While driving around yesterday, the wife and I began a discussion on this Spring’s Convergence game possibilities and difficulties surrounding certain decisions. As a quick aside, I often chat with her about thoughts I have for games and she graciously doesn’t give me too many strange looks; for that I’m grateful. Basically I pointed out that I was waffling between setting the Call of Cthulhu game in the present era or to go with the tried and true method of putting it in the 1920s. Each has benefits and I was trying to break a stalemate in my mind.

In the past I might have tossed out the general question to the gaming public, but my players read this blog and finding my posts on Yog-Sothoth.com is easy enough. I’d rather not tip my hand on what the scenario will be for Spring, as CoC and horror in general aren’t served well when the ending is easily discovered.

I should also point out that while I’m very knowledgeable of CoC from a theoretical standpoint, to date, I’ve never been a Keeper (unless you count the Convergence game You’re all going to Die as a CoC-ish game.) Nor have any of the prospective players played CoC as far as I can discern… so we’ll be heading into uncharted territory together.

I figured that it would be easier to get “buy-in” from the players if the game was run in a modern setting. We already all know the framework of the world which allows for only having to bring players up to speed on the game mechanics. Short-circuiting world discovery bodes well for a Convergence style game. 

However, much to my surprise, my wife, without a moment of hesitation,  promptly informed me that I should go 1920s. Her answer encompassed a variety of reasons, but the one that has an interesting cross-genre effect was this (paraphrased of course):

It is easier to suspend disbelief quickly, thereby easing immersion when the frame of reference of the player is such that player information doesn’t leak into the reference of, or interfere with, their character’s interaction in the game.

That’s an intriguing idea… and in direct opposition to my long held beliefs. I’ve been squarely in the camp that says if you want to raise the possibility of immediate and long standing immersion, you should find ways of getting players to internalize parts of the game easier by making those parts more compatile with the player, not necessarily the character. But I’m beginning to think she has the right of it.

Her counter argument is that if the player is constantly interjecting themselves in the game, finding it hard to separate themselves or their personal knowledge from the game, then their immersion will be hampered by handicapping their personal ability to suspend disbelief. In short she pointed out that it’s easier to immerse yourself in a game that purports to fantasy elements (thereby requiring a suspension of disbelief) so long as you aren’t “playing yourself” and bringing along your own ability to separate reality from fantasy. Play yourself and disbelief is immediately impacted by reality… even if the reality of the game is in direct opposition to the reality of the real world. Modern games are doubly impacted by this by constantly placing the frame of reference in the player’s field of view, not just their character’s.

Of course this easily explains the case for when the reality of the game is fantastic, or requires disbelief. But looking deeper at it also helps to explain why modern games are difficult to run for a GM. In my experience, players are constantly dragging in knowledge their character can’t possibly know, but likely have roots in the player’s experiences, not the character. In fact, I’ve gone so far as to require certain players spend level-up points (or the equivalent) to buy skills they keep bringing into the game. That’s not a shot at any player; they’re not trying to gain an edge any more than they would in any other game, they’re experiencing a failure implicit in the nature of the setting by not being able to shift frame of reference.

In some regard, look at Frame of Reference and Suspension of Disbelief as conflicting sides of a balance. Shift Reference to the player and you diminish disbelief suspension. In contrast, enabling disbelief suspension requires the reference focus of the player to take a back seat to that of the character they portray. In effect, you can’t eat your cake and have it too.

So the Spring Convergence Call of Cthulhu game will be set in the 1920s. The fantastic nature and requirement to shift reference dictate that it won’t hold the same immersive qualities if I put it in modern times without having the players play themselves. And playing themselves would hamper immersion by short-circuiting suspension of disbelief.

Up to 1d6-1 Related posts:

1. You can’t do that in a RPG… at least not anymore
2. You’re all going to die – Take 2
3. March Trip
4. Setting the tone of the game
5. Here’s something I want to try

Tags: Call of Cthulhu, Convergence, horror, rpg, Setting