Creation of Narrative in Tabletop Role-Playing Games - Jennifer Grouling Cover [14]
2. You can seek out the Druids, find the Crimson Flame Mushroom [a powerful magical item], and take it to Alcazar. Turn to page 21
[Lowery, 1983, p. 10].
The book offers similar choices throughout, some of which lead the reader to a happy ending, some of which do not. For example, if the reader follows the path that leads to page 188, she ends up being chased by a ghost: “You run and scream and hope that someone will hear you—hope that this is not ... THE END” (Lowery, 1983, p. 118).
Katz (2004) notes that these books came from a type of writing called “tree literature.” Similarly, in her chapter titled “The Structures of Interactive Narrativity,” Ryan (2003) maps out the tree structure to represent the form of the Choose Your Own Adventure book. This structure starts from a common point but branches out to multiple nodes. As Ryan (2003) points out, in order to avoid an unmanageable number of pathways, paths often merge (p. 249). Multiple endings are possible and the story continues to branch out until one of these endings is reached.
In order to get a better idea of the way interactivity is structured in gamebooks, I have mapped out the choices in The Spell of the Winter Wizard starting from one of the initial choices listed above. Figure 1 gives a more specific representation of the narrative structure of an example gamebook. My diagram comes very close to Ryan’s (2003) generic tree diagram. However, a couple of interesting patterns come to light. As Ryan noted, certain pages are used multiple times, accessed through a variety of paths. I call these pages “nodes.” When we look closely at these nodes, we find that there are, perhaps, far fewer paths than it initially seems. There are also pages that either redirect to a single page only or that ask the reader to turn back to the previous page and make another choice. This feature was not accounted for in Ryan’s tree model. Thus, “real” choices are even more limited. For example, at one point your character meets an alchemist who offers to help in your quest. From the passage that begins on p. 97, it looks like the reader has three choices:
1. You ask the alchemist to make a potion for you and take it directly to Warzen’s Castle. Turn to page 77.
2. You can have the alchemist make you disappear, then reappear with Cornelius in the Ice Cavern. Turn to page 35.
3. Or you can thank the alchemist for his offer but refuse his services. Turn to page 43
[Lowery, 1983, p. 101].
If the reader chooses to ask the alchemist for a potion and turns to p. 77, the next choice involves either trying that potion or leaving the alchemist. If you choose to try the potion, you turn into a cockroach and reach the unsatisfying ending on pp. 95–96. If you leave, you go to p. 43, the same node you would have reached had you rejected the potion in the first place. The potion, a supposed remedy, never shows up in the story again. Thus, the section of text on p. 77 proves to be a diversion from one carefully steered plot and not actually a new plot. The only real alternative to this line is p. 35, the choice to disappear and reappear in the Ice Cavern. This choice leads to the node on p. 28, which is also reached from the decision point prior to this one. As seen in figure 1, the only difference in how page 28 is reached is whether the character takes a magic potion or blows a magic whistle to reach it. Thus, a more limited number of options are really available from those that initially appear. If the story continues “successfully”—that is to a satisfactory rather than unsatisfactory ending—the reader must progress either through page 43 or 28.
One way that the text steers the reader toward these nodes is through dead ends. These dead ends are not unsatisfactory endings but instead direct the reader to return to a previous choice. The text from p. 147 is one of several dead ends. This section concludes thusly: “You have a split second to make another choice. Please