Scenes within Scenes
-
@Trashcan It’s not hard to address with code given we have the code already. And the current/traditional/typical code implementation allows for interruptions, as they are sometimes required or desired.
Though honestly, I’m more on board with the suggestions that involve “just fucking don’t” for scenes that require it. I don’t need massive meetings, huge parties, all that shit. If you like those, I think you’re weird but whatever, if you like those and don’t see utility in places code, I think you’re weirder.
-
@Pavel said in Scenes within Scenes:
I’m more on board with the suggestions that involve “just fucking don’t” for scenes that require it. I don’t need massive meetings, huge parties, all that shit.
This is my perspective on it. Most of the massive meetings are effectively a monologue with a guest speaker or two. There is some incentive to show up (votes, IC timer xp, etc.) but not to engage meaningfully since contributions outside of the main players will end up being sidelined. I don’t need to show up to showcase my reaction about some new plot development for the faction. Massive factional meetings are a bbpost given life.
"And the Fool says, pointing to the invertebrate fauna feeding in the graves: 'Here a monarchy reigns, mightier than you: His Majesty the Worm.'"
Italo Calvino, The Castle of Crossed Destines -
For the sake of finding or shaping tools for the mechanic here, let’s assume that a hypothetical game has enough players that warrant occasional large meeting scenes that people might get real cranky about missing, or that some people may even look forward to.
It’s true, you don’t need to show up. But some people want to. Naturally bbpost updates are a good idea in general. The whole concept of larger factional scenes or even events could potentially be its own thread.
-
@somasatori said in Scenes within Scenes:
Massive factional meetings are a bbpost given life.
Using one very, very, very broad definition of life.
-
I feel like there were a few games – Star Trek games, maybe? Back in the Days of Yore that had where you could spectate scenes in viewing rooms - like watch an Away Team get into wacky adventures. I wouldn’t mind that sort of set up for the Big Scene People Need To Be At…but honestly, traditional places are more flexible.
You can get up from one place and find another. You can choose to pose to the ‘bigger’ scene and so can other people at other places, so it’s not really posing to an empty room. It honestly works pretty well, even if it’s not 100% ideal.
In Ares, some games tried to emulate it with having multiple rooms per scene that represented areas you could move to, which isn’t a horrible workaround, but still a bit clumsy.
-
@Roadspike said in Scenes within Scenes:
If it’s a one-way scene that again, can’t be interrupted? Don’t make it a scene! I’m sure we’ve all been in plenty of scenes where we thought, “This didn’t need to be a scene, it could’ve been a post/vignette/scene-set.” So don’t make them scenes. Have the GM post up their too-important-to-be-interrupted scene as a Vignette, and then have the actual scene be everyone’s reaction to it afterwards. You know, when people can actually interact with each other without interrupting.
Shouldn’t the solution be to find a way to make it more interactive? Like, if the King is making a proclamation that affects all the PCs, wouldn’t you want that scene to be something people show up to?
Even if they know they can’t stop the speech, can’t they RP trying? Throw the ST a curveball and bring a rotten tomato and wind up getting arrested?
It seems like the assumption of “all the PCs show and watch like good boys & girls” may make it easier for the ST, but it’s not giving characters much room to maneuver.
-
@Roadspike said in Scenes within Scenes:
@howyadoin said in Scenes within Scenes:
But the real purpose of table talk is to isolate the inane peanut gallery chatter from the actual important shit going on.
And also to make mostly one-way scenes (such as sermons, lectures, ceremonies, giant meetings and concerts) less boring.
Again, this seems like a code solution trying to fix a social problem.
If there’s “important shit” going on that the peanut gallery can’t interrupt? Don’t have the peanut gallery at the scene. Have them in their own side-scene, either happening at the same time as the “important shit” scene that they can watch freely, or RPed after the "important shit* scene but ICly taking place at the same time.
If it’s a one-way scene that again, can’t be interrupted? Don’t make it a scene! I’m sure we’ve all been in plenty of scenes where we thought, “This didn’t need to be a scene, it could’ve been a post/vignette/scene-set.” So don’t make them scenes. Have the GM post up their too-important-to-be-interrupted scene as a Vignette, and then have the actual scene be everyone’s reaction to it afterwards. You know, when people can actually interact with each other without interrupting.
what if some players like it, though? like, we all have different experiences here, and i very much recognize that plenty of the experiences being talked about here are indeed very unpleasant. but also there have been people talking about how this scenario has been enjoyable to them. i have been in big scenes about Official Stuff where maybe my character present wasn’t a part of the Official Stuff, but i was able to discuss it while it was happening, and sometimes there would be in fact be reason to respond to things publicly in the scene.
a wholesale hatred of all large scenes of all types isn’t actually universal. if you’re coming from the assumption of “everyone hates this,” then yes, it will look like just trying to solve a social problem with code. but instead, you have to accept that you have a population of people who are actively interested in these scenes and just want it to be more easily parseable.
-
@KarmaBum said in Scenes within Scenes:
@Roadspike said in Scenes within Scenes:
If it’s a one-way scene that again, can’t be interrupted? Don’t make it a scene! I’m sure we’ve all been in plenty of scenes where we thought, “This didn’t need to be a scene, it could’ve been a post/vignette/scene-set.” So don’t make them scenes. Have the GM post up their too-important-to-be-interrupted scene as a Vignette, and then have the actual scene be everyone’s reaction to it afterwards. You know, when people can actually interact with each other without interrupting.
Shouldn’t the solution be to find a way to make it more interactive? Like, if the King is making a proclamation that affects all the PCs, wouldn’t you want that scene to be something people show up to?
Even if they know they can’t stop the speech, can’t they RP trying? Throw the ST a curveball and bring a rotten tomato and wind up getting arrested?
It seems like the assumption of “all the PCs show and watch like good boys & girls” may make it easier for the ST, but it’s not giving characters much room to maneuver.
Honestly?
No. Please don’t do this. It’s not fun for anyone but the troublemaker, and as much as large scenes with announcements can be trying, they become five thousand times worse when people decide they want to make it “exciting” by acting like dipshits so that maybe Leader Daddy/Mommy will spank them and justify their hate boner.
It’s a bit different if a PC has a real stake/influence in what’s going on - if someone announces that they’re going to be taking over X business or attacking Y faction, then obviously I expect X and Y to raise an immediate ruckus. But keep the edgy tomato-throwers as far away as possible.
Or be as snarky as your heart’s content…at a place where the rest of the scene doesn’t have to deal with it.
-
@Pyrephox said in Scenes within Scenes:
I feel like there were a few games – Star Trek games, maybe? Back in the Days of Yore that had where you could spectate scenes in viewing rooms - like watch an Away Team get into wacky adventures. I wouldn’t mind that sort of set up for the Big Scene People Need To Be At…but honestly, traditional places are more flexible.
One of the really early MUSHes I played, a Harry Potter game called Alere Flammas, had a ‘viewing room’ where you could watch events or classes even if your PC wasn’t in them. IIRC this was pretty common on the BSG games, too. It’s not really what anyone’s talking about here, since the watch parties were OOC, but it was neat.
-
In my experience, it’s not even the case that the code is used to avoid people interrupting; it’s to avoid people having to keep track of fifty people’s poses to find the people their PC is closest to. If there are twenty or so people in a scene, it’s legitimately difficult for some of us to keep track of what’s going on, with places the ‘main’ scene turns into a bit of a pantomime, and the places scene is where we actually do the bulk of the RP—occasionally stopping to shout ‘he’s behind you’ to the main stage.
It’s a surprisingly elegant solution to that problem.
-
@Pavel said in Scenes within Scenes:
In my experience, it’s not even the case that the code is used to avoid people interrupting; it’s to avoid people having to keep track of fifty people’s poses to find the people their PC is closest to. If there are twenty or so people in a scene, it’s legitimately difficult for some of us to keep track of what’s going on, with places the ‘main’ scene turns into a bit of a pantomime, and the places scene is where we actually do the bulk of the RP—occasionally stopping to shout ‘he’s behind you’ to the main stage.
It’s a surprisingly elegant solution to that problem.
Yeah, this is what I like places for. I do not mind large scenes; I can actually really enjoy a large scene, even an announcements-and-meeting scene! But I want to have a sense of being able to RP with a smaller group WITHIN that space without having to always worry about missing poses or spamming the greater room (since a small conversation is likely to go faster than the larger scene).
Places help keep me engaged and on track. I’d want any replacement for them to be able to tick those boxes. (I get why Ares can’t, and I can’t even imagine the nightmare it’d be for logging.)
-
@Pyrephox flippant example, as that’s usually all I have, but I see your point. Replace “throw tomato” with “smuggle in a weapon, ask a salient question, etc.”
The idea that the whole scene is impervious to characters feels like lazy storytelling.
Which I’ve totally been a lazy storyteller and just put a scene on rails or slapped a post up because I didn’t want to deal with curve balls. It happens, but if it happens often, I should probably tell a more interactive story.
-
@KarmaBum said in Scenes within Scenes:
The idea that the whole scene is impervious to characters feels like lazy storytelling.
Well, it’s less that the scene is impervious to interaction and more that people find it really annoying when people interrupt. At least in my experience. Sure, it could still involve lazy storytelling, but it’s typically an OOC cultural thing rather than strictly a matter of scene design.
