[Polaris] Transcending the Rules
Troels:
OK, I'll bite, controversically.
In a game of Polaris, I let my knight, Algol, fail and be corrupted a bit sooner than the system would have forced me to, because it seemed approriate story-wise. Concretely, he hesitated and let his adulterous lady love jump to her death instead of making a conflict out of trying to save her. From outside, in story terms, I'm told it was cool. But it's bugged me ever since because it diminished Algol's tragedy that he didn't fail in spite of struggling with all his will and virtue, as he would have a bit later, he failed on purpose, or perhaps because this evil otherworldly possessor spirit named Troels (that would be yours truly) made him.
I really wish I'd played him by the book, doing my best to be a big damn hero, going down in a blaze of glory and human frailty. Not by choice. Next time, I'll be true to my protagonist. And at least to me, the resulting story will feel better and more tragic.
Yours, Troels
Frank Tarcikowski:
Hi Troels, okay, I'll let that pass as controversial. I knew it! ;-)
Please note though that "playing by the book" does not mean "try best to win conflicts" (as a player). That's totally up to each player to decide. I take it you did feel that not only did your protagonist have to put up a good fight, but you as well? You do realize that very different things would have happened if you had, don't you? Polaris is absolutely unpredictable once you really go into the conflicts full force. Which I like a lot, by the way. It was just, in this game here, not what clicked with us. As Dirk said, we played it smoothly.
- Frank
Ben Lehman:
Quote from: Troels on March 07, 2008, 10:21:22 AM
But it's bugged me ever since because it diminished Algol's tragedy that he didn't fail in spite of struggling with all his will and virtue, as he would have a bit later, he failed on purpose, or perhaps because this evil otherworldly possessor spirit named Troels (that would be yours truly) made him.
Oh, Troels. How excellent is that. That really deserves a thread of its own. Or even a book.
This is the "make Ben rejoice in people finally getting his creative vision" thread, isn't it?
yrs--
--Ben
Troels:
Quote from: Frank Tarcikowski on March 07, 2008, 01:45:18 PM
Please note though that "playing by the book" does not mean "try best to win conflicts" (as a player). That's totally up to each player to decide. I take it you did feel that not only did your protagonist have to put up a good fight, but you as well? You do realize that very different things would have happened if you had, don't you? Polaris is absolutely unpredictable once you really go into the conflicts full force.
The protagonist had no motive force other than me. If I don't fight for him, who will? My mistaken will corrupt, crush, defeat and humiliate him. OK, so what if the Mistaken isn't doing his worst, but instead we have an idea of where we are going together and cooperate in telling a story? First, without serious adversity, my knight has no challenge to rise to, he can't be a hero, only look like one from the outside. Second, the story creeps towards predictability. You don't get story NOW, you get story later, when re-told.
Also, Algol was going down, it was just a question of time. The end point of a Polaris story is predictable, even if the way there is not. Algol would (IIRC) have had odds two to one agains him if I had rolled, and even if he made it he would still be a knight with a talent for winning fights in sneaky ways who was sleeping with his dying father's young wife under his father's roof while his fellow knights were out in the field dying like heroes. Exactly how things would have gone south (an expression that makes so much more sense in Polaris) could have changed, and thereby could have hung a story (now).
Mind you, I'm not trying to get you, just providing some adversity for your argument... :-)
Yours, Troels
Frank Tarcikowski:
Hi Troels,
Quote
You don't get story NOW, you get story later, when re-told.
Oh, that’s neat! I’ll borrow that some time. It’s not what happened in our game, though. Only the last couple of scenes were predictable, for we were just bringing the story to its well-deserved bitter-sweet ending. The stuff that happened in the middle of it was quite surprising and no one could have fortold.
It was just that we didn’t play as adversarial as you suggest. It was more like, the Mistaken comes up with something and it’s bitter, it’s tragic, it’s not right-out crippling, it’s just cool and fitting, and you go: “Hey, I could fight this, but really, I like it far too much!” Ever seen how Narrativist-inclined players in traditional games deliberately plunge their characters head first into trouble, or make them fail to realize stuff that’s pretty obvious? Same thing.
One example that illustrates very well how this particular game worked has been floating in my mind for days. The protagonist is Capella, played by Tanja. Capella was the little girl who had the ambition to become the greatest knight. (I really want to tell the whole story because it’s all so cool, but to the point.) It had been established via conflict key phrases that Capella would fall in love with Dirk’s protagonist but Dirk’s protagonist would break her heart by falling in love with Sabine’s protagonist. My protagonist, Capella’s brother, had just died tragically in her arms. (You still following?)
Hendrik, Capella’s Mistaken, frames the scene. So Hendrik is the Mistaken, Tanja is the Heart and plays Capella. Sabine is the New Moon and also plays her own protagonist, who is not in the Cosmos. Dirk is not a moon (six players, remember), but still plays his protagonist who is of course in the Full Moon section of the Cosmos. Hendrik frames the scene and gives an introductory narration, also desribing Capella’s feelings. Tanja adds some bits into it. Then Hendrik describes how she goes to see her love, Dirk’s protagonist, for she needs a shoulder to cry on. But as she enters, Dirk’s and Sabine’s protagonists are fucking on the floor like animals.
And Sabine says, no, no way. That’s not good enough. Here’s what’s going on: He is holding her hands and looking at her, in an incredibly intimate and caring way. That’s all. And the rest of us are all like, HELL YES! And Hendrik is a little sceptical but says, okay, if you like that better… And I (not a Moon either) add that upon seeing this, Capella’s heart breaks (everybody nodds to this). Then Tanja has her protagonist get all choked up and try to be strong and walk away and Dirk has his protagonist be a real asshole and yell some really mean things at her that question the very core of her self-image.
I don’t think any conflict key phrases were used in that scene.
- Frank
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page