thread: 2005-11-10 : Open House: Ask a Frequent Question...
On 2006-01-27, Eric Provost wrote:
Hey Vincent,
I think I know the answer, but I thought it would be interesting to ask anyway;
"Thematic play where the players participate in creating the theme" = narrativist play.
Recalling an earlier essay of yours, the theme is composed of three parts, right? The question, the answer, and the result. Like;
Is duty more important than family? Duty is way more important than family. Choosing family over duty contributes to the collapse of one's government and the loss of family anyway.
If I've got all that right then it would follow that narrativist play could result from the players creating all or just some of the theme. That is, some games already do the first part for you. They ask the question and then you get to answer it. Sometimes the game even encourages you to talk about the result.
What seemed interesting to me, and the reason why I made this post, to make sure I was on the same page, is that it seems like it would be interesting to play with what part of the theme the game text does and does not provide for you before you sit down to play.
-Eric
This makes SDL go "Interesting..."
...So you could have something like: "The House and the State - The bickering of the great houses are causing the collapse of the republic" = setting... Or something like that?
This makes ERP go "Um, yeah..."
I think so/sort of. I haven't spent enough time pondering the idea to know if it really connects to the setting so directly, so I'm not willing to commit to that idea.
I'll say that I feel certain that a game can ask the question and then let you answer it and provide the result. I feel fairly certain that the game could ask and answer the question and then let you provide the result, and you'd still have narrativist play. What I'm curious about now is if a game text could somehow provide the third and/or second parts of the theme, letting the players come up with the first part, and still have narrativism. Unfortunately I have no idea right now how a text would support that.
This makes VB go "yeah, you got me."
I have no idea.
This makes CS go "Sort of a mystery?"
The Empire is collapsing for some reason, and through play, you discover what failing is bringing down the state. That someone out there in a position of power is answering some question in a way that causes the state to fail is a given, but what question they are addressing is unknown, and what answer they are giving is unknown.
Maybe the question is "Does duty limit liberty?" or maybe the question is"Does a centralized state make everyone's life a living Hell?" and maybe the question is being answered wrong here, or maybe the question is being answered right, but we know that the state is falling because of the answer someone is giving.
Actually, doesn't Polaris kind of do this? The World has been broken, and your characters choices will drive them to their own destruction. What broke the world, and what are the questions and answers that will drive your cahracters to their doom is up to you.
I admit I still haven't played Polaris. Maybe after Dogs, although Jake is more interested in Bliss Stage.
The problem is that the result is the most flexibnle part, although the answer can be to, so if the game answers a question and gives a result, it is hard to see how you aren't VERY constrained about what the question is. Result is fixed or question fixed, or even both together, I can see, but answer fixed, result fixed is hard to see not destroying effective participation.
This makes BL go "Play Polaris"
You could use Polaris for this, although it isn't the point.
