Started by mcv, February 10, 2009, 07:43:14 AM
Quote from: mcv on February 11, 2009, 04:02:25 PMI sometimes do have some theme or engaging question in mind when I design a character, but once designed, I play him (almost) entirely from the character's own motivation, rather than mine. If I did my work right, the theme or question will come out. But what I'm doing is still mostly Sim, I think.
Quote from: mcv on February 11, 2009, 05:20:45 PMI mean, you can still approach moral dilemmas from the viewpoint of your character, and that's still simulationist, not narrativist.
Quote3. Luke needs to hit that deathstar
Quote from: greyorm on February 11, 2009, 05:47:19 PMQuote3. Luke needs to hit that deathstarIs exactly the opposite of Narrativism. Whether or not Luke hits that Deathstar can not be a given. If he fails to do it, THAT has to say something about the premise as well. Otherwise, who cares if he hits or not? Also Star Wars is FULL of premise (this ties back to problem #1 above).
Quote from: lumpley on February 11, 2009, 04:31:50 PMQuote from: mcv on February 11, 2009, 04:02:25 PMI sometimes do have some theme or engaging question in mind when I design a character, but once designed, I play him (almost) entirely from the character's own motivation, rather than mine. If I did my work right, the theme or question will come out. But what I'm doing is still mostly Sim, I think.Nope! No sim at all. That's a perfectly good, easy, common, and natural way to do Story Now.
Quote from: lumpley on February 11, 2009, 05:32:52 PMDoes your roleplaying have something to say about human beings (sometimes shortened to "moral dilemma")?
Quote from: greyorm on February 11, 2009, 05:47:19 PMOne of the problems is your use of the "moral dilemma" idea -- I know where you're coming from, and the problem is your idea of what that encompasses is too narrow, I'm betting tied to a right/wrong or "hard choice" conception. "What does individuality mean?" is a premise/moral dilemma.
QuoteThat those are the same thing may not make sense unless you're familiar with authorial terminology and usage/understanding, so how about you stick with "premise" and forget "moral dilemma" for the moment. (In fact, you might go back through all your answers and swap out "moral dilemma" for "premise" then see if your questions still make sense or if your own answers/ideas change.)
Quote from: greyorm on February 11, 2009, 05:47:19 PMAnother problem I've noticed is a consistent confusion between Technique and Agenda -- and while it has been explained a couple times, I don't think what that really means has come through for you. Simply: ALL Techniques can be used for ANY Agenda. So when you say, "If I do this thing, say deep character immersion, is that Narrativism, or is that Simulationism?" the answer is "Might be." When you ask "Does rolling the dice this way make that Simulationist or Gamist?" the answer is "Might be."
Quote from: JB on February 11, 2009, 07:43:18 PMMcV did mention Serenity RPG as a possible example of a narrativist game though, and I can say a little something about why/how Serenity isn't narrativist. Seems like we've likely moved beyond that on this thread though, and I don't want to threadjack, so I'll refrain unless it'd help to clarify what narrativeist/Story Now is for the OP.
Quote from: mcv on February 12, 2009, 04:20:50 AMBut in this case I'm basing my decisions on the personality I established for my character. The character was designed with story in mind, so I'd argue that character design was Story Now, but if in actual play, I'm not focusing on that story anymore, but hoping it will emerge automatically from the well-designed personality of the character (which it probably won't if the game, setting or other characters aren't what I expected), isn't that closer to The Right To Dream?
Quote from: lumpley on February 12, 2009, 07:26:46 AMIF, in actual play, the story emerges automatically from the well-designed personality of the character, because the game, setting, and other characters (and their players) work to make it so, that's Story Now. If it doesn't, it isn't.Your attitude toward your own character isn't the point. Whether you create story, actively, as a group, in play, is the only point.
Quote from: mcv on February 12, 2009, 08:16:24 AMSo in order to get Story Now, all we really need is a setting that facilitates Story, and that everybody designs their character so that it ties into that. Correct?
QuoteMy guess is that in order to fix this, we should agree on Premise before we design the characters, and remind ourselves every session that we need to address that premise. Is that correct?
QuotePremise: In his seminal work, The Art of Dramatic Writing, Lajos Egri introduced the world of theatre to the idea of premise. Premise is very similar to theme but to Egri it is much more powerful, decisive and less open to misinterpretation. The goal of any good play must be to prove its premise and all aspects of the play must be focused on leading the audience to that conclusion. Offered as examples are premises such as: "great love defies even death", "Blind trust leads to destruction, "Jealousy destroys itself and the object of its love".