Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7391727" data-attributes="member: 42582">Here are some replies on stuff that [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION] has mostly covered, but where I thought I'd add my own take as well:You can define "backstory" however you like. But Eero Tuovinen is using it with a definite meaning: stuff written in advance of acutal play, or stuff made up in the course of actual play that is a proxy for pre-written stuff. To <a href="https://isabout.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/the-pitfalls-of-narrative-technique-in-rpg-play/" target="_blank">quote</a>: The concept [of backstory] only makes sense when somebody has done preparatory work for the game or is using specific heuristics to simulate such preparation in real-time. . . . Backstory is specifically separate from what might happen during play itself. He even gives a handy illustration: a GM "decid[ing] in advance that the butler did it". I don't think he give examples of the heuristics he mentions, but these are also fairly well known, and some have been discussed in this thread, like rolling on a random generator or extrapolating realistically from what has already been establishd. A secret door discovered in the course of play as the outcome of action resolution that establishes both (i) a secret door exists, and (ii) a character discovers said door, is not backstory in Eero Tuovinen's sense. It was not pre-authored. It was not established by way of a specific heuristic to simulate preparation in real time. I don't see how that could be clearer. (If you had any familiarity with the games he actually references, it would be even clearer.) But an arbitrary number is "more realistic" only on the same principle that a stopped clock is right two times a day! This is why [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION] describes this a an aesthetic preference. You prefer to have a number, however arbitrary, rather than leaving ti a matter of the fiction that no one needs to settle until some dramatic situation calls for it - and then settling it via some other mechanic than counting. In D&D there is no rule for sharpening or blunting a sword. But the player of any weapon-wielding PC in Cortex+ Heroic can spend a plot point to add a Honed Blade resource. The Swordthane in my viking game even has a special ability, whereby the player can add a d6 to the Doom Pool in return for stepping up such a resource. (When that guy hones his blade, we know things are going to get ugly!)******************************************And here is a further comment on GM-driven play and the generation of "story":Neither I nor [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION] has suggested this as the best reading of the Pippin arc. I suggested something like "I will repay my debt to Boromir." AbdulAlhazred suggested "I will serve and follow the Gondorians, whom I admire greatly." Either agenda - whether expressed formally (as some systems have it) or informally (as is the case eg in 4e) - is a hook to the GM. The GM will establish a situation (and then, following on from that, further situations which incorporate consequences and outcomes generated via play) which puts that agenda to the test. If one wants to imagine JRRT's Pippin story as the result of this sort of RPG process, then the first situation was the meeting with Denethor, and the element of that which put the agenda to the test was the fact that Denethor did not seem terribly likable. But if the future choices are which intersection to take, or the other sorts of choicds that you and Lanefan have emphasised as important, then how is it going to play out? This is back to the "monkeys might fly out my butt principle". I am not talking about techniques that have a slight chance of producing meaningful dramatic arcs in play. I am talking about techniques that do this reliably, day-in and day-out. The best way to find out what Pippin's player is prepared to do to honour Pippin's commitment to Boromir and/or Gondor is to frame a scene that puts that to the test. The best way to find out what the players of the PCs who promised to help the dwarves with the giants are prepared to do to honour that promise is to frame a scene that puts that to the test. This is what is meant by "going to where the action is". Pre-planning is not a very significant part of it. On the player side, what matters is sending some signals. On the GM side, what matters is following the players' leads. It's not all that esoteric. All it requires is a certain readiness to cut through some cruft. And obviously flexibility in narration helps with that. And a light touch approach to worldbuilding and initial establisment of setting helps with that flexibility.</blockquote>

Verification