[DitV] Play by Post Game?
Filip Luszczyk:
Moreno,
Quote
Can you give an example of a DitV play procedure that you think it would impossible to play by forum?
Just about any rule that relies on real-time interruptions won't work in asynchronous communication, unless you apply it retroactively (which completely changes the flow of communication, and therefore turns the entirety of system structures built on this foundation upside down). This inlcudes play procedures like kibitzing, veto, say yes or roll the dice and so on. All the processes that normally linger at the back of player's head waiting for a trigger are delayed. The delay messes up the default communicative arrangement of the system.
If the given session used long blocks of text per post (most of PBFs I've seen so far did), applying such communication interrupt rules would potentially require the players to rewrite a lot. Adds to the workload and possibly produces confusion and/or frustration. If the game used mainly short exchanges (as some D&D PBFs I've seen), there would be a lot of pausing to make sure a given unit of information doesn't trigger a lingering process, insanely prolonging things. But I find it hard to imagine anyone playing in such a manner effectively.
Either way, even if you somehow manage to maintain the communication discipline needed to accurately apply the entire system as is, at this point it's not simply PBF slow. It's slow by frickin' Cthulhoid standards :)
Furthermore, I believe the text environment involves some factors that might prompt the players to loosen their mechanical discipline (unless you introduce some measures to discourage such behaviours, consciously or not, which alters the system by adding an additional layer of structures). E.g. I can easily imagine players driven to produce large blocks of fluff-rich text defensively, in hope the others, not wanting to force a fellow player to rewrite a piece of well-written narration, would be less likely to veto stuff or initiate conflicts. Weak mechanical discipline = weak session of Dogs.
So, on a very fundamental level, that's an entirely different system. Therefore, it's an effectively different game, and consequently a completely different (if superficially similar) gaming experience.
Moreno R.:
Quote from: Filip Luszczyk on June 01, 2009, 01:32:58 AM
Moreno,
Quote
Can you give an example of a DitV play procedure that you think it would impossible to play by forum?
Just about any rule that relies on real-time interruptions won't work in asynchronous communication, unless you apply it retroactively (which completely changes the flow of communication, and therefore turns the entirety of system structures built on this foundation upside down).
I have observed that, in practice, the use of these rules is always retroactive, even when you play tabletop. The veto is never given interrupting someone: you let him finish, then you ask questions, then if you are not convinced you use the veto. The same with blocking a raise: you let per player who raise finish the description of what he want to do before saying "you don't get to do it"
This is a rather general thing: synchronous communication in tabletop role-playing is a mith. To get something of the sort we should forcefully stop the other players from talking every time we want to stop their action (so, to stop the sword trust someone described, I would not describe my parry afterwards, I would punch him in the face to stop him from completing the word "hit"), so, synchronous communication at the table would no communication at all, only chaos.
Actions applied retroactively, extensive rewrite of what's happening until the round is completed, edition of what was said or done, is normal in every sort of tabletop roleplaying, so I really don't see any difference here with play-by-forum.
Quote
This inlcudes play procedures like kibitzing, veto, say yes or roll the dice and so on. All the processes that normally linger at the back of player's head waiting for a trigger are delayed. The delay messes up the default communicative arrangement of the system.
There is a slowness problem, as I said. What at the table would require less than a second can take a week to sort in a forum communication. But even if this change my SUBJECTIVE experience (I am writing on a board, not talking with a person, how could the experience not be different), the game is still the same, the same way Chess is always chess, if you play on a table or by e-mail, the same game. The creative "button" it push, the kind of satisfaction and reward, are the same. What change it's the social environment OUTSIDE the game.
It's like playing DitV with you best friends in the world, or playing it with someone you never met before: your subjective experience change because there are changes in the social environment and in your behavior, but would you say that I am playing with a different system? What about playing with an empty stomach or after having eaten too much? After having a glass of water or after having three bourbon?
Quote
If the given session used long blocks of text per post (most of PBFs I've seen so far did), applying such communication interrupt rules would potentially require the players to rewrite a lot.
Why we should write a lot of text in a game like DitV? Most raises are a single sentence. The only longer blocks of texts are from my NPCs when they "reveal the city" narrating everything that happened before.
You call look it up yourself, I did write the link upthread. Even if you can't read Italian, the dialog of the characters is in red ink, all he rest are description of the setting and spaces, game rule explanations (it's a teaching play-by-forum, as I said), and out-of-character kibitzing (to better show how these games work, I consciously did choose to not use a different thread for out-of-character discussions. I even go off-topic talking about what happened to me the evening before, sometimes. I WANT to show that during these games people should talk to each other and not "be silent when your character is not in the scene".
Yes, it's slow. I said it in my first post. But slowness don't bother me. It's even a help for the busy players: a slow game can be played even when you free time is rather limited, because all you need is some free minutes every few days.
Most PBF I have seen don't really use any formal game system, it's for this reason that they turn into epistolary novels. All you need to do is use a formal game system.
lumpley:
P1nback, I dunno about these two, but I'M glad you had a good time playing.
-Vincent
Filip Luszczyk:
Moreno,
Quote
Actions applied retroactively, extensive rewrite of what's happening until the round is completed, edition of what was said or done, is normal in every sort of tabletop roleplaying, so I really don't see any difference here with play-by-forum.
The difference is scale. This is not the normal tabletop scale, where all that occurs within mere seconds. The environment messes up time factors (and psychological factors as well, I'm sure).
Quote
But even if this change my SUBJECTIVE experience (I am writing on a board, not talking with a person, how could the experience not be different), the game is still the same, the same way Chess is always chess, if you play on a table or by e-mail, the same game. The creative "button" it push, the kind of satisfaction and reward, are the same.
Of course it isn't the same game, exactly for that reason. Games tend to be designed to produce a gaming experience in a specific range, and experience can only be subjective.
The "slowness" you mention in your every post is this change. It isn't discussed a lot, but tabletop games are affected by various time-related factors. Here, for example, this creates additional time to think up your Raises. You don't have a lot of time to think about your Raise normally - that's why they tend to be spontaneous, and even if the narration is rough, this lends itself well to a strong emotional impact. I noticed that whenever people deliberate about their Raises/Sees for more than a few seconds (eyeing their Traits lists and so on), their Raises/Sees tend towards crap. In PBF, you always narrate from a position similar to a novelist. This automatically creates a certain detachment from immediate circumstances that wouldn't be there in normal play.
Chess (this one I did try in PBF environment) plays the same way only as long as we aren't considering the use and impact of Chess clocks. Chess, however, is a clinical game. I'd say a game like Quake would be a better comparison. If you slow the game down to a snail's pace, you're no longer playing Quake as designed, and the subjective experience the game produces is entirely different. The slowness means your reflexes are not tested the same way - if anything, it becomes an excercise in precision. Dogs does not rely on your reflexes, but it does rely on creativity and communication in a similar manner. The slowness of PBF environment disturbs the arrangement.
Likewise, the kind of satisfaction and reward are not the same - the part that relies on real-time interaction with other people is totally not the same. It strongly depends on the players' ability (and willingness) to accurately express their emotions in writing. Another thing is, the same person can be writing several subsequent messages in entirely different emotional states, depending on the time of writing and the surrounding factors that one never sees from the other side of the screen. PBF play does not occur in a single "ritual space" where the emotional experience is fluid and uninterrupted. You dive in and out repeatedly.
You experience the game in chunks that it wasn't designed to handle the same way (i.e. no structures for mitigating the impact of the above factors are provided).
Moreno R.:
Hi Filip.
It seems that we are stuck in a loop, repeating again and again the same things. And as Vincent reminded us, we are occupying P1NBACK's thread, so this is not the place for this discussion.
I am rather firm in my opinion on DitV by PbF, so I see no sense in continuing this discussion elsewhere if it stay limited to this game, but if you are interested in discussing play by forum asking for actual play experiences from other people with other games (enlarging both the scope and the number of participants in the discussion), you could post a thread in the Actual Play subforum and we could continue there.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page