RPGing via Billy Bragg?

[pemerton]

@Grendel_Khan

Does A|state require social organisation to improve things? I would count that as social realism. If the PCs can improve things through their individual deeds of compassion or heroism, then I would see it as closer to utopianism or fantasy.

I'll concede there's a spectrum there, especially because the units of social organisation are individuals.

 

[Grendel_Khan]

Does A|state require social organisation to improve things? I would count that as social realism. If the PCs can improve things through their individual deeds of compassion or heroism, then I would see it as closer to utopianism or fantasy.

I'll concede there's a spectrum there, especially because the units of social organisation are individuals.

Individual actions are definitely a major factor (hard to avoid that in an RPG, as opposed to a boardgame) but like most FitD games almost everything you do is about improving or worsening relationships with the setting's many factions. So to increase your Tier and continue advancing your corner you probably need to set up alliances with factions, and avoid getting torn up by enemy factions. And the GM is encouraged to set up progress clocks for lots of factions, to track how they're moving toward certain goals over the course of the campaign. That, along with other faction-related mechanics, could be used to set up the larger impact of groups working with or against each other (including the various authorities in the setting, which are largely antagonistic).

But that might be considered a departure from FitD's general principle that, as in most PbtA games, what really matters are the mechanics and setting elements that relate to the PCs. Modeling the larger setting in detail is possible, but maybe missing the point.

 

[pemerton]

Individual actions are definitely a major factor (hard to avoid that in an RPG, as opposed to a boardgame

<snip>

FitD's general principle that, as in most PbtA games, what really matters are the mechanics and setting elements that relate to the PCs. Modeling the larger setting in detail is possible, but maybe missing the point.

This gets directly back to my pondering in post 5:

The technical problems I'm thinking of are how to express the weight of social structures in framing and resolution and perhaps how to perform actions which take as their objects social relations.​

Outcomes of actions that take social relations as their objects might include solidarity among group members, or developments in their consciousness, that improve the capacity of that group to take further actions aimed at transforming social relations.

 

[Haiku Elvis]

@Haiku Elvis, hey thanks! You gave me my 1000th like. I got a (virtual) trophy and everything.

I'd like to acknowledge the 999 likes that came before me and made this achievement possible. I'd also like to thank my agent, the academy, and everyone who believed in me...

 

[gorice]

I'm following this with interest, since it's something I've pondered on and off for years without reaching any satisfactory conclusion.

I will say that express the weight of social structures in framing is likely the easiest bit. Especially if background material drawn from the setting and the PCs' histories informs framing. I've always had a soft spot for lifepath character generation, and really anything that firmly ties a PC to a particular class or other social position.

Bringing that background into focus in a moment of decision is another matter.

I do seem to have a bit of an aversion to any game that pitches itself as revolutionary or utopian; I'm more inclined to games that foster a strong sense of social situation, and maybe let us discover, in play, if/how characters can form the kind of bonds necessary to even start such a project.

 

[pemerton]

I do seem to have a bit of an aversion to any game that pitches itself as revolutionary or utopian; I'm more inclined to games that foster a strong sense of social situation, and maybe let us discover, in play, if/how characters can form the kind of bonds necessary to even start such a project.

My feeling is that this sort of approach also presupposes an (implicit) social theory, just as the approaches you dislike might.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This thread has two inspirations:

@chaochou's "cultural influences" thread: Cultural influences in roleplaying

A stanza in the Billy Bragg song "Island of Long Return" that I was listening to as I started this thread:

I never thought that I would be​

Fighting fascists in the Southern Sea​

Saw one today and in his hand​

Was a weapon that was made in Birmingham​

The problem of how to make RPGing thematically weighty in moral, or personal, terms has largely been solved: DitV, Burning Wheel, Apocalypse World are just some of many examples.

But what about social weight? Over the Edge is one I can think of, but its social is surreal or kind-of magically realist; what about social realism? What would the right system be? I don't know BitD/FitD well enough - could it do it?

What do you mean by 'social' vs 'moral' or especially 'personal'? I'd be tempted to raise the old ghost of Hegel here and assert that these categories are artificial...

So, you asked about BitD. Well, I think that you could say that there is a substantial social dimension to BitD in that the game is largely organized around 'crews' and their relationship with other organizations in Doskvol. I guess the real question is whether or not the game is really 'weighty' in that dimension. I mean, every crew is a bunch of scoundrels. The ultimate nature of the group is somewhat set. I think the story of the crew is obviously to be played out, and that CAN certainly tell you something about it, as an organization. OTOH its also pretty personal.

Like, right now my interpretation of my character is that he has some conflicting feelings about exactly what the crew is getting involved in. This is pretty classic RP! I'm figuring out who my character IS. So, I guess I would say that it can be 'solved' in a sense, but I'm not sure that BitD is particularly special in this area. Its a focus, but I think you could generate a similar focus with a variety of games in a similar way. Honestly, BitD's approach is sort of pretty typical of RPG design, throw some mechanics at it!

 

[pemerton]

What do you mean by 'social' vs 'moral' or especially 'personal'?

See Post 5, and also my post just a couple upthread of this one.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This gets directly back to my pondering in post 5:

The technical problems I'm thinking of are how to express the weight of social structures in framing and resolution and perhaps how to perform actions which take as their objects social relations.​

Outcomes of actions that take social relations as their objects might include solidarity among group members, or developments in their consciousness, that improve the capacity of that group to take further actions aimed at transforming social relations.

I think it might be more along the lines of building trust, or else building repression. Imagine how a political/social system REALLY works. People convince other people to act in a way that is in their interest, or not act in some other way, etc. There's fear, friendship/trust, obligation, belief, and ritual/institution (social momentum) that all play a factor. I think those would be the most substantive sorts of currencies for such a system to deal in.

 

[pemerton]

Imagine how a political/social system REALLY works.

Well obviously this is contests, but in a social realist framing notions like ideology (in the pejorative sense), solidarity, and so on can't be ignored. Thinking of interpersonal relationships only in terms of individual mental states like fear, trust, ritual, etc would itself be succumbing to ideology (as per my remark upthread about my own lack of imagination in the climax of Battleship Potemkin).