent. That is, if I were to "play to win" and bend the spirit of the rules such that I were to benefit from the described actions, but they were obviously distasteful to others in any way, that would be irresponsible. Immature. It's what kids do because they do not understand that one can participate in a "game" and do so in a way that all the participants can have fun even when they "lose". Or that you can be magnanimous in your success.

Anyhow, in actuality maturity is missing the point. Surely, you need to be playing with mature people. But the thing is, that the system is set up so as to sort of require that sort of attitude. The only potential problem you might have is if you play with "traditional" players, which is to say "Gamists", who think that the game is set up in the traditional adversarial mode. Players just have to disabuse themselves of the notion that they are an advocate for their character so much as an advoate for the story. And, as such, that when given powers normally reserved for the GM, that they are to use them in much the way that a GM is usually supposed to. Not as players traditionally would.

Again, this is rarely a problem. One of the things that modern designs (such as Dust Devils) do a lot is refrain from putting in mechanics meant to limit the powers of players so as to provide a hedge against "abuse". Such limits, when imposed, inform the player that they are supposed to be trying to find loopholes, and ways around the limits so imposed. By simply making it easy to "cheat", and "win" one informs the player that they are only limited by their own sense of what they should do. And that said, the only challenge that remains is to make up a good description of the action, or add to the story.

So, assuming you are playing with mature people, and you describe the unlimited nature of the narrative ability (that their job when they get the narratiion is to explain the trait losses effectively and interestingly), then there will be no problems. People will respond appropriately.

There is a maxim in management that speaks of empowering people. A while back someone discovered that if you gave a subordinate power, and clear objectives, that they would do exaclty what you wanted them to do with it in almost every case. Because we are social creatures, and seek the approval of those who we work with. The same occurs in games. Give people powerful responsibilities, and a clear goal for them, and they will perform.

Mike

You hit on the exact right word for it...trust. Obviously games with shared narrative control like Dust Devils, Inspectres, or Universalis require playing with players you can rely upon.

In my experience the first thing players usually go for when they are handed this sort of power is humor. So initial games tend to be rather silly and outrageous. The reason for this I suspect is two-fold.

1) Humor requires less committment and is easier to pull off than drama. If the humor falls flat...well that's just a lame joke. But if an attempt at drama falls flat...that can sometimes be embarassing, so humor is safer.

2) Alot of players don't at first believe the power they've been given is real. They've played alot of games where GMs solicit ideas or areas of interest that then just get twisted against them so they're waiting for the other shoe to drop. Instead of giving the GM something meaty to screw them with, they stick to slapstick.

You can often tell when it finally clicks with a player; like the cartoon lightbulb going off as they realize what they can now do.

Like anything else "with great power comes great responsibility" and there are some players who can't really be trusted with a loaded gun. But I've been pleasantly surprised by players who I never thought would or could who instead are actually really good.

A lot of good points have been made that I agree entirely with and I won't bother to repeat them. While, I have not yet played Dust Devils, I would say that there is something very unique about it's shared narrative mechanic that is absent in most other shared narrative mechanic driven games (The Pool, InSpectres, OctaNe). That unique element is: He who "wins" is not necessarily he who narrates.

The other problem with newbie shared narrative players besides falling into comedy is that players are SO used to playing defensively that success becomes boring. In every game of InSpectres I've played player success has equaled end of conflict. Maybe, I'm wrong but I never saw InSpectres as being a Scene Resolution game like Story Engine.

The end result is that I as the GM describe some demon roaring up from Hell then some player rolls Athletics to attack the demon and upon success describes killing or banishing the demon in one blow. This not only sort of ends the scene prematurely but denies the other players to get in on the conflict. It simply never occurs to players to use a high roll to gain a significant advantage but to allow the conflict to continue, using a series of high rolls to achieve "victory" in a series of exciting steps.

Dust Devils, in my opinion, significantly works to combat this with its conflict goes to the high poker hand, narration goes to the high card. It's a lot more like passing the GM duty around than just winner, gets to say how they win. So, it encourages more surprises, twists and drama from newbie players who are so used to playing defensively.

Just my thoughts.

Jesse

I don't know what to add that hasn't already been said, and no doubt better than I could say it.

I will offer up my own viewpoint about relinquishing control. It may not be about trust after all. The issue MAY be that as a Dealer in Dust Devils, you have to let go of the notion that you know best. It may not be trusting the other players' abilities and creativity. (They should have that in spades! If a player can make a character he likes, then he very likely can make a compelling narrative for that character!)

I know I'm that kind of victimizing GM sometimes. That is, that I don't think the players should have narrative authority because I can better see what's unfolding (or, worse, I just think I'm better at storytelling).

This, as the cowpoke might say, is horseshit.

So, yeah, TRUST your players, because they can do it. The only reason that you may not trust them yet or that they're worried about how it will play out is, well, because you have always done it some other way. That is, most groups I'm familiar with are leery of this kind of "revolutionary" play because, by golly, there are things they take for granted. Things like "The GM is in charge." Why? Because you've always done it that way? If that's the reason, you need to find a better one.

And note, Paka, that when I'm saying "you" here, I'm not actually specifying you or your group! That's just my way of addressing the point. It might not apply to you at all, but it may apply to other players and groups out there.

I've gotta say that letting go of the reigns that a traditional DM-Storyteller has held and giving players control made for an interesting game.

I will write it up as an Actual Play thing soon, just haven't had the time but the game was a blast and none of us really knew where it was going.