The '100 words' is normally a longer piece of prose, depending on the ideal length of the series/scenario and contains just the sort of things you _should_ find on the back of a dvd case: hints as to what's inside, names of characters, scene setups, premise but no spoilers. Of course a spoiler in a RPG would be a railroad.
I've been toying with the idea of a 'series bible' as you put it for some time now. Already, for my ongoing campaign, I have used CmapTools (http://cmap.ihmc.us) to map out the entities in my campaign; I recommend this tool heartily - it helps keep track of everything. My idea for what I've been calling a campaign log (your 'bible') was to have two sections: one available to players containing everything they have seen and on for the narrator for everything yet to see. I still fantasise about putting in pictures of the important entities - using removable cards that can be used as visual queues in play.
But back to BSG:
This method of developing television I think is responsible for the fairly long periods during the BSG series where I was confused about what was going on. I mean, I am used to playing follow-the-bread-crumbs when watching Lost but this was different. Your explanation of how BSG was actually made helps me to better understand the series which, whilst interesting, ground-breaking and ultimately very rewarding suffered, I feel, with the lack of focus you'd expect from this design methodology.
Unsurprisingly, I see this happening in our narrativistic roleplaying. The trick for us and for TV series producers is to avoid these new pitfalls.
Thanks, Ian, for the insight.
M
-----Original Message-----
From: WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com
[mailto:WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ian Cooper
Sent: 29 March 2009 15:33
To: WorldofGlorantha_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Liminal heroquest in Galactica finale
Slightly off-topic, but hoping the OP won't mind.
One of the things that interests me about BG is that it had no metaplot. Ron Moore put together a series bible describing the background, characters, genre and premise but had no idea of the destination. Series had a theme, but it was up to the writers to show character through the events/situations that occurred in each episode.
For example no one knew Boomer was going to be a Cylon until they decided that it was a key way to end the mini-series and draw folks in to any TV series. No one knew who the final five were until the end of series 3 when they wanted another big revelation.
This is similar to how I play HQ today. There is a series bible with situation, characters and premise, and I may have an idea of a theme for a series, but there is no meta-plot, just me preparing events/situations for each week by which I hope to show character.
It's interesting to see the parallels. It's also interesting to note that the decision to end after 4 series, and tie up plot lines because developments had driven the story toward a conclusion, is one I think that we are all to afraid off when running games. Endings are tough, but ending well can really make a game, like a TV show, memorable, rather than allowing it to fizzle out like a damp squib.
Powered by hypermail