From: Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou)
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Followup-To: rec.games.frp.misc
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada
	<4802@balrog.ctron.com> <1992Aug22.041047.14654@tronsbox.xei.com>
	<1992Aug23.102714.4637@ens.fr>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 08:36:10 GMT

In article <1992Aug23.102714.4637@ens.fr> duchon@clipper.ens.fr (Philippe Duchon) writes:

[...]
   >	The better game is the one wherein the GM plays fair.  Improvising the
   >plot, _ESPECIALLY_ in a mystery, is not fair.
   >
   Dennis, I think what Steve is, the goal of a role-playing game is for the
   players to have fun (I'd say it is for the players AND GM to have fun...).
   Therefore, the better game is the one in which everybody enjoyed the game
   session as much as possible.

Of course, I agree that you can still have a very, if not more, enjoyable
game. But the fact is that what you do then is nearer "interactive
storytelling" than "roleplaying". This is not necesseraly bad in itself,
but still the distinction must be made, I think.

The line between the two is very hard to draw, because it varies from GM to
GM, is very wide and often overlap. IMHO, a mix of preparation and impro is
what's roleplaying is all about. Pure preparation means that the GM isn`t
roleplaying but acting. Pure improvisation means that it's becoming
interactive storytelling, because whatever the players do, as long as it
looks good and is well done, it will (often) succeed and shape what the
next set of events is made of. The three forms can be just as much
enjoyable as the other, but the true roleplayer should try to find his own
balance.

I've done enough "pure impro" games to know that it requires far less
effort, because the GM uses the players own imagination and ideas to
constantly supplement his owns. Of course the GM thinks in advance of what
will happen in the next set of events, but this is shaped of what has
happened in the previous set of events (so, in a way, the current set of
events is directly shaped by what happened in the next to previous set of
events and those before it... ;-) ). IMHO, this is easier to do, and means
that when I do it I use my imagination less. I still have fun doing it, but
I found out that with perpared games the DIVERSITY of events that can
happen is generally far greater than in pure imrpo games, while in pure
impro games the spontaneity, and thus the frequency of events happening, is
greater, but tends to often give the same kind of results choosen from a
limitec "set" for each type of action. I've found that miximg preparation
and impro makes for the best of both worlds.

I've played with GMs who impro only, and as a player I don't like it unless
the guy is a very good roleplayer. Even then, one has to play for
completely diffrent reasons. When you play an impro game, of course you try
to achieve something, but the player must play FOR the present and IN the
present, because long terms effects are directly shaped by these decisions.
The loss of stability in the future "state" of the "universe" must then not
be an important point. The pure simple enjoyment of what is being done IN
the present and mostly HOW WELL it is done must become the principal source
of onjoyment.

I've also constanted that pure impro games lead to PC (given good players)
who nearly ALWAYS succeed enven against incredible odds simply because the
players acted intelligently and did a good roleplay. This is not
necesseraly bad, but I like to think that when I succeed it's for
something, that I choose the GOOD decision, that I found the REAL secret,
instead of simply aving chosen actions which the GM deemed interesting and
I roleplayed them well and "did good".

I.E. There is a difference between succeding because you did something
good, and succeeding because you did the good thing. Both can be
interesting, so I simply propose not to forget these other sources of fun.

As they say "A little preparation goes a long way". You don't even need to
write it down. Impro needs quick wits and a little imagination. Preparation
needs some wits and a very good imagination. Personnally I'll NEVER believe
someone who tries to prove he has a really good imagination becaused he is
a good improviser GM. I've improvised GMing, and I've talked to other GMs
who improvise, and I've looked the way yet other GM improvise. In ALL
cases, the GM uses what players said at time t-(n*10) minutes to decide
SOME of what will happen at time t+(m*10) minutes, while having already
decided what's going to happen now and up to time t+10 minutes. In short:
there is clearly a form of interactive storytelling taking over somewhere,
and the imagination and ideas is supplied just as much by the GM as it is
by the players.

Well, enough rambling...


Pak.





--
/---------------------------\
| Patrick "Paradak" Rannou. |
| Rannou@info.polymtl.ca    |
\---------------------------/

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc