In Dark Trees
trevorhock:
that's a really interesting idea. i had considered using a system of clue cards, which were similar in many ways to Strands. instead of just creating a mystery from scratch each player was given a clue card which had some player generated motif written down on it such as "shady dive bar" and then using those clue cards the players collaboratively constructed the mystery.
however, i like what you're implying, which seems to be a slow reveal of the mystery. if i'm understanding you correctly, the game would almost become trying to figure out what the mystery is rather than trying to solve it? if so, this is a pretty great idea and certainly very Lynch-ian. though i'm not sure of how Threads would function in this sort of game. how do would you think to implement Threads if the players had no knowledge of what it was?
thanks for looking over the document!
Callan S.:
Quote
when the other players feel that a protagonist's thread is resolved, that protagonist no longer has cards drawn for his scenes is free to use their scenes to tie off their story or work more directly towards solving the mystery created at the start of the game.
I think I'd probably treat the mystery as merely scaffolding for the building of the games events, rather than actually important in itself. I'd suggest something like if someone ties off their story, you roll with some chance of everyones thread being advanced. When the last persons thread is resolved, the mystery is simultaniously resolved (make up some reason why the thread resolutions of everyone, including the last protagonist, leads to the mystery unraveling).
I mean, the mystery really isn't what were there for, is it? It's just scaffolding, to use in building something and relatively disposable.
trevorhock:
i ran a brief playtest the other night which ended eventually over player confusion over the "interconnectivity" between characters as well as the purpose of the mystery. one player got very confused over the fact that none of the protagonists really interacted with each other and thought that the mystery felt superficial. me and the other players tried explaining that this is intentional, and i tried liking the form of narrative as being similar to films like Magnolia or Traffic.
the reason i mention this is because, as Callan pointed out and as one of my players put it, the mystery is essentially a red herring. while it's entirely possible for a player to actively pursue the mystery, it's supposed to become more of a background element as the game moves forward.
Callan S.:
How did the characters develop - or more exactly, did they get up to choices they wouldn't normally make in their lives (I'm not sure how to describe it)
I mean, if you've got that, that's interesting and worth playing for. Them being interconnected is like a bonus, rather than a necessity and I'm sure would come with time, anyway. If you had the sort of character development I described, did that confused player enjoy that part?
trevorhock:
we didn't get to play further than probably the fourth round of turns, but we did have some interesting development for one of the characters. the problem, the way i see it, is that since there's no true mechanical way to enforce that characters reach flashpoints, it's something that really needs to be pushed by the players, similar to the way the crime caper is to be pushed in Fiasco.
1/4 players moving forward with their character isn't really great odds, but i think that if we'd been able to complete the game we'd have been able to see much more character development. my confused player was kind of thrown into the game without getting a chance to read through my text, so i think the theme of my game may have been lost on him. he didnt take the opportunity to push character development in his scenes or investigate the mystery and, since players establish their own scenes, it's difficult for the narrator to compensate for this.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page