The Forge Archives

Back in [Capes] Social Resolution Mechanics we gave the idea of session-long Complications (Issues) a really thorough working over, and reluctantly concluded that we couldn't see a straightforward way to make them work.  

To brutally distill, the discussion back then concentrated on two possibilities:  One, you could decide what would happen in the Issue ahead of time and let players work to that.  This gave people a structure to work to, but didn't give a straightforward way of adapting that structure when unexpected things happened.  Or, two, you could create a way that such a structure could emerge out of how people resolve Complications.  That was adaptable, but didn't give a structure to work toward.  

Using Complications, I (at least) couldn't see any way to get what was needed from both.  But Events aren't Complications.

I've been perusing my reference movies again and what I notice is that the same Events crop up over and over again in what Sydney refers to as the "B-Plot".  The details are different because of different ways that the characters have worked to control them, but they're recognizably the same Event.

Unlike Complications, it seems you can reuse Events without them losing their narrative sting.  

Here are Events I see cropping up three or more times in Spiderman:

[*]Norman Osborn chooses between Harry and Peter
[*]Peter learns who MJ cares for
[*]Peter keeps a secret from Harry
[*]The Goblin personality informs Osborn's actions
[*]The people of New York judge:  "Spiderman: hero or menace?"[/list:u]Looking at the introductions of the various relationships in the movie, I think that you could have posited these Events within minutes of each characters introduction.  For example, the very first conversation Harry and Peter have is about which of them Norman likes best.

So what if players can define Issues for their characters, and these Issues are just Events that they will set scenes around many times throughout the story?  They could pay a Story Token to establish a Scene (or sub-Scene in an existing scene, maybe), and then spend another ST to get their hero into the scene, then play it out.

I think this could serve much the same purpose as the non-conflict mechanics I recommended, but in a more unified and sensible manner.  Rather than having a whole different rule for how people do their personal B-Plot scenes, you have a pre-existing structure that tells them not only how to manage the rules but what context their struggles to make their hero's life better will play out in.

This is taken from the New Uses for Story Tokens thread:

Quote from: Doug RuffInspirations can be spent to introduce new Events. If Story Tokens can be used to perform the same task, Inspirations aren't as necessary.

Granted, it doesn't allow players to start a die at a higher level, but I don't think this is necessary any more. Therefore, are Inspirations necessary?

Quote from: TonyLBWell, they still serve the game system by providing a thematic chain of events ("Love of Jessica" -> "Won challenge against Gigantor" -> "Galactic Renown" -> "Asked Jessica to marry me") and they're the backbone of the current non-conflict mechanic. I don't see Story Tokens as being descriptive enough to really handle either of those tasks.

I think that the "recurring Events" that you've just described (in the current thread) is pretty much equivalent to the "thematic chain of events" above.

So, instead of using Inspirations to generate new Events within a conflict, why not use them to advance a character's Issues?

This would allow Events within conflicts to fall fully within the "Story Token economy", while giving players a powerful reason to rack up Inspirations.

Not exactly sure what you're saying, but I'll venture a guess and you can correct me if needed.

[*]Players would be able to introduce Events without Inspirations
[*]Introducing Events would cost a Story Token
[*]Inspirations would be used on any Event to increase the die, but nothing else
[*]Inspirations would thus be a way (among other things) of translating advantage from A-Plot to B-Plot and vice-versa (i.e. you beat up the villain which gives you the confidence to ask Louise Bennet on a date)[/list:u]I think I pretty well agree with all those points, but are they the points you were actually making?

The only thing I might have a question about is whether the system benefits from having any charge for introducing an Event.  There is a temptation to say that introducing them is free.

Hi Tony,

This isn't quite what I intended, which means I need to correct myself!

My idea is to separate "one-off Events" from "recurring Events". I'm going to adopt your terms, and call the former "Events" and the latter "Issues".

So, Events would be brought into play with Story Tokens (not Inspirations), exactly as you stated. These Events must resolve at the end of a conflict (as they are one-offs).

However, the Inspirations are still gained by winning Events, and the player gets to spend these towards advancing their Issues (and that is all he can use Inspirations for).

Spending Inspiration to advance Issues becomes the "B-plot" and this can take place during the scene or as a separate "non-combat" scene, depending on what's appropriate for that Issue.

Quote from: TonyLBThe only thing I might have a question about is whether the system benefits from having any charge for introducing an Event. There is a temptation to say that introducing them is free.

I think there should be a charge for two reasons. One of these is that introducing an Event allows you to shape the scene, and certain Events give a distinct tactical advantage ("MJ falls of the balcony" isn't something Spidey can ignore) and the opportunity to Gloat. The second reason is simply to reduce the maximum number of Events in a single encounter (handling time again).

I am still mulling over this suggestion, I think there is a lot of potential there, but I am going to need a bit more time before I comment.  That said, I would caution you regarding the use of the word Issue as jargon.  It already has a strong connotation within the comic book medium (i.e. one Issue is one unit of story) and confusion may arise...

Thomas

ASIDE:  The question of whether to charge STs for Events is a good one, but I'm not going to be able to speak with any certainty until after tuesday's face-to-face.  When I've seen the new ST economy in action, without Prominence, I'll have a much better idea of whether it's generating enough spare STs that it would be reasonable to charge them for Events.

Doug, thanks for the clarification.  I think that I, in turn, may have miscommunicated.  I don't think there needs to be a rules distinction between the two different kinds of Events.  I get the impression from your phrasing that you think a recurring Event would be introduced in Scene 1, but not Resolved until Scene 3 (or 8 or 29).  That's not really how I was imagining it.

Recurring Events resolve every single time they were introduced, just like any other Event.  They aren't seminal Events that happen once at the climax of a story, they are running tropes that occur over and over again in various forms.

Take "Osborn shows a preference between Harry and Peter".  By my rough count that Event is resolved (i.e. Osborn shows a marked preference of some sort) at least four times during the movie.  Very nearly every single scene where Norman and Harry are both on-screen features such a judgment.

That one is a clear-cut case of an Event that is tied into the relationship between two people ("Exemplars", anyone?)  There are some counter-examples of recurring Events that aren't Exemplar based  ("Jean Grey confronts her fear of her own power") but not enough to make a federal case over.  What do people think of the notion that at the beginning of a story you define three recurring Events for your hero, one for each Exemplar?