Each episode consists of a number of scenes:
- an opener that introduces the theme
- an indeterminate number of development scenes that riff on and refer to the theme in various ways
- a closer that somehow completes the theme—or ends organically, on a cliffhanger, conclusive line, or other exciting moment
| Calling Scenes | Each scene begins by throwing to a player who then calls the scene, laying out the parameters under which it unfolds.
These are:- Cast: names the main or recurring characters taking part in the scene. To cast a scene your player character is not in costs you a drama token. - Setting: where the scene takes place (at least at its outset; a scene can shift in time and place as it unfolds) - Time break (if any): by default, scenes are assumed to take place shortly after, or concurrently with, the previous scene.
If you want to jump ahead in time, say so, and by how much. Time breaks are susceptible to challenge (see below.) - Mode: Indicate whether this is a primarily dramatic scene, in which a PC or recurring character pursues an emotional reward from a PC or NPC, or a procedural scene,
in which one or more PCs (possibly aided by supporting characters) pursues an external, practical goal. Dramatic scenes are the default; when the group becomes comfortable with the structure, you’ll find yourselves just casting scenes without having to explicitly identify the mode. Only much rarer procedural scenes need to be called out by name. - Situation: a brief description of what’s happening at the scene’s outset. The caller can vividly narrate the location, the activities of the characters involved, and other vivid backgrounds. Sometimes it’s smoother just to cut right to the dialogue and work out supporting details as they become relevant. Caller narration may be challenged if players object to what you describe them as doing, or if they feel that you’ve assumed a plot advancement that ought to be played out instead. Other players cast in the scene may bounce off your description to describe what they’re doing or other details. Often, you’ll find it more natural to describe these elements in another order than the one given above.
Calling Order
Before the episode’s first scene, the GMs pick the precedence order.
The player choosing the episode’s theme always calls first. Then comes the player who actually appeared first, in your precedence order.
The GMs insert themselves into the order, replacing the player who chose the theme.
Scenes are then called according to this altered order.
It is Beata’s turn to choose the theme. She selects lust, and will call the first scene. A GM shuffles the precedence and, conveniently for the clarity of this example, draw the players’ names in alphabetical sequence: Adrian, Beata, Claude, Delia, Edward, and Franca. The GM substitutes himself for Beata’s appearance in the
precedence order. The order in which participants will call scenes this week is: Beata, Adrian, The GM ,Claude, Delia, Edward, and Franca.
Once you reach the end of a calling order, it rolls over, continuing the already established precedence order.
In the above order, after Franca's first scene concludes, Beata calls her second scene of the evening, then Adrian, then the GM, and so on.
Alternatively, scenes might be called just randomly/organically.| Challenges | Challenges
Players may request adjustments to called scene parameters by announcing a challenge. How they do this depends on the element they object to.
Except where otherwise indicated, challenges resolve through a vote. All players side with the caller or the challenger.
Players may see that a scene might justifiably be challenged, but elect not to do it.
In most groups, callers adjust their choices as soon as someone raises an objection, without having to go to challenge. The threat of a challenge leads to resolution without it.
Ducking
You may challenge your casting in a scene you do not want your character to take part in. Remember, however, that in drama, characters frequently take part in confrontations they’d sooner avoid. DramaSystem challenges the traditional roleplayer’s credo of complete control over his character at all times.
Be prepared to detach, and allow your character to be pulled by emotions and obligations beyond willful control—just as we so often are in real life.
The caller may then acquiesce to your objection, and call the scene without you, or may further describe the scene so that your character’s desire and poles compel your participation. You can duck this compulsion by spending a drama token, which goes to the caller.
After you successfully duck a scene with a cast of two, leaving nothing to play, the caller starts over, calling a new scene that does not include your character.
In practice, players rarely duck scenes. They’re much more likely to try the following:
Rushing
To insert your character into a scene the caller has not cast you in, and actively wants to keep you out of, spend a drama token or a bennie.
The caller receives the token or bennie.
It costs nothing to join a scene if the caller consents to your joining.
A caller may block your unwanted entrance into a scene by spending a bennie.
(This is not a challenge, per se, but mirrors the procedure for ducking a scene, making this the logical place to present this rule.)
Challenging a Time Jump
Players may object to jumps in time when they preclude them from taking actions they see their characters as wanting to take in the nearer term.
Resolve a challenge to a time break with a vote.
You can always jump back in time to play flashback scenes. If you’re reasonably sure your scene won’t change the outcome of the one at hand, you needn’t feel compelled to challenge it.
Challenging a Plot Jump
Players may object to a situation on the grounds that it advances an ongoing plot element that would be more satisfying if played out in full.
Alternately, they might feel that you’re cutting into the middle of a brand new situation, and that it’s unbelievable that their characters would not have intervened in it sooner.
If the caller loses the challenge, he/she must then revise their situation description to meet the objections of the challenging player, and the voters who supported him/her.
Challenging for Novelty
Players may object to a situation on the grounds that it is an attempt to retry an earlier scene the caller’s character lost.
If the scene seems too similar to the GMs, they invite the caller to point to a change since the previous scene that puts the situation in a new light.
The best defense against this challenge is to point to an intervening scene that changed the situation.
Prevailing in a dramatic scene with a third character may change the complexion of an emotional conflict enough to justify a second attempt.
If the player can’t point to a changed situation, the GMs resolve the challenge by requiring the caller to call an entirely different scene.
In the first scene Delia calls in the current episode, her character Darkeye seeks Axehandle’s forgiveness for letting her love for him come to the attention of his
recalcitrant wife, Bladesinger. Axehandle’s player, Adrian, decides that he will reject her petition.
When her turn to call comes up, Delia says, “I go back and beg Axehandle for forgiveness again.” The telltale word again tips off the other players, who want to see this story thread develop in a more interesting way.
Edward plays spoiler, pointing out that Delia’s call is a repeat.
Delia instead elects to call a scene in which she goes to Bladesinger to assure her of Axehandle’s steadfastness.
Beata, Bladesinger’s player, grants her petition, and reassures Darkeye in turn.
With the situation now altered, Delia can now call as her third scene a repeat of the scene with Axehandle, arguing if challenged that the situation has changed since the
previous go-round. This doesn’t mean that Adrian is now obligated to grant her forgiveness—he might equally be enraged by Darkeye’s approach to his wife—but it does let her try again.
Like many of the grounds for challenge, this problem is more theoretical than actual. Players
don’t want to repeat themselves. |
Going to Procedural
If a player describes his/her character successfully performing a difficult practical task, any participant, the GMs included, may demand that a procedural resolution instead be
performed to see if they successfully do it. Unlike other challenges, it takes only one objector to trigger a procedural resolution. The narrating player may avoid the procedural resolution by either withdrawing the description entirely, or adjusting it to satisfy the objector(s).
The Right to Describe
Players with characters present in the current scene may at any point narrate details, including:
- physical circumstances (“I look up and see vultures circling overhead.”)
- the behavior of walk-on characters (“The Tridents are getting restless.”)
- their own characters actions and what comes of them (“I pick up an axe and smash the idol.”)
When someone objects to a bit of narration, they can either adjust what they’re describing or let it go to challenge. |
| Dramatic Scenes | In a dramatic scene, characters engage in verbal conflict over the granting or withholding of a desired emotional reward.
The character seeking the reward is the petitioner. This role is more often than not taken by the scene’s caller.
The character deciding whether or not to extend it is the granter.
| Drama Tokens | All participants collect and spend drama tokens throughout the course of an episode.
Everyone starts each episode with zero tokens.
Tokens left unspent at the end of a session contribute to a player’s chance of winning bennies, then revert to the zero.
They do not carry over to the next episode.
Tokens do not represent or simulate anything in the fictional reality you’re collectively depicting. Instead they bend events toward a satisfying literary rhythm, where characters
sometimes prevail and are sometimes defeated in emotional confrontations. They overcome gamers’ natural tendency to always dig in when challenged, forcing them to play their characters like real people, impelled by emotional need and obligation. |
| Calling Dramatic Scenes | Call a dramatic scene by specifying: - the cast
- the location
- how much time has passed since the previous scene (if any)
The final ingredient for a dramatic scene is intent—what the petitioner wants, consciously or otherwise, from the granter.
If you are calling a scene in which your character acts as petitioner, as is the norm, simply go ahead and enter into the scene, without announcing your intent.
You don’t have to make your character the petitioner, although it costs you a drama token if he or she isn’t present at all.
You can designate an NPC, or another PC, as the petitioner. When doing this, suggest what it is that the petitioner wants.
The participant playing the character may ask for an adjustment, or allow the character’s intent to drift as the scene plays out and the granter responds.
Never call a dramatic scene between two recurring characters. |
| Playing and Resolving Dramatic Scenes | Players portray their characters through dialogue until the petition is either granted, or it becomes apparent that it has been conclusively rebuffed, or is losing tension and energy.
This occurs when the players in the scene start to repeat themselves, or players not taking part in the scene grow visibly bored or restless. Where necessary, a GM steps in to declare the scene concluded, by asking the petitioner if she thinks she got a significant concession.
If the answer is yes, the petition is considered granted, even if other players feel that the petitioner didn’t get everything he or she wanted.
Neither the caller or the other players in general may gainsay the petitioner’s player on this point.
If the answer is no, and the rest of the group agrees with the petitioner’s assessment, the petition is considered to have been refused.
If the answer is no, but other participants feel that a significant shift in emotional power from granter to petitioner occurred, the group votes.
The scene’s caller gets an extra tie-breaking vote, where necessary. |
| Gaining Drama Tokens | Any dramatic scene ends with an exchange of one or more drama tokens. If the petition is willingly granted by the participant, the granter earns a drama token - taking a token from the petitioner if they have any.
If the granter refuses, the petitioner gains the token - taking a token from the granter if they have any. |
| Forcing | If the player playing the granter chooses not to relent, the petitioner may, by spending two drama tokens, force the granter to grant a significant emotional concession. This may still withhold some part of what the petitioner seeks, but must nonetheless represent a meaningful shift of emotional power from the granter to the petitioner.
The forced granter receives the two drama tokens from the petitioner.
The granter’s player may cancel a force by spending three drama tokens. These are paid to the petitioner.
After a force occurs or is canceled, the same characters may not, for the duration of the episode, be called into similar scenes intended to reverse the original result.
Some significant new element, as judged by challenge voting if need be, must be added to make the scene a true new development, and not just another kick at the can.
Supporting or Blocking a Force
Players not directly involved in a scene may support an attempt to force, or cancel a force, by
giving their drama tokens to the current petitioner or granter—provided their character is
present in the scene. They describe what they say or do to make the force more or less likely
A grant needn’t give the petitioner everything he wanted in exactly the terms he wanted. Any major shift in emotional power from granter to petitioner counts as a grant.
Sometimes you'll reach clear consensus on what constitutes a major shift; in a few cases you’ll have to vote.
Even a force must respect the bounds of the granter’s established character. You can’t, and shouldn’t expect to, turn an avowed enemy into a loyal friend in a single scene.
Forced petitions represent the character giving in for the moment, not undergoing a life-changing epiphany. They certainly don’t play like hypnosis or mind control.
A force causes the subject to grudgingly act in a friendly, or friendlier than usual, manner in this particular instance.
Axehandle (Adrian) meets with the Slipper (NPC), a representative of the northern king.
He barges into the scene demanding respect, even though Slipper has never met him before and considers him an ignorant barbarian.
Slipper goads and insults him throughout the interview. In the end, though (after Adrian pays two tokens to force a grant), he offers Axehandle a position in the king’s command—
while continuing to subtly mock him. Adrian protests that he wanted more from Slipper: he wanted true respect and a better practical offer.
You argue that the Slipper has already made a major concession: he now treats Axehandle as a useful ignorant barbarian instead of a useless one.
To, on first meeting, embrace Axehandle as an equal would be completely outside this wily northerner’s character.
Although Adrian continues to feel that he should have gotten more from his force, the other players agree with your argument, and pronounce the scene and force to have
been fairly played.
If he wants Slipper to admire Axehandle as a peer, he’ll have to keep working on him over the course of many episodes, until the shift from his initial attitude seems
plausible in the storyline. One scene does not a turnaround make.
|
| Dramatic Scene Example |
It’s Delia’s turn to call. She has a drama token and could call a scene without her character in it. However, she knows what she wants Darkeye to do next and so calls a scene accordingly. In an earlier scene, Darkeye discovered that people in the clan have begun to gossip about her poorly concealed affection for Axehandle.
If she does not somehow address this potential scandal, it could lead to her being shunned by the others. Darkeye will act as petitioner, so she simply thinks of her intent, keeping it to herself, and starts the scene: “I catch up with Bladesinger as she leaves the sparring grounds.”
Delia refers to a location already described in past episodes, so it requires no further explanation.
She doesn’t specify a time, which by implication means that it takes place shortly after the previous scene.
“Can I be at the sparring grounds?” asks Claude (playing Crow.)
“Sure, but I want a private talk with Bladesinger, so I’ll do my best to pull her away from prying eyes before we speak.”
“Fair enough,” says Claude. “Crow will know you pulled her aside, but for the moment at least will keep sparring, with Grasslander."
Darkeye’s intention, which Delia is not required to state, is to reassure Bladesinger.
Delia: (as Darkeye, except where noted): Have you a moment to speak?
Beata: (as Bladesinger) I suppose.
Delia: (pointing) Let’s go over there.
Beata: Are these not words we can openly express, without fear of prying eyes?
Delia: Please, Bladesinger. Humor me.
Beata: Very well.
Delia: (OOC) Okay, now we’re off in one of the natural craggy alcoves near the
fortress. (as Darkeye) You spoke of prying eyes. I come to warn you of a troubling situation, and assure you that it is not of my making.
Beata: Ah. The wagging tongues. I have heard them.
Delia: You have?
Beata: But perhaps I have not heard the same waggings as you.
Delia: Some say I have eyes for your husband. I am here to say I have done nothing dishonorable, and to assure you that I never will.
Beata: You don’t quite deny the gossip, then.
Delia: What?
Beata: You promise that you won’t act on your desires, and I believe you. But you do desire him.
Delia: I... I...
Beata: Do not fear, girl. I question your taste, not your honor.
Delia: Um... thanks?
Beata: I’ve more important concerns than making trouble for you.
Delia: Uh, good then.
Beata: (cupping hand over mouth as if calling after her.) If it were up to me, you could have him.
The scene clearly over as a GM leads the outcome determination.
“So, Delia, did Darkeye get what she wanted?”
“Hmm, that’s a tough one. On one hand, she did assure me that she wouldn’t make trouble.”
“But on the other,” suggests Beata, “I totally shut you out.”
“Yes,” says Delia. “That was a totally unreassuring reassurance. Well, if you go by who had the emotional power in the scene, she started out with it and never gave it up.
I think Darkeye feels worse after the talk than she did going in. So no, I don’t feel like Bladesinger granted.”
“Do you agree?” The GM asked Beata.
“Absolutely. I was not conceding anything of importance to me.”
Delia has no tokens. Beata has 1. Having refused a petition, she gives that token to Delia, and now has none.
This example is written as if the players were in the same room with one another in a tabletop setting.
In effect, here on TWC's forums, players are expected to write a whole lot more than just dialogue lines most of the time. |
| Special Cases | This section presents rules for unusual situations that crop up in and around drama scenes.
No Contest Scenes
When you act as granter, you may find, as a scene plays out, that your character has no reason to oppose a petitioner’s request.
If so, you can declare this a no-contest scene, bringing it to a quick conclusion. The caller may then call a new scene—hopefully one in which real conflict does occur.
If at a loss for a replacement scene, the caller may choose to pass to the next caller in the established precedence order.
Two-Way Exchanges
At the end of a dramatic scene, the participants might conclude that it was a two-way exchange, in which each character sought an emotional payoff, which either was or wasn't granted. If both participants were a) denied or b) got the payoffs they sought, each receives a drama token.
If one petition was granted and the other denied, the granting player gains 2 tokens - taking from the denying player if they have any.
Two-way exchanges may prove particularly common in scenes started with a soft open.
Multiple Petitioners
Sometimes more than two characters will take part in one dramatic exchange—or several dramatic exchanges will overlap and interweave with one another.
This might happen when:
- a player jumps into a dramatic scene
- a dramatic scene arises organically from a conference scene
After the various discussions come to ahead and appear to resolve themselves, ask whether this was a dramatic scene at all. Do one or more players feel that their characters sought an emotional payoff?
- If not, it was an expository scene setting up future events, probably of a procedural nature. No drama tokens are exchanged. Call the next scene.
- If only one player answers in the affirmative, this is an ordinary drama scene with onlookers. Determine the distribution of tokens as usual.
This is the most common case: even in a group scene, one character’s petition usually dominates, to a degree that all participants instinctively acknowledge.
- If multiple players feel they sought emotional reward, the group continues as follows.
The GMs quiz each participating player, in a newly drawn precedence order, asking:
- what they most wanted, emotionally, in the scene
- who they wanted it from
- and whether they got it
If they got what they wanted, the specified player granted their petition and earns a drama token—from the petitioning player if he or she has one.
If they didn’t get what they wanted, the specified player refused their petition. The petitioner earns a drama token—from the refuser of the grant if he or she has one.
A group scene might easily come to one overall conclusion about a practical course of action, with various different emotional ramifications for the those taking part.
Petitioning For Practical Favors
Any scene involving a main cast member or recurring character is by definition dramatic.
Even if the granter seems to be asking for a practical favor, the subtext of the scene is always emotional. Depending on how self-aware the characters are, they may or may not realize this, but it’s true all the same.
The scene counts as a grant if the promise to perform the favor feels like a significant concession to either the petitioner, or to the group at large. Whether the favor is later performed to the petitioner’s satisfaction does not retroactively alter the outcome of the scene—but probably provokes a new scene in which the disappointed petitioner returns to the granter to express a grievance. |
| Organic Creation and Balanced Input | Expect scenes to spontaneously head in directions unanticipated by the caller. These bursts of spontaneous group creation will often comprise the standout moments of your collective story. In allowing players this freedom, the GMs should ensure that everyone gets an equal chance to push the story forward, especially when their turn to call comes around. In some gaming groups, a dominant player grows accustomed to driving the narrative and seizing an undue share of spotlight time, whatever game they’re playing. Often this is the most inventive player in the group. As such, he may try to hijack every scene, without even realizing he’s doing it.
The GMs should intervene to bring out the contributions of other participants, balancing the input of the bold and shy alike. |
| Soft Opens | You can start a scene without specifying a situation. Instead the characters cast in the scene simply start talking to one another, and the scene works organically toward a dramatic conflict. This is called a soft open. It’s up to you to make sure that the scene goes somewhere interesting after a bit of casting about, so make sure your character is in the scene. A GM may guide the participants by asking them questions that help them crystallize the soft open into a true scene.
When the scene arising from a soft open winds to a natural close, it may be self-evident to all concerned who the petitioner and granter were, and whether the petition was granted or withheld. If not, the GM questions the players involved, and if appropriate the wider group, to determine who gets a token out of it.
Soft opens tend to become rarer as players grasp dramatic scene construction. Players over-relying on them should give their characters stronger motivations and/or goals in conflict with the rest of the cast.
Conference Scenes
On occasion you’ll want to call a particular type of soft open, the conference scene, in which all or most of the main characters discuss the issues currently before them.
This might or might not resolve into a dramatic scene. It may instead simply work as an establishing scene, setting up subsequent dramatic and/or procedural scenes.
When drama breaks out in a conference scene, the GM follows the multiple petitioners rules to see who gets or gives drama tokens.
One or more NPCs may also be present, pitching in opinions or answering questions. Try to avoid situations where multiple NPCs take main focus.
Calling a conference scene costs you a drama token only if your character is not present.
Conference scenes are most effective when used sparingly. On one hand, they help to focus the series and re-establish the cast’s various agendas.
On the other, they tend to go on for a good while without really moving the story forward. |
|
| Procedural Scenes |
In procedural scenes, characters pursue practical, external goals.
These may allow them to petition for emotional rewards in subsequent scenes, but at the moment of success or failure are matters of practical effort.
For example, you might:
- Battle defenders of a neighboring territory with swords and spears, as you try to steal their cattle
- Journey across an arid desert
- Know where to find a prophet who leads a hermit’s existence on the desert’s other side
- Make a magnificent staff, to replace his damaged walking stick
- Convince him (a man you have no emotional hold over and seek only a practical benefit from) to reveal to you his latest vision
- Avoid detection by scouts sent by the people you raided, skipping a confrontation in which you have nothing to gain
| Drama v.s. Talking | Where any scene between a PC and another character is by definition dramatic, with emotional stakes at play, all dialogue interactions with minor characters are procedural, and resolved with the Talking ability. They can never grant meaningful dramatic concessions, because the PCs have no emotional investment in them. They can only grant—or refuse—practical favors. Drama tokens are never awarded or spent as the result of a Talking scene.
Expect players to periodically call speech-making scenes, in which their characters petition the clan as a collective, hoping to sway it in a certain direction.
Treat these as dramatic scenes, in which the crowd acts as granter. In this setting (and almost any other) people maintain a strong emotional stake in the actions of their community.
This distinction might seem tricky, but you won’t have to wrestle with it often if at all. Players rarely bother to call scenes involving minor characters. |
| Procedural Resolution | This section shows you how to determine what happens when the main characters pursue a practical goal.
This section presents simple starter rules to resolve procedural actions. Use these when the group is new to the game.
Experienced hands can later move on to the more versatile advanced resolution system (see Appendix).
If no one ever expresses a desire for the additional choices it provides, stick with this version. |
| Procedural Tokens | Each player starts the game with three procedural tokens: one green, one yellow, one red. When you spend a token, set it aside. The others remain unspent.
When you've spent all three of them, they immediately refresh. All three of them return to your pile of unspent tokens, and become once again available for use. |
| Playing Cards | Procedural resolutions also require a deck of standard playing cards, from which the jokers are removed. The GM always shuffles the deck before launching into any new resolution.
(The forum uses Random.org's Playing Cards, taking out the jokers of course) |
| Calling a Procedural Scene | To establish a procedural scene, the caller describes the basic situation. While adding as much evocative narration as possible, they specify: - The scene’s location
- Which characters are present
- What they’re trying to achieve, and how
Most of the time, you’ll ask players if they want their characters to take part, and frame the scene so that those who want to participate get to.
You may break this natural etiquette if you want to, either casting unwilling characters or keeping others out, requiring players to officially dodge or rush the scene.
To call a procedural scene your character is not in, spend a green token.
Once you get the hang of this, procedural scene resolution becomes an exercise in free-flowing joint narration, as other players add details of what their characters are doing.
They may add details of the environment and situation as needed. If the caller feels that these added details undermine the intent of the scene, they may adjust them to fit. |
| Step One: Difficulty |
Just like the Procedural Tokens, there are Difficulty Tokens for the group. The GM(s) spend them to determine difficulty of procedural scenes.
We start the game with 1 Strong, 1 Middling, and 1 Weak. When any individual one is spent, the other still remain unspent.
When all three are spent, they immediately refresh. All three of them return to the pile of unspent tokens, and become once again available for use.
The pile carries over through the entire game, across scenes and episodes.
The GM(s) determine the difficulty of the procedural action by picking a token.
Strong, Middling, or Weak.
Difficulty can only be chosen from available Difficulty Tokens.
How To Assign Difficulties
When there is more than one available Difficulty Token, the GM(s) decide how to place the Difficulty using the following criteria (in rough order of priority, from highest to lowest):
- Creative Instinct: If you have an instinctive sense of how hard this should be without being able to articulate why, go with that.
- Story Possibility: If you can see more possible story branches from a success than a failure, assign the most forgiving Difficulty available. If failure seems to offer more story
possibilities, assigns the least favorable Difficulty you can afford.
- Emotional Rhythm: If the primary actor’s most recent scenes (including dramatic ones) have resolved in the primary actor’s favor, assign the most challenging Difficulty you can
afford. If recent events have gone against him, assign the least challenging Difficulty available. Sometimes a player’s mood runs contrary to an objective rendering of his
success or failure. Go with the subjective impression over your detached assessment of how well he’s been faring lately.
- Foreshadowing: If prior events have established a success as more likely than a failure, assign the most forgiving Difficulty available. If the reverse is true, assign the toughest Difficulty you can.
- Literal logic: If success seems unlikely based on historical precedent, your knowledge of physics, the relative strengths of various weapons, or some other factor tangential to the
construction of a compelling story, assign the hardest available Difficulty. If it seems likely based on those factors, assign the easiest available. Take the players’ descriptions of their
tactics into account. Spend high for ludicrous plans and low for brilliant ones. |
| Step Two: The Target Card | | After shuffling the deck, the GM(s) cut it and draw a card. This is the target card. |
| Step Three: Players Spend and Draw | GM(s) do the card drawing for the players!
Drawn cards should be public knowledge.
In turn, according to a freshly-determined precedence order, each player may now spend a procedural token and draw a corresponding number of cards.
To succeed, at least one of the players must, when all cards have been played, have a card that matches the target.
Depending on the strength of the opposing force—which the players do not yet know—they may need to match only its color, or perhaps its suit, or even its number.
So if the target card is a King of Clubs, they know that black cards are good, clubs are better, but kings of the other three suits are the best of all.
- A player spending a green token draws two cards.
- A player spending a yellow token draws one card.
- A player spending a red token draws one card - after which the GM removes from play a single card held by any player.
If none of the cards on the table match the target’s color, suit or value, the GM waits, instead knocking out the next card that does, as soon as a player draws it.
Players whose characters are present must spend a token and make the corresponding card draw.
Players whose characters are not present may alter the odds in the group’s favor by spending a yellow or green token. If they have neither of these tokens to spend, they can’t influence the outcome.
Knocking Out Cards
When a player spends a red token, the GM always removes from play the best available match, prioritizing as follows:
1. cards with the same number
2. cards of the same suit
3. cards of the same color
If two or more cards are equally good matches, it doesn’t matter which of them the GM chooses. They do so based on what seems easiest to narrate. |
| Step Four: Final Result | When all of the players have acted or (if absent) passed on acting, the GM reveals the target card to the group and checks to see if any of their cards match the target card.
On a match, the characters prevail. Without one, they fail. A card matching the target’s value always wins, no matter the difficulty. |
| Step Five: Personal Consequences | Players who drew face cards (even if they were later knocked out by the GM) may face a personal consequence which matters in a future scene.
-If you drew the face card when playing a green token, introduce an advantage your character can take advantage of in an upcoming scene.
-If you drew the face card when playing a red token, introduce an additional obstacle your character must resolve in an upcoming scene.
The GM(s) may step in to adjust advantages that seem out of proportion with the stakes of the scene or otherwise break narrative plausibility.
Likewise, if you create a problem for yourself that isn't serious enough or acts as an advantage in disguise, the GM will help you to find an appropriately genuine and entertaining problem.
(In the DramaSystem, Aces are considered Face Cards, along with the Jack, Queen, and King) |
| Narrating the Ups and Downs |
While performing the rule actions described above, the players describe the smaller advances and setbacks the participants undergo on their way to victory or defeat.
Here’s how it all fits together:
- The players kick off the scene by describing what their characters are trying to do.
- The GM(s) describes whatever it is they’re trying to overcome. They may choose to accurately portray the strength of the opposing force, or set up the players for a surprise by making a tough obstacle seem initially easy, or a weak one strong.
- With each card drawn, the relevant player describes his character taking action. The extent of the match colors the description:
- When the GM knocks out a card, the player who spent the red token has suffered a reversal that erases a previous advantage.
When learning the system, concentrate on getting the rules stuff right first. Fold in narration as you grow comfortable with it. It’s more important to describe events in a fun and exciting way than to puzzle out precise interpretations of every single card drawn or removed. |
| Multiple Resolutions | | Scenes never include more than one procedural resolution. Fold additional or side actions into the main narrative, or wait and call a new scene, making it a flashback where necessary. |
| Procedural Resolutions in Dramatic Scenes | On occasion, a player may wish to have her character take on a practical goal during a scene called as a dramatic. Conversely, drama may spontaneously break out during a procedural scene.
Allow scene modes to intermix as seems organic to the story. When everyone seems to be happy with the results, GMs, as arbiters of pacing, sit back and let this happen. When these shifts feel more like sidetracks than positive developments, the GM intervenes to refocus them back to their original intent. When deciding whether to intervene, they gauge the reactions of all players, granting some extra weight to the scene’s caller. |
| Success By Narration | Often you can describe your characters, in concert with others or alone, as undertaking successful practical action, without submitting yourself to the vagaries of procedural resolution. You can do this at the top of a scene, while setting the scene, or as it unfolds. You needn't be the caller to describe your character’s practical successes.
If no participant objects to your narration, what you describe becomes part of the narrative.
If any participant objects, you must play out a procedural to see if your pursuit of a practical goal succeeds.
You aren’t obligated to start a procedural when an objection is raised. Instead you can delay the attempt, or give up on it entirely.
In the second case, your character probably sees that the action is more difficult than it at first appeared.
In the first, you’ll likely go on to bring other players in on your action—which is the best assurance of success under the simple procedural system.
When you call a procedural scene, and the GM doesn’t see any good story reason for you to face resistance, she’ll ask if anyone else objects to your success. If not, you describe your action as having succeeded, and then call a reframed scene arising from that.
Adrian wants his character, Axehandle, to impress a rival chieftain, Many Words. He proposes a procedural scene in which Axehandle rescues Many Words’ daughter from a sandstorm. You, as GM, see no story reason why he shouldn’t be able to do this. Why not give him the win, and move on?
You ask the other players if they have any objections. None of them do.
“How do you rescue her?” you prompt.
Adrian describes his daring plunge into the maw of the whirling storm, and his
emergence with the girl in his arms.
“Now what scene do you call?”
“I take her to Many Words,” he says.
Taking the part of Many Words, you start the dramatic scene, in which Axehandle is clearly petitioning him for a show of respect.
Procedural Tips
The simple procedural system rewards you for persuading as many of your fellow players as possible to participate, and to spend their best tokens.
This underlines the game’s emphasis on the personal interactions of the main cast. Success in the practical realm follows one or more successful dramatic petitions.
This is where the the dramatic and procedural token economies intersect—you spend drama tokens to get others to spend procedural tokens on your behalf.
Actions undertaken alone face tough odds, even when you spend your best token. When you want your character to do something on his own, you’re almost certainly better off trying for a Success Through Narration, and hoping no one objects. If they do, you'll need allies.
For a system where ability ranks matter, graduate to the Advanced Procedural. |
| Player vs. Player |
Two main cast characters can oppose each other in achieving a practical goal. For example:
- an arm-wrestling contest
- a punch-up
- one character tries to remove another forcibly from a scene; the other resists
- competing to impress a supporting character
Before proceeding, check the two contesting characters’ action types. If one primary is using a Strong ability and another a Weak ability, the Strong character automatically wins, no resolution system required. Each player announces the ability his character is using and what he is trying to achieve.
Players may challenge stated goals on the grounds that they are implausible or move the story too far forward in a single action. In the event of a successful challenge, the GM suggests a modified goal that satisfies all concerned.
If a strong ability contests against a weak ability, the character using the strong ability automatically wins.
Otherwise, each player spends a procedural token. The outcome is then decided through a series of card draws. The maximum number of cards the player draws depends on the token
spent: 3 for green, 2 for yellow, 1 for red. A player using a strong ability may draw an additional card if his opponent is using a middling ability.
The GM decides which of the characters seems to have started the contest, whatever it may be.
That player draws the first card.
The other player draws the second.
The first player may then draw an additional card, if he has one left.
Then the second player may do the same.
This continues until both players have either run out of card draws, or choose not to draw any
more.
The player with the highest card overcomes the other, achieving his goal
To resolve ties between cards of the same value, use the suit order (from best to worst): spades, hearts, diamonds, clubs.
Players who at any time drew a face card and spent a green token introduce an advantage their characters can take advantage of in an upcoming scene.
Players who at any time drew a face card and spent a red token introduce an additional obstacle their characters must resolve in an upcoming scene.
Assisting in Player vs. Player Contests
Player vs. player contests may involve more than two main characters.
The assisting player announces which contestant his character is trying to help, how he’s doing that, and what ability he’s using. Players can intervene at any time, and don’t have to
announce this at the top of a contest. He spends a token, allowing the assisted character a number of redraws equivalent to the token spent: 3 for green, 2 for yellow, 1 for red.
If he’s using a strong ability and everyone acting on the other side is using a weak ability, he adds an additional draw to that number.
The assisting player draws those extra cards, as necessary, and narrates what his character is doing to bring victory for his chosen side.
Even in what seems like a disorganized rumble between two sets of main characters, it’s always neatest to designate a primary contestant on each side. When it’s not clear who this might be, the GM chooses. Usually this will be obvious—the first character to act on one side, and the first character acted upon on the other.
Consequences are handed out by the winning original contestant, regardless of whose token paid for the final card drawn.
Solo Actions
The standard procedural rules make it easier to succeed by bringing other players into your action attempt.
Where it makes sense for a player to act on his own without undue risk of failure, the GM may decide to instead use the Player vs. Player rules, acting as the opposing supporting
character or impersonal obstacles. The GM spends a procedural token, getting the usual 3 redraws for green, 2 for yellow, and 1 for red. If the supporting character has been established as being especially formidable in the action type used to oppose the PC, the GM gains an additional redraw. |
Use Only When Needed
Dramatic scenes dominate DramaSystem play, even though they’re simpler and thus briefer than the procedural rules.
Most groups start out calling lots of procedural scenes, because that’s what they’re used to playing.
They find them easier to conceptualize, at first. As they find their legs with the system, procedural sequences begin to fall away.
After a while, a group may all but drop them, tending instead to accept jumps ahead in time where procedural activities take place offstage, to a mutually-agreed outcome.
This is exactly the play pattern that is meant to emerge over time.
That said, groups develop their own internal cultures. A group that continues to call and enjoy plenty of procedural scenes is also doing it right: they’re having fun and building the story they collectively want to tell. |
| Resolving Consequences | When a character earns or suffers a consequence during a procedural scene, GM and player each make a note of it. Consequences are typically too ephemeral to include on the character sheet.
Players should then attempt to work their consequences into an upcoming scene. If they don’t, the GM will.
You can invoke a consequence in more than one scene. Eventually some new consequence will arise, and the old one will fade into the background.
Eager’s new tie to Blunt Helmet resolves as soon as it appears.
But he might well draw on it in a subsequent dramatic scene he calls with Blunt Helmet, seeking another concession from him.
The rule of novelty will prevent his player, Edward, from drawing on it again and again without interruption.
Over time, the relationship with Blunt Helmet will likely resolve in a way that moves past the consequence—either solidifying, so that its origin is forgotten, or becoming strained once more.
|
| Supporting Characters | Supporting characters are created and fleshed out during the game by any participant, and portrayed by GMs as NPCs. They break into two types: minor and recurring. This is mostly a bookkeeping distinction, sorting the tangential figures from those who will play an important ongoing role in the series.
The GM, or a player given bookkeeping responsibilities, should keep a list of characters appearing in the series, updating it as necessary. Separate them into the two categories, with
special attention paid to the recurring characters.
Minor Characters
Minor characters provide obstacles during procedural scenes. They do not tie into the desires of main cast members or satisfy their emotional needs.
Alternately, they may be mentioned in passing, without taking a central role in the scene.
They’re the equivalent of Shakespearean spear-carriers.
Many recurring characters start out as minor, then become more important when a PC develops an emotional need they can fulfill.
Introducing Minor Characters
Characters are introduced for the first time either by the caller, at the top of a scene, or by any participant, while a scene is already in progress.
When bringing in a new character, give him or her a name and a brief description, no more than two or three clauses long. The brief description indicates the minor character’s role in the world or story, giving the GM enough of a starting point to portray him.
Recurring Characters
A player can promote a minor character to recurring status by making him or her the object of his character’s emotional needs.
Some characters start out as recurring, when their first appearance is a dramatic scene in which they are called upon to grant a PCs’ petition.
Players may establish relationships to recurring characters promoted by other players. Do this during any scene featuring both your character and the recurring character.
Recurring characters may act as petitioners, seeking grants from players, but never other recurring characters. |
| Introducing Locations | Any participant can introduce a new location in which a scene can take place, or to which a scene in progress can logically shift.
(For example, a scene that takes place during a journey might start on a road and end up in a swamp.)
The caller, or any participant during a shift in location, provides an introductory description of the place, which other participants can then elaborate on.
They can do this as the scene progresses, or in a later scene set in the same place.
Once you establish a few basic locations, you'll find the story often returning to them, like the regular sets in a TV show.
A participant who feels that an introduced location detail is out of bounds can challenge it on one of the following grounds:
- Consistency: The description is anachronistic or otherwise unsuited to the established setting and genre.
- Continuity: The description is inconsistent with what has already been established.
- Tone: The description is somehow ridiculous.
- Believability: The description defies common sense.
If the GM agrees that the detail fails one of the above tests, they allow a challenge, as per the Challenge rules. |
| Bennies | DramaSystem rewards the players who most consistently and entertainingly enact their dramatic poles.
Gaining Bennies
At the end of each episode, each player may make a brief statement, highlighting how he entertainingly brought out his character’s dramatic poles over the course of
the session, in relation to the episode’s theme. Any story with a theme inherently includes the opposite of that theme. A story about war is also about peace; a story about hunger is also about nourishment; and a story about love also threatens the possibility of lost love. Therefore, you can describe your character as either reinforcing or undermining the theme.
You might describe yourself moving from one pole to the other, or bringing both poles into your characterization at different points.
For example, in a episode with the theme of Power:
- “I demonstrated my warrior side when I led the raid, and my peacemaker side when I argued to spare the prisoners. In both cases I demonstrated my personal power.”
- “This time I became less of a leader and more of a tyrant, when I demanded that Fated accept my power.”
- “I argued for tradition when Axehandle wanted to add to the temple, and against it when the women demanded greater respect. I maintained the power of male authority.”
- “As Axehandle became more of a tyrant, I shifted from loyalty to ambition, seeking to grab some power for myself before he locks it all down. And that scene where I struck a deal with Blunt Helmet was pretty awesome, you have to admit.”
When a player is unable to articulate a case, the GM makes it for him.
All participants then vote, ranking the other players in order, with #1 the best score, #2 second best and so on.
The argument is just a reminder: voters base their rankings on how well the players brought out their dramatic poles in relation to the theme, not how skillfully they made
their cases. Moving from one pole to another in the course of an episode is a good thing. Vote against players who, episode in and episode out, stress a particular pole and ignore the other. Players do not rank themselves.
The GM then totals each player’s vote tally. The number of drama tokens the player has in hand is then subtracted from this number.
The two players with the lowest scores gain one bennie each.
If two players are tied for the lowest score, each gets a bennie. The second place finisher(s) does not.
If two players tie for second place, both of them gain bennies, as does the player in first.
If three or more players tie for first, all gain bennies.
Spending Bennies
When you have a bennie, you can spend it for, as the name suggests, narrative benefits that kick in during play.
Once spent, you remove the bennie from your character sheet. They don’t refresh; you can replace a spent bennie only by earning a new one, as above.
Cash in a bennie for any one of the following:
- a dramatic token
- a procedural token
- to draw an additional card in a procedural scene
- the right to jump the queue and call a scene immediately after any other scene. The queue-jumper’s next scene is skipped, after which the existing calling order is observed as per usual.
- to jump into a scene the caller wants to keep you out of
- to block another player’s attempt to jump into a scene you've called
- the right to burn any 1 token held by another player.
You may spend only one bennie per scene. |
| Adaptation | The DramaSystem rules can be changed and adapted for different settings, and specific rulesets can be derived from it for specific settings, but the original rule set should never be forgotten or lost.
More importantly, always make sure everything is dramatic! |
|
The Amphitheater: A Place of Drama
Reply With Quote
ers (because their kings marry their sisters), dwell in a fabulous land to the south and west of Tridentia. 
Originally Posted by Ancient Aliens
