Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 7652218" data-attributes="member: 8835">Having read the penguin article, I see some other interesting lessons from Mamet.mamet talks about writing for TV and not radio, since thats the people he's addressing.&nbsp; The inverse is really true for GMing.&nbsp; You're writing for listeners, not watchers.&nbsp; People can't see anything, so you've got to hold their attention in an audio medium.&nbsp; That still means not boring them to death.mamet hates scenes with 2 people talking about a 3rd person or exposition scenes.in D&amp;D, I take these concepts from that:any scene with 2 people talking means the rest of the party is bored.&nbsp; Cut some conversations down to summations rather than back and forth dialog that the rest of the party is stuck waiting for it to finish.Don't spend a lot of time describing everything or giving length backstory.&nbsp; Somebody else has an article on cleaning up boxed text.&nbsp; Read it.in that same vein, don't describe, show.&nbsp; We don't need to know exactly what the evil prince of evil is wearing.&nbsp; But if you want me to think he's really evil, show me the results of his evil or have him do something evil in front of me.&nbsp; That'll get the point across better than trying to dress up how evil this guy is and it'll use less idle game time to do it.I still like KM's mandatory goals for PCs, as a driver of action.&nbsp; Just about every scene should be actions taken to get the goal.&nbsp; I was going to say &quot;driving to the goal&quot;, but that's another metaphor.&nbsp; Don't waste my time describing the ride along the trail.&nbsp; Ain't nothing happening.&nbsp; it's filler. Cut to the chase.KM raised an interesting point in his second post here about goals, in that they are predestined to fail unless the PC exerts effort.&nbsp; He should have put that in his original Goals article.&nbsp; But I'll extract another lesson from it.One of the ways TV shows lose audience is when they take so bloody long to resolve themselves.&nbsp; Lost hit a lull like that (season 3 if I recall the complaints).&nbsp; As a writer or a GM, you can only milk a goal for so long.&nbsp; It needs to move to the next stage or end in final defeat.&nbsp; If you keep milking the same cow, you're going to jump the shark.This is part of what Burn Notice suffered from.&nbsp; How many seasons is Michael going to be burned, and go after the guys who burned him, and then go after the guys who were really behind the guys who were really behind the guys who burned him.&nbsp; Even an onion has a limited number of layers.&nbsp; Finish it.There is a pacing that should be kept, so the player feels tension, and progress.&nbsp; And if the PC is lucky, eventual success.&nbsp; But certainly not never ending repetition of being stuck in the same stage for 20 levels.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Janx, post: 7652218, member: 8835"] Having read the penguin article, I see some other interesting lessons from Mamet. mamet talks about writing for TV and not radio, since thats the people he's addressing. The inverse is really true for GMing. You're writing for listeners, not watchers. People can't see anything, so you've got to hold their attention in an audio medium. That still means not boring them to death. mamet hates scenes with 2 people talking about a 3rd person or exposition scenes. in D&D, I take these concepts from that: any scene with 2 people talking means the rest of the party is bored. Cut some conversations down to summations rather than back and forth dialog that the rest of the party is stuck waiting for it to finish. Don't spend a lot of time describing everything or giving length backstory. Somebody else has an article on cleaning up boxed text. Read it. in that same vein, don't describe, show. We don't need to know exactly what the evil prince of evil is wearing. But if you want me to think he's really evil, show me the results of his evil or have him do something evil in front of me. That'll get the point across better than trying to dress up how evil this guy is and it'll use less idle game time to do it. I still like KM's mandatory goals for PCs, as a driver of action. Just about every scene should be actions taken to get the goal. I was going to say "driving to the goal", but that's another metaphor. Don't waste my time describing the ride along the trail. Ain't nothing happening. it's filler. Cut to the chase. KM raised an interesting point in his second post here about goals, in that they are predestined to fail unless the PC exerts effort. He should have put that in his original Goals article. But I'll extract another lesson from it. One of the ways TV shows lose audience is when they take so bloody long to resolve themselves. Lost hit a lull like that (season 3 if I recall the complaints). As a writer or a GM, you can only milk a goal for so long. It needs to move to the next stage or end in final defeat. If you keep milking the same cow, you're going to jump the shark. This is part of what Burn Notice suffered from. How many seasons is Michael going to be burned, and go after the guys who burned him, and then go after the guys who were really behind the guys who were really behind the guys who burned him. Even an onion has a limited number of layers. Finish it. There is a pacing that should be kept, so the player feels tension, and progress. And if the PC is lucky, eventual success. But certainly not never ending repetition of being stuck in the same stage for 20 levels. [/QUOTE]

Verification