Preparing the Playing Field
With Great Premises Come Great Expectations
This could be seen as a continuation of the Accordance article that talked primarily about the dynamics between the participants, while today we look more at the expectation within the fiction.
To get a coherent narrative for everyone around the table it helps using a playbook scenario which establishes the premise of play and thus makes it easy to find common ground, still it would be a good idea to have a conversation before starting to tell the tale of how everybody interprets the themes or how they think their figure fits into the narrative.
As part of the collaborative creation of the living story, especially in cases when the fiction will be created whole cloth instead of relying on a playbook or a scenario, means that a pool of ideas has to aggregate. It is best to do that free of judgement, hence no laughing at ideas, or at the people who brought them up. This does not mean that everything has to be taken later, but it is helpful in creating a space in which people feel free to speak their mind and the weird ideas they might have.
The line between a jovial exchange of ideas and making fun of ideas can be occasionally rather thin, thus it might require some restraint not to cross that line. And if it happens, then a genuine apology should be made and not a deflection that justifies why one made fun of the idea or the person with that idea.
The brainstorming might reveal ideas that one participant would like to see in the fiction but that cross another participant’s boundaries. Especially if the boundaries had not been spoken about previous, this is a great place to establish how to treat those ideas.
As with boundaries during brainstorming, it is common to have some conversations about taboo topics, regardless if they are taboo because they cross personal boundaries, or because the larger society treats them as taboo. After all, fiction can deal with topics that people might otherwise ignore, or even outright try to ban.
Complacency
Certain means might sneak into fiction, and if they start to dominate the narrative it will suffer for it. Fan-fiction has a bad reputation for indulging in those, but role-playing games often see their fair share of this as well. None of these are intrinsically bad and having a little of those might even be enticing. Thus it is best to look at them as seasoning, which might enhance the flavour of the fiction, but should not be the whole meat of the story.
Nostalgic Bemusement. The fallacy to think that everything has been better in the past. Having moments of peace in a narrative can be good and tying them to familiar and positive memories in the minds of the participants is also neat, but that only works as a contrast to the struggles the figures face. Thus best ot be done as complete escapism.
Power Fantasy. Having the figures to be larger than life can be fun, but having the whole fiction slide into just a power trip will make all the struggles meaningless. Thus it is often better to have some restraint as a participant and delay the gratification of the success the figures will have to give them more depth on the way.
Safety Blanket. Feeling protected or at least getting comforted is an understandable desire. But i nothing bad ever happens to the figure then there is no narrative.
Wish Fulfillment. Similar to the other three (which could be seen as special cases), it might be entertaining to get everything one ever wanted, but if this comes not as a cost to create some drama then it might get boring soon.
Excitement
In opposition to the Boundaries that participants might set for things they prefer to avoid or minimise in play, there might be things they actively want to be part of the narrative. Especially when it comes to things that are not obvious, like horror or thriller elements.
Storytelling is most effective when it creates emotional investment in the participants, and for that reason it is beneficial to share what tropes one looks forward to. Since occasionally in an attempt to play it safe, everything that can create excitement gets avoided and thus making the whole experience somewhat boring for everyone. Hence it is important not just to talk about what is not liked, but also to talk about the very things that are enjoyed even if just in the secure environment of play.
Presentation
A good idea is to clear who holds which drama moderation rights or how they are shared to avoid getting into such meta-discussions in the moments that the flow of the narrative gets rocky. This helps to find quick arbitration and return to the story world.
It might also be of interest for everyone around the table to agree on a shared tense the narrative is depicted in. The default will probably be to have that in the present tense, as it allows the feeling of experiencing the fiction at the same time it gets shaped at the table. But there are occasionally scenarios in which it might be agreed upon to depict it as past events and thus in past tense. Or in some time travel instances it might even be considered to have some scenes depicted with use of the future tense. In any case, it is usually best to avoid subjunctive mood, since that easily might lead to participants losing their immersion.
The presentation can be looked at as a trinity of three facets that are relevant to how the fiction gets composed. And thus it might be worth considering those prior to the experience of the living story to have this established with all the participants being aware of the shared foundation:
Address. This is what in other media might be called the target audience, but unless it is some kind of actual play there will be no audience in the living story. Yet the idea to whom the fiction would be told shapes how the fiction gets told. Which would be the implied participant in the case of the living story. For example it would make a huge difference if the fiction is supposed to remain child friendly or gets into gratuitous depictions of all kinds of mature themes.
Issue. The leitmotif and premise are central within the story world, but on a meta level there is the issue, this is the moral of the story that engages more those who are addressed than the figures in the fiction. This is basically an agreement on what the narrative’s purpose is. A leitmotif of revenge could be played in various ways, but with an established issue it might be decided that it is played for laughs or for tragedy or any other reason that colours how the narrative should be approached.
Voice. Finally there is also the authorial voice which deals with the perspective of the participants and how they want to impart their ideas about the issue and to whom they address it. This is chiefly the voice of the metaphorical narrator and not literally the participants’ views. Thus It is the authorial stance the participants adopt for the duration of the experience which shapes the tone and feel of how the scenario gets presented or what atmosphere gets created. Part of the voice is also an opinion on the issues within the narrative that shine through. A narrative can have as many opinions as there are participants, but it is best to only display one per scene. The framing of the opinion is probably best left to the Lead on stage and other participants should present their figures in a manner that follows the voice of the Lead.
Promise
Scenarios have their premises which contain the leitmotif and other themes, the struggle or other obstacle, a vibe the narrative is exuberating with, and in general what is at stake. But these things rarely exist in a vacuum, they have to be interpreted and thus it becomes something to talk about beforehand what those things promise to the participants that they expect to be part of the living story.
Occasionally additional promises get made during a narrative, creating either a sub-mythos or a side-mythos to the main mythos. Narratives should deliver first on the promise made last, but occasionally a narrative has such a radical shift that it might outright abandon a promise made earlier. In such cases participants of the living story or the audiences of fiction in other media might feel betrayed or otherwise unsatisfied, since people want in general some kind of closure in their stories.
There are a five types of promises, and as mentioned, the one introduced first is commonly the main one that encompasses the whole narrative:
Agenda. This kind of promise is about personal stories which are driven by the figure. A promise of agenda contains the exploration of what the current situation is for the figure and the fundamental reason why they want to change that and then follows how they are going to do that. The mode, see under outline, can also serve as an agenda.
Pertinency. With the liberty of the living story to explore the themes and staying as close or not as the participants around the table want to, it might be occasionally a good idea to talk about how that will actually be handled in the narrative. Since for some people sticking too close to the premise might feel constricting while others might feel bored if no progress in that regard is even attempted.
Pressure. The story world is unstable and forces the figures to adapt. This can be because society is changing, because of being forced to migrate, or because of some change in the environment. The promise of pressure contains exactly that — pressure. The pressure in itself is not just the struggle or conflict but also the stakes which are at risk.
Solvability. A riddle needs to be solved or a mystery needs to be uncovered. The promise of solvability usually contains that it is possible to figure out what is going on and thus that there will be answers at the end. This allows the narrative to unfold without the participants getting lost in unnecessary detours to unearth every detail, since the core mystery of the fiction will present itself sooner or later. Of course the opposite might occasionally also be of interest, that the nagging unanswered mysteries will remain ambiguous; but that too should be established during the deliberation of the promise.
Transgressiveness. The promise to transgress taboos can be compelling. That was always the purview of fiction, to explore ideas and themes that some people would prefer to sweep under the rug. Of course this is not an invitation to make participants feel uncomfortable with certain topics, but if it is agreed on, that some topics which are usually treated as a taboo, should open to be toyed with in the living story, then this can create excitement.
Tension
Folks talking about storytelling generally put narratives in one of two categories, literary fiction or genre fiction. Literary fiction is like the living story method here, chiefly concerned about the figures and their narrative arc, thus what the change in them or the world means. While genre fiction is more focused on events and the narrative plot, which can be entertaining, but is often considered to be lowbrow for catering to the superficial. But both types of fiction culminate in the necessity for tension.
Tension can take various forms, like in suspense or in friction, which are both discussed elsewhere in this manual. Regardless if it is in literary fiction or genre fiction, the tension gets usually tied to themes which the narrative explores. That is true for the living story as well. With the figure-first approach, this means that the tension arises in complications and obstacles that prevent the figure from reaching their goals and eventually discover what they were actually missing to become whole. Thus for the duration of the narrative the success will always be delayed, and the moments when it seems like they are in reach will come at a moral toll which should feel too high to pay. And even if some issues for the figure get solved, new problems should arise simultaneously to keep some tension going.
Without a central storyteller and instead the narrative residing in the hands of each participant for their figure, it is pivotal that the tension is maintained by having the figure proactively being part of their own tragedy to avoid getting outright what they think they want. The will of the figure has to be to some degree misguided, and no matter if they overcome it or dig their own grave because of it, that is what memorable protagonists are based on.
Therein lies the reason why tension is addressed here in the expectations, since the tolerance level for this will vary from participant to participant. That is why every participant is responsible for the misbelief of their figure and how much tension they want to generate based on that. Another consideration is that the tension surrounding their figure will affect other participants through the shared themes which interweave the ensemble. This means it is wise to portray the moral shortcomings of each figure only as part of that figure and not as an universal truth that all other figures also have to abide by.