[PTA] Driving Towards Conflict
David Kay:
Hello Forge community,
This post is not an actual play report, so much as a request for actual play reports. I'm quite new to indie games, but I'm planning to produce a game of Primetime Adventures when next semester rolls around. My inexperience is giving me trouble with understanding something important in the system though; how exactly am I, as the Producer, supposed to drive the players towards conflict? Since I have no direct authority over stake setting, I'm just not sure how I'm supposed to encourage the players to take interesting risks with their characters.
I've lurked for a while, and I know that there have been lots of threads on stake setting and conflicts in PTA, but so far none of them have really directly answered my question. I'm perfectly happy to go back and look at an old thread again though, if you think it will help answer my question.
I would also love to see new actual play reports that could shed light on my question. I'm specifically interested in Producer techniques for driving towards conflict, and how the table talk around that looks.
Chris_Chinn:
Hi David,
Quote
I'm just not sure how I'm supposed to encourage the players to take interesting risks with their characters.
The big thing to look at is Issues. When you sit down to play, the Producer and the Players are coming together with this understanding- the Issues are what we're going to drive at, and drive at hard. You shouldn't have to "encourage" the players, that should already be their goal, and your job is to facilitate them driving to their Issues and applying pressure to make them see their Issues in ways they may not have thought of.
Anyway, Actual Play links from my play:
My friend Sushu who hasn't GM'ed games previously ran PTA for a short season (6 sessions) and wrote about some of her experiences here: http://summercomfort.livejournal.com/541550.html
Our Star Wars PTA game:
http://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/05/23/pta-star-wars-a-galaxy-divided/
http://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/pta-star-wars-pt-2/
http://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/pta-a-galaxy-divided-ep-3/
http://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/10/10/pta-a-galaxy-divided-ending/
Jono's thoughts on the game: http://evilbrainjono.net/blog?permalink=843
My reflections on Issues and Stake Setting:
http://bankuei.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/advanced-conflict-stake-setting/
Chris
David Kay:
Hello Chris,
Thanks for all of that material, it was a fun read. I'm still struggling a bit to understand this aspect of PTA though. Let me try to unpack exactly where my question is coming from.
I think my confusion about the Producer's role is tied to a deeper confusion about the nature of stake setting.
I understand that PTA is all about conflict resolution, as opposed to task resolution. The players create their character's Issues in the pitch, and all conflicts should tie into their Issues, through the stakes. The PTA book gives the example of a character with the Issue of self-doubt; the player sets the stakes for that character as "does my character show bravery in the fight" as opposed to "does my character beat the bad guy". Here's the thing though; why wouldn't the player in that situation just say that his character shows bravery, instead of having a conflict over it? In your play report, you said that you thought the stakes should never make a choice for a player (specifically in the scene where one of the protagonists had to decide whether to kill his clone or not). Doesn't the above example suffer the same problem? (Perhaps you could solve this by saying: "does my character impress NPC A with his bravery in the fight?"). Good stakes should tie into character issues, but I think I'm not understanding exactly how they should do that. I need a clear understanding of that before I ask more questions about the Producer's role.
I think what would be most useful for me is an actual play report that, instead of focusing on what is happening in the fiction, describes the process of what is happening around the table, specifically focusing on what the Producer is doing to frame the conflict and how the players respond to that by setting their stakes.
Chris_Chinn:
Hi David,
Quote
Here's the thing though; why wouldn't the player in that situation just say that his character shows bravery, instead of having a conflict over it?
When you do stakes setting, you have a quick conversation with the player and the group about what they are finding the most interesting thing that is up in the air, at stake, unresolved and in question.
Why would the player have a conflict over being brave? Maybe because it seems like the most interesting thing and the player himself or herself isn't sure of the outcome. "Is Dumbo ready to fly? I dunno! Let's find out!"
If the player is genuinely invested in the Issue of their Protagonist, and excited to explore it, these situations happen often enough. (If the player is stuck in Deathtrap Dungeon D&D mode, where every conflict is to be avoided, the game will not work.)
And the places where the player chooses to make a statement instead of a question, "No, this thing doesn't faze me.", then your job as the Producer is to make suggestions and ask questions and find out what the REAL thing the conflict should be about.
From our game, the Jedi had to fight his father:
"I hope I win!"
"Of course you'll win. You're a Jedi, he's a politician. No, the stakes should be, Do you win without hurting him?"
"Oh geez! Oh geez! How much Fanmail do I have?!?"
These things take from a few seconds to a minute to figure out, usually. And everyone at the table can make suggestions - these are also the people who are handing each other Fanmail, so they're also going to suggest things they think fit with what's entertaining.
Everyone has to go in accepting that conflict is going to happen - so there's no point in avoiding conflict - instead, the attitude is, "What is the most interesting conflict for the story I want to explore?" and to use the rules to aim towards that.
Chris
David Kay:
Chris:
So you're saying that in PTA, players have to actively choose to engage in conflicts and take risks when they set stakes because it makes for an interesting story. I can dig that.
Back to the Producer's role: What specific things does the Producer do to get the players into the game? So far, I'm seeing two specific things in your examples:
1. The Producer needs to get everyone on board with the premise of the game during the pitch: get them out of a competitive mindset if they are used to that and get them to buy into the idea of exploring character Issues.
2. During stake setting, the Producer has to push players to come up with stakes that involve their character's Issue (if they haven't done it on their own). Ultimately only the player can decide what their stakes in a conflict are. The Producer's role is more along the lines of making interesting suggestions.
Are there any other techniques that the Producer should employ (before, during, or after conflicts) to help drive players towards interesting conflicts? I'm asking this on a really basic level; don't assume that something you do is so obvious that I would already know to do it. I might, but it would help me to spell it out.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page