Hi,

I've found The Forge forums a great source of advice for narrativist gaming. I'm not desigining a game, I'm just interested in getting advice on how to run one. Is that acceptable in this forum?

In particular, I'm planning to direct a story in Theatrix in a few weeks. While I've had the game for 6 years, this is the first time I've had a chance to run it.

[Before you direct me to other threads, please know that I have already ransacked The Forge for every message on Theatrix, and Ron's discussions on the GNS definitions, Relationship Maps, Bangs, and Kickers (all very cool).]

Here's my opening question:

I want to run a classic "Characters trapped in a remote location menaced by supernatural terror." I'm very impressed with Ron's argument for getting player's engaged in the game from the beginning, and hope to use something like a Kicker for each player.

The problem: my situation really restricts the players' options for kicker. ie, regardless of how they want to start, they have to end up in the isolated location.

Any suggestions for handling this?

I'm also interested in other ways to get the players involved.

- Alan

I would start in media res. Your sceanrio is heavily based on the specific situation; it may not need kickers. Or, do cut-aways after the game starts as exposition of How We Got Where We Are.

Why not tell them the location, or one close by and let them come up with how/why the character got there? You could even do this one on one if the players wanted some secrecy, say if they were hiding a bag full of stolen bank money and didn't want the others to know about it.

Pete

Hi there,

This is a Paul Czege and Tom (Silent Tamatama) thread if I ever saw one ... these guys did Theatrix thoroughly.

Not having played the game, my own input is limited to the observation that "story creation" aside from GM-control may be problematic, at least without house rules. I agree with Pete and Gareth's advice, and suggest looking into Unknown Armies scenarios - these are specifically written to put the characters into 90%-finished situations and to play out the last 10% with a lot of "freedom" in terms of moment-to-moment options.

Best,
Ron

Aha! The cutaway idea has potential. I could set up the situation, then encourage players to create a flashback. Player-created flashbacks may have the same player-engagement effect as a kicker.

My reading of Theatrix is that players can have enormous authorial power: they can create scenes, add complications or elaborations, previous relationships, and even state the nature of game reality. There's examples in the rules where the player's improv a climax which suprised the Director. Sure, the Director can veto these, but is encouraged not to. I can envision using these rules in the sort of let-the-player-build-it way Ron describes for Sorcerer.

In fact, I guess this is what I'm struggling with: the collision of a story with player improv. I want to give players as much involvement in creating the story as possible, but don't want to give up the resolution of the story arc.

I use a theory from fiction writing called the desire line. In past games, I've waited until characters were engaged in my game world, then played the inciting event that gives them a goal they want to pursue. (The hard part is making the players care when the event happens.) This eventually leads to a revelation, which suggests a new, related goal and so on, until a major revelation spins them into a final confrontation.

It's rather like using pushpins to support a string. The pins are the key pieces of information and the string is player improvisation in between. In the past, I've even created pushpins on the fly to reify the direction players are improvising. I only need hard control over a few revelations to produce a story arc.

At least that's the theory. What I'm fishing for is practical advice - words from someone who's done this. Do I detail every plot point (or Bang?) or just write three sentences on a note card? Is there a way to sense when improvisation is going to cause a train wreck? Is there a non-directive way to bring it back on track?

- Alan

Alan,

One of the things you might consider is that responsibility for "staying on track" or rather, driving toward a resolution, can be shared. Your baseline assumption seems to be that players are not committed to that goal, so the only way that it can be realized is if the GM "makes sure" that it happens. So therefore your desires for player-improv and story-resolutions appear to you as opposed goals.

My outlook on the matter - not a gospel, just my outlook - relies on a real restructuring of the whole process, conceptually. However, it's not to the shared-GM extent that something like Universalis or even Dust Devils goes to. Instead, it all comes down to my metaphor of the GM as bass player.

Jesse Burneko (jburneko) can probably provide some down-to-earth insight about transitions to this mode of play, step by step. His threads and commentary in the Adept Press column are pure gold - I suggest heading to the Sorcerer website and checking out the Actual Play links in the "Game" section, with special reference to Jesse's gothic game and also to the Art-Deco melodrama discussions.

Best,
Ron

Hey Alan,

I've got a meeting in five minutes, so this is going to be quick.

I could set up the situation, then encourage players to create a flashback.

I think this is totally the way to go...but you don't have to encourage anything. The game mechanics will do it for you. I'm not remembering the exact term that Theatrix uses, but there are player "powers" that cannot be used without expending plot points. Start the game in the horrific situation with the characters not having any plot points. Present a supernatural horror that cannot be defeated without the expenditure of plot points, and make sure your players know they can call for flashbacks to events prior to the current horrific situation. These flashbacks are Subplots, in Theatrix terminology. By completing them, the characters earn plot points. Then, when you flash forward to the horrific situation, they're empowered to do something about it. Voila, instant horror movie!

Expect that player use of the Subplot mechanics will gradually build detail into the characters over the course of gameplay.

Paul

Hello Ron and Paul, et al.

I've been diving through the Art Deco posts and all of Jesse's preparation and play. I've also sent private email to Paul and am looking forward to contact with people who've actually run and played the game.

Ron Edwards wrote: Alan,

One of the things you might consider is that responsibility for "staying on track" or rather, driving toward a resolution, can be shared. Your baseline assumption seems to be that players are not committed to that goal,

Hi Alan!

My thinking is that you're over-prepping, in the sense of diminishing the strengths of Theatrix. Let me run down your prep steps and you can see if my Yes/No reactions make sense - i.e., whether you can see if they fall into two distinct groups. As always, if my recommendations don't seem valid to you, no big deal, and I'll always defer to Tom and Paul as knowing Theatrix much better than I do.

1. Tell the players the premise (people trapped by a blizzard in a truck stop while something kills them off.) Get a feeling for their commitment and try to establish a common concept of setting and genre conventions (like the noir comparisons in Art-Deco.)

Works for me. Keep it brief, though, or people will either get bored or play-before-they-play.

2. Players discuss the kinds of characters they'd like to see in the situation and make notes on desired traits.

Ditto. Plain character creation will do. Remind them that major motivations and so forth are easy to insert during play (and will benefit them to do so) so therefore don't have to be invented whole cloth.

3. Because this a horror scenario, I'd ask each player to come up with a Dark Secret, involving sex, family, or death. [Should I ask them to relate the secret to the location or the people there? Not sure.]

Yikes. Seems to me that you're trying to guarantee that the characters will matter, trying to guarantee that Dark Revelation is going to be climactic, and so on. I'd say let this get handled as desired during play; just let'em know that it's OK (better than OK) to invent a Dark Secret into existence.

4. Apply their ideas to character sheets. (In Theatrix that means sorting key words into Skills, Descriptors, Personality Traits, and Attributes, and assigning numbers. The Dark Secret is a Flaw, which earns a Plot Point when played in a scenario.)

Works fine. My point about the Dark Secret still applies, that is, don't try to force it. Let the content of flaws, if any, take care of themselves by having the players generate them.

5. Ask them to create kickers that bring them to the Truck Stop in the blizzard. [Should I also ask that the kickers threaten their dark secret or just use the DS to produce bangs during play? My horror will also be producing bangs.]

Or maybe I should leave kickers for players to create in Flashback? I don't really want to start the game in battle with the horror, then flash back, it grates on my artistic instincts. (This is what comes from being a writer who GMs :)

Flashback, flashback, flashback! Screw the writer, the "writer" is the act of play itself. And again, let Dark Secrets arise during play if they want them, and just use the mechanics to make them awful and Plot-Point-y.

Another preparation idea: ask the players to create a teaser montage of "scenes from the episode". Hm.

Do this afterward, or even better, give Plot Points when a player identifies a scene (successfully, in your opinion) as being perfect for the teaser during play.

Best,
Ron

Hi Alan,

I don't know Theatrix, but I am a writer, and I want to comment on Ron's "Screw the Writer" sentiment.

Being a writer may give you insight about plots on rails, character crafting and development, literary techniques that port into gaming, try-fail cycle, etc., etc., but in one key way, it can become a problem for a writer-GM. Writers are in complete control of their characters and stories (Caveat: I'm not talking about creative gestalt, mining the subconscious, going into left field kind of creativity theory here.), and the temptation arises in RP situations to impose a "story" or "plot" on the situation. Don't let it go there. Think of the fellow players as fellow writers in a collaborative story, if you will, and keep the "I'm an author" mindset in the writer's box. Otherwise "urge to write" jumps in like a 300 pound gorilla and becomes "urge to make players experience my brilliant novel." Whenever I tried that, things quickly devolved into the Big Ol' Locomotive of Gaming Hell.

As a GM, I find in media res works just great. Jump to the flashbacks with that adrenaline flow -- cool! Just make sure the flashbacks have a purpose for the players -- maybe they ought to be Kickers in their own right. Whatever you do, I'd suggest you let go and let the group jam.

Best,

Blake

Hi Ron,

Yeah, I'd already begun to realize that keeping the development and character generation sessions short would be a good idea. I know from my own play that I like to put down only a few broad stokes and improvise on them.

I also start to believe that player-driven flashbacks and statements can provide the kicker effect. And I'll leave relationships between PC and supporting cast to improv.

Great idea about awarding points for identifying teaser moments!

This is like a spiritual journey, peeling off the assumptions! I begin to see that giving players a lot more authorial power might actually releave me of a lot of work and let me enjoy the game.

Regarding starting the game in conflict with the horror, then flashing back - I'm concerned that this might put too much pressure to get back to the monster fight. I'd rather start at a quieter moment and let the players develop a social network with the npc's trapped with them. Of course, that means we will need to find another dramatic point to start with. Maybe that's something I can develop with the players.

- Alan

Hello again,

I drafted a relationship map for the 10 supporting cast members trapped at the truck stop. I didn't think it was credible to have a connection between ever npc, so I ended up with 3 clusters connected by sex and familiy. Outside this, they're all related simply by being trapped.

Are there any rules of thumb to gauge how well a map will support play?

I'm also going to ask Paul and Tom if they think an Rmap suits Theatrix.

- Alan