This neatly speaks to my thesis that there are modalists and hybridists. Modalists - like you seem to attest to being - don't believe properties of play can be found in degrees: it's all or nothing. Hybridists - like
@FrogReaver if I understand what they say correctly - believe that properties of play can be found in all kinds of arrangements and degrees.
What is a property of play, in this context?
Using the phrase with its ordinary meaning, one property of play is
it happens at pemerton's house. How is that a matter of degree?
Another property of play is
it was exciting. That probably is a matter of degree.
Yet another property of play is
it was interrupted because pemerton's child fell over and cut her head. That happened once. That doesn't seem to be something that can be a matter of degree - either play was interrupted or it was not.
Now maybe you are thinking of other properties of play? I really don't know.
hybridists are interested in drifted and yet-to-be-designed games. They're willing to focus on details and deconstruct.
I don't know what this means either. You and
@FrogReaver claim to be the hybridists. I'm not sure what games you've designed. On your account, Edwards, Baker and Luke Crane are presumably "modalists". Between them they've designed many games, some quite influential on the hobby as a whole.
Your "deconstruction", as best I can tell, involves coining a lot of new phrases that seem to me to have very limited explanatory power. Whereas the work of Edwards, Baker, Crane, Czege et al has both profoundly shaped my understanding of the RPG medium and hobby, as well as my own approach to RPGing.
So when you say a scene is framed or it is not framed.
Well, I didn't actually say that. I said "Either the way scenes are framed, and resolved, generates theme, or it doesn't." I don't think "deconstruction" extends to "misattribution".
A hybridist would see the possibility for variance on at least the following
What comprises a scene? We could have different lists in mind, with many commonalities and some differences.
Is it framed if some but not all of that list are framed? What about if some things on my list are left unframed even though your list is satisfied? And the converse.
Why does any of this matter? What concrete play examples do you have in mind? Did you have ever have play stall because a scene was incomplete? (Eg there was confusion as to where two people were located in relation to one another, or confusion as to which characters were present in the scene.) If you did, was it hard to correct an unstall?
What if some are framed contingently? What is the list of things that can undo or ignore our framing down the line?
I don't know what you have in mind by this.
Who frames what? Does it matter if that changes? What if GM frames everything? What if GM frames everything barring X? What if players frame everything? What if one player frames everything? Two? Etc.
These questions have been asked, analysed, and answered - to death - by me, and others, including in this very thread? It strike me as bizarre that you would think I am uninterested in this, when - for instance - you have seen me post about the role of Circles and Wises in Burning Wheel, about my experience of two player/two GM Burning Wheel play, etc.
Are there any rules governing framing? What if I vary those?
Ditto. If you think this is uncharted territory, I don't know what to say.