Problem:
A story is centered around a conflict that must be resolved (or, as I read once, about an imbalance that must corrected — I need to rediscover where that reference). In fiction, that conflict is often pretty obscure, but in a gaming scenario the conflict must be fairly explicit in order for the players to know what it is they are supposed to achieve. This is particularly so in a short-term scenario like High Noon in Dry Creek, when players have a very limited time frame in order to spot the conflict, decided (as a group) how to resolve it, and then carry out their plans.
My preliminary conception of High Noon centered on the idea that the climax of the story would be a shoot-out, the archtypal dramatic moment of Western lit and film. As I began to develop story ideas that would lead to that event, I found myself in a conflict of my own. My personal design requirements for this project dictate that once the stage is operational, it should require minimal oversight by staff. At the very most, it should only need one StoryTeller online when the stage is run, and then only to be available in case of trouble. Ergo, there will be no NPCs on hand to stir up trouble, point players in the right direction, or (most significantly in this instance) serve as the focus for player antagonism (i.e., play the badguys).
What’s more, I would like provide pre-generated PCs that only provide the barest essentials, leaving the majority of character development to the players. The pros and cons of this are still to be evaluated and decided upon, but my primary reasons are that 1) heavily defined characters can be restrictive and intimidating, as the player is always concerned about whether they’re doing what they’re supposed to be doing or not, and 2) I don’t want to lead the players around by the nose. I want them to have the freedom to create the story they want to tell, not be driven through a series of scripted actions and reactions to a pre-determined ending. Thus the choice of the Western theme to begin with, as most players will easily be able to fill in the blanks with their own experience and interests.
But how do I provide that freedom to players and still guarantee that final dramtic showdown on Main Street? Unless players are provided explicit stage directions describing allies and rivals, there is no reason to assume that they will develop antagonisms on their own, let alone ones that would lead them to want to shoot each other, unless the premise of the game were altered to emphasize player versus player conflict as opposed to cooperative storytelling.* One idea was to have a number of convergent storylines, all of which would culminate at noon, ensuring that some dramtic climax would take place at that time, even if it didn’t turn out to be a shoot-out. The main drawback to that approach is the increased amount of story development that would have to take place and conveyed, drawing away form the dramatic freedom that I hope to give the players.
Resolution:
I admit I’m really a novice at this sort of thing. My RPG experience is far below what most of my fellow game designers have under their belts, and I’ve never participated in a LARP, the closest equivalent in the non-digital world to the type of storytelling High Noon is attempting to provide. On the one hand, the lack of experience is probably a good thing, because I have fewer preconceptions about how things have been done in those media, so I won’t try to transfer inappropriate conventions into the digital realm. On the other hand, there’s a lot that can be learned from those media that can be applied to mine.
So, I spent some time looking at LARP and game design resources — not a lot of time, just enough to help redirect my thoughts along more productive lines — and entually was able to see a way out of my dilemma while still keeping my design goals intact.
They key, I realized, was in providing an outside adversary, one that had to be faced by the PCs as a group: in this case, a roving band of outlaws due to arrive in town at noon. The challenge for the characters is to come up with a way to defend their town from the mauraders, and conflict will arise because not everyone will have the same ideas about the best way to do that. I’m not talking about a strategic plan, but the interpersonal conflict that will (hopefully) arise when individual characters are confronted with the choice of whether to fight or to run and hide. The permutions of story possibilities are theoretically limitless, especially if players are given the maximum amount of freedom in defining their character’s personalities and goals.
There are a couple of issues with the idea yet to be resolved. The question of how much character definition to provide needs to be addressed, still. And then there are the technical challenges: engineering a system that automatically processes a multiple players versus CNPC combat and can produce an unique outcome depending upon the significant factors involved. Ideally, that system will be relatively low-key, emphasizing the fact that it’s not the outcome of the fight that matters, but how people roleplay the outcome.
Do I have high hopes? Indubitoubly. But I don’t think you ever get anywhere if you don’t set your sights high, and don’t stop reaching.
P.S. From now on, entries regarding High Noon in Dry Creek will have [HN] preceeding the title, for archival use as much as anything. While the game will likely predominate the entries in this journal for a while, it’s not meant to be the only subject!
*Actually, I do think that a free-for-all shoot-em-up type game, where whoever survives is the winner could be interesting, but it isn’t the goal for High Noon; it’s be interesting to consider as a strategic game sequel to this one, and even use the same set.