Can someone explain the true reason behind "traits" (PtA style) to me?
Ron Edwards:
Hi Markus,
What you're saying makes perfect sense to me. It's the essence of my essay System Does Matter. I wrote that essay in defiance of the conventional wisdom that system doesn't matter, all it takes is the right GM and the right people, role was everything and roll was nothing, et cetera. Also, given your clarification of your view, I completely agree about Trollbabe.
I'll try to clarify how that relates to our current discussion, because I certainly do not want to be the position of arguing against my own points. When I talk about playing with people whose goals are aligned with mine, that's not the same as generic "good role-players" or "the right GM." Those phrases from the conventional wisdom of the 1990s overlook and even deny the existence of distinct creative agendas of play, among which clashes are incompatible regardless of any vague "quality" of the people involved.
Instead, I'm talking about people whose goals of play do match mine in that instance, and who are willing to see what this particular system can do for them. In that case, regardless of the Traits chosen in playing, say, The Pool, we'll probably get Narrativist mileage out of them no matter what. That's not to say we are overriding or replacing the system, but rather that we are strongly driven to squeeze it very hard in the way it is best suited to respond to. Granted, the "handholds" for squeezing may not be as precisely shaped and color-coded as they are in, say, Grey Ranks, but they are indeed there. As you point out, one of the strengths of such a system is that if you try to squeeze it for some other purpose, it won't work.
So I'm hoping you can talk about how Traits like that have failed for you in actual-play terms. This isn't to say "prove it," but rather to illustrate to everyone reading exactly what the issue is. I can certainly throw in my own experiences along these lines, but it really lies with you as the arbiter of the thread topic.
It may take more threads and time, but I'm hoping for an investigation into how Traits in their most uninteresting form turn out to be boring and exhausting. I suggest that if this happens with The Pool or PTA (or for that matter, Dogs in the Vineyard or My Life With Master, both of which should be included in the discussion), then people are probably failing to utilize the system and falling back on a vaguer, drifted version of play. But there are some games for which the boring/exhausting quality exists for me, in precisely the terms you describe. For me, the main one would probably be Wushu.
Best, Ron
P.S. I find your English vastly clearer and more readable than that of many native speakers. I greatly appreciate your clarity.
Christopher Kubasik:
Ron,
Would you see Abilities from HeroQuest fitting under this discussion as well, since many of them seem like Traits from other games. If not, what is the distinction?...
I'm so glad this conversation is taking place and look forward to digging in.
Callan S.:
Hi again Markus,
Glad to hear it made sense to you! :) I can relate to your posts alot, so I'm partly here to give a quick 'YO!' of mutual appreciation, while at the same time helping in practical terms (or trying to help).
I think you want quality X in the games you initiate, but are having trouble finding the words to express what you want to others. I think I know what quality you mean and I'll describe what I think it is in a more condensed form that's easier to discuss. I'll quote you, because I think you've already said it in part, and this quote is a good example.
Quote
But, what happens if one of the guys replies "huh? what's this thing you're talking about?". Surely in this case, I'd have done better to give them some more details *before* playing. Then, and only then, they could use the information I'd give to decide how (and even if) to play the blues with me.
To me this is saying you want informed consent, because then you can just focus on the music making. But 'trait' isn't very informing at all.
Lets describe one way of playing as A: The notion that people turn up, then one or several people figure out how to make them happy after they are already there.
In comparison what I think you want is B: To simply state the entire activities exact procedures (the exact 'sausage machine') and those who are made happy by that, turn up. Those who aren't, don't. No one has to figure out how to make anyone happy and you just do the activity, rather than keeping part of your brain busy trying to figure out how to make people happy/keeping some sort of vibe going (and that assuming it's even possible to make/force someone to be happy). All of your brain is on the music. Well, your example shows you asking people which type of music they want to play (ie, the blues), but essentially that's still you just being entirely focused on the music. Disclosure; the informed consent method is my preference.
The thing is, if your want B, the more vague the wording is in the rulebook, the more it degrades into A (disclosure, showing my own bias in using the word 'degrade'). Trait is a pretty vague word and mechanical constraints aren't a language everyone knows/knows well, so they're also vague.
How does that sound? Are you looking to describe a particular quality you want? Would this wording help describe that quality?
PS: And I love that "(and even if)" in your quote. It's just good to see that recognition! :)
Markus:
I just had to post this quick reply after I read Callan's message... YES!
You nailed it perfectly: as in the previous post, I agree 100+% with you. I wanted to say this just in case other people didn't understand what I meant and were refraining from posting their impressions... just read Callan's post, *that* is what I wanted to say.
Anyway, I'm preparing a detailed answer to Ron's question, but the thing is taking *hours* to write, and I can work on it only when I'm off from work (I'd like my english to be more... fluent, but I doubt that it's the right word for written communication). Just don't get the wrong impression that I'm ignoring the discussion!
John Harper:
I was talking to someone else about System Matters vs. the "Sausage Machine" (love that phrase) and I made a couple of images to help illustrate the concepts.
System Matters:
The Sausage Machine:
Maybe they'll facilitate discussion here.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page