This week has seen several advances in RPG theory, including the creation of a new exploratory theory focused forum, Theory Decides.
Formulaic
Over at Story Games, Tony Lower-Basch began a discussion on formulaic stories and the use of well known landmarks to communicate and pace the stories as they are played. The discussion continues with analysis of the ways these landmarks can be identified, as well as their relationship with conflicts and decisions.
Constructive Denial and Emulation
Over at I would knife fight a man is an examination of genre emulation and constructive denial (a creative agenda where players conspire to protect core elements of the fiction). This is expanded by an example, designing a game for such a type of play
Strategy-Free
Jonathon Walton describes an under-investigated type of RPG. Specifically, where quantitative mechanics are minimized or non-existent and strategic thinking is not required for effective play.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Friday, September 21, 2007
Lesson: Forge Theory - Scoping of the Model
One of the more prominent theories of RPGs is that developed at The Forge. The present incarnation of this theory is built upon many past developments and ideas in RPG theory. Called variously Forge theory, the Big Model, or GNS, it is often a complex collection of ideas, some current, and some out-moded by later discussions.
At present the Forge theory is based on a way of breaking down play into four scopes, in a nested form. The largest scope is the Social Contract. Somewhat of a misnomer, this level includes all the social elements of play, making it essentially include everything going on during the game. As the name suggests this is the level were social agreements and understandings are built, but it is not limited to them.
The next scope is that of the Exploration. This is where the fiction of play starts to present itself. Exploration is typically broken into several categories: character, situation, system, setting, and color. These interact during the course of the game, but are considered to lie at this scope of the model.
The next scope is called Techniques, which is where practices of play are located. This can be everything from specific ways to resolve combat attacks to unstated rules on the importance of characters.
The lowest scope is Ephemera, where the actual events of play are considered.
These four scopes are a way of zooming in on play to help tease apart theoretical understanding. In a nut shell, they present four ways of looking at what happens during a RPG.
At present the Forge theory is based on a way of breaking down play into four scopes, in a nested form. The largest scope is the Social Contract. Somewhat of a misnomer, this level includes all the social elements of play, making it essentially include everything going on during the game. As the name suggests this is the level were social agreements and understandings are built, but it is not limited to them.
The next scope is that of the Exploration. This is where the fiction of play starts to present itself. Exploration is typically broken into several categories: character, situation, system, setting, and color. These interact during the course of the game, but are considered to lie at this scope of the model.
The next scope is called Techniques, which is where practices of play are located. This can be everything from specific ways to resolve combat attacks to unstated rules on the importance of characters.
The lowest scope is Ephemera, where the actual events of play are considered.
These four scopes are a way of zooming in on play to help tease apart theoretical understanding. In a nut shell, they present four ways of looking at what happens during a RPG.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Weekly Review September 9th to September 15th
This week has been an active one for RPG theory and related developments.
Fanfic, Elites, and Story
Ginger discusses fandom inspired online play, including the how goals of players differ between engaging story and simulating fanfiction. Also, she describes the effect of structurelessness on such games, and how they produce elites who covertly enforce their preferred style of play.
Jeepform Introductions
At Story Games, Emily Care Boss and Tobias Wrigstad have begun a conversation on the nature of story focused freeform RPGs, called jeepform. Related to the Nordic larp communities, this form of RPG focuses on strong constraints and responsive, story focused play, while avoiding explicit mechanics.
Guarding Yourself
Graham Walmsley discusses dropping your guard as part of his series on improvisation. As part of this he describes blocking and accepting as ways people raise and lower their guard during play.
Spotlighting the Unknown
Fang Langford returns to his discussion on moving the spotlight within RPGs as an alternate view of how systems work. In this case, he discusses the unknown as one way to draw the spotlight to a specific player, including ways that players introduce unexpected or unforeseen elements during play.
Fanfic, Elites, and Story
Ginger discusses fandom inspired online play, including the how goals of players differ between engaging story and simulating fanfiction. Also, she describes the effect of structurelessness on such games, and how they produce elites who covertly enforce their preferred style of play.
Jeepform Introductions
At Story Games, Emily Care Boss and Tobias Wrigstad have begun a conversation on the nature of story focused freeform RPGs, called jeepform. Related to the Nordic larp communities, this form of RPG focuses on strong constraints and responsive, story focused play, while avoiding explicit mechanics.
Guarding Yourself
Graham Walmsley discusses dropping your guard as part of his series on improvisation. As part of this he describes blocking and accepting as ways people raise and lower their guard during play.
Spotlighting the Unknown
Fang Langford returns to his discussion on moving the spotlight within RPGs as an alternate view of how systems work. In this case, he discusses the unknown as one way to draw the spotlight to a specific player, including ways that players introduce unexpected or unforeseen elements during play.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Weekly Review September 2nd to September 8th
This week has several disparate developments in RPG theory and related areas.
Re-enactment
J. Tuomas Harviainen offers several articles on historical re-enactment groups, including the SCA. He describes some of the results of that research, especially dealing with persona and the importance of social aspects within these groups.
Being Obvious
Graham Walmsley continues his discussion of improvisation for RPGs, by talking about the importance of not over-thinking one's improvisation. As such, he suggests that the first or most desired idea is often the best.
Design Conversation
Emily Care Boss describes how game design can serve the purposes of communicating specific ideas, and that progressing design can become a conversation in this way. She calls on a variety of examples based on gender roles, both for characters and players within the contexts of playing a RPG.
Specialization and Conflict
Chris Chinn talks about specialization in characters (especially with regards to point-buy systems), and the negative effect this has on conflicts. Typically the specialist will win their type of conflict and fail the rest, making the during play decisions less interesting.
Re-enactment
J. Tuomas Harviainen offers several articles on historical re-enactment groups, including the SCA. He describes some of the results of that research, especially dealing with persona and the importance of social aspects within these groups.
Being Obvious
Graham Walmsley continues his discussion of improvisation for RPGs, by talking about the importance of not over-thinking one's improvisation. As such, he suggests that the first or most desired idea is often the best.
Design Conversation
Emily Care Boss describes how game design can serve the purposes of communicating specific ideas, and that progressing design can become a conversation in this way. She calls on a variety of examples based on gender roles, both for characters and players within the contexts of playing a RPG.
Specialization and Conflict
Chris Chinn talks about specialization in characters (especially with regards to point-buy systems), and the negative effect this has on conflicts. Typically the specialist will win their type of conflict and fail the rest, making the during play decisions less interesting.
Monthly Review August 2007
This month has seen several theory developments focusing on dissecting or emulating certain kinds of story genres. First, Brad Murray at Story Games described how focused game design can be seen as a dissection of a specific genre of stories. In this way, a RPG can be seen as a distillation of the essentials (or one view of those essentials) of a specific genre of stories.
Later on, Fang Langford discussed looking at RPGs in terms of the movement of the spotlight among the players. Later, Graham Walmsley brought up status changes, both as the foundation to some types of stories and as a method for improvisation within RPGs. Lastly, Rich Warren described how the rules of RPGs act as the physics of its fictional world and genre.
Later on, Fang Langford discussed looking at RPGs in terms of the movement of the spotlight among the players. Later, Graham Walmsley brought up status changes, both as the foundation to some types of stories and as a method for improvisation within RPGs. Lastly, Rich Warren described how the rules of RPGs act as the physics of its fictional world and genre.
Monday, September 03, 2007
Weekly Review August 26th to September 1st
This week has seen a continuation of some ideas from last week, as well as other revisitations.
Fundamental Acts
Over at I would knife fight a man, there is a reprise in an earlier discussion about the fundamental act of roleplaying. That discussion centered on the relative importance of the social act versus the fictional one. Stemming from there are two other possible fundamental acts: imagination and choice.
Change in Status
Continuing his discussion on improvisation techniques, Graham Walmsley returns to the subject of status changes. In this case he illustrates how many different status situations can be actively enjoyable, including low status and drops in status.
Fundamental Acts
Over at I would knife fight a man, there is a reprise in an earlier discussion about the fundamental act of roleplaying. That discussion centered on the relative importance of the social act versus the fictional one. Stemming from there are two other possible fundamental acts: imagination and choice.
Change in Status
Continuing his discussion on improvisation techniques, Graham Walmsley returns to the subject of status changes. In this case he illustrates how many different status situations can be actively enjoyable, including low status and drops in status.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Weekly Review August 19th to August 25th
This week has seen some developments in RPG theory, from looking at older theory concepts to looking at the contractual aspects of game systems.
A Change in Status
Graham Walmsley discusses the utility of status changes in the construction of stories. He specifically offers this as the beginning of a series of articles on improvisation techniques for use in RPGs.
Rules as Contract
Rich Warren describes the difficulties that can arise from modifying system before or during play. Specifically he characterizes the way in which the game mechanics of a RPG can act as a contract among the players and the GM.
Unreconcilable Goals
Over at I would knife fight a man is a thread focusing on various unreconcilable goals that arise in RPGs. It starts with the "Impossible Thing Before Breakfast" (which, curiously enough, is not something you should believe), described as the inability to have the GM author the story and the players control the protagonists. It also discusses the "Method Actor Trap" where a group of method actors all share a goal of a coherent story, but expect it to arise without any constraints on their characters.
A Change in Status
Graham Walmsley discusses the utility of status changes in the construction of stories. He specifically offers this as the beginning of a series of articles on improvisation techniques for use in RPGs.
Rules as Contract
Rich Warren describes the difficulties that can arise from modifying system before or during play. Specifically he characterizes the way in which the game mechanics of a RPG can act as a contract among the players and the GM.
Unreconcilable Goals
Over at I would knife fight a man is a thread focusing on various unreconcilable goals that arise in RPGs. It starts with the "Impossible Thing Before Breakfast" (which, curiously enough, is not something you should believe), described as the inability to have the GM author the story and the players control the protagonists. It also discusses the "Method Actor Trap" where a group of method actors all share a goal of a coherent story, but expect it to arise without any constraints on their characters.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Weekly Review August 12th to August 18th
Likely due to GenCon this has been a slow week in RPG theory.
Spotlight
Fang Langford considers a variant on the definition of system, namely how the spotlight is moved among players. This perspective suggests looking at niche protection and turn-taking as well as resolution mechanics to understand how a game works.
Game?
Over at Story Games is a discussion about when roleplaying is or is not a game. Like game discussions in the past this has produced a variety of ways to say what is a game, from common use (if you play it with someone, it is a game) to stricter constructive definitions.
Spotlight
Fang Langford considers a variant on the definition of system, namely how the spotlight is moved among players. This perspective suggests looking at niche protection and turn-taking as well as resolution mechanics to understand how a game works.
Game?
Over at Story Games is a discussion about when roleplaying is or is not a game. Like game discussions in the past this has produced a variety of ways to say what is a game, from common use (if you play it with someone, it is a game) to stricter constructive definitions.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Editorial: Words Have Power
In RPG theory, much like RPG design, we should be constantly aware that the words we use to describe and classify have a depth of meaning and a history of use beyond our particular use of them. The choice of what to call a new concept or how to rename an old one has consequences in how we use that concept and what connotations the concept will gain.
This is an important reason to engage with multiple theories and to examine ideas and concepts from multiple perspectives and approaches. It is very easy to become lost in the connotations of names when we should be exploring the meaning that lies beneath them.
One excellent object lesson in the power of naming in design and theory is the Brain Damage debate started by Ron Edwards in 2006. Specifically he observed specific story difficulties in long time players of Storyteller games, which we called Story Blindness in reporting it. Examining his claim of Brain Damage opens up several interesting places where naming had a surprising amount of influence.
First, is in Storyteller games themselves. Specifically, these games name the common role of GM, the Storyteller in the context of the game producing a story. While we often treat the choice of such words to be incidental, the subtle implication of Storyteller is that the GM role is the giver of story, while the players are thereceivers of it, an audience who, while involved does not participate in the same way. Consider if the GM has been called Narrator how different the implied dynamics would be, with players being the main characters, not the audience.
Thus the Storyteller dynamic sets up the presumption that the story is what the Storyteller gives you, regardless of the quality or pertinence. This is despite the presence of tools that could just as easily foster collaboration (such as explicit theme, mood, and motifs). It is reasonable to see the Storyteller mystique as a major root of the brain damage that Edwards identifies.
This makes it all the more interesting that Edwards' use of the phrase brain damage is such an excellent example of how words can influence our use of them in unintended ways. Few discussions of RPG theory have reached the level of polarization and venom that the brain damage debate entered. At the same time, the term puts a pressure on extracting from the discussion some consensus. How can such a consensus be reached without using our (quite possibly damaged) brains?
Consider, again the difference had the debate started with the term story difficulty or story blindness (as this reviewer used to attempt to express the ideas of both sides in a reasonable manner). Would the debate have focused less on the visceral feelings and more on an examination of the causes of what Edwards observed? Over a year later the debate has polarized itself into stagnation, with only a brave few seeking to explore it, despite how well known it may be.
It is more than reasonable to say that the games and hence the stories from those games will affect our own views of stories. Indeed, the words we use to describe the process we take in building a story can do so. Edwards believed that the Storyteller games do have this effect, but that it could be remedied (in some ways) by games with a different view of stories, those with a Narrativist (also known as Story Now) bent.
One of the critical concepts in Edwards' flagship design, Sorcerer, of this sort is something he calls a Bang. A bang is a moment of decision, a choice for the player characters to make. As a choice of words, bang has very different connotations than, say, choice. Not the least of these is a sense of urgency and violence.
As the term bang has become an important piece of Edwards' theory and its use beyond Sorcerer, it is important to ask does this term present a similar risk as Storyteller does? Do Story Now bangs risk a different kind of damage in understanding stories? These are difficult questions, but ones we must ask when accept that the words we use have power beyond how we intend to use them.
This is an important reason to engage with multiple theories and to examine ideas and concepts from multiple perspectives and approaches. It is very easy to become lost in the connotations of names when we should be exploring the meaning that lies beneath them.
One excellent object lesson in the power of naming in design and theory is the Brain Damage debate started by Ron Edwards in 2006. Specifically he observed specific story difficulties in long time players of Storyteller games, which we called Story Blindness in reporting it. Examining his claim of Brain Damage opens up several interesting places where naming had a surprising amount of influence.
First, is in Storyteller games themselves. Specifically, these games name the common role of GM, the Storyteller in the context of the game producing a story. While we often treat the choice of such words to be incidental, the subtle implication of Storyteller is that the GM role is the giver of story, while the players are thereceivers of it, an audience who, while involved does not participate in the same way. Consider if the GM has been called Narrator how different the implied dynamics would be, with players being the main characters, not the audience.
Thus the Storyteller dynamic sets up the presumption that the story is what the Storyteller gives you, regardless of the quality or pertinence. This is despite the presence of tools that could just as easily foster collaboration (such as explicit theme, mood, and motifs). It is reasonable to see the Storyteller mystique as a major root of the brain damage that Edwards identifies.
This makes it all the more interesting that Edwards' use of the phrase brain damage is such an excellent example of how words can influence our use of them in unintended ways. Few discussions of RPG theory have reached the level of polarization and venom that the brain damage debate entered. At the same time, the term puts a pressure on extracting from the discussion some consensus. How can such a consensus be reached without using our (quite possibly damaged) brains?
Consider, again the difference had the debate started with the term story difficulty or story blindness (as this reviewer used to attempt to express the ideas of both sides in a reasonable manner). Would the debate have focused less on the visceral feelings and more on an examination of the causes of what Edwards observed? Over a year later the debate has polarized itself into stagnation, with only a brave few seeking to explore it, despite how well known it may be.
It is more than reasonable to say that the games and hence the stories from those games will affect our own views of stories. Indeed, the words we use to describe the process we take in building a story can do so. Edwards believed that the Storyteller games do have this effect, but that it could be remedied (in some ways) by games with a different view of stories, those with a Narrativist (also known as Story Now) bent.
One of the critical concepts in Edwards' flagship design, Sorcerer, of this sort is something he calls a Bang. A bang is a moment of decision, a choice for the player characters to make. As a choice of words, bang has very different connotations than, say, choice. Not the least of these is a sense of urgency and violence.
As the term bang has become an important piece of Edwards' theory and its use beyond Sorcerer, it is important to ask does this term present a similar risk as Storyteller does? Do Story Now bangs risk a different kind of damage in understanding stories? These are difficult questions, but ones we must ask when accept that the words we use have power beyond how we intend to use them.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Weekly Review August 5th to August 11th
This week has seen several developments about communication in RPGs.
Signalling
Fang Langford describes how the different modes of communication work within RPGs, and how the differences between these modes are (often informally) signalled. He also discusses some ways of making the signalling more overt in design and play. Chris Chinn looks at signalling at another level, specifically that of determining the duration of a group game commitment. He suggests the more concretely this is understood the greater willingness players will have to take risks.
Distilling Fiction
Over at Story Games is a discussion on a possible purpose for story-focused game designs of recent years. Specifically, Brad Murray suggests that these designs are a dissection of a specific genre to be reconstructed in varied ways during play. He likens this to an experimental analysis of the genres in question.
Learning the Game
Mike Mearls talks about learning RPGs, relating the difficulty in making a text both a reference and a learning tool. He suggests that RPGs could benefit by playing as you learn approaches, especially those that do not sacrifice fun.
Signalling
Fang Langford describes how the different modes of communication work within RPGs, and how the differences between these modes are (often informally) signalled. He also discusses some ways of making the signalling more overt in design and play. Chris Chinn looks at signalling at another level, specifically that of determining the duration of a group game commitment. He suggests the more concretely this is understood the greater willingness players will have to take risks.
Distilling Fiction
Over at Story Games is a discussion on a possible purpose for story-focused game designs of recent years. Specifically, Brad Murray suggests that these designs are a dissection of a specific genre to be reconstructed in varied ways during play. He likens this to an experimental analysis of the genres in question.
Learning the Game
Mike Mearls talks about learning RPGs, relating the difficulty in making a text both a reference and a learning tool. He suggests that RPGs could benefit by playing as you learn approaches, especially those that do not sacrifice fun.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Monthly Review July 2007
This month has seen various discussions on and around the way that players balance their contributions in RPGs, especially when one of those players is the GM. Over at Story Games, Tony Lower-Basch describes how a GM provides the ingredients to the story crafted by the players. A similar idea is further explored by Rich Warren as he discusses the way traditional RPGs treat the control and influencing of characters.
Moving away from the control of specific players, Ashi brings up fanfiction-based roleplaying, and specifically the effect that canon on the authority of the players. Also at Story Games Joshua BishopRoby suggests looking at RPGs as the interplay of situation, character, and adversity. Specifically he traces the change in these areas that arises as a game progresses and the impact of player decisions becomes more pronounced.
Moving away from the control of specific players, Ashi brings up fanfiction-based roleplaying, and specifically the effect that canon on the authority of the players. Also at Story Games Joshua BishopRoby suggests looking at RPGs as the interplay of situation, character, and adversity. Specifically he traces the change in these areas that arises as a game progresses and the impact of player decisions becomes more pronounced.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Weekly Review July 29th to August 4th
This week has been somewhat slow, but still evidences some contributions to RPG theory.
Community of Discourse
Bradley "Brand" Robins describes his intentions at a series of RPG reviews, specifically to build a discourse on the critical analysis of existing RPGs. Referencing reviews in other areas, as well as inadequacies in present RPG reviewing, he hopes to set a bar for effective and constructive criticism.
Character Death and Worse
Rich Warren describes the importance of character loss to building tension and a sense of risk into a RPG. He contrasts this with the overtly known setting of stakes in conflicts, suggesting that unknown risks provide more tension and energy.
Community of Discourse
Bradley "Brand" Robins describes his intentions at a series of RPG reviews, specifically to build a discourse on the critical analysis of existing RPGs. Referencing reviews in other areas, as well as inadequacies in present RPG reviewing, he hopes to set a bar for effective and constructive criticism.
Character Death and Worse
Rich Warren describes the importance of character loss to building tension and a sense of risk into a RPG. He contrasts this with the overtly known setting of stakes in conflicts, suggesting that unknown risks provide more tension and energy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)