From: oakes@nmt.edu (David Oakes)
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Organization: New Mexico Tech
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:55:00 GMT

In article <RANNOU.92Aug25033610@zuse.info.polymtl.ca> Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou) writes:
>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

is it just me, or does the use of the word diversity to describe a game
where all the varables have been set, and the boundries and scope of the
"adventure" already know seem a bit oxymoron

and to say that prep allows for more different types of "adventures" is silly -
the same potential exists for both styles, it is up to the GM to consider it
(and in the case of improv, for the players to want it)

>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.

so you are saying that a character in an improv game will not bother to save
the universe because it does not effect him now?
i am the most hedonistic, self centered, "live for the moment" guy i know,
and i am still suffering through a master's program, to have a "stable" future
(actually, a future that is MORE LIKELY to be stable -
 in real life, as in improv, there are no guarantees)

>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

and it has been my experiece that every prep GM i have delt with was NOT
any more imaginative, and seemd even less so, being bound by his prep
(not to mention that i find most prep to be "quest oriented", and that
 such an adventure style is the most derrivative of 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.

that may well be your experience, but my only input from the players 
is "we go there" or "we say this" or "we do this" 
i have never had a player say "i want to find this in my couch" or
"when i round the corner there will be giant rats"
(except in Amber, and they are allowed...)

i dream up the setting, i choose the NPCs, decide why they are there,
and watch to see how it unfolds, prodding it when necessary
if the players do something, fine, if they dont, fine.
i will ask them if they want to do something, and if they do, i start thinking,
if they dont, its what they want, but i dont stop thinking...

i think that is my main problem with the prep i have witnessed -
the GM feels that once the prep is done, he can stop thinking,
and just do what his notes tell him
(and your peeve seems to be that improv GMs dont think at all,
 and only do what their players tell them - we are both WRONG, in the absolute)

dave "NOTHING is absolute, even NOTHING" oakes