[GURPS Traveller] What type of play is this?
David Berg:
Quote from: David C on January 30, 2010, 02:12:24 AM
2. I don't remember reading about "Zilchplay." What article(s) discuss it?
Basically, it's when you do pull off Exploration (produce a Shared Imagined Space), but don't pull off a group Creative Agenda. This doesn't mean misery. Hanging out with friends may be fun regardless. Even the actual play itself may be fun, e.g. if each player has some play procedure that he simply loves doing (cataloguing weird ship features?). But you don't get the stronger level of mutual appreciation of each other's contributions to the fiction that you can get with a firing CA.
Zilchplay is defined all the way at the end of the Glossary.
Ron Edwards:
Oops, I forgot to answer the Zilchplay question. David Berg is correct, but I should specify that the Shared Imagined Space is not consistently shared in such cases. Without a genuine "why we play" in action, there isn't much incentive to do it with any fervor; in fact, the only reason people play this way is that they think the little glimmers or hints of CA they individually perceive are as good as it gets. Such play is characterized by a certain amount of "checking out" when your character is not immediately involved, and even sometimes when they are. For a really long thread about it, see HERO System, M&M and assessing incoherence. Unfortunately, some diagrams I linked to back then are now inactive. Has anyone preserved Chris Chinn's diagrams, or maybe can Wayback them for this thread?
I do not have any particular reason to think it applies to the group you're describing, especially not after four sessions. It's possible, but that's all I'm saying.
Walt Freitag's original Zilchplay post was here: Zilchplay [split from "Understanding: the "it".
I ask that no one else post until David C replies. We've thrown a huge mess of porridgy commentary and links at him. Once he does, the gate's open, no need to wait for me at that point.
Best, Ron
David C:
Ron, I definitely see a lot of what was mentioned. One guy is playing a "UNSC guy from Halo." Some people were angry at me for not recording how many B cells I was using. Money is definitely viewed as a secondary point pool.
The players seemed to have fun at times, but there was so much "solo/duo action" going on that we might as well have been playing different games. If it was a game about fixing space ships and we were all mechanics, that might be interesting. But 1-2 players would fix the ship, than 1-2 players would haggle with some merchants, than 1-2 players would do this and that. It was rare that we were acting as a group and/or interacting with each other.
There is something else going on that I haven't mentioned. Players seem to try and kill each other frequently. Sometimes it is "justified" (my character kills anyone who kills an innocent). Other times, it is just a way of manipulating the game. I suggested we play Paranoia, haha.
Quote
Without a genuine "why we play" in action, there isn't much incentive to do it with any fervor;
At one point, I actually sent the GM an email asking him, "What's the point of the game?" I found some of his comments really telling.
Quote
Its unfortunate because you really came in after the pcs went through all the prep story and you are 4 sessions in to an unfolding campaign that hasn't started yet (Due to pcs dogging) so you have really no context in which to put what is occuring
He also mentioned that I came in after 15 sessions. After 100 hours of playing, the campaign hadn't started yet?
Quote
The game is a bit more sandbox
The entire time I was playing, all I could thing was "Choo-choo!"
Quote
all i can say is play for several session in a row
Call me impatient, but I feel like I should see evidence of a good game the first session I show up (or at least the second session, in case people were having an off day).
The group has an open invitation for someone else to run a game (GM burnout). But at the moment, I'm pretty confident that I won't deliver the play they'd like. Sim is definitely my least favored CA.
contracycle:
I think players trying to kill each other is a big ol' red-flashing-light alarm right there. Reading that back into your initial description gives me a slightly different take; I could imagine a game dealing with this kind of ship-maintenance detail being fun, but I probably wouldn't find this actual game actually fun. The GM burnout thing reinforces my perception.
Therefore I'm more sympathetic to the idea that this is some kind of zilchplay, and I don't think you should take it as typical of sim. It's probably using, or trying to use, some sim principles of action, but if so it's working poorly.
But that also means you should be less certain that they will react badly to the kind of play that you like. I think the combination of PvP conflict and GM burnout suggest they're not really that happy doing what they are doing, even if they say and think they are. They might in fact be much more receptive to a different style of play if you actually go and give it to them.
David Berg:
I'm gonna say what Gareth just said, but with less sophistication and more fervor:
Quote from: David C on February 03, 2010, 02:36:58 AM
Sim is definitely my least favored CA.
Whether it is or isn't, please don't base that on this piece of shit game! I've loved many Sim games but would rather do jumping jacks for 4 hours than sit through what you've described here! (There's a reason for the "don't lump me in with those guys!" phenomenon Ron mentioned!)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page