D&D 4E Pemertonian Scene Framing and 4e DMing Restarted

[Storminator]

In which Storminator risks the wrath of the moderators by reigniting a locked thread.

Despite the other thread's problems, I didn't feel the conversation was finished.

I think JA brought up some good points, which I'd like to discuss in a respectful manner. As we all know, any DMing technique can be poorly applied. The previous thread didn't really address some of the pitfalls of PSF techniques.

One of the strengths of PSF is that it skips over the unimportant details to get to the next good scene. I'm interested in how people determine what are the unimportant details, and which are the good scenes. Obviously this varies from table to table, but how do tables go about getting that consensus?

We're already risking a lock folks, so keep it classy.

PS

 

[Bedrockgames]

In which Storminator risks the wrath of the moderators by reigniting a locked thread.

Despite the other thread's problems, I didn't feel the conversation was finished.

I think JA brought up some good points, which I'd like to discuss in a respectful manner. As we all know, any DMing technique can be poorly applied. The previous thread didn't really address some of the pitfalls of PSF techniques.

One of the strengths of PSF is that it skips over the unimportant details to get to the next good scene. I'm interested in how people determine what are the unimportant details, and which are the good scenes. Obviously this varies from table to table, but how do tables go about getting that consensus?

We're already risking a lock folks, so keep it classy.

PS

Well, i dont employ scene framing so I cant speak for users of this method, but I would think it isnt that different from when any GM elapses time: you just need to have a feel for your group and know when to move on. So my guess is this is just an intuitive aspect of the technique you hone through experience and that involves a certain amount of familiarity with the players at the table.

 

[DEFCON 1]

One of the strengths of PSF is that it skips over the unimportant details to get to the next good scene. I'm interested in how people determine what are the unimportant details, and which are the good scenes. Obviously this varies from table to table, but how do tables go about getting that consensus?

I don't think it gets determined in that way-- cut out the "bad scenes" and go straight to the "good scenes"... but rather, players just use standard improvisational theater technique: the Offer and the Accept.

The start of any scene of improvisation uses the "offer" and the "accept". One performer offers something into the scene-- makes a declaration of some sort of something going on or being felt or being seen or whatever... and the second performer accepts that what was offered is true and acknowledges the fact. The second performer then offers an additional detail to the first person's offer of what is happening in the scene, and then the first person accepts that bit as now being factually true to what is going on. It's your prototypical 'Yes, And' situation.

What I think is happening during PFA is that the performers involved (the DM and the players) MAKE that zoomed-in scene important by one person offering something and the others accepting it and then adding to it in such a way that the scene BECOMES important. It's not that bad scenes are skipped, it's that every scene IS MADE good by strong and important offers, strong accepts, and then even stronger counter-offers.

If the DM narrates the party has left a dungeon, he might make an Offer that the city is less than two miles away. The party then Accepts that to be true, and then Offers that they are going to go to that city and find someone to buy all the treasure they found. They've 'Yes, Anded'. The DM Accepts what they have said, and then makes an Offer that two hours later, the party finds themselves outside a blacksmith shop. The party Accepts that they have traveled the two hours and are outside the smith, and then Offers to make Streetwise checks to see if they perhaps know anything about the blacksmith himself. The DM Accepts the offer of Streetwise checks, has them roll (after setting an internal DC), and then depending on the result perhaps Offers that the party has heard this smith deals with the black market.

Now all of a sudden, we've moved our scene focus straight from exiting the dungeon directly into a scene involving a crooked blacksmith. Did the group "skip" unimportant scenes along the way? No. Reason why? Because no one treats these Offers made AS unimportant. Every Offer made is treated as a vital part of the story. Even if someone by some chance had made an Offer that seemed unimportant... the other players would turn it into something important based upon their Acceptance of what has happened and the Offer of what happens next. And this happens instinctually.

For example, if in the example above... after the party made the Offer that they were heading back to town... the DM accepted it and then made the Offer that halfway on the journey back, one of the wheels on their cart broke. Why? No idea, the DM just threw the Offer out there to see how the party would react. And what would that reaction be? Mostly likely... the party would get out of the cart, and make the Offer that they will inspect the wheel, check to see what caused the break, and keep their eyes peeled for anyone or anything that might be spying on them. Voila! Their natural reaction to this scene Offering has now set them on a path where this scene will now be Important. Because the DM (if he's worth his salt) will naturally Accept that they are expecting an ambush, and then make an Offer in direct reaction to that (probably by actually having it BE an ambush.)

Now you might make the case that after the party checked out the wheel, and kept their eyes peeled for an ambush, the DM could make the Offer that nothing else happens, they fix their cart, and they make it back to the city. And thus, this scene in the road remains "unimportant". And yet... I would still claim otherwise. Even if nothing has happened per se (other than the wheel breaking)... just the scenes very existence has generated thought in the player's minds. Did the wheel really just break on its own? Did it not? Why would we even have this scene in the road if it did? What is the scene's purpose?

And thus... as these thoughts run through the minds of the players, they will affect future Offers they make. Maybe next time they keep more of a watch on the road for potholes? Maybe they choose not to take a cart next time? Or whatever they Offer to the DM in the future. That scene... while seemingly "unimportant" in the grand narrative of the campaign... has become important in terms of how the players and DM make Offers and Accepts in the future to direct those scenes in new and different ways.

And that's how actual improvisation works.

 

[pemerton]

One of the strengths of PSF is that it skips over the unimportant details to get to the next good scene. I'm interested in how people determine what are the unimportant details, and which are the good scenes.

As far as the scene-framing techniques that [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] was discussing in that thread, which he generously attributed to me but which really (in my view) should be attributed to The Forge, the answer was given by [MENTION=6682826]CH[/MENTION]aochu: player flags are the key. "The good stuff" is the stuff that pushes the players (via their PCs) in respect of those elements of character, setting etc that the players have flagged as important to them.

In a game like Burning Wheel these flags are very express (Belifes, Instincts). In 4e it is more informal - though race, class, paragon path and epic destiny choices can all play a role.

EDIT: Here's an example where good commuication/mutual understanding matters.

Before heading out on an expedition, the PCs stock up on rope. Is this the players sending a signal that they want a climbing/pit/roping together scene? Or is it the players sending a signal that they don' want the GM to force them into a "trapped at the bottom of a pit/cliff" scene? Knowing which will be important to GMing that group effectively - otherwise you risk running a scene that they didn't want, or failing to run the scene that they did want!

 

[Loonook]

Before heading out on an expedition, the PCs stock up on rope. Is this the players sending a signal that they want a climbing/pit/roping together scene? Or is it the players sending a signal that they don' want the GM to force them into a "trapped at the bottom of a pit/cliff" scene? Knowing which will be important to GMing that group effectively - otherwise you risk running a scene that they didn't want, or failing to run the scene that they did want!

And can be discussed via a short Merchant interlude. A merchant, caravan keeper, or just some ropemaker that they find asking them about why they would need so much rope! It seems excessive!

Did the players mention how they are thinking there will be spelunking, mountain climbing, etc.? Well, you have a hook. If they speak about such pitfalls as mentioned? You probably want to avoid those... While giving them something to use all of that sweet sweet rope with.

Slainte,

-Loonook.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

I think that misreading the cues (and their motivations) can be a potential issue, as has been suggested.

I also feel like using things as basic (to D&D anyway) as Race, Class, and other player choices as hooks, can (but not necessarily) cause a misunderstanding of cues, but probably only with some types of players, i.e. those with minimal investment in the flavour or world significance behind a given choice, which can include both those who choose for mechanical reasons, and those who make the choice because they don't care or don't know what else to pick (casual players).

I think it could also occur where a player has made a choice and then reflavoured it. The choice on the page may not actually represent what it says. This is probably more common in 4e, but I know it was also used extensively near the twilight of 3.x (at least the games I played), and probably in many other games as well.

 

[Hussar]

One issue I do see here though is player apathy. I've played with more than a few players who simply will not provide the "Offer" to use Defcon1's term. They want the DM to pretty much roll up the plot wagon, give them a couple of simple choices and move on. Early dungeon crawling looks a lot like this. Once you are in the dungeon, the DM provides very little information and player choices are essentially random. Do you turn East or West at the T junction? Well, beyond the description of what you can see down each direction, the choice is essentially random.

How do you motivate players to actually provide "Offer"s? I've seen Defcon1's example of leaving the dungeon and going to the city bog down into minutia as one player decides to talk to every single person the DM describes while another player is fiddling with his cell phone because he's bored out of his mind.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

One issue I do see here though is player apathy. I've played with more than a few players who simply will not provide the "Offer" to use Defcon1's term. They want the DM to pretty much roll up the plot wagon, give them a couple of simple choices and move on.

Yup.

How do you motivate players to actually provide "Offer"s? I've seen Defcon1's example of leaving the dungeon and going to the city bog down into minutia as one player decides to talk to every single person the DM describes while another player is fiddling with his cell phone because he's bored out of his mind

I've had a few players over the years who were dependable for that, spread out over decades of play.

The only time my efforts to motivate players to tell me where they wanted to go were significantly rewarded were in my Supers 1900 campaign- the best campaign I ever ran. The means: a campaign-specific, single-page "news sheet" that recapped previous adventures, dropped tidbits related to continuing along that plotline, and provided news blurbs of the setting in general (including stuff generated from the PC's bios & disadvantages*), formatted like the front page of an old newpaper/internal memo for the organization that the PCs were members of.









* the system was HERO, so they were all providing me with narrative hooks to use by the way they designed their PCs.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

One issue I do see here though is player apathy. I've played with more than a few players who simply will not provide the "Offer" to use Defcon1's term. They want the DM to pretty much roll up the plot wagon, give them a couple of simple choices and move on. Early dungeon crawling looks a lot like this. Once you are in the dungeon, the DM provides very little information and player choices are essentially random. Do you turn East or West at the T junction? Well, beyond the description of what you can see down each direction, the choice is essentially random.

How do you motivate players to actually provide "Offer"s? I've seen Defcon1's example of leaving the dungeon and going to the city bog down into minutia as one player decides to talk to every single person the DM describes while another player is fiddling with his cell phone because he's bored out of his mind.

Well, again, the DM should know what offers are going to be worthwhile. In the first case I would say that the DM should be giving the players more info. He can create a scene "the T junction" where the signs are (maybe based on rumors, a partial map, smells, whatever) that the characters can choose zombies to the left or orcs to the right. Now its meaningful and it can even be a fairly significant scene in its own right if you want (again the nature of it would be based on the DM understanding what the players will find interesting, it could be a flashback to some distant time, a skill challenge of some sort, or just a quick lore check, choice, and on to the next scene).

I think a couple things are also important to remember. The players can make offers and state facts about the situation as well as the DM can. This may depend on the table as to exactly how powerful players are and in some systems there are mechanics and resources involved (plot coupons or other similar things) but in 4e generally it could just be a player saying "hey, there's an interesting looking swamp over there to the east, we head that way!" perhaps. Note too that everyone has some input on how focused in you get at any one point. Maybe the DM says "OK, you cross the swamp, it turns out to be just a small pond with some boggy ground around it, but you spot a ruin on the hill to the north of the pond" (IE he's declining to get bogged down in the swamp, but instead offering a dungeon crawl). Maybe the players want to do some cross country exploration (there may be some goal they want to pursue for instance) and they go on over the hill and down the other side and into the woods, or maybe they go down the ruined stairs into the dungeon (zooming the focus in on a tactical exploration activity and/or some combat).

I'd note that this kind of play is well served by a rules system that also has variable level of abstraction. Maybe in the dungeon the players are really only interested in finding some old inscriptions. Its handy if there's a way to just abstract the other parts. This lets you go ahead and have some resource management and still zoom in and out (otherwise resources get a bit wonky, it costs no surges to drive off the kobolds and read the inscription simply because nobody felt like bothering to run it), but if you have a "well, OK, you deal with the kobolds for 7 total surges spread about the party" that can work. Framing things dynamically as SCs is one way to handle this in 4e that works pretty well.

Anyway, this is a great topic.

 

[Storminator]

I don't think it gets determined in that way-- cut out the "bad scenes" and go straight to the "good scenes"... but rather, players just use standard improvisational theater technique: the Offer and the Accept.

Is there a "Reject" option? What happens if you Offer, but no one wants to Accept? Or is there some kind of Counteroffer option?

What happens if just one of the players is more aggressive, and Accepts scenes no one else wants to play out? I know I've found myself, as a DM, stuck in a scene only one player is enjoying, and wondering when I should have cut it short (it already being past that point). How does one minimize the "bad scene" problems. I'm talking about scenes that maybe never should have been run, or perhaps a scene that has soured and it's time to get out.

PS