diff -r 3164c82ac16e -r bdef1afd1170 draft/scatter-0.txt --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/draft/scatter-0.txt Wed Aug 30 21:32:44 2006 -0400 @@ -0,0 +1,356 @@ +About the Forge | Articles | Forum | +Reviews | Resource Library + + * +* <#> +Home +Help +Search +Login +Register +Welcome, *Guest*. Please login + or register +. +Did you miss your activation email? + +March 15, 2006, 02:37:44 PM + +Login with username, password and session length + + +*Forum changes:* Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice. + +*Search: * Advanced search + + +*198792* Posts in *18708* Topics by *5988* Members Latest Member: * - +kuljek +* Most +online today: *113* - most online ever: *271* (February 22, 2006, +03:03:12 PM) + ++ *The Forge * +|-+ *Inactive Forums * +| |-+ *Scattershot * +| | |-+ *Get Emotional! +* Ť previous + +next ť + +*Pages:* [*1*] Print + + +Author Topic: Get Emotional! (Read 942 times) + +*Le Joueur * +Member + +Posts: 1363 + + +View Profile + WWW + + + +*Get Emotional! +* +Ť * on:* August 10, 2001, 02:09:00 PM ť + + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ +This is what I understand. + +Context + +I think role-playing gaming is /thinking within the context of the +narrative/; nothing more is necessary. Anything that fails to have that +does not appear to be gaming. While some things outside of gaming +elicit contextual thinking, nothing that /is/ gaming _fails_ to do so. + +Let me illustrate with what I call the ?behind the bar? effect; let?s +say you?re playing a game set in a bar described with patrons, tables +and their contents, and let?s also say a fight has broken out. This +could easily be a card game, a war game, /or even a role-playing game/, +there?s no way to tell at this point. + +What makes it a role-playing game? The instant you decide that a +character goes /behind the bar/ and gets something. It doesn?t matter +what, as long as the player is thinking about what /ought/ to be back +there, they are working within the context of the bar and the fight /and +the role-playing game/. + +Emotional Investment + +If contextual thinking is the ?what? of gaming, then here is the ?why:? +I believe that one plays role-playing games only for the emotional value +they have for that player. Not limited to simply enjoyment, gaming can +evoke intrigue, curiosity, or virtually any other emotion, but I?ll just +refer to the whole package as emotional investment. This is a bit of a +simplification, but I think not an unclear one. + +What is gained through this emotional involvement? I think impact and +payoff are some of the things that result from ?feeling? involved in the +narrative. This is not about good or bad narratives, only the dividends +of the emotional investment. I say that the problems with any game are +those that impede the emotional payoff the way inconsistency or loss of +engagement do (to list a couple of examples). + +For an example, all game settings I have seen have dynamic backgrounds +or grand conflicts. When involved, I believe they heighten the return +on a player?s emotional investment. + +The Scattershot Model: + +Here are our two main frames of reference, personal (things that exist +only at the character level) and the game (everything that includes the +character in it). + +Personal Level + +The most basic ?contact point? of play involves what you are playing +(even when not the traditional player character). At this level the +overall game is of reduced importance because it only serves as the +vehicle for the personal identification substance within it. + +This is the reason character generation can be so important in many +systems. The player character is the entity in the game that you will +have the most affinity with. The sophistication and detail of the +character creation mechanics of a game system reflect the degree and +specificity of emotional investment in things created with them. When +you ?make them work for it,? the player is likely to care more about +their character. + +The most basic component of the personal level of emotional investment +is in its _intrinsic value_. In this frame of reference, what matters +is what goes on /for/ the character. + +This is ?where it all happens? at the most personal level and this can +lead to varying levels of immersion, such as thinking or feeling /as/ +the character. It can also be about watching what a game does to one?s +character from a personal, yet external point of view. The value stems +from what goes on ?inside? the character or at their level. + +The game becomes a vehicle for the expression of value of the character +to the player. The focus is on how the game affects the character and +by extension, the player. + +While still being personal, one can place more emotional investment in +the extrinsic value of their character. Finding value in the things the +character can do or what the player can do with the character. + Measuring characters against one and another. This can include a +certain amount of self-consciousness in the activity too. + +The character can become a tool for the player, what they /do/ to the +game is the source of value. This is about first-person value based on +what you can do as opposed to who you are. + +This is also about how the player affects the game, the rush of power +over the game in the most immediate and visceral fashion. Consistency +can become an issue of high value because without it, the extrinsic +personal value can appear illusory. + +Game Level + +What exactly is ?game level?? Not a just the setting, genre, or +narrative ? it is a living entity consisting of this and more, it is the +whole, shared experience ranging from (but not limited to) the game +system all the way out to the retelling of the narrative and all points +in between. + +Much like the personal frame, the most immediate form of gratification +stems from a game?s intrinsic value, of what makes play so fun. Whether +it is the setting, play within the resolution system, or something else, +the value is within the game itself. + +What the character does, as a part of the game, is where the emotional +pay-off is. Unusual situations, new experiences, discovery, these are +reflected in the intrinsic value of a game. The character becomes a +window to what the game has to offer. + +This may seem to place central value in the experiential world of the +game, but then that would mean that the world is all there is to the +game. It isn?t. There?s the tone, flavor, and atmosphere; there?s the +feeling of a game hard-played, the feeling of let down after the fact, +and more; this all stems from finding the intrinsic value of the game. + +Above this is whatever the extrinsic value a game may have. Usually +this also includes a fair amount of self-awareness. Not only does play +?know that its just a game,? but it is also willing to ?work with it? on +that level. + +This often includes an external perspective of the game. Many literary +and theatrical devices are used but only for the effect of enhancing +emotional impact of the narrative. Many lofty things are often ascribed +to this type of play and it can be a heady experience after spending a +lot of time restricted to the personal extrinsic level by a strict +division of powers. + +Many newer games invite the players to take a larger part in, if not +partial ownership, of the game. One hidden problem this poses is the +loss of connection with primary point of contact, their character. It +scores well in terms of getting players to care for more than their +character alone, but many times the value of the character can get lost +in the new vistas. And when the players cease to think in the context +of their characters, in context of the game, it stops being role-playing +and becomes ?writing.? + +Another thing this perspective includes is comparisons of systems and +genres /between/ games. When one game tries to ?out do? another in any +fashion, this is the frame that is being applied. Convention tournament +games have a lot of this too, as do a lot of demos. + +Explaining All This in Terms of the GNS Model + +Allow me to draw some parallels to the GNS model. Superficially, if you +generalize this scheme it comes out very like the GNS model (provided +immersion is split from Simulationism). + +The combination of immersion and Simulationism only works if the players +find value in both the intrinsic value of their character and the +intrinsic value of the game /simultaneously/. Since I do not believe +one can make a priority out of self and the world at the same time, I +fail to see how they can be clearly lumped together, one must take a +back seat. This is not to confuse a Simulationist world with +Simulationistic consistency, though. Most losses in consistency result +in failed emotional payoffs. + +From what I have read, I believe immersive players do not require as +much Simulationist detail in the game, so long as it still creates a +venue for their character in the absence. I /do/ see how one could +think of immersion as ?simulating? a character, but I do not think this +is what most people idealize when they use the word Simulationism, +especially when it does not seem like one can focus on simulating both +character and world simultaneously. + +These frames of reference also suggest a problem with one of the other +GNS comparisons. It seems to me when comparing Gamism to Narrativism, +it is like comparing oranges and IBMs. + +The comparison between Simulationism and Narrativism would be the +difference between the intrinsic and extrinsic value of what the game +evoked. (I think this would be like comparing apples and oranges.) + +The comparison of Gamism and Simulationism shows relation by subject. + The extrinsic value of a personal frame of reference has value based on +the game and the intrinsic value of a game obviously stems from itself, +making these values relative to the same thing, the game, only from +different perspectives, personal versus game. (This might be like +comparing Apples and IBMs.) + +Therefore comparing Gamism and Narrativism relates the extrinsic value +of the personal frame and the extrinsic value of the game. These, I +think, are unrelated. (This would therefore be like comparing oranges +and IBMs.) + +(I include these references to the GNS model only as a convenience to +those whose work is primarily with it. Consider it a starting point to +my explanation of the frames I use.) + +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 + + +*Ron Edwards +* +Global Moderator +Member +* +Posts: 12610 + + +View Profile + WWW + + + +*Get Emotional! +* +Ť *Reply #1 on:* August 10, 2001, 02:32:00 PM ť + + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ +Fang, + +I think the emotional investment you describe is related, or even +identical, to what I called "imaginative commitment" earlier, when +discussing Exploration. + +To review: Exploration is the starting point or act for role-playing. +GNS represents applications/foci/goals for the act. + +This is not to undercut or refute any of your post, but rather to agree +with and reinforce it. + +Best, +Ron + Logged + +*Le Joueur * +Member + +Posts: 1363 + + +View Profile + WWW + + + +*Get Emotional! +* +Ť *Reply #2 on:* August 10, 2001, 02:42:00 PM ť + + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ +Quote +Ron Edwards wrote: +I think the emotional investment you describe is related, or even +identical, to what I called "imaginative commitment" earlier, when +discussing Exploration. +Quote +This is not to undercut or refute any of your post, but rather to agree +with and reinforce it. + + +Excellent, "imaginative commitment" was what go me started, thanks to +you. I just felt that a sense of ?committedness? was the emotion at the +root of character identification and emotional investment. And the +"imaginative" part was too vague on the contextual scheme of things. + +Fang Langford + +[ This Message was edited by: Le Joueur on 2001-08-11 08:56 ] + 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 + + +*Pages:* [*1*] Print + + +Ť previous + +next ť + +Jump to: + + +Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP + The Forge | Powered by SMF 1.0.5 +. +Š 2001-2005, Lewis Media . All Rights Reserved. +*Oxygen* design by Bloc Valid XHTML 1.0! + Valid CSS! + +