AEGISweb 2002

RPGs are both games and works of collaborative fiction (or collaborative drama, if you will), in which players and GM all share the joys of being both co-authors and audience. But what does it mean to call an RPG "collaborative fiction"? What are the implications? Does it do anything to help us have better games?

First of all, looking at RPG's as collaborative fiction means taking a fresh look at what the game is all about and how it is played. Playing heretic again, here are some of the ideas I've had on the matter:

All character descriptors, including equipment, spells, special knowledges, social contacts, etc etc are nothing more or less than plot control devices, "switches" by which the player may try to influence circumstance to follow a desired direction. For example, taking a high level of skill in swordsmanship allows the player to shift the balance in favor of his character in melee combat situations.

The GM in his turn also controls "switches" which if activated may help or hinder the players’ characters: clues that may be gleaned only by talking to a certain person, a criminal gang which will harass the PC’s if a certain trigger event occurs, a magical curse that falls upon the characters if they fail to pass a certain test - these are but a few examples of what forms such GM switches may take.

These devices are the tools by which the game’s participants shape their story together. Now, with these in mind, how could we use the philosophy of RPG's as collaborative fiction to enhance our own games?

Collaboration implies a division of labor. What then is this division in RPGs? Who wears what hats? There are basically three hats; Author, Editor and Audience. In my analysis, both players and GM share the first and the last; the GM is responsible for the middle. By this way of thinking, each participant has certain roles and responsibilities:

First off, the GM is responsible for the Theme and Setting of the story, but not its Plot; that is the province of the players.

The Theme is the central idea behind the whole story. By its very nature, it dictates the forms the plot may take, though it does not necessarily dictate which of those forms it should take (am I getting incoherent here?). Theme builds player expectations, which they will then interpret through their characters’ actions, thus building the plot. Thus if the theme is heroism, the players will expect their characters to go through larger-than-life trials and conflicts, and have the means to succeed. It is the responsibility of the GM to establish the theme early and clearly, in order that the players will know what is expected of them, and what they in turn may expect.

Theme also allows the GM to establish certain storytelling objectives for himself, which can then serve to guide the crafting and running of the session. If the theme for example is living out the ideals of chivalry, the GM can engineer an encounter where the PC’s honor or moral integrity is tested. If the theme is horror and angst, the GM can engineer encounters where the characters are forced to play out then witness or worse yet, live with the consequences of the dark side of their natures.

Setting also is an outgrowth of Theme; it is the physical, social, and cosmological milieu in which the characters play out their roles. (Cosmological questions need to be asked if the game involves the serious use of magic or other reality-altering powers). It is the GM’s responsibility to present his Setting in a convincing and evocative manner, again to build up player expectations and help them suspend their disbelief - a necessary ingredient for the enjoyment of any form of fiction.

The GM must be aware of the differences between his imaginary-world Setting and the modern everyday world, and be able to use those elements to convey the sense that his players’ characters are fully part of that world. For example, many of the facilities and institutions we take for granted did not exist in the Middle Ages, or at least not in a form we would be used to; no hospitals, no banks, no formal education system such as we know, etc etc. If you’re running a game in Greyhawk, for example, and introduce a locale called The Greyhawk Learning Center for Toddlers, you’ve just broken the medieval feel of the milieu for your players.

Character Creation is a shared responsibility between players and GM; the players crafting their own characters, and the GM crafting both his own (NPCs) and helping the players by providing needed information and editing in the form of suggestions and pruning or reshaping ideas to bring the character concept more into line with the theme and setting. Player characters are of the highest importance in any game, the "stars of the show," for about as many reasons as there are players; but the most important reason, with regard to the storyteller’s craft, is that each one of these characters represents the potential to create or alter the plot. Descriptors such as natural abilities, skills, and backgrounds or personality traits are no more than the hows and the whys of this power. "Bricks" and combat specialists skew combat encounters toward victory; charmers and contacts-rich characters skew social encounters to favorable results; vengeful characters are more likely to take punitive action when provoked - and so on and so on.

The players are responsible for the Plot - a concept which may be something of a surprise to traditional gamers. I know it surprised me when I finally realized it.

Why is this so? To answer the question we must dig into the very roots of roleplaying. We roleplay because we want to have fun. We have fun in roleplaying when our characters get to do something daring, something of world-shaking importance, something clever, even - cough! cough! blechh! - something romantic. And what are all these actions? The basic elements of plot. The player is in the same position as a movie star with script control - while some elements of the story/movie may already be set, many more details may be changed at will and reflect the input of another person other than the scriptwriter.

The old philosophy of roleplaying as storytelling defined the GM as storyteller and the players more as an audience than anything else. Plot was a thing cast in iron, a straight track to which the GM had to prod the players’ characters along. This often results in situations where the GM causes a certain event to occur and the player can do nothing about it.

In the new way of thinking, it is the GM’s task to provide intriguing plot hooks, circumstances which bring the players’ characters into the story in a manner both natural and compelling. The GM must provide as many such plot hooks as he can think of given his theme and setting, and be ready to use or even combine any of them as necessary. It is then up to the players to pick up these hooks and make a story out of them, based on what they do. Players are free to choose their characters’ actions, dig for clues, get lost, make plans, and cultivate their characters’ friendships and enmities as they please.

Plot Hook > Character > Action > Obstacle > Resolution (Victory/Defeat) > Consequence > Next Plot Hook

That is, the character is introduced to a circumstance (Plot Hook) to which he must react; however, when he takes action there are Obstacles which may frustrate him, and which he either overcomes or not; this in turn has consequences either way, which then lead to either a Conclusion or the next Plot Hook. Note that after the initial Plot Hook, all the input is already from the player.

This means the GM must think of encounters in terms of situations and consequences. What information about the situation must be given to the character, and by what means? What aspect of the character’s personality will the situation touch? Why should the situation be important to the character? What does the character stand to lose or gain from the situation? What are the possible reactions of the character to the situation, and what will be the outcomes of those reactions? What friendships or enmities might be created or reinforced or even broken by the situation?

Go for the gut, not the brain. Scare your players, make them angry, make them laugh, make them cry. Good fiction is meant to be enjoyed both on the intellectual and visceral levels, but it's actually on the latter level that we make the decision whether we like a story or not.

Now all this sounds like the GM is still in control of the plot. He isn’t. He’s only laying the tracks for the players’ train - but he’s not laying just one track, he’s laying a whole network of tracks and the stations along them. Which tracks the players will follow and what stations they’ll stop at is up to them.

This now brings us back to the idea of switches. On railroads, trains are shifted from one track to another by means of switches. The same goes for plot; at certain points in a plot, which we can call its turning points, characters face two or more forks.

Take a combat encounter for example. Will the characters win or be vanquished? Will they avoid the encounter and try to engineer a better one on their terms later? Will they somehow neutralize their foes’ enmity and make them call off the combat? Will they win by force or stratagem?

It is the characters’ various abilities, and how their players choose to use them, which will "switch" the plot train to a particular track out of all the possible tracks. The GM, in turn, can use his switches to make a track look more or less attractive, or harder or easier to attain, reacting fluidly to the inputs given him by his players.

In this manner, the players act more like authors, taking greater and finer control of the story, while the GM takes more of a back seat and rationalizes his role as co-author to a lesser, more proportionate level.

The last "hat" is that of Editor, and it is worn by the GM. It is the source of the GM’s power, and he exercises it throughout the game from character creation to the game session itself and after when character awards (i.e. XP) are distributed and loose ends clarified for player information.

It is the GM’s responsibility, for example, to rule on what fits and what doesn’t within the world he has defined. When the players are making their characters, he should check each one to see if there are any elements which are out of tune with either his Setting or Theme, and give the players all the information they require and the time to discuss their characters with him. In a heroic adventure like Red Branch, for example, a weaselly thief or angst-ridden artiste would stick out like a sore thumb; likewise, very low ratings in the "heroic" personality traits such as Valor and Generosity would be similarly inappropriate.

During the game, the editorial function is exercised when players start acting "out of character" or when an action is for some reason or other illegal. Abuses of player information are also cases where the GM’s editorial fiat must be invoked. The GM has the power to call for a scene to be replayed, or for a player to reconsider or even retract a declared action when there is a good reason to do so.

In this manner, the GM keeps the running of the game smooth and engaging for all the players, just as a movie should be free of jump cuts and actors’ bloopers.

Nearly all the RPG’s I’ve encountered, either through simple reading or actual play, point to the GM as the sole originator of the plot; but this is a philosophy that grows outmoded as players mature and demand more. Even after only a few games, the typical player is already capable of doing his own authoring. It’s an ability we’ve all had since we were kids. The ability to imagine. To pretend. To identify oneself with another.

The best thing about succesful collaboration is that it’s synergistic; better than what any one of the collaborators could have done alone. Harnessing this collaborative power is actually easy. All we need are: more three-dimensional characters, good (detailed and clear) description and narration, and the willingness to take the extra work needed to create engaging and flexible scenarios. Let’s recognize that players’ input is important and give it its deserved weight in our games. Let them know they’re authors, too, by giving them more choices, and hearing out the details of what they want their characters to attempt and making that matter. Whatever the system, if players and GMs are willing to go the extra mile, collaboration will result in better stories.

And what is the desired result of all this? Memories. Good memories. Memories of dash and derring-do, memories of humor and tragedy heroically borne, memories of having been a star in a movie of one’s own making. And that’s why we roleplay, isn’t it?