D&D 4E Pemertonian Scene-Framing; A Good Approach to D&D 4e

[AbdulAlhazred]

[/INDENT]
For those struggling to understand strong scene-framing techniques like pemerton's, looking at this passage is key: The fundamental technique involves taking control of the PCs, railroading them through decision points "off-screen", and then continuing the action at the point where you've delivered them to a place of excitement/interest.

Pemerton and S'mon seem to be advocating an open handling of the scene itself, but other practitioners will actually go even further and frame the scene so that its purpose is to reach a specific outcome. In either case, once the outcome of the scene has been determined the railroading/framing happens again and the next scene begins.

The reason this is confusing for a lot of people is that:

(1) Pemerton confuses the issue significantly by also applying the term "scene-framing" to a number of completely unrelated techniques (particularly the "if a player asks if something is present, say yes" narrative sharing technique that dates back to Feng Shui).

(2) Scene-framing is really more of a continuum of pacing techniques coupled to motivation. So most people respond to discussions like this by saying, "Doesn't everybody do that?" Because, actually, everybody does it.

At one end of this continuum you have a pure, old school dungeoncrawl: There is no time-skipping. Essentially every single action is catalogued.

Once people get out of the dungeon, though, the GM quickly realizes that this technique doesn't work. That's where you get interactions that look like this:

GM: You're at the city gate. Whaddya wanna do?
Player: We go to the Tavern of the Lonely Wench.
GM: You're at the tavern.
​

Whoa. What just happened? We skipped over a whole bunch of stuff and -- bam! -- framed a new scene at the tavern.

In this middle-range of scene-framing, the GM is mainly looking to skip to the next meaningful decision point. The exact route by which the PCs went to the Tavern of the Lonely Wench isn't a meaningful decision, so we skip it.

At this level of scene-framing, the main consideration for the DM is: "Does anything interrupt the stated intention of the PCs?" For example, do they get ambushed on their way to the Lonely Wench. Or run into an old friend. Or have an opportunity to pick a pocket. Or see someone being press ganged into the Imperial Navy. And this is where motivation comes in: Do you determine interrupting events using a random table of simulated events? To key the next plot arc? Because you prepped a timeline? Whim? Because you want to activate a tag on one of the PCs?

As we begin moving further up the scene-framing continuum, what basically happens is that the threshold of interest required to frame the next beat is cranked up. Here's a slight example of that:

GM: You're at the city gate. Whaddya wanna do?
Player: We go looking for a tavern.
GM: Okay, you're in the Tavern of the Lonely Wench.
​

Spot the difference? The GM decided that the decision of which tavern they want to go to is irrelevant, so he skipped it, picked the tavern for them, and started the next scene. If he'd decided not to frame the scene quite so hard, he could have asked, "You want an upscale joint or a down-scale joint?" Or maybe offered them a selection of specific taverns and allowed them to choose.

The harder you frame, the higher the level of required interest needs to be before we stop fast-forwarding, and the more decisions get skipped. For example, maybe the GM decides that the tavern is completely boring and instead we get:

GM: You're at the city gate.
Player: We go looking for the tavern.
GM: You party long and hard into the night, so you're still a little hung-over the next morning when you're shopping for supplies at Dink's store and spot a shoplifter slipping a gold watch into his pocket.
​

And we can keep cranking:

Player: Okay, we're done here. We head back to town.
GM: Okay. It's two weeks later and you're shopping for supplies at Dink's store. You spot a shoplifter slipping a gold watch into his pocket. You shout, "STOP THIEF!" and he starts running for the door. Whaddya do?
​

And the more you crank it up, the larger the influence of the GM's motivations becomes. You'll also tend to see a decrease in even bothering to ask the players what they want to do next, because it will generally be irrelevant and over-ridden.

What also tends to happen at this point is that the game or GM will start introducing more STG / narrative control mechanics or techniques: The GM is taking so much control away from the players that it's necessary to compensate by giving them back control in other ways.

Of course, in actual practice GMs will vary the pace of their scene-framing considerably depending on context and circumstance.

Well, I can't speak for Pemerton, but maybe he considers all of those to be elements necessary to his form of scene framing. It isn't a matter of confusion as it is just a matter of definition. Maybe he could crack that open, but its not up to me. Its an interesting question anyway.

I think there is a continuum, sure. Your examples of different levels of abstraction in plot and narrative are some examples, but there are also examples of degree of before-hand setup vs dynamic scene framing too, which maybe is more interesting. I mean, sure the DM skipping a day or a week of mundane time is different from skipping 5 minutes, and you can dictate the narrative more or less, but at some point you come to decision points. Its more a question of how much does the DM railroad and how much does he put the choices in the player's hands, and how much of what happens was set up ahead of time and how much was framed in dynamically.

I'm not sure that the DM's influence is REALLY bigger though. Obviously a DM can just play railroady puppet-master, but if the choice of tavern really isn't relevant, nor what happens there interesting in a plot sense then the DM isn't particularly railroading, any more than he would be if he assumes that when you open a door you use the doorknob in a dungeon. PCs stay at taverns. If all taverns happen to be basically equal then its a detail that can be skipped. NOW, if the players want to jump in and change the narrative, sure they could in theory use some sort of plot coupon device to do that. OTOH there's nothing wrong with the D&D approach either, which would generally just be for the player to break in and state that they want some additional information or have some action to interject. The former approach makes it explicitly a part of the game, the later approach is more a table contract thing, but either one will generally work OK.

Anyway, its an interesting topic. IME the DM and players usually collaborate on how abstract they make this kind of thing. The DM may decide to leap ahead and the players may or may not go with that. Sometimes the players want to jump ahead (often for instance if they are traveling) and the DM will either go along with it or interject something. USUALLY most players seem used to making most basic choices, and most DMs seem to hit a comfortable level of maximum abstraction. Pemerton is of course obviously taking a more active control of that process. Its not NEW in any true sense, but the way he does it seems fairly artful to me.

 

[S'mon]

Just a heads-up folks. Someone is reposting fom his thread over at the grognardtxt subforum of omething awful. So anything you post in this thread is likey to be placed under scrutiny over there and mocked.

So we should do ....what?

 

[Bedrockgames]

So we should do ....what?

It is up to you. Some people might not want to post in the thread if they its bing torn apart at something awful, others might not care. Still I think its helpful to point out when this is going on so folks at least know about.

 

[S'mon]

It is up to you. Some people might not want to post in the thread if they its bing torn apart at something awful, others might not care. Still I think its helpful to point out when this is going on so folks at least know about.

This is reminding me of how Gerald Durrell described African witch doctor's curses as working - a man comes up to you and says "I'm very sorry to tell you this, but I heard a curse has been put on you! You're going to die!" - And very often the recipient would then die. Nobody who hadn't heard about their 'curse' ever died, though.
Likewise, this is a case where ignorance is bliss. But now that you have informed us of our cursing, could you provide a URL so I can see the black depths of their iniquity? My own search-fu just turns up Justin Alexander being quoted by 'neonchameleon' (no idea if that is our guy or an alias) - http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3493674&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=418 - but no responses.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Just a heads-up folks. Someone is reposting fom his thread over at the grognardtxt subforum of omething awful. So anything you post in this thread is likey to be placed under scrutiny over there and mocked.

haha, good for them

 

[Manbearcat]

Campaign plots I'll never use #94

Complete aside, but that is precisely what makes Batman so great! You can frame a million and one different stories around him because he can negotiate an interstellar treaty in the afternoon, fight some Frost Giants in the evening and still have time for afternoon tea! The narrative space for him is probably deeper than any other character in the comic book universe. Deadpool is pretty deep as well given his hyper-awareness, Bugs Bunny wackiness and breaking of the 4th wall. You can write all manner of stories around him. You can't write irreverent, 4th wall breaking stories with just about any other character.

Pardon, I haven't flexed my comic book nerd muscles in about 10 years. Carry on.

 

[Bedrockgames]

This is reminding me of how Gerald Durrell described African witch doctor's curses as working - a man comes up to you and says "I'm very sorry to tell you this, but I heard a curse has been put on you! You're going to die!" - And very often the recipient would then die. Nobody who hadn't heard about their 'curse' ever died, though.
Likewise, this is a case where ignorance is bliss. But now that you have informed us of our cursing, could you provide a URL so I can see the black depths of their iniquity? My own search-fu just turns up Justin Alexander being quoted by 'neonchameleon' (no idea if that is our guy or an alias) - http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3493674&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=418 - but no responses.

That is the one. It is how things begin on SA. Someone posts a "grognard" quote to get a kind of communal mocking going on. Not all of them take off of course.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Wow, I think I learned more about this topic in the responses to JA in the last couple pages than I thought I knew before, lol. Good stuff.

 

[pemerton]

I mean, sure the DM skipping a day or a week of mundane time is different from skipping 5 minutes, and you can dictate the narrative more or less, but at some point you come to decision points.

<snip>

I'm not sure that the DM's influence is REALLY bigger though. Obviously a DM can just play railroady puppet-master, but if the choice of tavern really isn't relevant, nor what happens there interesting in a plot sense then the DM isn't particularly railroading, any more than he would be if he assumes that when you open a door you use the doorknob in a dungeon. PCs stay at taverns. If all taverns happen to be basically equal then its a detail that can be skipped. NOW, if the players want to jump in and change the narrative, sure they could in theory use some sort of plot coupon device to do that. OTOH there's nothing wrong with the D&D approach either, which would generally just be for the player to break in and state that they want some additional information or have some action to interject. The former approach makes it explicitly a part of the game, the later approach is more a table contract thing, but either one will generally work OK.

<snip>

The DM may decide to leap ahead and the players may or may not go with that. Sometimes the players want to jump ahead (often for instance if they are traveling) and the DM will either go along with it or interject something.

I like this.

It's a bit like the conversation way upthread (in the 30s and 40s) between me and chaochou about the shotgun and the rattlesnake - there's a range of ways, mechanical and social contract, to handle framing, backing up, retconning etc. I think different groups and different GMs will reach their own preferred processes.

What I think can be helpful, though, is to be made more aware of the range of options so you don't get stuck in a rut that doesn't really suit you. That's why a thread like this can be useful!

given the tactical nature of combat, the detail of the grid and the structure of powers to leverage the grid and terrain, how do you balance scene readiness and prep vs psf ?

I think this is a reasonable question in the context of 4e.

Sometimes I have maps drawn in advance, if the players have made it clear that they're going to go to some particular place, or do something where that map will makes sense (two examples: when they were pursuing a purple worm, I drew a map of a huge cavern for a dramatic final confrontation with the worm and two T-Rexes; when they were entering a drow hold overrun by Orcus-ites, I drew a map of the Temple of Lolth).

Othertimes I sketch up a map on the spot. I also tend to agree wih [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] - modest mundane terrain can be better than weird magic terrain: a chokepoint or two, some ledges/stalagmites/pits etc can get things moving in a way that is easy for everyone to make sense of.

 

[Neonchameleon]

This is reminding me of how Gerald Durrell described African witch doctor's curses as working - a man comes up to you and says "I'm very sorry to tell you this, but I heard a curse has been put on you! You're going to die!" - And very often the recipient would then die. Nobody who hadn't heard about their 'curse' ever died, though.
Likewise, this is a case where ignorance is bliss. But now that you have informed us of our cursing, could you provide a URL so I can see the black depths of their iniquity? My own search-fu just turns up Justin Alexander being quoted by 'neonchameleon' (no idea if that is our guy or an alias) - http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3493674&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=418 - but no responses.

It was me. And Justin Alexander's spectacular post #404 was I think the first time I've ever immortalised an enworld post on grognards.txt. [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION], you've actually been quoted there approvingly four or five times in the past year or so, so maybe in your case not knowing about it has saved you from a curse of a swelled head