Running with Bangs

[Thor Olavsrud]

Read through the thread. I'm assuming a "bang" is the exact situational dilemma that the GM in Burning Wheel creates that challenges a player's belief? And reading through the notes on your game that you were running I have to ask, is that all the prep work you do for the game, loosely assembling several of these bangs for players to interact with? If that's what you run your game off of, holy shit. Do you think it possible that some folks just simply do not have the gift of improptu to run games in that way? I just don't know....maybe with practice it comes easier? I guess I'm just terrified that the game would merely creep along while I fumble around for the best way to react to player's actions while considering the BITs/relationships. Its a very different approach than running a "module" or even creating one. And I realize that its suppose to be very different from that sort of game but I'm not sure it something that just comes easily to everyone.

Yes, that's what a Bang is. And yeah, that's pretty much how I run my games. But the things I posted in that thread were more than enough to run a 4 hour session. I didn't even use the stuff that was blacked out.

But I had done a lot of planning to sketch out all of the relationships around the PCs. I knew who the major NPCs around them were and what their motivations were. With that in hand, I was able to play them (as you would play a PC) and respond to the actions of the players.

You don't need to fire off Bangs every five minutes. Play out the consquences of the decision and then move on to the next. If you find your brother-in-law taking money from an orc scout, no matter how you decide to deal with him, the consequences will ripple out across your entire family and community. Play out those consequences until the logical progression of the game demands a new Bang.

For instance, how do you deal with the brother-in-law? Let's say you take the normal RPG player approach and ambush him and kill him?
1. Play out the effects. Let's say you hid the body and everybody in your community knows the brother-in-law has disappeared.
2. How does your sister take it? What about the brother-in-law's friends and family? Your sister's children?
3. How do you prepare your community for a possible orc invasion without telling the community what you did?

Play all that out. Once the ideas stop trickling in, throw in a Bang! Here are some possibilities:
1. Your sister is pregnant. She and her husband were having a hard enough time getting along before. Now what is she going to do?
2. Someone finds the body. The wounds clearly aren't from orcs (their weapons make different wounds). Looks like there's a murderer in the community. Everyone thinks that this guy that's always had a rivalry with your brother-in-law was responsible. The community is ready to outlaw him (which means his family will likely starve). Your sister is calling for his head!
3. Your rival, the guy who's been trying to buy that pasture from you for years now, comes up to you and says, "I saw what you did, murderer! Give me that pasture, or I'll tell everyone!"
4. Your brother-in-law's ghost starts appearing outside your house at night, just pointing toward you while the wounds you left on him glow eerily in the moonlight. No one but you has seen the ghost yet, but it's only a matter of time...

I freely admit that playing in this style is not for everyone. GMing shouldn't be an exercise in terror! It should be fun. So don't do it this way if you think you won't have fun.

On the other hand, this method is easier than you think! You might surprise yourself.

[luke]

for example, my "bangs" from sunday night were:

•*Demons await Kublai at the mouth of hell.

• If the group goes to Westgate, they learn about the mass migration to the east.

•*If the group gates into Westgate, the magocracy brings them in and interrogates them.

• If the dragon finds out about the lawbreaker demon, he'll want to destroy the demon.


Now, the first one I couldn't use because of time constraints. So I just skipped it.

The next two, the players just blew past.

The third one is the best, because the dragon got them into a duel of wits where they had to compromise and take him to the demon. What's the big deal with that? If the demon's killed, Chris' character's immortal soul becomes property of these scary necromancers.


These aren't even very good bangs! But they are the complications I was prepared to lay out in front of the players as they went.

At the start of the session, I didn't even know where they would end up. They literally could have appeared anywhere in our campaign world (they had a special one shot power). But given what I know about thier BITs, I knew they'd go for the dragon.

And if they didn't? No big deal. We just roll with it and see where it goes.
-L

[Thor Olavsrud]

Oh, and I should point out that the Orc/Brother-In-Law thing was just one character. Imagine having that kind of play unfold with four different characters, all dealing with stuff as charged as the first one. It doesn't take much to keep the game spinning!

[donbaloo]

Processing...processing...

Okay, a few questions now.
Play all that out. Once the ideas stop trickling in, throw in a Bang! Here are some possibilities:

Are these just improptu reactionary bangs that you come up with according to how they've acted?

The third one is the best, because the dragon got them into a duel of wits where they had to compromise and take him to the demon. What's the big deal with that? If the demon's killed, Chris' character's immortal soul becomes property of these scary necromancers.

Okay, but like you said they could have skipped the dragon. And they didn't go for Westgate and you skipped the demons bang to begin with. What if they had taken off to Godknowswhere? I guess as a GM in Burning Wheel in this situation you are watching the players who obviously have a reason for going to Godknowswhere, and watch them create the story as you simply react accordingly when theres a conflict? Makes sense but sounds difficult.

Also, there's more to these pre-game notes than just the bangs I suppose. I mean, if the potential was there for Demons to waylay Kublai at the mouth of hell then you probably had some stats created for them ahead of time right? Same for the dragon. And if there's a town called Westgate then I assume you know something about that town and have pretty good details on its magocracy since it could have become a conflict. Am I way off here?

Oh, and I should point out that the Orc/Brother-In-Law thing was just one character. Imagine having that kind of play unfold with four different characters, all dealing with stuff as charged as the first one. It doesn't take much to keep the game spinning!

Do you typically play one character in a scene, cut to another character, then the next, etc. like that or do you ever run a typical party style scene where everyone is equally involved?

[luke]

Okay, but like you said they could have skipped the dragon. And they didn't go for Westgate and you skipped the demons bang to begin with. What if they had taken off to Godknowswhere? I guess as a GM in Burning Wheel in this situation you are watching the players who obviously have a reason for going to Godknowswhere, and watch them create the story as you simply react accordingly when theres a conflict? Makes sense but sounds difficult.


But I'm not planning in a vacuum. I'm basing my bangs off of what they were talking about doing last session. On the occasions that they have wandered, I simply ask: "Weren't you guys planning on doing X?" I usually get an "Oh, yeah!" Sometimes though, they just forge off in their own directions. At that point, I listen to what they're after and quickly sketch up a conflict (if necessary) to toss in there way.


Also, there's more to these pre-game notes than just the bangs I suppose. I mean, if the potential was there for Demons to waylay Kublai at the mouth of hell then you probably had some stats created for them ahead of time right? Same for the dragon. And if there's a town called Westgate then I assume you know something about that town and have pretty good details on its magocracy since it could have become a conflict. Am I way off here?


Yeah, it's called the Monster Burner. Seriously, I made a few notes about the dragon, but the demons were going to get pulled straight from the Monbu.

As for the town? It's a pre-established SIS in our game. But I've never not once ever mapped it out, done charts for population or economy or anything like that. There are some facts in play about the town: It's an insane place where everyone plays "The Game." It's really ruled by wizards. And we have a cast of wizard NPCs whom my players are all quite familiar with.

Characters make a place in an RPG, not description of plant life.

-L

[Thor Olavsrud]

Are these just improptu reactionary bangs that you come up with according to how they've acted?

er...sometimes? I have planned Bangs, but if something strikes me at the spur of the moment, I use it! This is not as hard as it might seem, because we're not operating in a vacuum. I know what the players' Beliefs are, and I know what drives my NPCs. Generally, the proper Bang seems obvious given those two things. For instance, all of the follow-up stuff -- the pregnant sister, finding the body, the blackmailer, etc. -- I would probably make up in play.

The rule of thumb I use: when someone makes a choice (e.g., to kill the brother-in-law) bring on the consequences! Make them pay for their choices with even thornier choices. Believe it or not, they'll love you for it!

Okay, but like you said they could have skipped the dragon. And they didn't go for Westgate and you skipped the demons bang to begin with. What if they had taken off to Godknowswhere? I guess as a GM in Burning Wheel in this situation you are watching the players who obviously have a reason for going to Godknowswhere, and watch them create the story as you simply react accordingly when theres a conflict? Makes sense but sounds difficult.

Well, like Luke said, these weren't particularly great Bangs. But he knows his players and their characters well enough at this point (10-year campaign) that he has a good idea what they'll go for. A really good Bang challenges a Belief (see my sig!). You can be pretty well assured that the players will go for it for two reasons: 1. They care about these sorts of issues because they wrote them down on their sheets as Beliefs, and 2. They are going to earn Artha for involving themselves in these kinds of situations! Afterall, their Beliefs are involved!

Do you typically play one character in a scene, cut to another character, then the next, etc. like that or do you ever run a typical party style scene where everyone is equally involved?

I do both, depending on what's appropriate, and what the players themselves choose. I never send the other players out of the room though. They are all involved, even if they are just taking the part of the audience.

[Kublai]

A minor note of encouragement: if your players aren't asshats then they'll probably play off of your cues. I am that way as a player. When Luke told us there was a strange population migration happening, I knew he was saying that for a good reason. He told us that because that's where our characters could find adventure!

I was this close to postponing the Dragon confrontation and gallavanting off to see what was causing the migration. I even asked those in charge of the land if they wanted my help! When they said no, I knew it was ok to come back and investigate after the dragon.

I hope you have players that don't enjoy screwing with you or find entertainment in ruining your ideas.

[Thor Olavsrud]

It's a pre-established SIS in our game.

For donbaloo's sake:

SIS = Shared Imagined Space

In other words, everyone at the table was familiar with the town and who the movers and shakers were.

[Kublai]

Thanks for clearing that up, Thor! I had no idea what that meant! :oops:

[Viper]

Thor's new indian name is "Runs with Bangs"

[yeloson]

Hi,

Another very useful technique for all this is to remember that your play is going to have a focal point before characters are even made. If you look at what's written in the CB, the group needs to vibe on an idea, then build characters around that. So, if it's going to be political intrigue around who's going to be king, you already have an idea of what you'll be getting into. Then you take the PC's beliefs- and craft NPCs who will challenge and conflict with that.

Obviously, ahead of time, you know -some- of the characters are likely to butt heads, and the potential ways that happens are Bangs you have prepared. And, along with playing out the consequences, you look at the NPCs motivations and goals, and think, "What would this guy do next?" and you get a lot of Bangs and play without having to prep.

In other words- the players come to the table, never knowing what's going to happen, but they adapt just fine by simply playing their characters- you come to the table with a solid conflict and a good set of NPCs, play them just like you would PCs, and you'll also be able to adapt without any problem either. :)

Chris

[donbaloo]

Yeah, Thor, you're right...I had no idea what an SIS was.

Characters make a place in an RPG, not description of plant life.

How about animal life? Else my work in progress, The Charismatic Megafauna of Godknowswhere, is gonna be useless.

Okay, I get the point on bangs and challenging beliefs through conflict. I really do. Its just going to be a matter of adopting a more improptu style of gaming than any of us has ever done. I look forward to it but know that its gonna be a challenge for me to not bring things to a short halt while I piece together another good bang to back one that's been played out. I know sometimes it must be easy and natural story flow but making it natural, quick, and BIT centered may be difficult for me at first.

Typically, how much narrating of the story would you say your players do during a session Thor and abzu? Do you give them free rein to narrate scenes until it conflicts with what you as the GM see as plausible then roll the dice? "Say yes or roll the dice" during these player narrated events?

[Kublai]

Typically, how much narrating of the story would you say your players do during a session Thor and abzu?

I feel so snubbed! :cry:

[luke]

Typically, how much narrating of the story would you say your players do during a session Thor and abzu?

I feel so snubbed! :cry:

Actually, Pete, you're probably a better one to answer this question. How much control do you feel you have in our game? In individual scenes? In the campaign at large?

-L

[donbaloo]

Typically, how much narrating of the story would you say your players do during a session Thor and abzu?

I feel so snubbed! :cry:

Unintentional, I assure you. I wasn't sure in the flurry of the post who among the elders typically ran games...I just went for the sure thing. And no...neither your four page thread on your Star Wars Force conversion, your thread on your Grief campaign, nor your 1000 posts were clues enough to convince me otherwise. :oops:

Maybe had you known what an SIS was I would have been convinced. :wink:

Seriously though, how does it typically work in your games as well Kublai?

[Thor Olavsrud]

Typically, how much narrating of the story would you say your players do during a session Thor and abzu? Do you give them free rein to narrate scenes until it conflicts with what you as the GM see as plausible then roll the dice? "Say yes or roll the dice" during these player narrated events?

Narration tends to grow pretty organically. Players are free to say: I want to go have a meeting with this guy, or I arrange a dinner party for all the mucka-mucks in town and make sure to invite THIS guy, or I'm marching my army on Orloss.

At the same time, I don't want the game to turn into an endless storytelling session either. I want the game to move from conflict to conflict pretty rapidly. Downtime to stop and plan the next move is fine, but I don't want to get into an hours long planning session either. For me, it's all about keeping the game moving.

Burning Wheel actually has some pretty good narration tools in the form of Circles and Intent, and I like to let those dictate narration rights wherever possible.

Circles have a very broad scope. For instance, in a recent game I ran, the players wanted to bring the Abbot of the monastery into play. That's a base Ob 4 test (possible because one of the characters had some religious lifepaths). Fine, where does the narration come in?

Well, some of the other characters had City and Outcast lifepaths and wanted to help with the test. The characters decided they wanted to bring in the abbot by finding the brothel he frequented! Did the Abbot frequent brothels? I dunno. But he sure would on a successful Circles test! The players narrated that aspect of the abbot into play and we used the rules to do it. This works quite elegantly in my opinion, because the more the players seek to narrate using this mechanic, the higher the Obstacle becomes!

Now, as it happened, the players failed the test! Did that mean their authorship went down the tubes? No! I invoked the Enmity Clause because I thought this was an interesting direction. So the madam that ran the brothel was extremely loyal to the abbot, and would do what she could to undermine the characters. Now we had conflict as the players had to break her to their will in order to get what they wanted!

Intent is a smaller-scale version of Narration. The player states his reason for doing something and then tests an appropriate ability to perform the task. If the roll is successful, the player gets his Intent.

Player: "I want to make the Count look favorably upon my character."
GM: "What's the Task?"
Player: "I'm going to impress him by going over all the interesting things in his family crest. I'm rolling Heraldry and FoRKing Noble-wise, Etiquette and History."

If the player succeeds in the roll, he achieves his Intent. He's made the Count look favorably on him. The player has just narrated himself into the Count's good graces and used the rules to do it.

If the player fails the roll, it doesn't necessarily mean he got something wrong or misstepped or anything like that (although it could). It's just as possible that the Count just isn't impressed by that sort of thing -- he'd have been much more impressed by someone with a good knowledge of falconry. Often, in such a case, unless I've got a definite idea of how I want the consequences of failure to play out, I'm happy to turn to a player and ask him to tell me the consequences. But I still retain veto rights if I don't like the answer I get.

[kaomera]

Gee... I've been running my games this way for years (possibly less organized, tho), without the benefit of BITs. Maps and other fiddly details just get in the way... Now, notes on NPC names ~ those are nice. Saves you from taking an (unopened, fortunately) 72 oz Dorritos bag to your head when the players realize just who this "new" NPC they've been talking to for the last hour is... :oops:

Seriously, tho, I love the idea of the system actually supporting this kind of play. Having a detailed time-line or a 30-room “dungeon” or whatnot is fine, but it tends to encourage you to stick to the “plan” even if you can get the players come up with something their characters would rather do... I have always found that the most fun I have in GMing is when something character-(or player-)driven comes up and takes the game in an unexpected direction. If worse comes to worse, just run with it and then make whatever notes you're going to need later, with the players' help.

[Thor Olavsrud]

kaomera: Yup. The support is awesome. Burning Wheel is not the only game these days that does this (although it happens to be my favorite among the ones that do). It makes a big difference!

donbaloo: You know, I think we may be moving too fast on this stuff. I don't want to overwhelm you! I'm starting to worry that a totally new system plus a totally different way of running things might be too much to take in all at once. It's not going to hurt you at all to run things the way you've run in the past. Burning Wheel will still result in a very different experience, but one I really think you'll enjoy.

So maybe you should take this one step at a time. Try running a game the way you normally would, but using the system and BITs and Artha. Get a handle on that first, and then you can try out some of my crazy suggestions if you still want to.

Though if you really want to dive in head first, I'll do everything I can to help.'

[stormsweeper]

So maybe you should take this one step at a time.

I'd agree - it's what I'm planning on doing with a spy game I'm running (not using BW). I'm going to have them retroactively make a few contacts, that they define (but I have veto on, of course). I'm also going to "port" a Circles-like mechanic to the game.

I can talk more about this in another thread, but essentially I felt the players weren't as invested in the world as I was, and that was partly becuase they only knew what I told them. The only challenges they had were the ones I put before them. I'm hoping to engage them more, spice up the game for all our enjoyment, and have less work to do. Everybody wins!

And, then, one day, if I'm feeling ambitious, I'll talk to Luke about Mission: Burninination 8)

[Kublai]

Typically, how much narrating of the story would you say your players do during a session? Do you give them free rein to narrate scenes until it conflicts with what you as the GM see as plausible then roll the dice? "Say yes or roll the dice" during these player narrated events?

In the games I GM, the players and I share equally the amount of narration. I describe the setting, they describe how they interact with the setting. I describe NPCs, they describe NPCs they'd like to encounter, and we use both. I even take into consideration player comments that directly effect the story. For instance, in my last campaign, a player beheaded another player. I was shocked and had no idea what to do. The beheader said, "Is he dead? I bet he's still alive and talking!" Since this idea fit into my theme and story, I took it and ran with it.

If something a player comes up with conflicts with what I think should happen, then the dice are rolled.

I believe GMs are just players. This whole method of creating a theme, story, and setting together makes this possible and fun. I've never enjoyed GMing much until I took this approach. I barely have to make notes or prepare for my sessions. Just some ideas are jotted down, perhaps some stats. (Though I rarely stat out anythng anymore as I am so familiar with the game.) What I really do is to keep in mind the players' beliefs and create conflicts that bring those to play. Maybe one a session, maybe two.

[donbaloo]

I like the idea of running games like that Kublai, as more of a player with a little more knowledge of what's going on. I'm looking forward to it immensely and that's why I think I'm gonna just dive in Thor. The whole purpose behind me looking for a new system was because I've just become too burn out with D&D. I mean, we've played in the style of GM creating the plot and leading the characters to it (though trying to make it look like its not leading :roll: ) since our beginnings. I really want something new for the group and myself...something that feels more like creating an awesome story full of player invested conflicts that everyone really digs on. We've wanted this for a long time and I think I'd rather us just go in head first with it, really shake it up. I want it obvious to everyone that we're not playing the same game any more. Burning Wheel has me really psyched because of what I think its gonna be able to accomplish with our gaming. I want us go all the way with it and see the players reactions to what it feels like to really have a genuine concern about their character and his interactions within the game. To see how directly they influence our story and feel that excitement. I think they will. If it really does just overwhelm us, I can scale it back and find a middle ground between what we've been doing and what we can do.

My emailaphobic player stayed at the house for a while last night after our fishing trip and wanted to take a look at the Burning Wheel stuff. So I got it out and, though you guys preach for group character burning sessions, I wanted him to taste what the game can offer us. I explained the group's discussions about what sort of scenario they wanted and he wanted to start thinking about his character. So we began.

As he worked his way through I explained what would be happening if the other players were there making there's simultaneously...how everyone would be working off of each other for cohesion. The process, once again, took an eternity. We spent a lot of time just reading around in the character burner before actually beginning and we logged about 3 hours worth of time "practicing" the creation process on his concept. We didnt' even finish as it was too late to really put adequate though into his beliefs and instincts and I had impressed upon him how they were really more important that the rest of the stuff we had done thus far. We decided to come at with a fresh mind instead of rushing through before he had to leave.

Initial response from him afterwards was as expected, he had never created a character that he felt he knew so well and understood before this one. He fell in love with it and wants to now how to order another set of books (hallelujah :D ). We'll be placing the order in the next couple of days. Anyway...he loves it and is very excited about completing the character's Beliefs and Instincts with the rest of the group so they'll benefit the story for everyone. I see no reason why his concept won't fit beautifully with what has been discussed so far as he kept it mind during the burning process.

I should say that when we got to circles, relationships, affiliations, etc. his eyes just lit up. He couldn't believe how involved he was going to be with the story.

Just wanted to share my newest thoughts and his initial reactions. Everyone's response has led me to believe that they are really digging on the new concepts and are nearly as excited as I am to see this all in play.

[Thor Olavsrud]

Wow! That's awesome!

We'll be here to help. Make sure you post their Beliefs and Instincts here before you start to play, and we'll brainstorm some Bangs to help you along.