For those wanting this stronger experience of standing in our characters’ boots, we can do much more, starting from the inception of the campaigns. Conventional (Meta) RPG methods allow the players to “see behind the Oz’s curtain” . We can change this to a flesh & blood experience from the get-go by setting strong boundaries of what information the players have access to.
We can begin by concealing even rules, lore, & mechanistic information from the players. Consider how this method can seriously change their gaming experience. Under conventional Meta-methods, players can see ‘classes’ from the rulebook listing all information about them, mechanics & otherwise. If they encounter a Knight of the Blue Rose having read about them in the rulebook, the curtain of mystery has already been pulled back on a potential treasure of the unknown, and the joy of slowly unveiling has been diminished.
But consider the effects of the unity-method, where the players have no access to any such catalogue of information. Now, when they encounter someone called, a “Knight of the Blue Rose” for the first time they have no idea who they are meeting, what skills or magic they may possess, or anything about their knightly oaths. Even after exposure to these knights, the PCs will only know what they specifically experienced, which only reveals a small (and imperfect) part of the whole.
The payoff for making this shift in method is both powerful and perpetual because each campaign can have creatures & variations that the players have no knowledge of. GMs can even alter such facts as time passes.
From countless movies & novels, we all know that when facing a vampire that it’s time
to pull out our holy symbols & wooden stakes. There is a werewolf in the forest? “Everyone get your silver weapons!” Part of the terror of such beings is that people do not know their powers, supernatural defenses or Achilles’ Heels (nor even that they have them at all!)
Again, the players in these situations can force their characters to behave as if they don’t know those facts, but that increases the schism of perspectives, working against the goal being endorsed here.
Imagine the difference between the players knowing the mechanics of an Obour (a revolting vampiric creature) because they read it in the rulebook versus them encountering this strange, disgusting horror, having no idea what they are facing.
Under Meta-methods, many (/most) players will have (inevitably) memorized some or all of this creature’s skills and powers. Again, players can restrain themselves, pretending that they don’t know these facts about such creatures, but within the Unity of Perspective method, this reeking, dung-flinging abomination, for which they have no name or classification (outside of their characters’ experiences), is frightening, in addition to its prowess & powers, because of the mystery surrounding it. The players genuinely do not know what it is capable of doing to them or how they can possibly defeat it, and a deeper level of discovery/excitement is generated from not knowing.
For the players, ignorance truly is bliss, for the joy of mystery/discovery is more consistent & all-encompassing. GMs do all they can to maintain this veil of mystery in every area, which requires them to carefully parcel out information to the players as their characters would interpret events.
This is not a new idea, just a rarely discussed/utilized one. As far back as 1975, Sandy Eisen created (what would become) “Eisen’s Vow.” Listen to Che Webster’s podcast episode, Eisen’s Vow. Or see Peterson’s, The Elusive Shift, chapter two.
Opacity on the Supernatural
Consider the experiential difference for the players when they don’t know about the mechanics of supernatural abilities in the game. Again, the mechanics of magic are still very important and are being adjudicated by the GM, but the players’ perception of magic gets unified with their characters. When they encounter monsters or characters, the players can be genuinely surprised when any magical event occurs as opposed to, “Oh, that is a [monster name/class type from page 91], who can do this and that.”
This even applies to players who possess supernatural abilities, themselves. They know they have magic, and that their ‘spells’ do certain things, but they view it from the perspectives of their characters rather than a Meta point of view. “I have a spell that does 5 points of damage unless [more mechanical information from page 66],” is replaced by, “I have a spell that creates a small, fiery dart that hurts enemies.” As minor as that may sound, this change, when applied to all aspects of their magic it helps maintain mystery about the supernatural at large.
Once again, I can say that I understand how strange (& “heretical”) this all seems to those habituated with conventional RPG practices, and that only from experimenting can you observe the value of these changes for the players.
I don’t suggest that groups attempt this with existing characters, especially those already in a long-standing campaign. Instead, try this with brand new characters in a new scenario. View it as experimental & tentative. If your players have the appetite for the “flesh & blood” (Unity of Perspective), observe how this radical change in method helps.
Comments