Mytholder ([info]mytholder) wrote,
@ 2006-07-17 14:42:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Stripped down collaborative storytelling.
A VAGUE IDEA
36 cards. One of the 36 Dramatic Situations on each, along with a minimal 'cast list'.

A system to give traits to a character.

A resolution or narrative control system of some sort.

???

Profit.

Edit: I seem to be drawing a distinction in my head between once-off (short-form) and campaign (long-form) rpgs, and how they really absolutely have to be treated as different types of game. A lot of this is stemming from games played at Ubercon this weekend. Best Friends is clearly a once-off game - you're not going to play for more than four or five sessions at the absolute limit with the same characters. I suspect Dust Devils is the same (at least, I'd play it that way). Something like D&D is the opposite, obviously, where long-term character development and advancement is paramount.

Related thoughts:
1) Short-form games should have definite end conditions, and even victory conditions to be meaningful.
2) YPPIDE is a short-form game. I'll need to work on the end-game stuff.
3) Episodic games fall between the short and long-form games. You can convert a short-form game into an episodic game; you can also force a long-form game into an episodic one. The latter is more painful than the former. A dedicated episodic game could be a lot of fun.
4) All these thoughts really warrant full posts, but I really should get The Sweep of Unhistory done first, not to mention my accounts for this year.
5) For fuck's sake, Gar, play more games. That was a really useful weekend there, in terms of new ideas for rpg stuff.


(Post a new comment)

Short Form Games
(Anonymous)
2006-07-17 02:23 pm UTC (link)
I don't think I agree that SFG need an end condition, I think of them as short but intense campaigns and that's pretty much all I'm running these days due to time constraints etc, I agree that some games are improved by end conditions. As for making SFG meaningful I don't think you need an end game condition to do so but you do need a tight focus on the game at the table as there is little time to mess around.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Short Form Games
[info]ubiquitous_cat
2006-07-17 02:25 pm UTC (link)
Gah, the curse of the sign out.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Short Form Games
[info]boxninja
2006-07-17 08:54 pm UTC (link)
I knew you would type this once I'd added a tiny bit about end conditions to Best Friends. Bah!

But, seriously, that is something that 3:16 mechanically drives and Best Friends doesn't.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Short Form Games
[info]mytholder
2006-07-18 12:12 am UTC (link)
After the game, we were speculating about a pecking order. Basically, at the start of the game, the pecking order is set based on the girls' stats. After that, you move down the pecking order if you publically screw up/lose face/are humiliated etc. Aim of the game is to come out on top...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Short Form Games
[info]mytholder
2006-07-17 03:47 pm UTC (link)
Hmm. We're possibly making the same point from different sides - I'm musing that the game should be designed with a focus, while you're saying that the players should provide that focus. Either works, but the important thing is that the SFG has a definite cohesion that a LFG doesn't want.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]kshandr
2006-07-17 03:06 pm UTC (link)
Short form games... We see heaps of these in a con sense as well as in a "commercially produced game" sense. There's lots of scope for games which are for playing over beer and pizza, and lots of people like to rant and invent mad schemes involving rubber bands, time machines and contraceptive devices. Using my own games as an example, "Sidekicks Anonymous" is a Short form game.

Episodic games... Now I like this one. Do you mean (taking your Teen Girl example) - Episode one: "The girls meet before the prom" (easy to get into), then continue through other events "At Myra's birthday party", "Organising the pep rally", "Muffy gets a boyfriend", "Annabel turns out to be gay." So you don't worry about how the story gets from event to event, you just supply the backdrop, and let the group go.

Intriguing...

Or is that not what you meant?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2006-07-17 03:55 pm UTC (link)
No, that's pretty much it.

Short Form: One plot, characters 'end' when that plot is done.

Episodic: Characters continue from game to game, each plot is self-contained. While the characters may change, this will be as the result of a plot, and will normally be a reworking of the character instead of an incremental thing.

Long Form: Characters continue from game to game, as do the plots. Character development will be incremental for the most part. There may be individual plots, but they'll be part of a bigger one.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]mytholder
2006-07-17 03:56 pm UTC (link)
I am me. Stupid computer.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2006-07-17 08:52 pm UTC (link)
We have caught it from Steve.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]boxninja
2006-07-17 08:53 pm UTC (link)
That was me.

:-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Rolling and Episodic Long Form
[info]tdo_ie
2006-07-18 08:12 am UTC (link)
In my mind, and it's been the case for a long time, I see no difference between episodic and "rolling" long form games. The only difference is that for the rolling long form game each episode/adventure dribbles/overlaps into the next. (or maybe the long form is simply an extended short form, which sounds awfully hard to pull off?). I mean you could treat a single session as an "episode" in a rolling long form because it has to be full experience for the players.

I certainly now model my long form campaigns on sets of individual adventures/episodes. It's easier to handle and plan. There is definitive points in the campaign for advancement and downtime and easier to pick up and start than if there is any sort of extended break in the rolling form version. Of course the adventures can and do dribble into each other and the downtime varies between them, but so far I find it works and is much easier to work with. I've found the rolling long form can lose pace quite often and sessions wind down right in the middle of the evening but YMMV.

I've found with the episodic approach, I have a sort of generic plan or model. First few adventures introduce the PCs to each of the elements I want to introduce in the setting while also getting the players use to the game and my style. Next set of adventures each centre on one of the PCs so that elements from their characters can become part of the setting. I'm actually quite honest and open with the players about this, just so that each of the players know that their character is going to get an adventure based on them. In fact I ask them if they have any ideas for their character... however not one player has ever given me a plot. Then I go for the big meta-plot, using the elements introduce in the previous adventures. Unfortunately I haven't fully tested this approach... campaigns get started but due to RL factors they get sliced. Still my current campaign has started very well and I plan to use my model (maybe I should call it the thedeadone model?).

I also think that some systems are better at long form (be it rolling or episodic) and short form. I've found Fudge excellent at short form and Ars Magica great at both episodic and rolling long-form for example.

Maybe I should write up a post about...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Rolling and Episodic Long Form
[info]mytholder
2006-07-18 12:29 pm UTC (link)
The difference to my mind is a question of rules support. You want a ruleset that pushes the game to finish in a set time. I'm specifically thinking of power pools and bonuses that reset on a per-session basis.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Rolling and Episodic Long Form
[info]tdo_ie
2006-07-18 12:39 pm UTC (link)
Interesting, so your talking about specific mechanisms that either encourage players to get to some end goal (episodic) or allow for stories/games to roll over?

I guess I always considered this an element of pacing of a game and considered in the control of the GM. If I wanted to do something like that, I would grab a ticking clock, set it for three hours and tell the players, if you don't "win" by the time that clock rings, you lose and your character dies. A bit like "24" the RPG! :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…