Gente Che Gioca > Gioco Concreto
Serpente di Cenere: chi me lo spiega?
Rafu:
Then, would you say what you're terming "GM" is a projection of the ruleset and scenario author or maybe an extension of the instruction text, rather than an actual participant in the game (a player with differentiated tasks)?
That's the impression I get from your post, except maybe for the last paragraph of it... I'd say myself that the request of clear and "objective" rules supporting their actions and the demand of validation of their actions from a game-master are quite different beasts, arising from different (even conflicting) needs, often in different persons. That's what happens in most tabletop gaming environments, in my experience at least, often leading to a sharp divide between players who support (and benefit from) the social leadership of a GM, and players who cling to the letter of the rules as an insurance vs. leadership abuse (the latter being usually singled out as "problematic players" in the pre-Forge RPGing environment I was nurtured in).
What I mantain is thus that the validation-seeking player in ModCon would himself likely not care much for more thorough and in-depth pre-game instructions - and especially not for written instructions - while the kind of player who (like Moreno, Claudia and Michele do) laments the murkiness of the rules could actually care less that a GM/organizer is available to provide directions mid-game, and they would only ask such an organizer "rule clarification" questions which (in their mind, at least) pertain either to a body of written rules they have not been provided the full text of, or to the spirit behind a rules-text they have available but feel is not explicative enough in style. It is also my opinion and experience that the former player, should he not entertain himselves, is not very likely to blame "the game" (meaning the scenario and ruleset) for a disappointing experience, as the latter do, but rather to blame a human factor such as the organizer's "GMing style", or himself.
Andrea Castellani:
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Rafu[/cite]the validation-seeking player in ModCon
--- Termina citazione ---
Se può aiutare, il giocatore in questione era Carlo Rebagliati (autore di Alter Ego e coautore proprio con Rafu di Trame).
Rafu:
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Andrea Castellani[/cite]Carlo Rebagliati
--- Termina citazione ---
Interessante. Non mi sbilancio sul caso particolare, ma resto della mia idea quanto alla validità generale di quel che ho scritto sopra.
EDITa tu che edito anch'io: Carlo è co-autore di "Trame", attualmente. Una collaborazione stimolante. ^^
Jiituomas:
Rafu, in such a design ""GM" is indeed more of an outdated term for the totality of game designer intent and the organizer who is present, coming from the way such games used to be made and run by the same person. So "GM", in my mind, for each run of such larps is a mixture of the original designer and the run-time organizer.
And in the case of Serpente, the questions are, in my opinion, not the different beast they would be in many other games. These all centered on the parameters of acceptable play, and the dissonance between the apparently limiting character/setting concept and the players' need to make the game provide suitably strong stories for them. Some just asked during play, some before it, and some only lamented the perceived dissonanace afterwards.
The tabletop equivalent I can think of is roughly that of players asking the GM questions of "would it fit the game if I did.." - or wanting to ask those questions but due to one reason or another never presenting them. So not rules questions, but questions of expected play style versus the type(s) of freedom they need. And that's in my view a very Narrativism-oriented kind of question, regardless of which N definition we use, and simultaneously also a request for the GM to present his own clear vision of what the limits of acceptable play there are.
Davide Losito - ( Khana ):
I had some very similar experience with another Larp, written by Marzia and Franz...
Maybe too used to some way of playing, I was expecting informations from the GMs, or validation to my personal speculations.
I understood why they considered this validation-seeking a failing of the scenario just some months later.
The larp was ment to let moral positions emerge inside the situation over some delicate topic, and all the choreography was... well... choreography!
Characters had a background and interpretation hints, but they were nothing more than hints and part of that choreography. There were no railroad becasue it was written nowhere which kind of position anyone would have kept over the moral issue.
The game ended in a climax scene during which this moral position erupted over a single choice.
Navigazione
[0] Indice dei post
Vai alla versione completa