The Problem With Microscope Scenes
Microscope is great, but as a designer I’m always looking for ways to make my games better. And Microscope has some spots that could use an upgrade.
What’s the problem? Scenes.
I think scenes are important to Microscope, because scenes are when we zoom all the way in and see how the big history impacts individual people. It makes the whole thing more personal and meaningful. You have a better total experience when you include scenes.
But players use Scenes less than other parts of the game. Some groups leave them out entirely. People are missing out on the full experience.
I want to fix that, and this is a design journal peek into how I’m going to do it. First I’ll review the issues that push people away from scenes, then I’ll talk about the improvements I’ve been experimenting with. Solutions you can start using in your Microscope games right now.
Issue #1: Making Big History Is Fun
This first issue makes total sense to me, and I’m not even really against it: It’s that lots of games let you play scenes, but most don’t let you raise up or destroy entire empires with a wave of your hand. So players gravitate to the unique opportunities Microscope gives them and use their turns to make big history in Periods or Events instead.
People wanting to flex their big creation muscles is actually great, but I’d like to tilt the balance a little bit back towards a healthy dose of scenes.
Issue #2: Scenes Take More Time
It’s no surprise that scenes take up more playtime. It naturally takes longer to frame a situation, have everyone pick characters, and role-play together, then it does to just have one player narrate a Period or Event.
On the plus side, everyone at the table gets to participate in a scene, so the time is being shared, but you could argue that in that same amount of time the group could “cover more ground” by sticking to Periods or Events (or dictated scenes): everyone would get to contribute just as much by taking their own turns, and we’d make more big history.
Issue #3: You Have To Switch Styles of Play
Scenes require players to shift to an entirely different style of play. Instead of taking turns and solo narrating, everyone is talking together and being their character on the fly. There’s a whole different set of rules for how to play.
That change of tempo can actually be a lovely break from the rigid structure of the rest of the game, but there is mental overhead learning a whole new system. Game designers take note: every time you require players to switch gears and use a whole different system, you are adding overhead. Make sure it pays off.
Issue #4: Too Much World-Building In Scenes
In addition to role-playing, every player in a scene can invent world-facts as fast as they can talk. Want an earthquake? Just describe feeling the ground tremble. It’s like the world-building power each player has on their turn when they make Periods or Events, except now everyone can do it all at once. Microscope is all about making stuff up, but while carefully moderating everyone’s ability to contribute — scenes have practically no limits.
Making up world stuff is also a distraction from role-playing. You’re trying to explore these character and their decisions, but you’re also busy trying to make up big history. You’re doing two things at once, which makes it harder to really get into the characters.
Issue #5: Fuzzy Answers
Everyone in the scene is supposed to be trying to work towards an answer to the Question. But that can be a very fuzzy process, because none of us has “dibs” on the answer and we all might be moving in different directions. What if two people have strong but contradictory ideas? What if no one has a clear idea? Do we roll for initiative? What? It can be awkward.
The Push mechanic was intended to help resolve disagreements but it’s a very crude fix. Note for designers: providing a veto is not as good as avoiding an undesired behavior in the first place.
…
So those are the issues that I’m seeing. They all interact, and they are not all problems that can be solved. But if I want people to use scenes more (and get the full Microscope experience) I need to make sure they get a satisfying return on the time they invest making and playing them.
The good news is that I have already been testing some changes to improve scenes, hinging on one key idea: Giving scenes back to the people…
Next up: Microscope Scenes 2.0
Leave a reply
[…] The problem with Microscope scenes, kirjoittajana Ben Robbins, ehdottaa mahdollisia syitä sille, miksi Mikroskoopissa ei pelata varsinaisia kohtauksia. https://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/3422/the-problem-with-microscope-scenes/ […]
Personally, I appreciate a game designer’s introspective thoughts about their games. I really like Microscope but this is the biggest drawback for me.
Issue #1: Making Big History Is Fun – So true! This is the unique bit so
it’s everyone’s focus
Issue #2: This is certainly true. This is the one thing that Fiasco solved with the dice scene ending mechanic.
Issue #3: This is shockingly hard for most people. Not me, I have ADHD, but most people get used to the routine of building the periods, etc. and forget about the scenes.
Issue #4: Too Much World-Building In Scenes – I like to limit this to just the player that called for the scene
Issue #5: Fuzzy Answers – the voting function helps with this but really when this happens we tend to pause, go through a summary of the scene, then pick out
the answer. IF there is still no answer, I like to request players continue a scene (perhaps with a time lapse) until we get at least a fuzzy answer.
I’ve felt all 5 of these while playing; it’s nice to see them articulated so clearly and that it’s not just me!
i’m sorry did you say street magic, another great game based on Microscope, still feels like it has most of these issues for its vignettes, and its events also has some of them (as well as suffering from just being too clunky of a procedure, and not summarized clearly and in enough detail imo).
I even started working on my own game in response to some of these feelings. 1-3 I addressed by making gameplay *only* scenes outside initial setup and by enforcing some default setting assumptions (high fantasy, each player has their own permanent immortal character chosen from a list and they each take turns playing an immortal, there are mortal legacies/archetypes to have recurring mortal characters or those influenced by future/previous mortals, and there are lists of scenery, non-player characters, and questions/problems to address).
Issue 4 is also addressed by having more setting assumptions, as well as metacurrencies and “moves” (similar to the weak/strong moves of No Dice, No Masters games).
Issue 5 is something I still struggle with; my patch was to add multiple ending conditions, and anyone can end the scene if at least one is met. Summed up as “when the thing we’re worried about is realized or averted”; “when tensions are high and we want to stew on what could happen next”; or “when we don’t have any more to say about this period for now”.
I’ve ended up with a pretty different game, but it would not exist without Microscope, so I’ll use this space to say thank you, and that I’m looking forward to seeing your solution!
The problem I’ve often encountered is people not wanting to end the scene. Often a question is something that could be answered at any time, even immediately, and this butts up against many of the issues you list.
2, scenes take time to set up, and that means if they end too quickly it doesn’t feel worth it. Especially since I usually leave explaining scenes until it comes up, unlike the ease with which I explain the rest.
3, switching styles of play is big. A longer scene means less frequent switching.
5, answers being fuzzy means that it’s very susceptible to players who are afraid of deciding something that is boring or messes with the fun of other players, and since scenes have everyone involved and are played linearly, they don’t have the safety rails the rest of the game has. I almost always play with newbies, not with an established group, so this almost always comes up.
4, too much worldbuilding exacerbates it by making everything more random. There’s no throughline or story, there’s just stuff that happens, and the answer is supposed to appear in there somewhere. For example, we don’t know if we’ll get a moment of “ah ha, this is clearly the reason the king changes their mind” that feels right, so we just have to rely on the person playing the king deciding to say so.
I’m just reiterating your points, really, but it’s interesting looking at the issues I’ve had through the lens of the issues you’ve described.
I’m really interested to hear more! Scenes have always been the sticking point that kept my Microscope games from really shining.
#3 and #5 are big factors in my experience, even though I’m always eager for our games to drill down to that personal level. On top of the uncertainty about playing toward an answer, I’ve found folks reluctant to curate or frame their scenes with a heavy hand, even though that usually pushes us into more fruitful territory.
The most success I’ve had was the last time I returned to Microscope, and was able to pull in techniques I’d picked up in other GM-less games. Having the right tools to proactively get at the “good stuff” makes a big difference.
@Austin: “On top of the uncertainty about playing toward an answer, I’ve found folks reluctant to curate or frame their scenes with a heavy hand” I thiiiiink the changes I’ve been working on will help with that.
Oh, this is interesting. As someone who’s mostly done Microscope pbp, I had to come up with some house rules to keep the game moving (since pbp games that stall tend to die), and scenes were the biggest stumbling block. Best hack I found was only allowing dictated scenes, but I knew we were missing out. Will be very curious to see if New Scenes help with that at all.
@Pilcrow: I’m not that versed in pbp, so I’m not sure how pbp scenes even work with other games. I suspect that no matter what, a pbp scene will need a different structure than a real time scene. Dictated scenes is a legit option, though not as juicy (I think).
[Issue #3: You Have To Switch Styles of Play] is by far the biggest reason I don’t want to choose “scene”. Or at least the biggest reason my brain makes available to conscious introspection.
@Sarah: Absolutely. And the other issues that make scenes more complicated feed into that.
Interesting thoughts. In the five Microscope games I’ve been in (all of them with the same group, close friends) I’ve never once seen a need to use the Push mechanic. I’d be curious as to how other groups used it.
@Chris: Not a lot, I’d expect. It was never great, and it was always intended as a “in case of emergency, break glass” kind of mechanic. And spoiler, with the changes I’m making it will go away entirely.