Here's an idea in the forming...we'll call it the Ball for short.

The Ball, represents input into "what happens next" in a game by the group. This input, is not always addressed by mechanics, and very often is not explicitly addressed in the rules. Scene framing does address one aspect of using the Ball(sort of like the volleyball serve to start it). Narrative control also addresses part of it(who's got it now) but it still often is handed off at somepoint (check out how some folks run with MoVs in the Pool, and other's do a little thing, then hand it back).

Check out this thread by Clinton as an example of the GM handing the player the ball, and the player handing it back.... http://indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=6116

My point isn't to establish a new term, but rather to try to find the appropriate terminology to discuss how the Ball gets handed back and forth by the group as a whole. I'd say that a lot of this has a lot of similar traits with flirting, since it depends a lot on implicit expression vs. what is "going on"(What is said vs. what is meant).

Consider this- everything that happens in play is either doing something with the ball, passing it when you're done, setting it up for someone else, or saying"Hey! I'm open!". Momentum in play is based on what folks are doing with the ball and how they are setting it up for others. Communication(explicit/implied) is the key to the group working together as a team and making sure that everyone gets their time with the Ball when they need it.

To give some more concrete examples, consider SA's and Kickers to be set ups, or serves, with the intent the GM will hit it back in the form of Bangs. Scene framing is also a set up, as well as any form of foreshadowing intended to be acted on by another person("The villain stands next to the edge of the cliff...").

Normal passes are usually stuff like, "What do you want to do now?" or "Where do you guys go?" by the GM, or "I look for clues" or "What happens?" on the parts of the players.

Asking for the ball might be the player sitting back and opening a book, playing videogames, or getting on their cell phone. It could also be physical cues, like getting antsy and fidgety, and looking at the player or "About to say something", the same input cues that occur in a conversation.

The momentum and energy of the game is based on how well the group communicates and works as a team for passing this Ball back and forth, with understanding of how, when, why, and who wants it and needs it. When the Ball gets dropped, you have folks complaining about "unreactive players", "players not knowing where to go/what to do", etc. on both the the GM's part and the players.

Although this has occurred to me through primarily Narrativist play, I can see that GNS is really defining what "sport" is going on with the Ball.

I'm really having a hard time expressing this concept, and I'm not sure if I properly put this forth to begin with, but if anyone can help me nail it down a bit better, or ask for clarification, I might be able to better work this out.

Any input would be greatly appreciated,

Chris

Further notes,

After a great discussion with Paul Czege via chat, I managed to get a better grasp on the Ball concept. The idea of the group working as a group, as a team really came up, and the emphasis on communication, again explicit and implicit.

Going further with the Ball analogy, Paul likened it to a good hockey team, that someone is always there to be where the puck is(not drop the ball), whereas most dysfunctional gaming comes about with desiring that level of teamwork but neglecting to see that the necessary communication(social contract) issues being handled.

Dysfunctional play is a matter of folks fighting over the Ball, not knowing what to do with it when it comes your way, or not even knowing whether its in your hands or not(classic railroading issues). You know the ball has dropped because the players are at a loss for what to do, the GM isn't driving things forward, in other words, both sides are sitting there looking at it on the ground. Perhaps looking for cues to pick it up or trying to cue the other side to do so.

Obviously, there are several ways the Ball(and game) can come to a halt, either because no one is sure who should have it, the person who has it doesn’t know what to do with it (think of players stuck in a puzzle, or looking for clues), or one person is hogging the ball (GM fiat, rules lawyer, the guy who wants to roleplay shopping for shoelaces).

The Ball is in motion whenever a conflict or a plot twist is being presented, resolved or foreshadowed, regardless of source(director stance, character actions, etc.)

A good player will then set up for another player to receive the ball in motion. This is setting up those conflicts and plot twists in such a way that another person can do something with it and present another conflict/twist/resolution and pass it on(“Yes, and...”,”No, but...”, etc.). A good Kicker is the player serving a set up to the GM. A Bang is the GM giving a set up for a player.

If it appears that the Ball is slowing down, and you’re not sure what to do, the second best option is to simply pass it. A good GM uses cutting agressively to order that the Ball be passed and “set up” for another player to keep it in motion. Good players will sense when it’s losing momentum and give good exit cuts for a GM.

The aspect of Scene Framing about when to cut in, when to cut out, and the players actively taking involvement into this is pretty much what the Ball is about.

Other side notes considering this idea-

Good Illusionism is Michael Jordan play- The GM hogs the ball, but does it so well, the team is cool with it. They know who to pass to.

Good protagonist play is Magic Johnson play- he’s always there to receive a pass, and always knows who to pass it to, on top of being a strong “Ball mover”

Hopefully this sheds a bit more insight on what I’m talking about. Again, comments or questions would be appreciated. Nothing's set in stone, and I'd really like to explore this issue further.

Chris

Cool analogy, Chris. I'll play--

Antagonism between gm and players could look like volleyball with the players on one half of the court and the gm (plus foosball like effigies) on the other half. Or it could be a circle where everyone is equally responsible for keeping the ball off the ground.

Communication is key--in sports people have positions, and territory they are responsible for protecting. In rpg, gms have setting/plot/npcs, non-gm players have character (primarily). Coming up with responses and material about these game elements are the territory on which they keep the ball from dropping. Plays give the team strategy and allow one another to know what to expect. Would this be campaign materials or modules? Genre expectations?

Social contract and system define the lines of the court. Where it's out of bounds to step, or moves that are illegal (can't elbow the gm in the stomach, so to speak, by proclaiming by fiat that your character won a conflict without using the agreed upon adjudication process).

>bap<
Ball's in the middle of the court, who'll volley next?

--Em Care

Hi Emily,

Was a bit afraid for a minute I went too far and lost everybody. To volley with you:

Antagonism between gm and players could look like volleyball with the players on one half of the court and the gm (plus foosball like effigies) on the other half. Or it could be a circle where everyone is equally responsible for keeping the ball off the ground.

Coming up with responses and material about these game elements are the territory on which they keep the ball from dropping. Plays give the team strategy and allow one another to know what to expect. Would this be campaign materials or modules? Genre expectations?