[Under My Skin]...got under my skin. Now, with pictures!
EarthenForge:
Man, I will say it again: I *love* hearing everyone's take on the events.
So Ron - to clarify a bit, I don't think that Kelly's long term decision to make the marriage work was necessarily a thing of weakness. I think it's entirely possible that those characters could have gone on to have a very healthy relationship. My sadness for her (and yes, Emily - it is so very true that these characters begin to have a life of their own!) had to do more with moment-by-moment decisions. At the time I think she stayed because she didn't know what else to do. That's not always a bad thing, but it's not a decision made from strength, which would have helped her immensely. The ending happened rather fast and I was only beginning to process the affair as it was playing out. Considering her weaknesses, it seemed like one of the worst possible things that could have happened to her. And while she was certainly beginning to forgive Martin in the last scene, I think she still struggled with a lot of rage - rage that had nothing to do with her husband. I'd imagine that it would take her a very long time to get past what happened and deal with her own serious issues. If I could have had one more scene at the end that didn't erase anything previously, it would have been for her to say something like, "Hey Martin - remember when I said that there was nothing I was angry about? That wasn't true. If we're going to be more open with each other, you need to know that I'm still very angry about the affair." and go from there. I imagine that Martin probably would have handled that very well...
Also, I'll be honest, as Kelly, I didn't have that surge of enthusiasm for Martin *until* that "how we met scene," which was pretty cool. This was almost entirely due to bracing myself for the coming hurt. As a player I knew that trouble was coming and I allowed that feeling to seep into Kelly because it felt very much inline with her issues - not allowing people to get too close, expecting others to disappoint her, etc. Thanks for bringing that up - I hadn't actually thought about that until now.
The alcoholism with Kelly was indeed interesting. I was a little surprised that it didn't end up being openly addressed, but then, if we had openly addressed everything, our game would have been quite a bit longer. So this part of her character remains a bit vague. She was clearly abusing alcohol at times (good eye, Ron - she was totally knocking back shots at the party), but to what extent she had a problem was never completely defined.
Also, Ron, I get your frustration with the crossing the lines issues. Being unsure of what is okay and what isn't in terms of game structure and mechanics can be annoying - especially in a game like this where you don't want to interrupt the flow too much. I encountered this a bit, too, but found myself not minding overmuch in the long run, because a pretty compelling story was woven even so.
Tobias Wrigstad:
Hey guys,
just some initial thoughts after reading through your posts.
Quote
Kelly wrote:
More monologues would bring this stuff out to the audience within
the game, but it takes practice, I think, to process thoughts and
spit them out in a timely manner in a way that makes the story
more interesting right then.
I actually think the opposite -- it would have made things easier.
Monologues are, at least to my mind, a great way of exploring your
character's thoughts and feelings. I like to throw players into
monologues for that reason -- you will discover things as you go
along. Let the monologues be the drivers, and the rest of the game
follow naturally.
Quote
Ron wrote:
I did react strongly to Kelly during the party scene, and paid
attention to Judy to keep from blowing up about it, but I think
you were interacting with others and missed it; I wonder if Tobias
and Em caught it.
I most surely did. My interpretation was that you were upset by
being poured a drink in public, and needing a smooth way out of
having to drink it. Which caused more public display than if you
hadn't touched it, which was excellent.
As a walking GM, I once approached you, stretching out my arm,
offering to take the drink away from you. My intent was to break
the invisible scenes, to make sure that your character's action
was seen, and help get the other players' attention to it. I don't
think you got that, but that's fine. It was a spur of the moment
thing.
Quote
Ron wrote:
I also thought Claire and Martin might have had a coffee shop
scene; we never did get to see that friendship in action.
Yeah, that is true. I was reluctant to suggest it because that
would have made Clare such a central figure, and while gossip
scenes can be fun, they aren't always that necessary in wholly
transparent play.
Quote
Ron wrote:
Kelly could essentially cross lines without mechanics/plot
consequences.
I think this is just as it should be. The lines are there to help
us focus on some things and to establish something that can be
clearly broken/crossed. The rest just follows naturally. I think
the game would have suffered if we had must somehow incorporate
plot consequences all the time. And oftentimes, not reacting
creates a more natural feel or interesting story.
Quote
Ron wrote:
I do think some thought might go into parsing out how a player
might be forced, or feel forced, into crossing his or her
partner's line (not the one which is the focus of the scene) by
validating the importance of the other character's
decision. It's a system issue.
I think these are important and valid points, and although it
would have been perfectly possible for Judy to hit the bar and
have unprotected sex with a total stranger following Martin's
dismissal, I don't think anyone would have been impressed by
that. I think the solution we eventually came up with was great.
I am not sure what "system issue" means here but I would agree
that the resolving of two individually designed conflicts in a
manner where they are dependent on each other is problematic. I
didn't see this in the game until you pointed it out, so thank
you. In the future, I think time should be spent before this
scene, or perhaps preferably before starting to play, to
brainstorm about the meanings and consequences of these
scenes. Maybe that is in the booklet already.
My gut reaction is that there is something to be said for this
potentially surrealistic intersections -- "how do we combine
unprotected sex and anger?" I suspect that may lead to things that
wouldn't have come out had we tailored everything from start.
Quote
Em wrote:
And thank you, Tobias for your help and for introducing me and
us all to this kind of labyrinth of the heart
My pleasure! I have told you before, and I'll tell you again, that
I am so happy to be able to come to GenCon and play jeepform games
written by others than the usual suspects! I am excited in seeing
what you will do with it, what parts that stick with you and what
you see that I don't.
Quote
Rachel wrote:
Also, I'll be honest, as Kelly, I didn't have that surge of
enthusiasm for Martin *until* that "how we met scene," which was
pretty cool.
I can totally dig this. I did not become emotionally invested in
your relationship until after this scene.
And, on a side-note, my mind started wondering -- thinking about
relationsships based on something awesome that happened initially
and how long it is actually possible to feed on that moment, spite
the fact that you are really not together with that person other
than in your mind. There is a game here somewhere.
Quote
Rachel wrote:
This was almost entirely due to bracing myself for the coming hurt
I so love this comment. I can relate and I think it is a good
thing. Sometimes, this will fuck up the story, but IMHO it is
always worth it if you realise what's going on and why you are
doing what you are doing. It is the experience of playing that
counts in the end.
I think, and this ties in to some stuff Sarah was saying in her
post, that you can learn a lot about yourself from watching how
you treat your character(s). What your impulses are, how you feel
when you are "hurting them" or "saving them" etc. This is such a
personal thing and hardly visible to other players (except if the
know you really, really, really well), but worth pointing out.
And this is of course not tied to jeepform or anything, but for me
it really stands out there, biased as I am.
--Tobias
EarthenForge:
Thanks for your comments, Tobias.
About monologues, I'm really beginning to understand how important they are. I refer to them as difficult partly because I personally struggle to spit out my thoughts on demand and partly because I'm not in the practice of doing so in other games I play. But in saying this, I absolutely agree that they can and even should have a major impact on the game. I think that a lot of tabletop story games could benefit from monologues as well. Before my next Jeepform game, I'd like to discuss using them, because I don't think the technique is necessarily obvious to the average gamer.
Tobias Wrigstad:
The notification tool rocks! I am writing job applications, which is sooo boring, so I am happy to
jump at this opportunity to think about something else for a little while.
I'm always up for discussing such things. Here, email or whatever.
The word monologue has some bad connotations, I think. I don't think they are supposed to be
theatrical monologues spat out as an uninterrupted flow. It is about finding out what you are
thinking (you = your character) and that is OK to take time. I mean, when I do monologues, I
oftentimes start out slowly, because I have little or no clue where I am going, and then, gradually,
as I hook into the character's thougt process, things speed up and I hear myself saying things
that I wouldn't have conciously thought of.
I see them as a tool for exploring the mind of the character. I guess I jump on your formulation
"spit out my thoughs on demand".
EarthenForge:
(As long as no one cares, I think it's cool to keep this discussion on the thread rather than email since others may find it useful.)
So, interesting. I'd really like to see this in practice. I don't think it's too hard to figure out, but it sure makes the way easier to see how someone else adds this technique in. How do you personally tend to go about it? Do you verbally pause, make a gesture, or something else to distinguish the monologue from the dialog? Is it usually something quick - just a sentence or two? Also, do you do these very often, or perhaps just a couple of times during the game?
When I played in the Upgrade, I really enjoyed how Past and Future scenes could inform and direct the Present scene, often giving the players a little more to work with and respond to. It seems that monologues might do exactly that as well. There were a few times in our Under My Skin game that I was having trouble reading my fellow player's intentions - and I'm sure the reverse was true for them. It's a little frustrating to want to say "yes" to them but not know what the "yes" is. And, of course, you don't want to interrupt the flow of the scene, if possible, to have a meta-game discussion. Monologues might interrupt slightly, but they would avoid some of the above problems and I'd imagine they would ultimately make the scene more intense and compelling.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page