New Choices & Roleplaying

I've been reading this thread on story-games.com about "Try A Different Way" in the game Archipelago. As I and Graham mention in our posts, there is a game in improv, "New Choice," where someone rings a bell and an improvisor needs to make a new choice during a scene.  To take Graham's example,

"This steak is undercooked."   (dull)
[Bell rings]
"This steak is overdone."        (the opposite, dull)
[Bell rings]
"This isn't a steak at all."       (trying to be creative, dull)
[Bell rings]
"I am a steak-pervert. Bring me seventeen juicy..."   (trying to be creative, dull)
[Bell rings]
"My steak just talked to me."   (something to work with!)
[Bell doesn't ring, scene continues.]

The intent is to practice blurting from the sub-conscious and finding stronger choices. It's not for one player to say to another "That's bad." You can accept the other choices, but they are weak. For awhile I've wondered if this could be used in roleplaying, either through structured statements like used in Polaris and Archipelago or maybe using a resource system like spending "fan mail."

Someone else in the thread suggests that most games he's played have something like "Try A Different Way" when people say,

"Oh! No Wait! I know! How about something more like this?"

Thiis is different than "New Choice."  Sometimes the new idea is a "Yes, and..." that builds upon the player's original choice, e.g., "Yes, the steak is speaking with the voice of your dead lover !" Often, the new idea offered is something entirely different .

This is an area where  improv and roleplaying are different.  In my experience, weak choices can be made in improv and they are accepted. If possible, they are built upon and otherwise may be dropped because they don't go anywhere. The players are acting and putting on a performance. In roleplaying, players aren't always talking in-character and the group's narration of the story can take many forms. Taking the Dust Devils description of Regular Play (outside of Conflicts) as an example:

The Dealer [GM] and the players talk freely among one another, and everyone has the opportunity to make suggestions about what happens, to talk with each other as characters would talk, to add details to the scene, and to create a story together. Players can request scenes or alter the story, even aggressively. ... However, during regular play, the Dealer has final say in what happens.

Generally, players have narrative authority over their characters' actions and dialog, which is something roleplaying has in common with improv. Depending on the game, players can also be called upon to frame scenes or narrate the outcome to conflicts.When the spotlight shifts to player and he or she needs to make a choice, one of the following can happen:

1. The player quickly steps up with a strong choice and everyone is satisfied and play flows smoothly
2. The player quickly steps up with a decent choice and someone suggests a better idea before play moves on. The player can accept or reject it. A discussion might ensue.
3. The player quickly steps up with a weak choice that people see he's clearly not entirely satisfied with and people make suggestions
4. The player doesn't have an idea, maybe after a pause, and asks for suggestions
5. The player is quiet and slow coming up with an idea and people jump in with suggestions

Perhaps because of my experience with improv, #1 is what I always want to happen when called upon. For me, #1 and #2 happen less likely than I'd like. It might be for any number of reasons like if I'm having a bad day (I need to watch out for H.A.L.T.), playing a game that isn't right for my tastes, don't have a handle on my character, or perhaps I'm just in my head and using my intuition (perhaps because I'm anxious and focused more on playing "well" than having fun). I think the last reason is probably the most frequent, which is why I'm interested how well "New Choice" could work in roleplaying. The narrating player can "blurt" and other players can call for a new choice, helping the narrating player without having to throw out ideas of their own.

In my experience, #5 above is the worst for me to do. When I do this too much, what results is 1) the GM or players get in the habit of immediately offering suggestions if I pause and sometimes before I have an opportunity to speak; and maybe 2) my engagement with the other players decreases quite a bit and I end up in the spotlight less often.

So just as in improv, I find it's a bad idea in roleplaying to spend time being quiet, trying to think of a strong choice. At best, if you are playing with friends who give you the space, the play often stalls.

I want to find a away for there to continue to be engagement at the table when #3 and #5 happen and for the game to keep flowing. My current working theory is that, absent a mechanism like "New Choice," I really need to get into the habit of blurting from my intuition.

The best case scenario for #3-#5 is that a strong idea is offered (maybe following an engaged discussion) , the player chooses it, and play continues to flow smoothly. I can get stuck when there are a lot of ideas or time passes and none of the ideas are clearly strong choices, i.e,., "Oh yes! That's right!"

What to do? The best I can think of is to pick the strongest idea, fully commit to it by narrating as colorfully as you can, build upon as much as you can, and keep things moving forward. I believe this is something I just need to practice (like having the courage to blurt).