[svn] r2449@freebird: fabien | 2007-04-24 15:19:05 -0400
Ajout de recompense.xml.
About the Forge </about/> | Articles </articles/> | Forum </forum/> |
Reviews </reviews/> | Resource Library </resources/>
*
* <#>
Home <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php>
Help <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=help>
Search <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=search>
Login <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=login>
Register <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=register>
Welcome, *Guest*. Please login
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=login> or register
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=register>.
Did you miss your activation email?
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=activate>
March 15, 2006, 02:55:14 PM
Login with username, password and session length
*Forum changes:* Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
*Search: * Advanced search
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=search;advanced>
*198794* Posts in *18708* Topics by *5988* Members Latest Member: * -
kuljek
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=6115>* Most
online today: *113* - most online ever: *271* (February 22, 2006,
03:03:12 PM)
+ *The Forge <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php>*
|-+ *Inactive Forums <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php#5>*
| |-+ *Scattershot <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?board=22.0>*
| | |-+ *Part II: Whence go the Mechanics
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.0>* « previous
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.0;prev_next=prev>
next »
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087;prev_next=next>
*Pages:* [*1*] Print
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=1087.0>
Author Topic: Part II: Whence go the Mechanics (Read 868 times)
*Le Joueur <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=73>*
Member
Posts: 1363
View Profile
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=73> WWW
<http://www.scattershotgames.com>
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10162#msg10162>
*Part II: Whence go the Mechanics
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10162#msg10162>*
« * on:* December 27, 2001, 10:45:00 PM »
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 2nd, 2002; Happy New Year! -
At the behest of my friends here on the Forge, I will present
Scattershot at the point I have it. Even though this is a
work-in-progress and much of the terminology is in a state of flux, I am
not trying to present a diary of the progress. Expect the lead
component of this thread to undergo changes as Scattershot does. This
edition was originally put together on Thursday, December 27th, 2001.
This series of articles will detail strictly the mechanics of
Scattershot, articles relating to the techniques of 'how to play' will
have to wait until I have more of them centralized and organized. The
third major component of the game, the setting and genre material is
will be addressed once I get a new batch of playtesters.
One deliberate feature of Scattershot has to do with how we handle the
complexity of the mechanics. Instead of a long catalog of 'optional'
rules, we divided the mechanics into three stages of complexity.
Basic
These are for beginners, or for 'on the road' (live-action or
driving). This portion will be included with all our 'satellite'
products. It's meant to be simple, basic, and
easy.[/list:u]Intermediate (Tournament)
These mechanics (which incorporate the basics too) are meant
for experienced gamers. Most often played 'at the table,'
these mechanics are the expected level of play.[/list:u]Advanced
This is the set of mechanics for completists and are
meant to be played 'in the books.' They allow for the
most specific derivation of the subtle differences
between abilities. This is the esotery not for the
minimalists.[/list:u]Certainly people could play 'at
only one stage,' but the playtesters not only liked
to, but tended to, shift back and forth between these
stages as needed by the game they were in. Because we
realized this early on, it was important to make the
comparisons between the mechanics' stages as
transparently compatible as possible. This means the
advanced mechanics are what we wrote first, keeping in
mind that there would be two succeedingly simpler
derivations necessary.
We have also broken the facile use of mechanics into
three different 'densities.' These are relative and
normal play shifts between these rather easily. One
of the most common problems we have seen in playtest
with beginners (and from our experiences) is the
awkward switching between these 'densities.'
Confusion often arises when there is no communication
of a 'switch' or when a 'switch' occurs at some point
other than an intuitive Breakpoint.
General Play
Most things are either resolved as dialogue and
description or simply taken as having happened
exactly as the speaker says. All things
mechanical are used more as guidelines and
almost always only when 'out of the
ordinary.'[/list:u]Specific Play
Mechanics are invoked on a sporadic basis,
most often to generate detail; how long
did it take, how well did it go, what was
the specific result. Occasionally the
mechanics are invoked to preempt any
question regarding impartiality, but this
tends to be rare within groups who already
know each other quite
well.[/list:u]Mechanical Play
This occurs most often when emotions
run high or when there is 'a lot on
the line.' Impartiality is the most
important feature so this is when
'everybody plays by the rules,' or
so it is understood. The most
common time when this occurs
historically is during combat. This
does not need to be exclusive, but
when you consider dying in those
games eliminates you from play,
there is clearly 'a lot on the
line.' Also combat is when the
entities that players have the most
emotional investment in, are at
risk; they would hardly stand for
subjective or casual destruction of
their investment.[/list:u]Since the
idea behind Scattershot's mechanics
is that they are a formalization of
intuitive play
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?topic=1073&forum=2&2>,
I should explain how we look at the
actual 'flow of play' formally. One
thing to remember, while this is a
formal breakdown, nobody is perfect
(neither yours truly, nor people
playing the games) and so this is
not a lot more than an
approximation. Still, from here all
Scattershot springs.
Respect the Speaker
As I said in the earlier
installment
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?topic=1073&forum=2&2>,
play bounces from person to
person in no particular order.
I think this way of looking
at play means play is only
occurring with the person
speaking. Normally there is
only one Speaker at any time,
but there are a couple of
exceptions I can think of;
dialogue and question & answer
(an interview style of setting
description is an example of
this). When this aspect of
gaming breaks down, it's
cacophony; the unconscious
formalization in natural
response to this is one of the
central formations of
gaming.[/list:u]The Scenic View
For simplicity's sake,
we break all play down
into either Scenes,
'Behind the Scenes'
(which would be Scenes
run 'during' the main
Scene), and between
sessions (which actually
tend to be the
bookkeeping done at the
beginning and ending of
sessions, and the
preparatory
'stretching'). I
realize this carries a
great deal of literary
and theatrical baggage
with it, but I am open
to a better term.
At the beginning of
every Scene, someone
must 'Set the Stage,'
that is making some kind
of introductory speech
(we often suggest a
soliloquy) that
describes basically
where, when, and who
will be involved in a
scene. While many game
systems suggest this is
the practice of the
gamemaster, we prefer to
call the person who does
this the /Proprietor/ so
that at times, a player
can do it as well. This
is because there are
many occasions that the
person most familiar
with the setting and
circumstance may be
someone /other/ than the
gamemaster (for example,
inside the
super/heroes'/
base).[/list:u]When Can
I Catch a Break?
The most
fundamentally
mistaken component
of gaming in our
experience
(outside of
/pacing/) are the
Breakpoints.
Changing tone,
Switching
'Densities' (or in
Scattershot,
changing the Stage
of the rules), or
any other shifts
that occur when
there aren?t any
kinds of natural
(and unfortunately
mostly
unconscious)
Breakpoints,
always seems to
throw a wrench
into the 'flow of
play.'
Scattershot goes
to some degree
talking about the
types and uses of
Breakpoints
(though I am not
going to go into
too much detail
here, because this
article is to set
up for the mechanics).
The beginnings and
endings of scenes
are principal
Breakpoints (but
that doesn't mean
to disclude the
huge number of
other intuitive
Breakpoints). One
way that a group
can easily
mishandle a scene
is by choosing its
parameters badly.
Start too soon
before the 'meat'
of the scene and
you risk losing
the participants'
interest before
the 'entree.' End
too long after the
'action' and you
watch a scene's
impact slowly
bleed to death.
Scattershot's
techniques speak
plainly about
starting a scene
so close to the
'meat' that the
start sheds blood.
These techniques
also talk about
tying off the
endings with
tourniquet
intensity when
they have served
their purpose.
(It goes hand in
hand with most of
our advice about
pacing and
choosing the
appropriate stage
of mechanics to
carry the game
forward at the
most satisfying
rate.)[/list:u]What
was the Point, Again?
This may not
need
suggesting,
but I think
it needs to
be said;
every scene
has a goal.
It might be
to show a
nifty thing
about your
character;
it might be
the
discovery of
some bit of
information.
Raising or
resolving
tension is
another
goal; so is
providing
color,
atmosphere,
warming up
and cooling
down¹ (two
of the most
overlooked
and
important
parts of a
session), or
even
'filler.'
The most
important
thing about
goals, as
stated
above, is
once you
have
fulfilled
the goal
(most often
supplied by
the
proprietor
of a scene),
get out! If
it becomes
clear that
the goal has
become
unattainable,
do the same.
Letting a
scene
meander
about in
search of a
goal (while
in some rare
cases, it
can bear
fruit) is a
recipe for
wrecked
context and
loss of
'flow.'[/list:u]What's
My Cut?
I need
to
take a
moment
and
return
to the
issue
of
sharing
play
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?topic=1073&forum=2&2>.
There
are a
couple
of
prime
issues
that
need
to be
addressed,
if I
am
formalizing
things.
The
first
(and
possibly
foremost)
is
commitment;
commitment
to
atmosphere,
commitment
to
plot-arch
(as in
how a
noir
story
just
'goes,'
not as
in
preplanned
conclusions),
commitment
to
ambience,
and so
on,
it's
all
about
'being
on the
same
page.'
If
these
things
are
not a
shared
commitment,
it is
only a
matter
of
time
before
things
break
down.
People
almost
always
think
about
'what
they
get'
out of
sharing
without
realizing
the
importance
of
'what
they
give.'
Another
point
of
sharing
we
suggest
in
Scattershot
is
keeping
everyone
involved;
whether
by
creating
riveting
play
for
those
whose
characters
aren't
present,
or
having
those
'uninvolved'
get
drafted
into
short-term,
supporting,
non-player
character
roles,
sharing
the
game
means
sharing
in as
much
as
possible.
A
little
conspiracy
now
and
then
is
good,
so is
a
little
mystery,
but
when
the
commitment
is
shared
as
above,
you
should
expect
participants
to
only
use
'player
knowledge'
as a
role-playing
game
/aid/.
If
you
suspect
cheating,
you
are
not
sharing;
you
are
'hording.'
(Mystery
good;
secrecy
bad.)[/list:u]One
of the
reasons
I put
all
these
clusters
together
is
because
they
will
be
referred
to
frequently
at
many
subsequent
levels.
Unlike
many
games
I have
read
or
played,
I
think
it is
important
to
cover
the
implications
of
using
basic
mechanics
during
mechanical
play
of a
event
not
including
combat.
(This
means
discussing
each
new
layer
of
Scattershot's
mechanics
in
terms
of how
each
of
these
clusters
apply.)
I
think
it is
important
to
consider
where
and
when
you
expect
to use
a
game's
mechanics
in
order
to
write
the
mechanics
that
are
necessary
to
support
those
situations
and I
think
so is
the
shared
commitment
to
using
them
that way.
Next
up the
nuts
and bolts.
Fang
Langford
¹ What
we
frequently,
incorrectly
call
denouement.
Logged
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fang Langford is formerly the creator of the Scattershot Role-Playing
Game System. This project has been permanently suspended. If you have
any questions regarding the implementation of it or anything else, he
can be reached at ripjack@mad.scientist.com
<mailto:ripjack@mad.scientist.com>
*Le Joueur <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=73>*
Member
Posts: 1363
View Profile
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=73> WWW
<http://www.scattershotgames.com>
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10518#msg10518>
*Part II: Whence go the Mechanics
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10518#msg10518>*
« *Reply #1 on:* December 31, 2001, 10:33:00 PM »
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry about this, but I just found one of the missing pages of my notes.
The whole section on formalization of 'flow of play' comes from there
and is new.
Hope you like it.
Fang Langford
Logged
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fang Langford is formerly the creator of the Scattershot Role-Playing
Game System. This project has been permanently suspended. If you have
any questions regarding the implementation of it or anything else, he
can be reached at ripjack@mad.scientist.com
<mailto:ripjack@mad.scientist.com>
*joshua neff
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=28>*
Member
Posts: 844
View Profile
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=28> WWW
<http://www.goblin-cartoons.com>
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10555#msg10555>
*Part II: Whence go the Mechanics
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10555#msg10555>*
« *Reply #2 on:* January 02, 2002, 07:33:00 AM »
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fang--
That's some good stuff there, especially the stuff about taking breaks &
respecting the speaker. That's stuff that /should/ be mentioned in RPGs
& isn't. As Ron said, "solid".
Logged
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--josh
"You can't ignore a rain of toads!"--Mike Holmes
*Le Joueur <http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=73>*
Member
Posts: 1363
View Profile
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=73> WWW
<http://www.scattershotgames.com>
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10565#msg10565>
*Part II: Whence go the Mechanics
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10565#msg10565>*
« *Reply #3 on:* January 02, 2002, 09:46:00 AM »
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
joshua neff wrote:
That's some good stuff there, especially the stuff about taking breaks &
respecting the speaker. That's stuff that /should/ be mentioned in RPGs
& isn't. As Ron said, "solid".
Thank you, that?s kinda what I have been thinking for some time. I feel
it?s especially important for people who are new to the hobby.
I am curious what you mean about "taking breaks." I can see that the
section title choice might be a little too confusing and I will change
it soon. Can you tell me if you thought I was advising actually
stopping play at any of these points? Perhaps using the term,
?breakpoint? is itself confusing. Can you suggest any alternatives if
you agree?
Fang Langford
Logged
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fang Langford is formerly the creator of the Scattershot Role-Playing
Game System. This project has been permanently suspended. If you have
any questions regarding the implementation of it or anything else, he
can be reached at ripjack@mad.scientist.com
<mailto:ripjack@mad.scientist.com>
*joshua neff
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=28>*
Member
Posts: 844
View Profile
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=28> WWW
<http://www.goblin-cartoons.com>
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10566#msg10566>
*Part II: Whence go the Mechanics
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.msg10566#msg10566>*
« *Reply #4 on:* January 02, 2002, 09:53:00 AM »
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know, I did think that. But I don't know why, because that's not
really what I meant. I mean, what I liked was the whole idea of
"breakpoints" as you described them. But somehow between reading it,
thinking about it, & then writing my post, it got mutated in my brain as
"taking breaks". Maybe a different name /is/ needed. (Or more ginko for
my brain.)
That being said, I /do/ think that one of the most neglected things in
RPG rulebooks is how to run a single session--particularly the structure
of the session, including when & why to take breaks from the game.
/Sorcerer & Sword/ has some good stuff about structuring both the
narrative as a whole series of sessions & the individual sessions
themselves, which has really helped me focus on what I'm trying to do
with my next game (which is, oddly enough, /Sorcerer/, sans swords). But
I'm also thinking about the thread in Actual Play in which we all talked
about when to take breaks from the game, & how to work that into the
structure of the session. I think that's good stuff for people just
getting into RPGs to think about.
Logged
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--josh
"You can't ignore a rain of toads!"--Mike Holmes
*Pages:* [*1*] Print
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=1087.0>
« previous
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087.0;prev_next=prev>
next »
<http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=1087;prev_next=next>
Jump to:
Powered by MySQL <http://www.mysql.com/> Powered by PHP
<http://www.php.net/> The Forge | Powered by SMF 1.0.5
<http://www.simplemachines.org/>.
© 2001-2005, Lewis Media <http://www.lewismedia.com/>. All Rights Reserved.
*Oxygen* design by Bloc <http://www.bloczone.net> Valid XHTML 1.0!
<http://validator.w3.org/check/referer> Valid CSS!
<http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer>