Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ST" data-source="post: 4842390" data-attributes="member: 14053">I finally found your reply. Sorry about ignoring it earlier!EDIT: I rambled so much but missed some key points, so here's some links for definitions and more discussion of scene framing.An excellent discussion - <a href="http://indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=383.0" target="_blank">Scene Framing</a> Ron Edwards takes a lot of flack from people, but I'm telling you, here? His explanation is solid.Wiki links with some definitions and examples - <a href="http://random-average.com/TheoryTopics/SceneFraming" target="_blank">RandomWiki | TheoryTopics / Scene Framing browse</a>A blog discussing aggressive scene framing - <a href="http://rpg.brouhaha.us/?p=851" target="_blank">http://rpg.brouhaha.us/?p=851</a>This gets debated a lot in what some people might call "story games" circles. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Not in terms of "how much power should I allow the players to have, because too much might wreck the game", but "how much power should (players and GM) have over the game, in what areas, because deciding this ahead of time helps accomplish the game's design goals". So how you apportion scene framing power can often depend on what exactly you're trying to accomplish. Sometimes you might go mostly GM-framed, with player suggestions being considered. (One argument I like is that even when the rules say "GM decides", that doesn't mean "GM decides based solely on their own thoughts" -- you can always ask for player input and decide if it's 'doable' at the moment.Some systems go with GM framing the scenes, and players spending a Hero Point or Fate Point or somesuch resource to introduce an additional element into the scene. (e.g., "I use Streetwise, I remember something about my mentor's old fence living in these slums", which might be entirely new content suggested at that moment.) Sometimes it's as simple as alternating GM framing and player framing depending on the constraints of the situation. In town? Feel free to head wherever you want, to explore. Chased by a lynch mob? GM is gonna frame each scene with those guys on your heels until you deal with the problem.This is all hopelessly vague, I know. It fits into some bigger topics in terms of player agency, and stuff like "What's real in the game world", which is I think the tangent howandwhy is interested in talking about. It also depends on how the group is structured -- do you run with a single party, or having PCs off doing their own thing? Does the table prefer people to not hear OOC info, or are they fine with the players being involved in scenes their characters aren't in? If you're running with a traditional party, and particularly if the current issue is slow pacing, it may make the most sense for the GM to aggressively frame forward to new events when that's what's going on, and for them to more relaxedly frame, with lots of player input as to the where and when, during downtime or investigation periods. It may also work out well to tie players getting to frame scenes in with their resources, either metagame resources (Fate points, hero points) or in-character resources (skills, contacts). Again, if pacing is an issue, it may work best for the GM to offer some suggestions or sort of treat these resources as a reward that lets the player 'cut to the chase'. I've done things like "Okay, with your contacts and Streetwise skill, you find the guy you're looking for in an hour or two. Where do you approach him?" so that we're kind of in a negotiating position in terms of deciding how the scene's set up. You want to approach the guy in a bar and schmooze him, catch him in a back alley and threaten him Batman-style from the roof above? This can be a way for players to express their character while quickly moving forward.Again, I know this is scattershot kind of stuff, sorry about that. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> I find it a fascinating topic, though. One last thing I'll say: I've not found that I needed to do much at all to rein in things like "Dude, don't frame ahead to you already having beat the villain", or players wanting to frame to scenes that can't happen, or stuff like that. Everyone at the table has a vested interest in keeping up suspension of disbelief and making the game interesting. I go with full metagame knowledge to players, including stuff like "Oh, if you want to spend a Fate point to show up during this scene, feel free", and letting players decide for themselves if it's plausible and how. You'd think it'd be a big angle for the players to break the game, but it's really not -- it's largely self-correcting. For instance, I played in a freeform-ish game once where one of the players was your traditional stereotypical badass rogue sneak, a hot elven PC played by a dude, the whole nine yards. Said PC set things up such that they achieved their personal goal, a mission from their thief's guild, so sneakily that the other PCs didn't even know about it. Victory! Well, I guess. He played it so safe and sneaky that essentially he was barely involved in the game, as far as the rest of the players were concerned. He got what he wanted out of the experience, I guess, but it didn't affect or take away from the rest of the group's satisfaction at acheiving their own goals at all. It's like, if you give players some of the Power of Plot, and they "abuse" it, setting up easy obstacles they can overcome with little effort -- they've only really cheated themselves.</blockquote>

Verification