Images of the Three Way Tension (Part 2)
Quite some time ago, I was writing about the Vector Theory (wow, that was 16 year ago), describing a perspective on how games are run.
It used illustrations like these.
I still think there's some value in these ideas, however my current thoughts are less about specific flowchart paths that a story MUST follow, and now my thoughts tend to flow more organically because we can't account for crazy choices that players might make, or every type of action that characters might choose to engage.
So everything basically collapses back to the "Simple Path" or "Path of Clouds" in the images above.
The point here is that the Three Way Tension doesn't always only to the GNS triangle, the actual essence of the model applies to the specifics of the GM, the Players and the Rules.
We can look at this a few ways when considering the dynamics at the table. With each player pulling on the direction of the story, while the GM/Narrator imparts their own tension on the potential direction.
This could also be broken down into the pull exerted by the collective of the players, versus the pull directed by the GM/Narrator, with a third tension applied by the rules underlying the story (whethert those rules are the non-diegetic mechanics of the game, or the diegetic influences emerging from within the story. (Note that it may be possible for the diegetic and non-diegetic forces to be working against one another, which can make for some interesting dynamics of their own.
The forces pulling on a session are not static, as the session changes, the forces change, characters (and players) change their objectives, new forces come into play, and old forces may start to lose their significance.
It might be worth noting here that I'm really simplifying things, We've basically got a vertical axis on our chart charting the lightness and darkness of the story, and a horizontal axis charting how complete the story is. The vertical axis could instead measure the danger of the situation, the degree of surrealism in the story, or some other favouring element... there could also be multiple dimensions of chart that get quite complex. I'm keeping it easy here.
In this illustration, I'm applying multiple sets of forces and demonstrating how they might appear at six instances during a session (entitled A through F to show their progression flow). We have four potential dramatic points (or even endings) for the session, and show how player intentions reflect those dramatic points. I've got the GM generally pulling the narrative to the right, often providing a tension to the players as the story moves across the diagram. I could have balanced the influences of the players against one another beofre comparing them to the pull of the GM and the rules, but for the purposes of this diagram I thought it was interesting to see the dynamic of how the players work against one another at various points.
For the purposes of this drawing, I've used red starbursts to indicate events that the storyline is pulling the character into (unless the players make deliberate choices to avoid those potential moments), and blue starbursts to indicate events that are unlikely to happen and which specifically force character away from them. In a game of Vampire, the red options might be moments when the masquerade is breached or when the beast.
Point A
Player 1 wants a downward direction, for the purposes of this diagram we might say they want a darker and more dramatic story. Player 2 wants the game to head in an upward direction, let's say that this means they want a happy and light narrative arc. The rules are generally pulling toward the first of the end points, which might be a simple conclusion to events, but it isn't far from the starting point and probably isn't narratively satisfying. The GM is pulling to the right (because they want the story moving forward) and downward (because they want to start the story with some dramatic tension and want to avoid the end point that the setting proposes). At this point the game is just beginning, but even here there is a possibility of everything ending too soon unless the group works together to get the ball rolling.
Point B
Some momentum has built, but the terrain has shifted as the story moves toward a new situational modifier. Player 1 really wants to explore the narrative consequences of the element that is pushing them away. Player 2 is still aiming toward something a bit lighter than the current circumstances of the story. The rules are both pushing away from the blue critical point and pulling the narrative back to the point that the story had previously moved past, echoes of that event still linger in the story and if nothing is done the narrative will be drawn back to that ending. The GM keeps moving the story forward, aiming toward the interest of the blue point, if only to see what happens around this area.
Point C
Player 1 is happy with story's flow at this point and just wants the narrative to move forward. Player 2 is interested in going back to previous events and exploring them more thoroughly. The biggest rule pull at this stage is away from the blue (thinking back, and if I was to redraw the diagram, I'd probably direct the rules tension toward the next red point, bu8t perhaps there are critical thresholds in the story, and the red hasn't appeared yet to make its presence known and lure the story in...this is where a lot of the vector theory comes in, and I really need to get the basics out there before I start introducing new complications). The GM is still pulling forward, but their tension is more toward the dramatic narrative arc, and to build a momentum away from the next red trap when it appears. (Note that the GM may have placed this trap when they designed the scenario, so they may be playing a reverse psychology game at this point)
Point D
Player 1 still thinks there's something of value at the centre of the blue starburst, but hopes that coming at it from a different angle might be easier. The advantage here is that it pulls the story away from the next red trap, Giving up on going back, Player 2 wants to move forward to the next thing that might bring drama to the story. The GM continiu8es pulling, but aims toward a darker path before the conclusion that should be on its way some time soon. The rules have combined forces diverting the story away from the blue and towards the red. There are many forces at play here, and the mechanics of the game are exerting a strong influence.
Point E
As we get to the climax, the rules may have an effect, but here the GM is pulling the story to a conclusing and letting the decisions of the players make the final choice that will determine where things end. The GM is just keeping the story moving at this point.
Point F
There could be a few end points, but this is the one that the journey ended up at. The red or blue fields could have easily diverted the story to different outcomes depending on slight changes in circumstances.
Comments