On 2006-01-12, xenopulse wrote:
|
It seems to me that I'm one of the few people around who were actually deeply involved in narrative RP (we need a better word for this; I know! I'll call it Character Ownership Narrative Game, or CONG!), which really surprises me. I would have thought that our geeky gamer culture would have jumped into the internet world of CONG all at once. I actually played CONGs every day, for a good 20-30 hours a week, for about four years (1996-2000), and then much less, but still frequently for the next couple of years. I know, that's a lot of time spent gaming, but I found Lisa that way, and that makes it all worth it. Anyway, here is my reflection on another main reason why character ownership is the foundation for this type of game: No solid Social Contract. Imagine a place with 50-100 players around at any one time (even at night, because it transcends time zones and is played by people all around the globe). Old players leave and new players show up every day. The Social Contract is in constant fluctuation. That's a fundamental difference to a table top group, even at a con, *especially* when you don't have a rule system to establish the basic distribution of authority. There are great things that come out of this: you get to play in an environment with dozens of people, characters that have plotlines you don't even know about but could still be touched by, things are going on behind the scenes, and if you don't like to play with one person, it's so easy to just play with someone else. But it also means that you have no chance to easily negotiate any other distribution of authority, so you fall back into just playing and controlling your character. If not you, who else? A bunch of strangers? Now: once you make friends, you can negotiate other arrangements. I've GMed several games with people where I was given more authority and could hurt the other people's characters; basically, I had complete control. Think about the trust that necessitates. Another reason is a strong tendency of CONG players to identify with their characters, often because the players had no RPG experience and felt that the character was more of a personal chat avatar. For some, they were simply wish fulfillment and socialization vessels (including cybersex, which was rampant). - Christian |
Some maybe useful links: Complete Index of Entries Search for a Post or Comment Search the Forge Forums This makes... XP go "And by the way" Emily: "My script immunity is limited only by the social contract between the players that says that if you don't take hits, you're a wanker, or perhaps, it makes a bad story and so shows poor sportsmanship." The social pressure behind following the norms of the particular place and subgroup you get involved in are very powerful. "Pulling", if you want, becomes an art form with two extremes: players who are excellent communicators and play into other players' hands, and amazingly talented bullies. ecb go "yowch" guess the gender split of tabletop vs online ain't about avoiding social competition. JBR go "Girls are Mean" It's not avoiding competition, it's avoiding a specific kind of competition, and often replacing it with another. WMW go "Yep." Which may explain why I wasn't real quick to embrace the Push/Pull division. I've seen this in operation. CS go "Which style?" Christian, Which format were you playing in? Just curious. |