Engaging the Whole Scene
-
@L-B-Heuschkel said in Engaging the Whole Scene:
A player who refuses to share the stage if they cannot be at the centre of it is honestly a player you'll be better off without. Good players understand that sometimes, you're on centre stage, and sometimes you're support cast. Inside scheduled events, and outside of them. While it's true that we are all the star of our own life, that's not how collaborative story telling works.
One of the disconnects here is that many players don't think of online roleplaying as a form of collaborative storytelling but, rather, as an interactive novel. And in novels there is often a protagonist the readers empathize with, so that's the shoes they try to fill with their character.
But the real issue is not even that. It's simpler - ego is very much a thing. Many players are not trying to participate in a story, they're trying to win the game. To me that's what it boils down to.
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
To my mind, there is a reason why Initiative has both a physical and mental aspect, at least in terms of WoD games. It's not just how fast you move, it's how fast you react and focus. As such, I tend to keep to Init orders even if there's no combat involved - it factors into pose orders, and it factors into what people can do before someone else gets a go. When your init comes up, you get your action. Then you have to wait until the ST goes down the list and comes back to you before you can act again. People can always pass their turn, or they might not even notice <fail a perception check before the issue becomes obvious> but it still keeps things organized.
-
@Killer-Klown said in Engaging the Whole Scene:
To my mind, there is a reason why Initiative has both a physical and mental aspect, at least in terms of WoD games. It's not just how fast you move, it's how fast you react and focus. As such, I tend to keep to Init orders even if there's no combat involved - it factors into pose orders, and it factors into what people can do before someone else gets a go. When your init comes up, you get your action. Then you have to wait until the ST goes down the list and comes back to you before you can act again. People can always pass their turn, or they might not even notice <fail a perception check before the issue becomes obvious> but it still keeps things organized.
A lot of systems, however, don't have an init order. Or you may be in the part of the scene where you're not in initiative (it's brought out during combat, largely).
I wouldn't want to force a plot scene into initiatives from the get-go for the entire scene: it'd slow things down way too much.
Saying the quiet parts out loud since 1996.
-
@Auspice said in Engaging the Whole Scene:
@Killer-Klown said in Engaging the Whole Scene:
To my mind, there is a reason why Initiative has both a physical and mental aspect, at least in terms of WoD games. It's not just how fast you move, it's how fast you react and focus. As such, I tend to keep to Init orders even if there's no combat involved - it factors into pose orders, and it factors into what people can do before someone else gets a go. When your init comes up, you get your action. Then you have to wait until the ST goes down the list and comes back to you before you can act again. People can always pass their turn, or they might not even notice <fail a perception check before the issue becomes obvious> but it still keeps things organized.
A lot of systems, however, don't have an init order. Or you may be in the part of the scene where you're not in initiative (it's brought out during combat, largely).
I wouldn't want to force a plot scene into initiatives from the get-go for the entire scene: it'd slow things down way too much.
Even in systems without init orders, though, pose orders are a thing. I don't think I've ever played on a game without one,. If there is NOT an order of some kind -- then the ST should probably enforce one anyway, for the sake of sanity.
As far as 'who can do what the fastest', even in games without a set initiative order, we still have some idea of action economy. If everyone else is just throwing punches, then Miles Gloriosus probably isn't given enough time to run into the burning building, save the kidnapped princess, and return the kitten to the old lady.
Players should really be on the same page, and I think that it's up to the ST to fill in those blanks, if the system doesn't. Even if you just tell everyone to roll a die once per turn to see who goes in what order.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@Derp said in Engaging the Whole Scene:
Even in systems without init orders, though, pose orders are a thing. I don't think I've ever played on a game without one,. If there is NOT an order of some kind -- then the ST should probably enforce one anyway, for the sake of sanity.
But we come around again to 'whoever can type fastest, wins.' I enforce a 3PR pose order outside of initiative. Because it means everyone has a chance as opposed to Mike Speedyfingers tossing out a 2 line entrance pose to secure his spot as 'first' so that every round, he's still 'first.'
3PR means, a) there's a slowdown in effect (the 3 poses between), and b) other people will have a chance to step up and pose things.
There's no perfect method and it does come back to the ST, but that's why I'm asking here: what methods do people use to organically encourage people to share? How do you ensure everyone is involved?
If you're relying on a set, strict pose order, how do you make sure the people who are last in the order get to remain involved and not feel steamrolled every round?
-
@Arkandel said in Engaging the Whole Scene:
But the real issue is not even that. It's simpler - ego is very much a thing. Many players are not trying to participate in a story, they're trying to win the game. To me that's what it boils down to.Unfortunately this is true. To me, that's a game breaker. I will roleplay with people of this caliber once. Just once.
-
I think it's imperative upon players to realize when a scene SIMPLY is not for us and be willing to step away also then not lambaste ourselves for that.
I know I just dropped out of a scene on Arx because of a few things that ran contrary to how I work as a player. Paragraph long poses just lose me. I always miss a detail and then I feel stupid for missing it. I always do SOMETHING wrong when someone hands me paragraphs of text to react to. Then others were also posing paragraphs back and I checked out so quickly it wasn't even funny. There was also a very strict pose-order (aka, everyone posed between ST poses.) THIS IN AND OF ITSELF IS OKAY, but I get bored if I can't respond in a timely fashion to the other people around me. This is my own character defect and nothing that reflects upon the ST in the scene.
So... it's okay to step out when you realize it isn't your pot of tea.
For GMs I think it's important to keep track of the pacing of your scene. Like, is it taking people 10-15 minutes to pose? Is there someone who is isn't posing regularly, or if they're usually a prolific poser, are they only doing 1-2 line nothing poses? Then they can ask.
-
@silverfox said in Engaging the Whole Scene:
So... it's okay to step out when you realize it isn't your pot of tea.
This. So much this. No character needs to be part of everything. It's quite legit to simply not be part of a storyline, not be in the mood for a storyline or, to be honest, not like the way a storyline is done.
Personally, I alternate depending on the mood of the scene. Some scenes are slow pose affairs where we write perhaps an entire page of carefully thought out text at a time, and subsequently, wait an hour or two for the other player to respond. Others are machine-gun scenes where dialogue goes pang pang pang and is pretty instantaneous. Both work, for different purposes. But it's pretty important to have aligned expectations between players in advance because I for one do not want to wait an hour for a pose if I'm expecting rapid-fire arguments.
