robotnik2004 (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
robotnik2004) wrote2003-01-25 01:05 pm
robotnik2004) wrote2003-01-25 01:05 pm
Entry tags:
Unknown USA
We're supposed to be playing Unknown Armies on Monday, and I'm kinda stumped as to what is going to happen.
I've got piles of ideas: weird people to meet and places to go and plots to be embroiled in and so forth. Coming up with that stuff is easy and fun. It's logistics that drive me crazy. How do I herd the PCs to the place where the story kicks in? Will they investigate lead A or lead B? Will they be interested in subplot C or subplot D? Now, I don't think that "railroading" is always the crime that a lot of gamers say it is. My Adventure! game was a massive exercise in consensual railroading and that seemed entirely appropriate for the genre. But it is a lot of work, and I'm not all that interested in doing it week after week after week.
I have this idea, though. If, say, I want to run a session where the PCs are in rural Appalachia searching for the Book of Good Roads, or are being chased by an implacable bounty hunter across the New Mexican desert, why can't I just start the session by saying "You're in rural Appalachia, searching for the Book of Good Roads." Or "You're in the New Mexican desert. A bounty hunter is chasing you." If I was going to run a one-shot, that's what I'd do, and nobody would complain. Couldn't you run an extended campaign this way?
It sounds like I'm robbing the players of their autonomy, and to some extent I am, but all the herding takes place "off screen," between sessions. In a lot of ways the players end up with more "in game" autonomy, because I've already established the situation I want to explore. They now have absolute freedom in how they respond to it. No need to spend half the session asking "What do you want to do? Wouldn't you like to look into that intriguing-sounding McGuffin that NPC muttered about last session? [clatter of dice] You hear rumors it might be in Appalachia..." And of course, if the players say, "but we wanted to go to Minnesota!" then I can always start out the next session with, "You are in Minnesota."
Basically it's the difference between a TV show like 24, where each episode leads directly into the next one, and one like Samurai Jack, where we have no idea how much time has elapsed between epsisodes or even what order the stories come in. The latter probably leads to a more picaresque, episodic story structure, but then that was always part of my plan for this game.
I've got piles of ideas: weird people to meet and places to go and plots to be embroiled in and so forth. Coming up with that stuff is easy and fun. It's logistics that drive me crazy. How do I herd the PCs to the place where the story kicks in? Will they investigate lead A or lead B? Will they be interested in subplot C or subplot D? Now, I don't think that "railroading" is always the crime that a lot of gamers say it is. My Adventure! game was a massive exercise in consensual railroading and that seemed entirely appropriate for the genre. But it is a lot of work, and I'm not all that interested in doing it week after week after week.
I have this idea, though. If, say, I want to run a session where the PCs are in rural Appalachia searching for the Book of Good Roads, or are being chased by an implacable bounty hunter across the New Mexican desert, why can't I just start the session by saying "You're in rural Appalachia, searching for the Book of Good Roads." Or "You're in the New Mexican desert. A bounty hunter is chasing you." If I was going to run a one-shot, that's what I'd do, and nobody would complain. Couldn't you run an extended campaign this way?
It sounds like I'm robbing the players of their autonomy, and to some extent I am, but all the herding takes place "off screen," between sessions. In a lot of ways the players end up with more "in game" autonomy, because I've already established the situation I want to explore. They now have absolute freedom in how they respond to it. No need to spend half the session asking "What do you want to do? Wouldn't you like to look into that intriguing-sounding McGuffin that NPC muttered about last session? [clatter of dice] You hear rumors it might be in Appalachia..." And of course, if the players say, "but we wanted to go to Minnesota!" then I can always start out the next session with, "You are in Minnesota."
Basically it's the difference between a TV show like 24, where each episode leads directly into the next one, and one like Samurai Jack, where we have no idea how much time has elapsed between epsisodes or even what order the stories come in. The latter probably leads to a more picaresque, episodic story structure, but then that was always part of my plan for this game.
no subject
As far as Unknown Armies goes, I'd say don't worry. I think it'll play best as an episodic series, as opposed to story-arc series. The characters are so scatterlogical, it requires a huge suspension of disbelief to keep 'em together anyways. I def. see it all as some kind of weird road pic, no explaination of what came before the opening credits, just 'they're five guys in a car...'
I think at this point, you should probably plan on me not being able to make it. I fairly sure I'll be stuck at work a little late becuase I'm going in late (need to take Michelle to the airport). And since Michelle will be out of town, I'll have to head home to walk the dog... so by the time I finish all that and get back out to JP, it probably won't be worth it...
Just have the boys drop off Blind Joe at some bar somewhere and come back for him later. Or maybe he wanders off while walking Scraps somewhere, and they wait for him and finally end up leaving...
no subject
"Scatterlogical." Hee. Great word.