> Everything is Thunder is a engrossing story, centered on a
> beleagured community's struggle and a reminder of how great the
> stories a game like HW can tell. John produced a lot of material for
> the scenario, which we really only scratched the surface of. One
> item was a plan for the episode presented in terms of David Siegel's
> Nine Act structure. Though I had encountered this plot breakdown
> technique before, because of John's usage I returned to look at it
> again. There is much there of use in planning an episode, even when
> adopting a style in which backstory, setting, and character have the
> focus in prep time and events are more scanty and fluid to allow
> interaction by the players.
>
> A few people requested a link in post-session discussion. If your
> interested take a look at:
>
> http://www.dsiegel.com/film/Film_home.html
>
I also have been using screenwriting structures in my scenario writing, in
particular the simpler three-act structure. Take a look at the Furthest
Shadow War and Edrald's Torc, both in UW2. It seems to create a dramatically
compelling plots that are flexible enough to cope with PCs.
If anyone's interested in the three-act structure, take a look at [1]:
http://www.sydfield.com/paradigmworksheet.htm
And if you're really interested, get the Theatrix role-playing game. It's got a great section on how to write plots to the three-act structure. It's also packed full of exciting tips on how to increase drama and improvization in your games, including the notion that success and failure can be plot-driven and completely independent from notions of competence, how to get exciting sub-plots, and how to deal with players that don't stick to the adventure. Much of what it says is similar to Roderick's "Whose scenario is it anyway" approach.
However, such things only work for certain kinds of story, such as action-adventures or thillers. Things like murder mysteries need a different structure. I've got some ideas, but if anyone out there has a copy of "the standard murder mystery plot outline," I'd love to know about it!
(This explains John's comments that EiT didn't fit into four hours: Ride For Your Wife, the module I ran at CO2, was 1/3 the size and took 3.5 hours!)
Neil.
[1] But don't look if you enjoy programmes like Buffy, Voyager, and the like. They end up getting just so predictable.
Powered by hypermail