Praise for Hamlet’s Hit Points

A critical hit! Whether you approach Hamlet’s Hit Points as a writer, as a

critic, as a film buff, or as a gamer, you’ll find that Robin Laws is there ahead
of you, pointing the way. An unparalleled game designer and best-of-breed
game master, Robin reminds us that narrative is worth it: worth creating,
worth studying, and worth nurturing in any format, with or without dice.

—Kenneth Hite
Author, Tour de Lovecraft

In skilled hands, roleplaying games are powerful lenses through which we can
see our world and our lives in fresh ways. Robin Laws applies a lens to the
lens, zooming in with Hubble-like intensity to expose the rich relationship
between interactive stories and their participants.

—John Scott Tynes

Game Designer, Puppetland and Unknown Armies

Robin Laws cannot see a game-box without thinking outside it.

—James Wallis
Also from Gameplaywright Press:

Things We Think About Games

by Will Hindmarch & Jeff Tidball

The Bones: Us and Our Dice

edited by Will Hindmarch
Hamlet’s Hit
Points
What Three Classic Narratives
Tell Us About
Roleplaying Games

Robin D. Laws
with Illustrations by Craig S. Grant

Gameplaywright Press
 A Note About This PDF’s Formatting
This PDF edition of Hamlet’s Hit Points is formatted—and thus,
paginated—differently from the book’s print edition. Specifically,
in the three story analyses here, beat maps that graphically depict
several beats in succession have been eliminated in favor of single
icon-and-arrow combinations per beat. We’ve done this because
on many PDF readers viewing an entire two-page spread at once
is impractical, but to do so is necessary to make easy sense of the
print edition’s multi-beat maps. However, because you may want
to have it, a separate PDF that is identical to the print version, for-
matted in spreads rather than single pages in order to preserve the
print edition’s exact appearance, has been made available in parallel
with this version. In addition, a third PDF presents all of each story’s
beats as single, massive, one-page maps.
If you acquired this PDF from a legitimate source, all three files
should have been provided as a bundle. If you did not receive all
three PDFs, please contact [email protected] or your
PDF’s vendor.

Text © 2010 Robin D. Laws

Illustrations © 2010 Craig S. Grant
Design © 2010 Gameplaywright LLP

The icons that identify the beat types described in Hamlet’s Hit Points have been released under a
Creative Commons license. We hope you’ll use them to create beat maps of your own. For more
information and to download these graphics, visit gameplaywright.net/hamlets-hit-points.

A thousand thanks to Jason L Blair, Seth Johnson, Joshua Rensch, Melissa Rensch, Josh Roby,
and Karen Twelves for their help with our crowdsourced eleventh-hour proofreading.

Gameplaywright Press
www.gameplaywright.net
2191 Rosewood Lane South
Roseville, Minnesota, 55113
United States of America

This PDF edition of Hamlet’s Hit Points was prepared in August, 2010. It does not have an ISBN.
The print edition of Hamlet’s Hit Points is ISBN-13: 978-0-9818840-2-8 (ISBN-10: 0-9818840-2-4).

Cover design by Will Hindmarch

Book design by Jeff Tidball

Set in Helvetica Neue and Garamond Premier Pro
 Table of Contents
Front Cover. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

How To Pretend You’ve Read This Book. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Surprised By Story. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Beat Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Hamlet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Dr. No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Casablanca. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

Applying the System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178

About the Author. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184

Rear Cover. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

 How to PretenD You’ve Read This Book | 7

How To Pretend
You’ve Read This Book
Hamlet’s Hit Points creates a system for analyzing stories tuned to
the needs of roleplaying gamers. As such it assumes a basic famil-
iarity with roleplaying terms and techniques.
With its system of beat analysis, you can track a narrative’s
moment-to-moment shifts in emotional momentum. Beat analysis
builds itself around the following very basic fact:
Stories engage our attention by constantly modulating our emo-
tional responses.
As observations go, this one is glaringly obvious, once stated.
Yet we in the roleplaying community have paid it surprisingly little
heed over the nearly forty years of our form’s existence.
The opening essay, “Surprised By Story,” finds a historical ex-
planation for our collective neglect of narrative fundamentals.
The “Beat Analysis” section lays out the building blocks of our
story breakdown system. It divides stories into a series of separate
moments, or beats. Beats fall into nine categories: two primary types
and seven less common ones. Each beat resolves in a way that alters
or reinforces the audience’s responses. Most move us either toward
hope or fear, with the odd beat resolving ambiguously.
 How to PretenD You’ve Read This Book | 8

The bulk of the book is given over to full-length analyses of

three classic narratives. It applies the beat analysis system to learn
how William Shakespeare, in Hamlet, and the filmmakers behind Dr.
No and Casablanca modulate our responses. Notes throughout ex-
amine ways to import the techniques found in these works into our
GMing and playing.
Finally, we discuss ways to use the beat system to analyze:

• Other existing narratives, with an eye toward internalizing

storytelling technique, which strengthens your instincts as an
improviser when GMing or playing.
• Your planned adventures and scenarios, to increase player en-
gagement with them.
• Game sessions in retrospect, to look for things to improve
next time.
• Your own non-RPG stories, to improve them during the outlin-
ing and/or revision phases.

If you walk away from reading this book thinking, “Well, that seemed
obvious, now that I think of it,” and your gaming subtly improves as
a result, it has done its job.
 Surprised By Story | 9

Surprised By Story
When Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax entered into the collaboration that led
to Dungeons & Dragons, and hence what we now call the tabletop roleplaying
game, they weren’t trying to invent a new story form. They set out to create a
new variant of the war games they both loved, in which the basic unit of play
would not be a military platoon, vehicle, or squadron, but an imaginary indi-
vidual. Precursors of their experiment included Dave Megarry’s board game
Dungeon and an unpublished game by Arneson in which police officers pur-
sued fleeing criminals across the highway system of a conveniently squarish-
shaped state. Both of these featured identification with a solitary fictional
character, but neither had quite evolved into the RPG as we know it.
The missing ingredient was persistence—the idea that the single charac-
ter you played and identified with during the game retained a history from
one scenario to the next. Dave and Gary didn’t call this persistence; they called
it the experience point. By allowing players to follow a character through a
series of incidents, in which he gained capabilities—not to mention useful
gear—along the way, they let a mysterious element sneak into their creation
through a back door. (Doubtless this was a secret door, which elves had a bet-
ter chance of spotting.)
Certainly, this infiltrating narrative seemed rudimentary at first: a chron-
icle of rooms explored, creatures slain, and treasures looted. But a simple
story is still a story, and soon the other telltale techniques of narrative began
to creep in as well. These ranged from supporting characters the heroes in-
teracted with and didn’t necessarily fight, to details of setting and culture, to
hints of an overall shape, or structure. The game concept of levels, in which
the heroes would over time fight progressively tougher threats, paralleled the
rising stakes of Western dramatic narrative. Some players found it appealing
to develop the inner lives of their characters. This in turn led to the idea that
PCs might sometimes disregard their most advantageous choices in straight-
up game terms in accordance with their emotional impulses. This innova-
 Surprised By Story | 10

tion led to the first of many aesthetic splits within the suddenly burgeoning
RPG community, between the efficient strategists and those more interested
in exploring their characters. It caused some discomfort even to Gary, who, in
one of his occasional excursions into controversy, used his Dragon magazine
column to decry the growing influence of play-acting on the game he had co-
created and popularized.
As story continued to seep in unbidden through the edifice of armor
classes and magic item tables, dissatisfied tinkerers responded to D&D with
rules sets of their own. An early wave of designs sought, in keeping with the
hobby’s wargaming roots, to simulate reality less abstractly, by considering
more of the factors influencing combat outcomes. Designers tackled new
genres, from space opera to superheroes. Later waves confronted the rigid
limits of early class-based character creation by creating discrete skills and,
later, build point systems. As they did so, they added to the arsenal of tools
GMs could use to evoke narrative forms. RuneQuest, to name one of many ex-
amples, introduced a system of cults that made your character class your ide-
ology, providing you with a personality stereotype and hooking you into the
myths of its setting, the world of Glorantha. Champions encouraged players
to create secondary characters around a player character, from enemies to de-
pendents, by treating them as disadvantages that would earn additional build
points. Call Of Cthulhu, by evoking the structure of the horror mystery, cre-
ated an explicitly narrative framework for its characters to navigate through.
It also measured its characters’ emotional states by assigning a Sanity statistic,
which was then placed in constant jeopardy. The James Bond game likewise
attempted to emulate the tropes and tricks of Ian Fleming’s novels and the
long-running movie series they spawned.
Since then, the constituency of players, designers and GMs focused on
the game’s narrative values has continued to grow. A move in the mid-90s
toward radically simpler rules sets, typified by Jonathan Tweet’s Over the
Edge1, helped story-focused GMs and players situationally seize control of
the narrative from the dictates of tightly deterministic rules resolution. Story
concerns dominate the designs of today’s now firmly-established indie scene,
as inspired by seminal games such as My Life with Master and Dogs in the
Vineyard.
Simultaneously with these later waves of rules development, schools of
criticism grew up to define and explain the various divergent strains of RPG

1: Full disclosure: The author contributed material to Over the Edge and its product line—another
confirmation of the field’s blurred lines between the roles of author, designer, participant and critic.
 Surprised By Story | 11

practice. Following the hybrid nature of the form, in which participants serve
as both creators and audience, these critics were not outside observers, but
participants. These systems most notably included the set of terms defined
by members of the USENET newsgroup rec.games.frp.advocacy and Ron
Edwards’ Gamist-Narrativist-Simulationist trinity. These putatively critical
inquiries often served as manifestos, subtly or otherwise arguing for the supe-
riority of their promulgators’ preferred play styles. More importantly for the
purposes of this discussion, they tended to develop their approaches from
scratch, without reference to other story forms and the array of techniques as-
sociated with them. The same can be said of many indie-style designs, whose
attempts to foster narrative play sometimes seem abstrusely detached from
the principles of story creation as used by practitioners in the fields they’re
seeking to emulate.
This makes historical sense, given narrative’s secret door approach into
our form. Collectively, we designers, players, and GMs have yet to step back
and study the fundamentals of western story technique as developed since
prehistory (myth and the epic poem), Greek antiquity (theater as we know
it), the 1700s (modern fiction), or the 20th century (film, comics, radio,
television).
This book, then, is an initial step toward developing a grounding in story
techniques of relevance to roleplayers. It breaks down three classic narratives
according to their story beats, in search of principles and examples we can
apply to our storymaking process at the gaming table2.
It would be mightily convenient for this purpose if there existed a ready-
made mode of narrative analysis we could take off the shelf, sprinkle a few
RPG observations onto, and call it a day. Instead, we’ll have to descend to the
lab to create a hybrid entity, like Gygaxian wizards taking a deer and an eagle
and turning it into a peryton.
From the elementary literary analysis you probably learned in secondary
school, we can take certain fundamental terms. Of greatest use are those con-
cerning the roles characters play in the story, such as protagonist, antagonist,
foil, and so on. Also of some use are terms for the components of story struc-
ture: introduction, rising action, climax, and denouement.
Higher-level literary criticism is of less direct use here. It tends to focus

2: At the risk of committing a vile act of neologism, I use the term storymaking to emphasize the col-
laborative nature of the process. Storytelling sounds nicer but carries the connotation of a one-way flow
of creativity from a privileged, active GM to a subordinate, passive group of players. It has also been
hijacked by writers who prefer to shirk the requirements of coherence and thematic unity by saying
“I’m just a storyteller, man.” These people are why I stopped wearing a fedora.
 Surprised By Story | 12

on prose style, and also on theme, including political content, historical con-
text, and gender roles. This is not to say that these components of fiction are
unworthy of study, just that they have little to tell us about the nitty-gritty of
roleplaying technique.
Theater and film, including off-shoots like radio and TV drama, serve as
our strongest models for the RPG experience. Their emphasis on dialogue
and external action makes their techniques ripest for our looting purposes.
However, texts for playwrights and screenwriters don’t necessarily focus on
our issues. Screenwriting manuals tend to focus on structure, following the
granddaddy of the form, Syd Field’s Screenplay.
The improvised, collaborative nature of the experience frees us from the
tyranny of structure. We not only forgive messiness, we expect and demand
it. Without it, players fear a loss of control to an overbearing uber-narrator. If,
as GM, you can occasionally build on a previous moment in an unexpected
way, cut out a few boring bits, and have something big and exciting happen
near the end of a session, you seem like a genius of structure.
With loose structure being the norm, we can instead turn our attention to
the moment-to-moment transitions inside a play, film, or television episode.
One tends to find it codified not from the writer’s point of view, but from
the actor’s. As interpreters of dramatic material, actors learn to break scenes
down into beats, marking shifts in tactic and reaction. Actorly beats may shift
on a per-sentence basis, or even by sentence clause or fragment. Fortunately,
we can zoom out further than that, or it would take the entire book just to
analyze the bedroom scene between Hamlet and Gertrude. Nonetheless, we
can adapt this method of analysis to find the basic direction of interaction
scenes, including shifts that mark changes of beat within the same scene.
These are drawn in part from the Michael Shurtleff acting text Audition.
If screenwriters are supposed to wrack their brains over structure, film
editing requires a focus on the internal rhythm of each scene, in addition
to the broad strokes of overall pacing. The terms petitioner and granter are
borrowed from legendary film editor Walter Murch, as they appear in the
Michael Ondaatje interview book, The Conversations.
 Surprised By Story | 13

Exceptions That Test the Rule

In any art, including the narrative forms, rules are made to be bro-
ken. Story construction is alchemy, not science. The techniques
identified here aren’t rules to be obeyed so much as tricks that have
been proven to work over time. They’ve reliably delivered, from
Shakespeare’s day to ours. We can use them to our benefit if we
learn to internalize them and deploy them instinctively. That said,
some of the most memorable and resonant moments of fiction, the-
ater, or film come when the creators violate, or seem to temporarily
suspend, the so-called “rules.”
The more conventional or classical a narrative, the more readily
beat analysis can be used to understand it. Samuel Beckett’s Wait-
ing For Godot gains its power from its refusal to resolve or develop.
Non-narrative novels, like William S. Burroughs’ works from his
cut-ups period, or the surrealist reverie of Giorgio de Chirico’s Heb-
domeros, may convey emotional ups and downs without recogniz-
able beats.
Poorly constructed works break the model by failing to satisfy
the audience. A work that continually rings the same emotional
note wears on all but the most tolerant viewer. However, it must be
acknowledged that some works employing extremely flat and/or re-
petitive rhythms wring reliable praise from a small but devoted band
of critics and viewers. However, as few of you are planning to run
roleplaying campaigns based on the films of Bela Tarr or Zhang Ke-
Jia, we can make intellectual acknowledgment of the exception and
move on.
 Beat Analysis | 14

Beat Analysis
What follows is not the only or ultimate way to analyze narrative3. It does,
however, provide us a basic series of reference points we can use when looking
at particular stories and how their scenes are constructed and connected.
We’re going to look at beats as consisting of two components: types and
resolutions.
The type tells you what purpose the beat performs in the narrative. Beats
may perform multiple functions, particularly during key moments.
The resolution marks the emotional state engendered in the audience by
the beat as it closes. It may occasionally be ambiguous—we might register a
mix of elation and fear over an action beat, or contradictory feelings toward
our hero after a dramatic beat.

Beat Types

Procedural
A procedural beat brings into play a protagonist’s external
or practical goal. It either moves him closer to that goal,
fulfilling our hopes, or moves him further away from it,
realizing our fears. During a procedural beat the hero, or
others under his protection, are often in jeopardy, directly or indirectly. If
not, the hero is at some risk of a setback that would take him further from his
goal. For this reason procedural beats generally evoke a feeling of suspense,
which may be intense or subtle, depending on the stakes in play.
In a procedural beat, verbal conflicts are resolved through negotiation,
threats, or by reference to other external or tactical considerations. One par-

3: Nor does an exploration of narrative technique constitute the only avenue worth exploring as we
look for ways to make our games more fun and engaging.
 Beat Analysis | 15

ty, the petitioner, seeks a practical consideration from the other, the granter.
Once gained, the petitioner is able to move forward in the narrative in pursuit
of a goal, usually the procedural goal. The petitioner often gains information
but might also get money, a needed piece of equipment, access to a location,
or a promise of non-interference from the granter.

• Obi-Wan Kenobi uses the Force to convince the stormtroopers that

these aren’t the droids they’re looking for. (Star Wars.)
• Dr. Willett intones the spell that reduces the possessed body of
Charles Dexter Ward to dust. (“The Case of Charles Dexter Ward.”)
• Marion Ravenwood drinks the roughneck patrons of her Nepalese
bar under the table. (Raiders of the Lost Ark.)

Dramatic
A dramatic beat invests us in the protagonist’s inner goals.
To achieve them he must engage in negotiation with others
to whom he maintains some sort of emotional connection.
He may petition them for expressions of feeling, or thwart
their efforts to gain the same from him. We hope that the beat moves him
closer to a positive inner transformation and fear that it might move him
toward a negative transformation.
Conflicts in dramatic beats are by definition verbal. One party, the peti-
tioner, seeks an emotional concession from the other, the granter. Common
concessions include gestures of affection, reassurance, or submission. Often
the petitioner seeks to inflict emotional injury on the granter. In more com-
plex dramatic beats both participants may act as both petitioner and granter,
each seeking to wring an emotional concession from the other.

• Spock Prime establishes himself as mentor to his younger, alternate-

universe self. (Star Trek, 2009.)
• Seeking a connection to the man he believes to be his brother, Daniel
Plainview confesses that he has competition in him, and wants no
one else to succeed. (There Will Be Blood.)
• Roma humiliates Williamson after the latter’s blunder costs him a
real estate deal. (Glengarry Glen Ross.)

Narratives typically exist on a continuum between the procedural and

dramatic, rather than being exclusively one or the other. Hamlet sits in the
 Beat Analysis | 16

middle of the continuum. Dr. No is primarily procedural, introducing a few

dramatic beats during one sequence and then folding them back into its
procedural narrative. Casablanca is primarily dramatic, with a procedural
subplot featuring a secondary character. Other pieces of less interest to the
gamer tribe are exclusively dramatic: examples include Death of a Salesman,
The Graduate, and Bright Star.
Moments of drama in a primarily procedural narrative may be left unre-
solved. Typically we refer to such sequences as “character development.” They
intensify our identification with the protagonist, who seems more fully hu-
man due to these moments, even if they never really go anywhere.

Together, the procedural and the dramatic beats comprise the elementary
building blocks of narrative. Almost all beats in a story will be one or the
other. The following special beat types occur less frequently.

Commentary
A beat in which the protagonist’s movement toward or
away from his goal is momentarily suspended while the
author underlines the story’s thematic elements. Com-
mentary sequences often make use of bystander or ob-
server characters who function as a Greek chorus. Shake-
speare’s clowns may provide commentary on the action. Adroit storytellers
use this device sparingly; it stops the action and easily becomes heavy-handed.
Ideally, a story’s theme is handled through beats which are also accomplish-
ing something else, so that it is seamlessly interwoven with the rest of the
narrative.

• Noting Romeo’s lovestruck state, Mercutio goes off on a flight of po-

etic fancy, comparing him to a man bewitched by fairies. His speech
metaphorically reinforces the suggestion, pervasive throughout the
play, that the eventual sacrifice of the young lovers has been decreed
by destiny. (Romeo and Juliet.)
• In his authorial voice, Charles Dickens asserts that the people of 1785
saw their era in contradictory terms—as both the best and worst of
times—and were thus not much different than people at any other
time. (A Tale of Two Cities.)
• The Stranger (Sam Elliott) addresses the camera to take comfort in
the fact that the Dude abides. (The Big Lebowski.)
 Beat Analysis | 17

Anticipation
Beats of this type create an expectation of coming proce-
dural success, which we look forward to with pleasure. The
reverse of a beat of jeopardy or suspense, this foreshadows a
success or gratification to come. The beat in which the hero
finally suits up and readies himself for a long-delayed battle provides a classic
anticipation beat. We are not worrying for the hero, but vicariously reveling
in his promised victory.

• Popeye has eaten his spinach. (Any given episode of Popeye.)

• Bruce Banner has transformed into the Hulk. (Any given issue of The
Incredible Hulk.)
• The blast doors whoosh up to reveal Ripley in the power loader.
(Aliens.)

Gratification
A gratification beat allows us a positive emotional mo-
ment that floats free from the main narrative. They often
appear as rest breaks between major sequences. A musical
interlude often acts as a gratification beat (unless it also ad-
vances the story, as it frequently does in the musical genre). In stories drawing
on a rich ongoing continuity, a beat that tips the hat to fans with an aside ac-
knowledging their mastery of its trivia works as a gratification. Other in-jokes
and winks at the audience work the same way.

• Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) makes a crack about how ridiculous he

and the other X-Men would look if they all wore spandex. (X-Men.)
• Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Bogart) goes to a party to talk to Vivian
Rutledge (Lauren Bacall), where he finds her giving an impromptu per-
formance of the song “Her Tears Flowed Like Wine.” (The Big Sleep.)
• Indulging his love of racing, George Lucas extends a racing sequence
featuring young Anakin Skywalker long after it has served its infor-
mative purpose by establishing the kid’s vehicle-wrangling chops.
(The Phantom Menace.)

Because they situate themselves outside the story, gratification beats risk
breaking the fictional illusion and must be doled out sparingly. When a mov-
 Beat Analysis | 18

ie or TV show is too heavily larded with these moments, you may be looking
at the result of interference from producers and executives. They’ve trained
themselves to see stories as connective tissues fusing together various catego-
ries of gratification. This is why so many would-be blockbusters play more like
hodge-podges of disparate stimuli than satisfyingly integrated narratives.

Bringdown
A mood-setting beat in which we experience a negative
emotional moment that floats free from the main narra-
tive. This may be a moment of pathetic fallacy, in which the
hero’s environment reinforces and comments on his unfor-
tunate situation. Stock bringdowns include the moment when the hero gets
splashed by a passing truck after being dumped by his girlfriend. Moments of
creepy atmosphere in horror stories might also function as bringdowns.

• The Dude’s cell phone continues to ring in the bowling alley after his
failure to deliver the ransom money. (The Big Lebowski.)
• Jerry Lundegaard’s car, alone in a desolate parking lot, is completely
iced over after his father-in-law bars him from a promising business
deal. (Fargo.)
• After losing his straight job, Jack Foley’s short-lived return to crime
ends with his arrest in a car that won’t start. (Out of Sight.)

Pipe
A beat that surreptitiously provides us with information
we’ll need later, without tipping the audience to its impor-
tance. The twin dangers of pipe-laying beats are complex-
ity and predictability. The teller must avoid providing so
much supporting information that the story becomes confusing, and must
disguise it so that the audience doesn’t spot the associated reveal (see below)
ahead of time. The term comes from screenwriting parlance and compares
exposition to plumbing: you need it for your house to work properly, but you
don’t want to see it.

• None of the adults really interact with Dr. Crowe (Bruce Willis).
(The Sixth Sense.)
• From the first frames of Shutter Island, skewed angles and a sound-
 Beat Analysis | 19

track loaded with distressing 20th century classical music sublimi-

nally hint to us that something’s not right here.
• Danny Ocean and crew build a duplicate of the vault they’re plan-
ning to rob. (Ocean’s Eleven, 2001.)

Question
A question beat introduces a point of curiosity we want to
see satisfied. Often it occurs as a protagonist seeks infor-
mation in pursuit of a procedural goal. Question beats are
the basic narrative currency of the mystery genre and its
various offshoots. While standard procedural beats make us wonder what is
going to happen next, question beats tend to engage our curiosity about what
has already happened, but has not been made clear to us. A question generally
resolves as a down beat (see “Resolutions: The Hope/Fear Cycle”); the lack of
information poses an obstacle to the hero and tantalizes the audience.

• The crew of the Nostromo receives a distress call. (Alien.)

• A client, Miss Morstan, presents Holmes with a curious letter she
received, promising her the vengeance she deserves as a wronged
woman, if she keeps an appointment with the unknown writer later
that night. (“The Sign of Four.”)
• J.J. Gittes finds Mulwray, drowned during a drought. (Chinatown.)

Reveal
A reveal provides the information we were made to desire
in a previous question beat, or surprises us with new infor-
mation. In the latter case it might come out of the blue, or
have been set up with one or more pipe beats laying the
groundwork for the surprise. We tend to be more engaged by exposition when
it has been teased to us by a prior question, or can clearly see its impact on our
hopes and fears. Reveals are likely to resolve as upward beats, especially where
they satisfy a prior question that has been nagging at the audience since it was
posed. The information provided, however, might indicate greater jeopardy
or challenge for the hero, in which case it resolves as a down beat.

• Dr. Crowe is a ghost, perceived only by the kid who sees dead people.
(The Sixth Sense.)
 Beat Analysis | 20

• Ocean’s gang built the vault to create a false video feed to the casino
security system. (Ocean’s Eleven, 2001.)
• Norman’s mother is a mummified corpse in the basement. (Psycho.)

Pipe, questions and reveals interrelate; we can collectively refer to them as

informational beats.
Most narratives resolve from disorder to order.
Their first acts may present an orderly status quo which is then disrupted.
Casablanca does this, as we’ll see: our protagonist is imperturbable until his
personal order is disrupted by the return of his former lover.
Alternately, stories may start as the eruption of disorder occurs, as Ham-
let and Dr. No do.
Stories typically add complications, increasing disorder until a very dis-
orderly climactic event occurs. It introduces a conclusive change and a new
equilibrium.
In drama as in life, a question disrupts order, and its answer restores it.

Question/Reveal:
Litfic’s Secret Weapon
Many contemporary literary novels rely heavily on the question/
reveal duality as a source of narrative suspense. Often fracturing
their narratives chronologically, they keep the reader engaged by
repeatedly hinting at major plot points before revealing them in their
entirety. This device allows writers working in the literary tradition
to downplay or ignore physical jeopardy, and to present character
interactions without constantly resorting to the high-pressure stakes
of dramatic scene construction. For examples of this technique in
action, see Michael Ondaatje’s The English Patient, Robertson Da-
vies’ Fifth Business, or John Irving’s A Prayer For Owen Meany.

Resolutions: The Hope/Fear Cycle

We like to think of ourselves as having a wide range of emotions—well, except
for those of us who would rather be Mr. Spock—but when it comes to stories,
 Beat Analysis | 21

two emotions rule and contain all the others. At any given point in a story, we
hope that the situation at hand will resolve favorably for the character we iden-
tify with, and fear that it won’t. The manipulation of these opposed impulses
is the key to narrative engagement. If we don’t either hope or fear for the char-
acters, we don’t care what’s going on, and the game is lost. Both responses are
easily exhaustible—too much hope and we become complacent and bored. Too
much fear and we surrender to despair and disengage. The rapid yet unpredict-
able alternation of hope and fear keeps us on the edge of our seats.
When the gaming stories we make together are unsatisfactory, it may be
because we aren’t ringing the emotional changes often enough.
As we analyze our three narratives, we’ll be constructing maps showing their
oscillations between hope and fear. All beats resolve forward in experiential time,
toward the next moment in the story. Chronologically, a beat in the present may
connect to a moment during a flashback (as it does in beat 63 of Casablanca), but
it always moves us forward into our engagement with the narrative. (We’re not
concerning ourselves here with the possible branch points you get in a roleplaying
story before it unfolds, just with what we see before us on the page or the screen,
or what is described as happening at the gaming table.)
In other words, we represent resolutions with arrows, which can only
point to the right.
The top of the map represents hope. The bottom represents fear. Reso-
lutions that tend toward hope point up. Those that tend toward fear point
down. Beats that don’t engage us either way warrant lateral arrows, pointing
straight to the right. In a compelling story, lateral moves occur infrequently.
For added detail, the arrows indicate which
of the beat categories they belong to. They are
either procedural, dramatic, or free-floating.
In the latter case, they show no evident con-
nection to either of the main types. For obvi- Procedural, dramatic, and free-
floating (upward) arrows.
ous reasons, free-floating arrows are rare. These
allow you to tell what kind of story you’re analyzing—a procedural (which
includes most genres appearing in RPGs) or a drama, and what mix of each
you’re dealing with.
Procedural and dramatic beats may move us toward hope or fear. Some sec-
ondary beats typically resolve in particular ways. Gratifications always point up;
bringdowns, as the name suggests, move us down. Questions tend to point down,
because lack of information irritates us, whereas reveals often point up, because
having information satisfies us. This isn’t an ironclad rule, though: sometimes
we’re afraid to get information, or lose hope when we learn something negative.
 Beat Analysis | 22

The movement between hope and fear is less a cycle that moves back
upon itself than a wave of upward and downward movement. The term is
used to invoke the pass/fail cycle, a classic way of analyzing adventure fiction,
in which the hero meets a series of obstacles, overcoming some of them and
being overcome by others4.

Finding the Beat

Given the sheer number of beats analyzed, you will probably find
moments in the following three narratives that you’d call differently.
Narrative values aren’t mathematical; they depend on assuming an
audience response, which is subjective. The urge to quibble with
choices made within the system is the first sign you’ve taken it on
board. Like any rules sub-system in a game, you not only can but
ought to modify it to suit your own needs. You may find it useful to
subdivide the gratification category into a variety of gratuitous plea-
sures, or to treat happy and unhappy reveals as separate entities.
Even using the system exactly as laid out here, no two of us will as-
sign the exact same values to every beat.
The most obvious point of divergence lies in what to consider a
beat, and what to treat as one moment within a larger beat. An actor
or director would likely find many more beats in dialogue sequences
than I recognize here. To keep the beat list to a manageable length,
I mark separate beats only on a major shift of tactics on the part of
either petitioner or granter, or a change in objective.
In action scenes, I tend to treat a single move or countermove
on the part of a protagonist or opponent as a single beat. This fits
our responses to the easily read back-and-forth of an action scene.
In dialogue exchanges, one typically has to follow both the petition-
er’s pitch and the granter’s reply before deciding whether something
good or bad is occurring.

4: The original analysis of Hamlet appeared as a series of entries on my blog, which you can find by
Googling my name. On my first pass through the work I characterized my analysis as a pass/fail cycle,
concentrating at first only on the protagonists’ successful or unsuccessful confrontations with plot ob-
stacles. It was while looking at the play on this level that it gradually became evident that the tracking
of emotional up and down moments yielded much more useful information on the nuts and bolts of
narrative construction. The version of Hamlet seen here has been revised to incorporate that insight
from the outset.
 Beat Analysis | 23

Example: The Guy With the Hat in the Tavern

To take our system for a preliminary spin, let’s describe an archetypal role-
playing situation and map it out as a series of beats with resolutions.

What Happens Beat Type Resolution

1: The PCs meet up in a tavern, where Pipe Lateral
a guy in a funny hat tells them about a
cave complex in the wilderness outside
town, which may contain treasure and
danger.

2: They travel toward the site, on the Question Down

way noticing a shadowy lurking figure
watching them from the treeline.

3: Along the way they encounter an or- Procedural Up

acle, who offers to see the future if one
of them can beat her at a game of cards.
The rogue wins.

4: The oracle goes into a trance and sup- Question Down

plies a terrifying prophecy of doom.

Hope

1 2 4
Guy in Hat Tells Shadowy Lurker Horrifying Doom
About Dungeon 3 Prophecy
Card Game
With Oracle

Fear
 Beat Analysis | 24

What Happens Beat Type Resolution

5: Approaching the dungeon, they ap- Procedural Up
prehend the skulking figure.

6: Interrogating him, they learn he’s a Reveal Up

strange creature called a kobold, and
that the cave complex is a nest of his
kinfolk.

7: Reaching the cave complex, they use Procedural Up

the password they learned from the
skulker and gain admittance.

8: The angry kobolds on the other side Procedural Down

attack them.

9: The adventurers defeat the kobolds Procedural Up

and take their stuff.

If our assignment of types and resolutions to these beats seems unclear to

you, make a note to come back to this section after reading the three analyses
to come. If this book has adequately performed its labors, you’ll be able to
explain them, having absorbed the examples to come.

Hope

8
Kobold Attack
7 9
Using the Victorious
6 Password Heroes Take
Learn About Their Stuff
5 Kobolds and
Chase the Their Nest
Skulker

Fear
 Beat Analysis | 25

Beat Analysis and Other Narrative Curves

The overall narrative line you get when you connect all of the beats looks
different from other story diagrams you may have seen. The classic chart you
may recall from secondary school literature classes looks like this:

Climax
Denouement

Rising Action

Turning Point

Intro

That chart measures the escalating stakes of the narrative. Like most dia-
grammed narrative maps it is more concerned with conveying the sense of
an overall structure than in breaking down moment-to-moment emotional
shifts. Although useful to us as a structure to shoot for, the roleplaying form’s
already-mentioned forgiveness of a messy or wandering narrative line makes
it only tangentially useful to us as gaming improvisers.
Devourers of screenwriting manuals may also recognize the narrative
curve of the contemporary three-act screenplay, with its notoriously over-
worked end of act two low point:
 Beat Analysis | 26
Denouement
Climax

Pay-off
Development

Turning Point

Intro
Low Point

As we’re about to see, the line we get from performing a beat analysis is
much flatter overall. It tends to resemble a stock tracker measuring the prog-
ress over time of a slowly deflating security. The overall movement is down-
ward, but there are continual ticks up and down along the way. Here’s what
Hamlet will look like at the end of our analysis:

Even stories that end happily, like Dr. No and Casablanca, tend to move
downward over time.
Dr. No looks like this:

Its downward run is less steep than Hamlet’s, but its last beat still winds
up lower than its beginning.
 Beat Analysis | 27

Here’s Casablanca:

If anything, its downward slope is more inexorable than Hamlet’s—which

adds all the more punch at the end when the Humphrey Bogart character
achieves his moving redemption.
When you think about compelling narratives, the downward slope of
emotion makes sense. They spend much of their time increasing your sense
of tension and anxiety, especially at the end, before relieving it in a sudden
upward sweep at the end.
You might correct for the flat slope of beat analysis maps by assigning
relative values to all of the beats. While this might prove useful in an aca-
demic context, for roleplaying purposes the practical benefit of this added
complexity seems elusive.
What with its sword fights and appeal to the Ren fair crowd, we know
that gamers find Hamlet one of the more approachable pillars of the western
literary canon. However, if you’re still scarred by studying it in high school or
are put off by the tights and the iambic pentameter, get your feet wet by skip-
ping ahead to Dr. No and Casablanca, and then come back here.
 Hamlet | 28

Hamlet
Written at the turn of the 17th century, Hamlet remains the master narrative
of English literature. Every major leading actor takes a crack at it, or wishes he
had. More has been written on it than any other work in the dramatic canon.
Though no real scholar has, I bet, included as many arrows and icons in his or
her diagram of it. With its tale of murder and retribution within a royal fam-
ily, it mixes elements of the procedural and the dramatic. Its revenge plotline
requires a spate of investigation that makes Hamlet, along with his tragic pre-
decessor Oedipus, a precursor of the modern detective archetype. Although
considered a tragedy for its cathartically violent conclusion, our beat analysis
will reveal that it’s really more the tale of a doomed hero.
Beats for Hamlet are numbered by using Shakespeare’s act and scene
numbers, followed by a letter within each scene. To aid immediate recogni-
tion, beat numbers are presented as Arabic numerals and not the traditional
Roman numerals. The third beat in Act II, Scene I would, for example, be
labeled 2.1.C. To help you keep your Shakespearean bearings, the traditional
Roman numbers appear in headers for each scene.

Act I, Scene I
1.1.A A changing of the guard takes place at midnight. Mar-
cellus, an officer at the Danish court, takes Horatio, friend to
1.1.A Prince Hamlet, to witness the appearance of an apparition.
Guards Take They identify it as the ghost of the recently deceased king, Ham-
Horatio to
See Ghost let’s father.
Using one of his standard devices, Shakespeare increases the
status of his main character by having him spoken about by others in advance
of his eventual appearance. Here his narrative role is taken by a surrogate, his
friend Horatio.
This beat establishes the external problem that will drive Hamlet—even
 Hamlet | 29

though we haven’t seen him yet—for the remainder of the story. His proce-
dural goal is to bring about the vengeance demanded by his father’s ghost. It
is no less the story’s driving goal because he accepts only with doubt and re-
luctance. Once the story gets rolling, we will hope that Hamlet achieves this
vengeance, and fear that he might not. Not that we know this quite yet, as we
allow the author the space to orient us in his story.
As we experience it, this might seem to be a procedural beat—the mere
presence of a ghost suggests that the characters might be placed in terrifying
jeopardy. Horatio, Marcellus and the guardsmen Bernardo and Francisco are
certainly frightened of it. As it turns out, the ghost, unlike its counterpart in
a horror story, has no power to jeopardize anyone, and no intention of acting
against our protagonists.
Although it might also evoke a touch of dread, the beat’s main purpose
is to engage our curiosity, making us wonder if the ghost is really that of the
dead king, and what its appearance portends. That makes it a question beat.

1.1.B Horatio seeks words with the spirit but can’t get it to
speak to them. It vanishes with the dawn. Horatio and Marcel-
1.1.B lus resolve to tell Hamlet about it.
Horatio The ghost is the petitioner. Its silent presence demands that
Interrogates
Ghost Horatio bring Hamlet to it. Its goal is practical; it doesn’t
seek an emotional concession from Horatio, who acts
as granter. That confirms this as a procedural beat. The outcome seems to
promise that the question of the previous beat will soon be answered, moving
us closer to the only hope for the story we’ve yet had time to develop. The
procedural arrow points upward.
If Hamlet were played as a solo game, this scene would occur offstage—
Horatio would appear to him and narrate the incident through expository
dialogue, giving him his mission for the game. Let’s assume for the sake of
this exercise that certain major supporting characters, including Horatio, are
also PCs. As the confidant character, he’d be an ideal choice for a kibitzer or
a player who attends sporadically.
During his interrogation of the ghost, Horatio charges it to speak, but
gets no response. The standard GM move here, would be to have Horatio roll
his Religion or Occult or whatever to see if the ghost talks. Neither result
would branch the story: a success might lead to the ghost saying that he will
only reveal his secret to Hamlet. If so, it would be an example of something
that happens all the time in RPGs—the non-branching obstacle. A skill gets
used, and the player either feels like a winner or a loser. The emotional tone
 Hamlet | 30

changes unpredictably, but the narrative remains on its present course. In

gaming, you often get these non-branching obstacles as the PCs explore an
environment, seeking information or interactions which wind up being inci-
dental to the action. You haggle down a vendor, learn a bit of tangential lore,
or successfully take an unnecessary precaution.

Act I, Scene II
1.2.A Claudius addresses the court, establishing his authority
as king. He grants Laertes leave to return to France.
1.2.A These story beats are basically expository, with no real
The King’s conflict in play, and no signals telling us what to hope or
Authority
Established fear. Shakespeare is laying the basic pipe we need to orient
ourselves in the story. Among other facts, we’re introduced
to Fortinbras. Shakespeare will continue to drop references to him so we re-
member who he is when he shows up to provide closure at the end of the play.
The beat establishes the status quo that the ghost’s demand for vengeance is
about to disrupt; as such it warrants a lateral procedural arrow.
In a game, the exposition given here would be handled as GM narration.

1.2.B Claudius and Gertrude attempt to mollify a clearly dis-

contented Hamlet. Each employs different tactics. Hamlet’s
1.2.B mother makes an emotional appeal; his uncle lectures him on
Gertrude and acceptance and questions his masculinity. Claudius commands
Claudius Entreat
Hamlet Hamlet not to return to school in Wittenburg, but to remain
at court.
Hamlet, obviously, is a player character. This is a dramatic beat. Hamlet’s
objective in this scene is to punish Claudius and Gertrude by withholding his
approval from them. They’re petitioning him; he’s the granter—albeit one
with no intention of granting anything. His goal is emotional, not pragmat-
ic—he wants them to feel his displeasure for its own sake, not to achieve any
external objective. We see, for example, no indication that he’s scheming to
take Claudius’ place as king.
Gertrude’s objective is also emotional. She wants Hamlet to show her
that he still loves her. (You could play her as calculating here, but it would be
an unconventional interpretation.)
Claudius is a tougher call; depending on how you want to play him, he
could be primarily concerned with maintaining his power (a pragmatic goal)
or seeking Hamlet’s unknowing forgiveness as expiation for his guilt (an
 Hamlet | 31

emotional objective.) In performance, a goal with an emotional element is

always stronger than a purely calculating one. Whether this is also the case
in roleplaying remains unclear. For the sake of this example, let’s go with the
theatrical choice. It’s compatible with the play’s portrayal of Claudius as an
ambiguous figure, driven by selfishness but capable of remorse.
Gertrude and Claudius fail to extract their desired emotional concessions
from Hamlet. They’re the petitioners, he’s the granter. He has the power in
the scene, and emerges as its winner.
This beat calls for an upward dramatic arrow.
This beat might be split in two, one for Gertrude’s approach and the oth-
er for Claudius’. Since they’re acting on complementary objectives and get the
same result, it seems most economical to treat it as one moment.

1.2.C A grief-stricken Hamlet agonizes over his father’s

death.
1.2.C Shifts in audience mood can occur without outward conflict,
Hamlet Agonizes as characters reveal their inner states. Hamlet does exactly
Over Father’s
Death that in this, the first of his famous soliloquies. Hamlet’s in-
ner focus reveals this as a dramatic beat; he loses emotional
power, which we mark with a downward arrow.
You occasionally see soliloquies in RPG sessions, when a player spon-
taneously describes a character’s thought process out loud. GMs looking to
build them into gaming scenes might actively prompt players to share their
characters’ inner states when:

• They’re in a solo scene, with no other characters to interact with.

• Their motivation is opaque to other participants.
• The drama would be heightened by a hint of character emotion.

1.2.D Horatio and Marcellus tell Hamlet about the appari-

tion of his father; he decides to investigate.
1.2.D Horatio and Marcellus convey information we already know.
Hamlet Decides You don’t much see this in well-paced contemporary writ-
to Investigate
Ghost ing, but then Shakespeare’s players had restless groundlings
to contend with. A little repetition of essential plot points
would have been essential at the Globe Theater.
This also arises frequently in roleplaying sessions, where players must be
clear on what information they’re sharing with each other on the character
level. To the extent that Hamlet is a detective story, this is the scene where he
 Hamlet | 32

accepts his assignment. Except here the client is himself. This moves him to-
ward a pragmatic goal, calling for a procedural arrow. It points upward, indi-
cating Hamlet’s new resolution. In contrast to the despair of his monologue,
he can now see a course of action that might address his grief and shame.
In other words, the play’s procedural and dramatic streams have now dove-
tailed—by procedurally investigating the ghost situation and seeing where
that leads him, Hamlet stands to repair his shattered emotional state.

Act I, Scene III

1.3.A Laertes warns Ophelia against a liaison with Hamlet.
A dramatic beat: Laertes wants reinforcement from Oph-
1.3.A elia (his objective), which he hopes to get by projecting his
Laertes Warns concern for her as a protective brother (his tactic). Unlike
Ophelia Off
Hamlet Polonius, who makes the same entreaty later in the scene,
we see no external ulterior motive at work. As is so often
the case, it is the largely silent object of the emotional pitch, Ophelia, who
holds the power in the scene. With so little dialogue to go on, her objective
remains opaque. She rebuffs her brother by turning the tables on him with an
affectionate witticism. It suggests that her goal is to maintain her autonomy
against this well-meaning, would-be second father figure.
Ophelia is our third and last PC in our hypothetical roleplayed Hamlet.
She’s the final major character vaguely aligned with Hamlet—although of
course she winds up as a casualty of his quest.
This beat’s protagonist figure maintains her emotional power, concluding
on an up note.

The Protagonist Of a Beat

The habit of attaching new meanings to established terms is confus-
ing, deplorable, and one that I’m now going to engage in. The al-
ternative is to create a new term which will be confusing, inelegant,
and unmemorable.
Typically we define the protagonist of a story as the character
who sets it in motion and makes the choices that determine its di-
rection. We tend to think of it as a solo gig, but stories can be driven
by multiple protagonists. Their choices and plot threads might
actively collide with one another, or might unfold in parallel, each
 Hamlet | 33

thread exerting little pull on the other. The Coen brothers often gravi-
tate to the former approach, for example in their films Fargo, No
Country For Old Men, and Burn After Reading. Robert Altman was
the master of the latter mode, in such works as Nashville and Short
Cuts.
In beat-by-beat terms, however, I’m going to use the term pro-
tagonist to refer to the figure around whom our hopes and fears
are focused in any given beat. Occasionally we relate to multiple
characters in the course of a single beat, with paradoxical results if
they’re in conflict with one another. Sometimes a minor character
briefly becomes our focus figure. A strange example occurs in beats
67–73 of Dr. No when the secondary villain Professor Dent momen-
tarily becomes our protagonist.

1.3.B Polonius bids farewell to Laertes with a string of fatherly

platitudes.
1.3.B Establishing Polonius’ character as a bit of a gasbag and fig-
Polonius ure of absurd authority, this scene functions as pipe, and
Gives Laertes
Platitudes also as gratification. As pipe, it fixes Laertes in our minds so
we’ll remember him when he comes back into the narrative
in beat 4.5.C.
The gratification comes because Polonius is traditionally played for
laughs here, as a buffoonish gasbag. If so, it improves the audience’s mood,
and is marked with a free-floating up arrow.
Occasionally Polonius is played here as a more sinister figure, which in-
creases our sense of worry for Ophelia and, because Polonius is Claudius’
henchman, Hamlet. In that case, we’d treat this as a procedural scene and
record it as a down beat.
Laertes, as granter, offers no significant opposition to his father, allow-
ing him to feel wise and patriarchal. If we were invested enough in Laertes to
regard him as a protagonist, this might be considered a lateral dramatic beat.

1.3.C Echoing Laertes’ concerns, Polonius interrogates Oph-

elia regarding Hamlet’s intentions toward her.
1.3.C In this dramatic beat, our secondary protagonist must de-
Polonius fend against the petition of a supporting character. Polonius
Warns Ophelia
Off Hamlet uses his daughter’s sense of filial duty to wring a concession
 Hamlet | 34

out of her. She promises to obey him by fending off Hamlet’s romantic ad-
vances, even though she describes them as honorable. In addition to seeking
the sense of power he gets from her obedience, Polonius also furthers the
external goal of protecting his position at court. A consummate politician, he
sees only trouble in Hamlet’s affection for his daughter. If this was the story
of how Polonius saves his daughter from a crazy prince, this would also count
as a procedural beat in his favor. But of course it isn’t, so Ophelia’s concession
of emotional defeat determines the beat’s outcome—a downward dramatic
arrow.

Act I, Scene IV
1.4.A Hamlet complains to Horatio of the Danish custom of
revels attending a coronation.
1.4.A This interchange reiterates Hamlet’s disdain for Claudius,
Hamlet vs. who he associates with the corrupt behavior he describes.
Coronation
Drunkenness It fills out his character, establishing him as an intelligent
nonconformist, criticizing a tradition that gives his people a
reputation as drunkards.
Neither a dramatic beat (Hamlet seeks nothing from Horatio) or a pro-
cedural one (it gets him no closer to his goal), this beat plays as a throw-
away moment. My guess is that it’s a topical aside, 1599 style, in which case it
counts as an instance of gratification. Assuming that the audience agrees, at
least momentarily, with Hamlet’s editorializing, its outcome is a free-floating
up arrow.

1.4.B The ghost appears and beckons Hamlet to a private

talk; Horatio tries to talk him out of going.
1.4.B This is a procedural beat; both participants argue the best so-
Horatio: Don’t lution to a procedural problem they both want to solve. Hora-
Meet That Ghost
tio’s fear heightens our sense of the characters’ jeopardy. The
conflict resolves inconclusively, as indicated by a lateral arrow.
If Horatio and Hamlet are both PCs, this is an intra-PC tactical dis-
cussion. The baseline RPG tradition calls for such negotiations to be han-
dled without rules. And indeed, this ends the way most PC disagreements
do—with both sides digging in until one of them decides to act on his own.
 Hamlet | 35

1.4.C Hamlet breaks free of his friends to confront the ghost.

Hamlet and Horatio take their conflict, which they are un-
1.4.C able to resolve verbally, into the physical arena. The prince
Hamlet Breaks then goes off to do the risky but interesting thing that moves
Free to Confront
Ghost the story forward. A classic roleplaying moment!
This procedural beat increases the scene’s sense of ur-
gency. It concludes with a win for Hamlet and a corresponding loss for Hora-
tio. Since this gets our hero closer to the achievement of his procedural goal,
it warrants an up arrow. If Horatio’s loss had an ongoing consequence in the
storyline it might be worth marking with a separate down arrow, but this
fleeting moment is never referred to again.
This moment would be problematic in a game context. One choice
(Hamlet’s) drives the story forward, while the other (Horatio’s) prevents or
delays an interesting development but leads nowhere in particular. When a
PC faces resistance from a character or force controlled by the GM, the GM
can alter the resistance so that it’s easily overcome, or allows victory inevi-
table. It’s much harder to intervene when two PCs pit their abilities against
one another.

Act I, Scene V
1.5.A The ghost commands Hamlet to avenge his murder,
naming Claudius as his killer.
1.5.A This is the big reveal we in the audience have been waiting
Ghost Assigns for ever since we heard there’s a ghost. Hamlet has now re-
Hamlet Mission
of Vengeance ceived his mission, just as 007 does in beat 19 of Dr. No.
Even though it was introduced in the very first beat, our
protagonist is now consciously aware of his procedural goal. The rest of the
narrative will now flow from this moment. Like most reveals that answer a
previously established question, this gratifies the audience and therefore war-
rants an up arrow.
In the prototypical RPG experience, this beat is the equivalent of the
scene where the GM plays the guy in the funny hat who the adventurers meet
in a tavern, and who tells them about the treasure-rich dungeon in the wilder-
ness outside town5.

5: You may recall that the man in the funny hat delivered a pipe beat in the example on page 24. Like
any character who exists to supply exposition, the MIFH can deliver pipe, reveal, or even question beats
as circumstances require.
 Hamlet | 36

1.5.B Hamlet swears Horatio and Marcellus to secrecy.

This beat, complete with the delightfully eerie theatrical ef-
1.5.B fect of the ghostly voice, underscores the gravity and danger
Hamlet Swears of the situation Hamlet now finds himself in. It heightens
Friends to
Secrecy the suspense surrounding his procedural goal, allowing us to
fear for him, meriting a procedural down arrow.

Act II, Scene I

2.1.A In a bizarre scheme to test his son’s mettle, Polonius en-

lists a functionary, Reynaldo, to go to Paris and slander Laertes’
2.1.A name.
Scheme Shows This peculiar and eminently removable scene further es-
Polonius’
Duplicity tablishes Polonius as both dodderer and schemer. It serves
as a procedural beat, if not an especially strong one, by
establishing Polonius as a menacing, if foolish, secondary villain. As an ob-
stacle to Hamlet, Polonius is a figure of fear, not hope, and moves the arrow
downward.
This is the first of many scenes over the course of the play where none of
our designated protagonists is present. To translate it into game terms, a GM
would have to stage it in such a way as to overcome POV limitations (see
sidebar).

POV Limitations
Every narrative form exhibits distinct strengths and weaknesses.
Film excels at portraying physical action but struggles when called
on to convey complex inner states. Theater thrives on the immediate
interplay between performer and audience but can’t direct the eye
with the precision of a moving camera.
Roleplaying games erase the boundary between audience and
performer. By giving players decision-making power over the pro-
tagonists, it promotes the strongest vicarious identification of any
narrative form. Though this dynamic lies at the heart of the RPG
experience, it carries with it a downside: stories can only be told
through the eyes of their protagonists.
(Exceptions exist, from the troupe style play of Ars Magica to the
use of third-person vignettes, as described in the fourth edition Dun-
 Hamlet | 37

geons & Dragons Dungeon Master’s Guide 2, but they’re still excep-
tions to a core assumption.)
Novels, films, plays and comic books can all cut away to scenes
featuring antagonists and secondary characters. This facility allows
easy manipulation of information flow to the audience. It’s the key
technique of classic suspense sequences, in which the audience
knows more about the jeopardy in play than the character who faces
it.
In an RPG version of Hamlet you’d have to make the point about
Polonius’ Machiavellian nature, as seen in beat 1.2.A, in a scene in-
volving a player character. At least one PC would have to listen in on
his orders to Reynaldo or somehow hear of them later. Whatever the
mechanism, the information would have to reach the player charac-
ters in order to be presented at all.
We’ll note other scenes that would have to be reconfigured to
overcome POV limitations as we come to them. To avoid repetition,
we’ll let some instances pass without comment.

2.1.B A frightened Ophelia comes to Polonius to report an

encounter with an unhinged Hamlet. He concludes that he
2.1.B has gone mad with love for her and takes her to repeat her
Ophelia Reports story to the king.
Hamlet’s Distress
to Her Father In this dramatic exchange, Ophelia seeks reassurance from
Polonius, and gets a small measure of it. Her father does
show regret at not taking Hamlet’s interest in her more seriously, though he
remains mostly concerned with being a good courtier and getting informa-
tion to the king. It’s a small victory for our protagonist but still merits an up
arrow.
This beat also supplies our first example of a mixed outcome: it’s also a
procedural victory (and up arrow) for Hamlet. We’ve already heard him an-
nounce to Horatio and Marcellus his intention of putting on an “antic dis-
position,” so we know he’s manipulating Ophelia and Polonius. How this
furthers his scheme is not yet clear; making this in some sense also a question
beat.
In an RPG, the player would likely have explained what he was trying
to do, so it wouldn’t play out as a question. Protagonists can’t conceal in-
formation from the audience in a form where the players are the audience.
 Hamlet | 38

Also, the encounter with Ophelia described here would have taken place “on
stage,” between the two PCs. To convince her that he’s taking leave of his
senses, Hamlet’s player would likely have had to overcome her Perception (or
an equivalent ability, depending on the game system) with his Deception.
Alternately, Ophelia’s player could have specified that she’d be predisposed
to fall for this—although it’s the rare player who agrees to have her character
deceived.

Act II, Scene II

2.2.A Claudius and Gertrude greet Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern.
2.2.A This scene introduces a new obstacle to Hamlet’s plans—the
C. and G. Greet king and queen have summoned his friends to use against
Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern him. Although there’s a personal element to the coming be-
trayal, Claudius’ gambit seems more practical than personal.
That makes it a procedural beat. As it increases our fear of Hamlet’s failure,
the arrow points down.
In a game, POV limitations would place this scene offstage. It would not
register until beat 2.2.E, when Hamlet figures out why Rosencrantz and Guil-
denstern are here and who they’re working for.

2.2.B Ambassadors from Norway announce that the threat of

invasion from Fortinbras has ended.
2.2.B In modern screenplay jargon, you’d say that Shakespeare is
No War from keeping the Fortinbras subplot “alive.” This way we remem-
Norway
ber who the heck he is when he shows up at the end. That
makes this a pipe beat. Evoking neither hope nor fear for
our heroes, its effect on our narrative direction is lateral. Its relation to both
the practical and emotional goals of our protagonists is unclear, and is noted
with the free-floating arrow.
In game you’d handle this with a similar expository throwaway moment,
directed instead to Hamlet or another of the PCs.

2.2.C Polonius recounts, to Claudius and Gertrude, Hamlet’s

rebuffed entreaties to Ophelia, as well as Hamlet’s increasingly
2.2.C erratic response to this rejection.
C. and G. Buy Here we fall into the central ambiguity that makes the play
Into Hamlet’s
Madness Ruse so eternally memorable: how crazy, if at all, is Hamlet?
 Hamlet | 39

If he’s entirely feigning his madness, this is a procedural beat. Hamlet

tries to seem crazy, to buy himself breathing room as he explores vengeance
against Claudius, and to generally throw him off guard. He succeeds in creat-
ing a reaction in Ophelia that leads her to tell her father, which in turn guar-
antees that the story will be conveyed to the king. He has successfully per-
suaded them that he’s slipping into madness—giving us an upward outcome.
If Hamlet is already going crazy, he’s desperately trying to save himself by
winning a declaration of love from Ophelia. That would make this a dramatic
scene, one in which he loses emotional power, marked by a down arrow.
Although you can read it either way, I say that it’s too early to start Ham-
let on a path to madness. We in the audience know he plans to act crazy, and
are most likely to respond to this happily, watching the villains take a step
into the heroes’ trap.
(As we go forward, studying his intentions in each beat and seeing how
they further his procedural ends, we’ll find surprisingly little support for the
idea that he ever succumbs to madness.)
In a game, POV limitations would require the GM to reconfigure the
scene around the PCs.

2.2.D Hamlet plays the madman for Polonius.

Although you could argue that Hamlet’s emotional goal is to
2.2.D enjoy toying with Polonius, the scheming courtier is clearly
Hamlet Plays a means to an end for him. Hamlet scores a procedural up
the Madman
for Polonius arrow by convincing Polonius he’s gone mad. He does this
by playing on Polonius’ vanity and concern for his daughter,
hinting that Ophelia is somehow central to his disordered mental state.

2.2.E Rosencrantz and Guildenstern meet up with Hamlet

and seek to ingratiate themselves with him.
2.2.E The exchange between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
Hamlet Seeks breaks into two beats. In the first of these, the pair pursue
Empathy from
R. and G. a procedural goal: to cozy up to Hamlet in order to inform
on him to Claudius. However, we’re interested in what our
protagonist seeks, and here his goal seems to be dramatic. He’s happy to see
his old friends and seeks sympathy from them, by honestly confiding his dis-
tress. (You could play it the other way, that he’s already suspicious of them
and acting the madman. But emotional goals are usually stronger and more
interesting than purely procedural ones.) Rather than truly empathize with
him, Hamlet’s college buddies pooh-pooh his concerns and try to jolly him
 Hamlet | 40

up. The beat ends on an emotional down point for Hamlet—he reaches out
for comradeship and gets something else.

2.2.F Becoming suspicious, Hamlet turns on his old friends,

asking them if they came on their own, or were sent for. They
2.2.F look stricken, revealing the sickly truth—they’re here at the
Hamlet Seeks bidding of the king to exploit their friendship for advantage.
Remorse from
R. and G. Hamlet wants his friends to feel the sting of their betray-
al. He’s the angry petitioner, seeking emotional pain from
them. After a bland denial, Rosencrantz weasels out of the confrontation by
distracting him with news of the traveling players’ arrival at Elsinore. His eva-
sion carries the day, lodging a dramatic defeat for Hamlet.

2.2.G Rosencrantz and Guildenstern fill Hamlet in on the de-

plorable degradation of the theater scene back in Wittenberg.
2.2.G Shakespeare allows himself a digression to slyly decry the
Child Actors faddish popularity of companies staffed by child actors. As
Decried
an Elizabethan theater in-joke, this beat reinforces the play’s
appearances versus reality theme but primarily operates as
a gratification. Like any gratification, it gives the audience an upbeat that
floats free of the overall narrative.
In a game, this might be an example of the GM providing tangential but
colorful world detail to the players, creating a sense of verisimilitude and
pleasing players who enjoy setting exploration.

2.2.H Hamlet warmly greets the players, performs a speech

from the Death Of Priam, and encourages the First Player to
2.2.H do the same.
Hamlet Reprises This is a veiled soliloquy, in which Hamlet’s mourning for
Death of Priam
his father is reiterated through his fixation on a play about
the death of a noble king. It reminds us both of Hamlet’s
procedural goal and of his emotional connection to it. The beat doesn’t move
us toward fear or hope for his procedural goal, but it does make us feel pity
for him, making it a dramatic down beat.
 Hamlet | 41

2.2.I Hamlet asks Polonius to treat the players well, and he

threatens to treat them only as well as they deserve. Hamlet
2.2.I upbraids him.
Hamlet Seeks This minor dramatic beat reminds us that Hamlet is a sym-
Submission
from Polonius pathetic figure and Polonius, a nattering figure of blind au-
thority. Hamlet seeks an emotional concession, submission,
from Polonius, which he gets. The beat ends on an up note; Hamlet is getting
his emotional footing back after a couple of dramatic losses to Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern.

2.2.J Hamlet asks the players to prepare The Murder of Gon-

zago, and to be ready to add a few lines he has written.
2.2.J This beat sets up Hamlet’s central procedural gambit, in
Hamlet Enlists which he will test Claudius for signs of guilt. With Hamlet’s
Aid of First
Player taking the initiative and putting a plan into motion, the au-
dience has reason to hope. The beat ends on an up note. It
also sets up a question: exactly what is he planning?

2.2.K In a soliloquy, Hamlet curses his inability to express his

true grief over his father’s murder, in contrast to the Player
2.2.K summoning affecting tears over the mythical Hecuba.
“Rogue and Here Hamlet is in dramatic conflict with himself, unable to
Peasant Slave”
fend off an attack of self-reproach. The fit of weakness leads
us to fear that he might fail, supplying a down note.

2.2.L Still soliloquizing, Hamlet reveals to the audience his

scheme to force the truth into the open by presenting Claudius
2.2.L with a fictional portrayal of his own crimes.
Hamlet’s Plan This reveal of the previous question gives us reason for hope,
Explained
as we can now envision the plan, and see how it removes the
primary roadblock between Hamlet and his goal—his need
to confirm the ghost’s accusation.
Again, you’d get this question-reveal pattern regarding a PC’s plans only
if the player made a special effort to conceal his actions from other players.
Though players keeping secrets from one another can lead to mistrust and
confusion, this sequence suggests that the occasional well-planned and ex-
ecuted protagonist reveal can add excitement and rhythmic variety to a game
session.
 Hamlet | 42

Act III, Scene I

3.1.A Claudius questions Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in

an attempt to divine Hamlet’s mental state. They tell the king
3.1.A about the play; he seems encouraged by Hamlet’s interest in it.
Claudius Happy Here Hamlet, though offstage, scores a procedural up arrow
to Learn of Play
when Claudius seems to be falling into his trap. In a game,
POV limitations would mean that players would learn of
their victory only when someone—perhaps Rosencrantz and/or Guilden-
stern—came back to report that the king has chosen to attend.

3.1.B Claudius and Polonius lay a trap of their own for Ham-
let, plotting to spy on him when he runs into Ophelia.
3.1.B This procedural beat is initiated by the antagonists. Oph-
Ophelia Agrees elia, who we’re treating as a PC, agrees to cooperate, un-
to Take Part in C.
and P.’s Scheme aware of their perfidy. The beat ends on a down arrow, as
her cooperation makes the situation more dangerous for our
protagonists.

3.1.C In literature’s most famous soliloquy, Hamlet contem-

plates suicide and agonizes over his inability to put action over
3.1.C thought.
“To Be or This speech reminds us of the real Hamlet, a necessary point
Not To Be”
for Shakespeare to make, as the one we see in action is pre-
tending to be a madman. It shows him in a state of paralysis,
unable to move forward. He might prefer suicide to his present situation, but
is unable to take that course of action, either. In this dramatic beat, he is both
the petitioner and granter, looking for calm or relief and refusing to grant it
to himself. This registers as an emotional defeat for our focus PC, marked
with a down arrow.

3.1.D Encountering Ophelia, Hamlet verbally assaults her,

giving voice to his despair and urging her to withdraw to a
3.1.D nunnery.
“Get Thee to Here Hamlet’s emotional and procedural needs reinforce
a Nunnery”
one another. Emotionally, he wants Ophelia to share the
despair he voices in his soliloquy. Procedurally, he wants
her to report his distress back to Polonius, reinforcing the madness he feigns
as he tries to prove the ghost’s accusation against Claudius. Accordingly, the
 Hamlet | 43

scene delivers both dramatic and procedural elements. Hamlet scores victo-
ries on each level.
Does Hamlet really expect Ophelia to go to a nunnery? If so, he’s making
a second procedural gambit, trying to safely remove her from Elsinore and
the dangers posed by his quest for vengeance. An argument can be made for
this, but it seems that if this were Hamlet’s primary goal he’d select a tactic
more likely to succeed—like confiding in Ophelia and issuing a clear, ratio-
nal warning. Instead his approach seems calibrated for its effect on Claudius,
with little thought to the devastating impact it will have on her.
As audience members, however, our perception of those victories under-
goes an ambiguous shift. From Ophelia’s perspective, it’s a dramatic beat end-
ing on a down note. She wants Hamlet to return to his previous, loving self,
and is cruelly rejected. This scene shows us that dramatic scenes between PCs
work in both directions, offering victory for one player and defeat for an-
other. We’ll note this by giving Ophelia a dramatic down arrow of her own.
Watching the play, we tend to respond to this particular collision of focus
characters as an emotional down note. Hamlet gets what he wants, but, for
the first time in the play, our sympathy departs from him. We feel for Ophelia
as he treats her cruelly. She suddenly becomes our viewpoint character. In
other scenes of conflict between focus characters, our sympathies might be
more evenly divided—as they tend to be in the many ambiguous dramatic
beats rung between Rick and Ilsa in Casablanca.
Ambiguously scored scenes, rife with internal contradiction, tend to land
more memorably than their simpler counterparts. The fact that this scene
works on at least three levels accounts at least in part for its lasting power. Like
the monologue that precedes it, it’s one of the high points of dramatic litera-
ture and still plays like a house on fire four centuries after it was written.

3.1.E Witnessing Hamlet’s encounter with Ophelia, Claudius

concludes that his nephew has gone dangerously mad.
3.1.E Hamlet doesn’t know it (due to the POV limitation) but has
Claudius achieved the first part of his objective: Claudius has swal-
Convinced of
Hamlet’s Madness lowed his madman act. He has therefore scored a procedur-
al victory.
 Hamlet | 44

3.1.F Accordingly, Claudius decides to send Hamlet to

England.
3.1.F Immediately afterwards, Shakespeare hits us with a reversal:
Claudius Plans Hamlet has been a little too successful at playing the mad-
to Send Hamlet
to England man. Claudius resolves to get rid of him. Although we don’t
yet realize just how thoroughly Claudius intends to dispose
of him, we still see this as trouble for Hamlet—he can’t solve the mystery of
his father’s death and take due vengeance once he’s been packed off to the
British Isles. This threat to Hamlet’s plans ratchets up the suspense and ends
on a procedural down arrow.

Act III, Scene II

3.2.A Hamlet dispenses some suspiciously writerly acting tips
to the First Player.
3.2.A Here we indulge Mr. Shakespeare in an extended inside joke-
Hamlet’s slash-rant. Clearly Hamlet’s player is pausing for a comic
Acting Advice
riff and/or historical tangent: a gratification beat, in other
words. By definition, this ends on a free-floating up arrow.
In a game, this is the bit where the players break character to talk about
last week’s episode of Lost, and the GM struggles to decide whether to herd
them back on track, or make that mot juste he’s been saving up about the
Smoke Monster.

3.2.B Horatio deflects a kind word from Hamlet, prompting a

desperate profession of gratitude and friendship.
3.2.B In this brief dramatic beat, Hamlet seeks reassurance from
Hamlet Seeks the only true friend he has left. He’s nervous as the moment
Assurance
From Horatio of truth approaches for his theatrical trap. Hamlet wants
Horatio to accept his professions of friendship and loyalty.
As petitioner, his tactics are two-fold: to argue that character is more im-
portant than rank, and to express himself in a somewhat desperate manner,
encouraging Horatio to go along with him. After an immediately interrupted
expostulation, Horatio wordlessly acquiesces to his royal friend. Both pro-
tagonists get what they want, emotionally, taking us to the next beat with a
dramatic up arrow.
Hamlet then enlists Horatio in his scheme to watch Claudius’ reaction to
the theatrical recreation of his apparent crimes. This resembles one of those
moments in play when players engage in a planning session, quickly harmo-
 Hamlet | 45

nizing player and character knowledge. Although it makes sense for Hamlet
to enlist his friend, this plot point doesn’t really come to anything, and is best
regarded as an expression of Hamlet’s emotional up note in this beat rather
than a significant beat of its own.

3.2.C Hamlet greets the king’s entourage. Resuming his mad-

man act, Hamlet baits Ophelia with ribald remarks. She de-
3.2.C flects him, commenting on his merry mood. He responds by
Hamlet Subjects challenging her to agree that his mother seems too happy, given
Ophelia to
Ribald Jokes his father’s recent death.
Hamlet’s treatment of Ophelia only tangentially impacts on
his current procedural scheme, to test Claudius’ reaction to an enactment of
the murder. You could argue that it is chiefly for Claudius’ benefit, so that
Hamlet won’t seem to be suddenly dropping his cover just as the trap is about
to be sprung. If so, this would be a procedural scene. But since we don’t see
Claudius react to this, it doesn’t resolve as such. As a dramatic scene, Hamlet
seems to be testing Ophelia, to see if her affection for him transcends his
madness and crudity. In a perverse way, he’s petitioning for her affection.
Ophelia gently denies him her concern or loyalty, diminishing his comments
as merely “merry.” He then switches tactics, giving her another chance to side
with him and against tradition and authority as represented by her father and
the king. Again she rebuffs him. She doesn’t particularly get what she wants,
either, resulting in a dramatic no-win resolution. We come out of this ex-
change on a down note, representing the trajectory for both characters. (You
could more cynically characterize this as Hamlet’s attempt to gain a sense of
emotional power by picking on Ophelia, but he loses that way, too.)

3.2.D Hamlet comments on the action as the players reenact

Claudius’ murder of the king. He baits his mother, asking her
3.2.D what she thinks of the play. Gertrude’s answer to his question
Play Prompts seems inadvertently revealing.
G.’s Unwitting
Admission Finally we see Hamlet’s plan in action. His mother’s reaction
seems to be a minor procedural success. But since he’s said
nothing about using the scheme to uncover his mother’s guilt, it’s slightly off-tar-
get. This can also be seen as a dramatic moment—he wants her to concede to him
that she’s behaved shamefully. However veiled and unknowing, Hamlet presum-
ably takes satisfaction in her words—as does the audience. As his procedural and
dramatic aims dovetail here, the moment is both emotional and charged with
suspense. We score the scene with both arrow types, headed up.
 Hamlet | 46

3.2.E A nervous Claudius asks about the play; Hamlet claims

that it’s about a murder committed in Vienna. The action con-
3.2.E tinues until a distraught Claudius abruptly rises and storms
Claudius off, confirming Hamlet’s suspicions…
Reveals Himself
by Storming Off …and paying off the scheme he’s been hatching since the ar-
rival of the players in Act II, Scene II. This is a major proce-
dural win for Hamlet. It’s not much of a dramatic scene, as a) Hamlet never
seems to want much from Claudius, emotionally and b) it’s achieved through
complicated trickery, as opposed to the use of an emotional tactic in a duel of
petitioner and granter.
Hamlet confers briefly with Horatio, now taking the ghost’s words about his
murder as the truth.
This is not so much a separate beat as a confirmation of Hamlet’s victory and
a capper to the last one. In a game, this would play out as non-contentious
dialogue between PCs.

3.2.F Guildenstern and Rosencrantz arrive with a summons

for Hamlet from his mother. He agrees to see her. Dipping back
3.2.F into his madman persona, he lashes out at them for their con-
H. Gives R. & G. tinuing effort to manipulate him.
Second Chance
at Contrition Hamlet tests his former friends for signs of contrition. We
see no indication of his doing this to further his plans, so his
objective appears to be mostly dramatic. They respond with either feigned or
genuine incomprehension. Again they disappoint him, ending the scene on
a down arrow.

3.2.G Polonius, as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern did before

him, comes to tell Hamlet that his mother wants to see him.
3.2.G Hamlet takes the opportunity to have some pseudo-madman
Hamlet Subjects fun at his expense, getting him to agree that a cloud is shaped
Polonius to a
Cloudy Jape like a camel, then like a weasel.
This beat accomplishes nothing new for Hamlet in the pro-
cedural plot line: Polonius is as well convinced as anyone that the prince is
mad. Its purpose must be dramatic: after once again being disappointed by
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s steadfast commitment to Claudius, Hamlet
regains a measure of emotional power by making a fool of the father of all
lickspittles, ending on an up note. Note how it compensates for Hamlet’s
previous down arrow, giving us a varied emotional rhythm and a sense of
reversal.
 Hamlet | 47

Act III, Scene III

3.3.A Claudius informs Rosencrantz and Guildenstern that
they are to escort Hamlet to exile in England.
3.3.A By escalating the exile story thread, the scene further threat-
Claudius ens to move Hamlet further from his procedural goal, earn-
Assigns R. & G.
to Hamlet’s Exile ing a down arrow.

3.3.B Polonius informs Claudius of his plan to hide behind an

arras and spy on Hamlet’s conversation with his mother.
3.3.B Immediately after one antagonist-driven scene that intensi-
Polonius Plans fies the pressure on an unknowing Hamlet, we get a second
to Spy on
Hamlet’s Talk one. Hamlet’s big feint at Claudius through the players has
engendered a furious counter-reaction. This too rates a pro-
cedural icon and a downward arrow.

[No number.] Hamlet’s mother scolds him for offending Claudius; he responds
in kind, accusing her of offending the late king.
This is really the header of a dramatic scene which will continue in a moment,
after a deadly intrusion by the narrative’s procedural thread. On the map,
we’ll treat this as a single scene that occurs when it reaches resolution.

3.3.C Mistaking Polonius for his uncle, Hamlet kills him.

This disastrous mistake represents a grave procedural loss
3.3.C for Hamlet. If only he hadn’t failed his Perception check…
Hamlet Kills This analysis has until now skipped over the relative
Polonius
weight of narrative beats. Some of the moments we’ve isolat-
ed and placed on the diagram are fleeting and not especially
memorable. The upcoming scene where Hamlet approaches upon Claudius at
prayer and vengefully decides not to kill him is of greater emotional, thematic
and narrative importance than the earlier moment when Hamlet makes fun
of Polonius by getting him to agree that a cloud looks first like a camel, then
like a weasel, then like a whale.
An elaborate system to mark relative importance of various beats would
cost us more in abstruse complexity than it would yield in understanding of
narrative patterns. However, certain beats represent major turning points in a
story, and this is one of them. The mistaken murder of Polonius inflects every
plot development that follows it. If we were varying our arrow sizes according
to their weight in the narrative, this would be the biggest and most precipi-
 Hamlet | 48

tous drop of the lot.

In roleplaying games, we’re used to treating the deaths of enemies as vic-
tories. Here it’s the opposite. To ensure that a failed Perception check leads to
disaster, the GM would make sure that Polonius can be easily killed, at least
in this instance. Under most game rules Hamlet would have to hit Polonius
multiple times to do him in, making this plot point unworkable.

3.3.D The confrontation between Gertrude and Hamlet re-

sumes. She demands that he justify his disrespectful treatment
3.3.D of her. His blistering response provokes an epiphany in which
Haces Laces into the queen responds to her own actions with shame and guilt.
Gertrude; She
Sees Her Guilt Here we have an archetypal dramatic scene. Each partici-
pant seeks capitulation and remorse from the other, dou-
bling as petitioner and granter. Hamlet gets what he wants, taking the emo-
tional power and ending on an up arrow.

3.3.E The ghost appears to chide Hamlet for his slowness in

killing Claudius.
3.3.E The ghost increases the urgency of the procedural thread by
Ghost Pressures pointing out that Hamlet’s purpose is “almost blunted.” This
Hamlet to Kill
Claudius doesn’t so much advance the procedural storyline as re-in-
flate its necessity. In its function it’s not dissimilar from the
standard moment in a Law & Order episode when a tearful family member
shows up to ask the prosecutors why they aren’t moving faster to convict the
guy who killed their relative. This added pressure constitutes a down moment
for Hamlet.

3.3.F The ghost introduces a new demand, that Hamlet help

save his mother’s soul.
3.3.F This dramatic beat increases our sympathy for Gertrude by
Ghost: “Save portraying her as redeemable. At the same time, it increases
Gertrude’s Soul.”
our fears for the narrative’s ultimate outcome, by adding the
new awful possibility of her damnation. As such, it points
the arrow downward.
The issue of damnation confuses the emotional and the practical. Thank-
fully, this point is never directly dealt with again. We can therefore duck the
theological implications of our two main beat types.
 Hamlet | 49

3.3.G Gertrude, not seeing the ghost, takes Hamlet’s behavior

as evidence of his madness. Hamlet tries to convince her that
3.3.G it’s real.
Hamlet Can’t Here an element from the procedural storyline leads to an
Persuade G.
Ghost is Real dramatic loss for Hamlet. He tries to persuade her that the
ghost is real but fails. The result is an interesting crossing of
the streams: a failed persuasion attempt, usually associated with procedural
scenes, that leads to a loss of emotional power. In this beat, their conflict aris-
es from a factual question: is Hamlet seeing a ghost, or is he crazy? Hamlet
is trying to convince her rationally rather than to overcome her emotionally.
Before Hamlet had the upper hand, inducing remorse in his mother. Now,
thanks to an ill-timed spectral intervention, that seems to be in doubt. As
is the ghost’s very existence, which Claudius’ reaction to the play seemed to
confirm.
Here Shakespeare uses a time-honored technique, engineering a failure
that is not the hero’s fault, but results from the interference of a secondary
character. We’ll see this again in Dr. No.
Stupid ghost!

3.3.H A heartbroken Gertrude asks Hamlet what he wants

her to do. He makes two requests. One, he tells her to rebuff
3.3.H Claudius’ future affections. Two, after admitting that his mad-
H. to G.: Rebuff ness is a ruse, he swears her to secrecy. She agrees to the second
Claudius; Keep
My Secret with such passion that Hamlet—and perhaps the audience—
fails to notice that she makes no mention of the first request.
Hamlet’s two requests split along structural lines—the request for his mother
to reject Claudius is dramatic, while the request for secrecy furthers his pro-
cedural goal. He gets the latter, but not the former. Further complicating
matters, the loss of his emotional objective is not evident here; it doesn’t be-
come apparent until later that Gertrude has chosen to remain with her new
husband. Victories and defeats need to be felt by the audience to impact the
dramatic rhythm, so we’ll leave off notating this emotional loss until it be-
comes apparent, in beat 4.1.C.
This is Hamlet’s first procedural victory since Claudius revealed his guilt
during the players’ performance.
 Hamlet | 50

3.3.I Hamlet reminds Gertrude that he’s being banished to

England, revealing that he distrusts his escorts, Rosencrantz
3.3.I and Guildenstern.
Hamlet Fears As soon as Hamlet secures a victory by (seemingly) winning
Treachery from
R. and G. Gertrude to his cause, Shakespeare increases the pressure on
him again. His distrust introduces a note of danger, making
us worry about his success in pursuing his procedural goal. Increased tension
means a downward arrow.

Act IV, Scene I

Hamlet disappears for a while, leading to three beats whose POV limitations
would require reconfiguration in an RPG context.

4.1.A Gertrude tells Claudius that Hamlet has killed Polo-

nius. We can see that she’s taking her son’s side to a degree, be-
4.1.A cause she portrays him as mad, with no mention of his admis-
Gertrude Keeps sion from the previous scene. Claudius responds by vacillating,
Hamlet’s Secrets
fearing that he’ll ultimately be blamed for his nephew’s
actions.
Though offstage, Hamlet gains the upper hand in his struggle against Clau-
dius, scoring another moment of procedural advantage. His mother keeps
her promise to him—tellingly, she also omits the fact that Hamlet thought
he was stabbing her husband. Claudius is taken off-guard, worrying as much
about political fallout as the personal threat posed to him by a mad and vio-
lent Hamlet. The arrow points up.

4.1.B Claudius orders Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to find

Hamlet and recover Polonius’ body from him.
4.1.B This simple procedural moment increases suspense by
R. and G. promising a confrontation with Hamlet. It places Hamlet in
Dispatched to
find Hamlet additional jeopardy, so we give it a down arrow.

4.1.C Claudius departs with Gertrude, announcing his plans

to confer with allies, and his dismay.
4.1.C This beat reprises Claudius’ previously expressed distress.
Gertrude Still In addition, Gertrude’s silent acquiescence suggests that
Allied With
Her Husband Hamlet’s previous injunction to avoid her husband fell on
deaf ears. It confirms that she’s his procedural ally (keeping
 Hamlet | 51

secret his confession of false madness) but not his dramatic one. Although
he hasn’t yet discovered this, perceptive audience members register it as an
emotional defeat for him.

Act IV, Scene II

4.2.A Rosencrantz and Guildenstern confront Hamlet. He
subjects them to verbal abuse they’re too obtuse to understand,
4.2.A but refuses to reveal the location of the body.
Hamlet Mocks In this scene of verbal conflict, Rosencrantz and Guilden-
and Rebuffs
R. and G. stern are the petitioners, seeking the location of the body—
an external, and thus procedural objective. They lack any
power over Hamlet, the granter, and get nothing from him. It’s an easy vic-
tory, and up arrow, for our hero.
Purists of procedural construction might argue that Shakespeare intro-
duces false suspense, following up a couple of beats in which Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern seem to be threats, but then letting Hamlet blow them out of
the water when the confrontation occurs. We can happily discard this theory,
especially when faced with the pressures of on-the-fly creation. So-called false
suspense is just a variety of reversal, and no more a cheat than any other time-
honored storytelling technique. Or, to put it another way, if it’s good enough
for Shakespeare…

Act IV, Scene III

4.3.A Claudius explains to his attendants why he’s sending
Hamlet away instead of punishing him for the death of
4.3.A Polonius.
Why Claudius This beat doesn’t so much advance the procedural thread—
Doesn’t Kill
Hamlet we have known for some time that Claudius intends to send
Hamlet away—as address a logical question concerning the
antagonist’s behavior in it. (I’m picturing an incident where the actor playing
Claudius asks Shakespeare, “Why don’t I just kill him?,” and he responds by
inserting this speech.) It preserves our suspension of disbelief regarding an-
other story moment, rather than being a beat unto itself. It’s a reveal, though
not one we were particularly dying to discover—as indicated by its weak out-
come, a lateral procedural arrow.
 Hamlet | 52

4.3.B Claudius demands that Hamlet produce Polonius’

body; Hamlet refuses. Hamlet continues his madman act and
4.3.B reveals where he’s stashed the remains.
Hamlet Mocks Hamlet is advancing his procedural goals only insofar as
Claudius
he reinforces his madman ruse, which Claudius has already
bought into. At best, he seems to be temporizing. Emotion-
ally, he’s attacking Claudius by showing contempt for the dead, and the very
idea of death. His revelation of the body’s location isn’t a loss for him; he’s
giving up a bargaining chip of no great value. The dialogue doesn’t indicate
how shaken Claudius is by Hamlet’s emotional assault. It might play as a vic-
tory, a loss, or a wash, depending on how the actor playing Claudius chooses
to react. For the purposes of this map, let’s treat it as an inconclusive beat,
with a lateral dramatic arrow.

4.3.C Hamlet departs for England. Claudius orders Rosen-

crantz and Guildenstern to make sure he boards the ship will
4.3.C all due haste.
Hamlet Departs If he’s anywhere but Elsinore, Hamlet can’t take revenge on
for England
Claudius, making this a procedural down beat.

4.3.C Claudius reveals his intention to kill Hamlet after all,

acting by proxy, through the English king.
4.3.D Another suspense-heightening procedural moment. Be-
Claudius to Ask cause we now increasingly fear for Hamlet, this can be
English King
to Kill Hamlet scored as a down beat. As per usual, in an RPG version this
would register only when the players learned of the increased
threat.

Act IV, Scene IV

4.4.A Fortinbras, a prince of Norway, dispatches a captain to
affirm his permission to march through Denmark on his way
4.4.A to wage war on Poland. Hamlet meets the captain and asks
Re: Fortinbras, him whose forces he beholds. The two of them commiserate on
Hamlet Inveighs
Against War the pointlessness of war—this particular war, at least.
This exposition highlights an aspect of Hamlet’s character—
as a critic of pointless war, he’d make an admirable king. It’s laying pipe for
the play’s very last beats when Fortinbras declares a kingly funeral for him. Its
opportunity for our hero to express noble sentiments might also register as
 Hamlet | 53

gratification. If so, that justifies our use of an upward free-floating arrow to

mark the beat’s outcome.
In a game session, this could be seen as a plot thread dangled in front of
Hamlet’s player: the GM is giving him the chance to go and interact with
Fortinbras. We can imagine various plot branches not taken: maybe Fortin-
bras would help Hamlet with Claudius. But of course this doesn’t happen.
Hamlet’s player makes the choice to stick to his plan, to go with Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern to his exile in England.

4.4.B Hamlet soliloquizes, comparing himself unfavorably to

Fortinbras. Where he has good reason to act and is stymied,
4.4.B Fortinbras is able to whip himself and his people into a whirl-
Hamlet Contrasts wind of warlike activity over nothing.
Himself with
Fortinbras As his soliloquies tend to be, this is a self-inflicted dramatic
down moment for Hamlet — even if we feel that he’s being
too hard on himself, and don’t particularly admire Fortinbras’ devotion to
meaningless warfare.
In a game, this might be a moment of player discouragement, expressed
in character. This implies that moments of player discouragement should be
treated as emotional down moments for the character. They should be taken
into account when designing upcoming obstacles—perhaps by lightening the
mood with an easy or comic challenge.

Act IV, Scene V

4.5.A Torn by her own guilt, Gertrude refuses to see a torment-
ed Ophelia—until Horatio persuades her otherwise.
4.5.A We’re treating both Ophelia and Horatio as secondary PCs.
Horatio Persuades This beat represents an emotional victory for Ophelia, but
Gertrude to
See Ophelia is brought about by Horatio. He secures it by invoking the
queen’s concern for her people, arguing that Ophelia’s mad-
ness might prove a danger to others. Although Ophelia is offstage, the de-
scription given (by an unnamed walk-on character) of her behavior gives her
a sort of presence in the scene. We can intuit that she’s seeking solace in her
distress—a dramatic goal rather than a practical one. Horatio’s brief inter-
vention gives us no indication that he’s pursuing a tactical end aside from his
worry for Ophelia, so the dramatic up arrow applies to him, too.
 Hamlet | 54

4.5.B In her famous flower speech, Ophelia insanely sings and

babbles to Gertrude and then to Claudius.
4.5.B This mad scene gives interpreters considerable leeway in
O. Confronts King choosing an intention for Ophelia. As its ultimate effect
and Queen With
Her Madness is to remind the king and queen of the guilt they ought to
feel over the tragic events they’ve set in motion, let’s say that
she’s subconsciously seeking a show of remorse from them. Whatever Oph-
elia wants, it’s not procedural in nature, so we can score it as a dramatic scene.
She garners only bafflement from them, leading out on a down note.

4.5.C Disturbed by what he’s seen, Claudius reveals to Ger-

trude that Laertes is on his way back to Elsinore, and that he
4.5.C plans to suborn the young man to his cause.
Claudius Plans to With Hamlet bound for England, we’re not sure what the
Suborn Returning
Laertes consequences for him will be, but we know that a new ally
for Claudius is bad news in general. This fresh note of sus-
pense serves as a procedural down note for our absent protagonist.

4.5.D An enraged Laertes bursts into the royal chamber, de-

manding satisfaction from Claudius regarding his father’s
4.5.D death.
Laertes This quick beat introduces a moment of narrative uncertain-
Threatens
Claudius ty in which we think that Claudius might suffer a setback at
Laertes’ hands. Although none of our three protagonists are
present (making this another reminder of POV limitation) a defeat for Clau-
dius would be, by default, a victory for Hamlet. This warrants a procedural
up arrow.

4.5.E Claudius calms him.

After keeping the narrative rhythm jagged with the prospect
4.5.E of a reversal, Shakespeare returns to his structural aim for
Claudius Calms the entire sequence: cranking up the suspense by developing
Laertes
the threat Laertes poses to Hamlet. We mark this as a proce-
dural down note for the absent Hamlet.
 Hamlet | 55

4.5.F Laertes encounters his sister, discovering her madness.

This dramatic beat continues Ophelia’s downward emotional
4.5.F spiral. Where her madness took on a slightly menacing note the
Laertes Discovers last time we saw her, she now regresses to a child-like, eerily in-
Ophelia’s
Madness nocent craziness. Like a Call Of Cthulhu character, she’s lost all
her Sanity points and is about to be withdrawn from play.

4.5.G Claudius enlists Laertes as an ally.

This scene builds on the already established suspense, ce-
4.5.G menting the fact that Laertes must now also be considered
Claudius an antagonist to Hamlet. The moment also introduces a
Makes an Ally
of Laertes note of emotional ambiguity, as we sympathize with Laertes.
We may be worried for him, too, sharpening the edge of this
procedural down moment. The prospect of a deadly clash between two char-
acters we fear for bodes ill no matter how it comes out.
This beat might be analogous to a moment in a game where the GM
creates sympathy for a character the PCs are in opposition with. When this
happens players feel a similar sense of ambiguity. They might act against the
character as they’d planned to do, but then feel bad about it, or change their
plans to accommodate their new feelings toward the obstacle NPC. The GM
then might ring another change by having the antagonist turn on them again,
and so on.

Act IV, Scene VI

4.6.A Horatio receives a letter from Hamlet telling of his pi-

rate-assisted escape from the ship taking him to England.
4.6.A In a game, we’d see Hamlet escape rather than hearing about
Hamlet Has it second-hand—meaning that this scene would occur ear-
Escaped
lier in the action.
A heroic escape from captivity is a staple procedural
success, so we score this with an up arrow. After three successive down beats,
it’s about time we felt some vicarious triumph.

4.6.B Striving to earn Laertes’ trust, Claudius justifies his le-

niency toward Hamlet as a gesture of love for Gertrude.
4.6.B Though still doubtful and offering resistance to Claudius,
Claudius Seeks Laertes seems mollified, making this a victory for the antago-
Laertes’ Trust
nist and thus a procedural down arrow for our offstage hero.
 Hamlet | 56

4.6.C Claudius is dismayed to receive a vaguely threatening

letter from Hamlet announcing his imminent return.
4.6.C Claudius’ moment of discomfort counts as a procedural
C. Dismayed victory for the hero over the antagonist. Although Hamlet is
by Hamlet’s
Plan to Return only present in letter form, it’s still a dialogue interaction—
in a game, we might resolve it with an Intimidate check.

4.6.D Claudius proposes to Laertes that they contrive to kill

Hamlet and make it seem like an accident; Laertes agrees.
4.6.D Suspense is reintroduced through the plans of the antagonist
Claudius Plans and his new ally. Our worry for Hamlet merits a procedural
“Accidental”
Death for Hamlet down arrow.

4.6.E Gertrude describes Ophelia’s drowning.

In a game, this would be our first player character death.
4.6.E Clearly Ophelia has been completely removed from play
Ophelia after failing her Sanity check. In a game we’d describe it
Drowns
directly rather than hearing it through an NPC. Ideally,
Ophelia’s player would be given wide leeway to choose the
manner of the character’s harrowing ultimate fate.
This is clearly a down moment, and a big one. This is a point where the
dramatic and procedural dovetail, as is appropriate at a story’s truly pivotal
moments. Ophelia is an unintended casualty of actions taken by Hamlet
to further his procedural aims—his mistaken killing of Polonius, and per-
haps his feigned madness. Yet we also anticipate that her death will take an
emotional toll on Hamlet. If anything, we feel more pity (the hallmark of a
dramatic down moment) than suspense (the marker of a procedural down
beat). Our concern for how this will affect Hamlet’s plans are pushed to the
background.

4.6.F Laertes’ rage flares again; Claudius fears his success in

calming him will now be undone.
4.6.F On the surface, it might seem that anything that worries our
Laertes’ Rage antagonist is good for our hero. But we know that Laertes’
Ignites; Claudius
Worries fury won’t be good for Hamlet, even if it also scotches Clau-
dius’ exact plan for cleverly disposing of his nephew. We si-
multaneously hope that Laertes will harm Claudius and fear that he’ll harm
Hamlet. This mixed result is marked by a crossed pair of procedural arrows,
reflecting the confusion of our hopes and fears.
 Hamlet | 57

Act V, Scene I
5.1.A The two gravediggers (billed as First and Second Clown)
engage in Elizabethan badinage. They cast satirical doubt on
5.1.A the decision to grant Ophelia a Christian burial, despite her
Clowns Jape apparent suicide.
Over Ophelia’s
Grave Shakespeare follows a moment of procedural ambigu-
ity with one of emotional ambiguity. On the surface, the
clowns’ turn-of-the-17th-century japery appears to serve as pure comedy re-
lief, a form of gratification. It provides a free-floating up moment for the
audience—one that none of the main characters, as the story spirals toward
tragedy, is now capable of providing. GMs often throw in comedy relief walk-
ons and underlings to lighten the proceedings, but due to POV limitations
can’t keep all the PCs offstage while they do it.
However, this is a prime example of a Shakespeare clown scene that proves
to be darker than it first appears on the surface. In mocking the decision to
bury Ophelia on consecrated ground, the gravediggers cast a jaundiced eye on
the privilege of our entire main cast. Their commentary cynically undercuts
the proceedings in general, and our sympathy for Ophelia’s fate in particular.
In this interpretation, they offer another twist of the emotional knife, con-
fronting the audience with a subtle but troubling irony. A GM might convey
a beat of this type with a quick aside, for example a description of cynical or
doubtful onlookers to the main action.
With none of our main characters present, the crossed arrows reflecting
the emotional uptick of the gratification and the competing downward effect
of the commentary are free-floating.

5.1.B Hamlet muses on the ironies of death.

Despite the gruesome subject matter of his musings, we find
5.1.B the returned Hamlet in a calm and reflective mood. He has
Hamlet Muses the emotional power to display a philosophical distance
on the Irony
of Death from death, the threat of which he faces as he pursues his
vengeance against Claudius. This moment of pause gives us
hope for Hamlet’s emotional well-being.
At the same time, there’s yet another irony Hamlet is of yet unaware of.
We know that his melancholy detachment will reverse itself when he learns
who’s in that grave. This gives us our third ambiguous outcome in a row, this
time with crossed dramatic arrows.
 Hamlet | 58

5.1.C Hamlet ask the gravedigger whose grave he digs, getting

only tantalizing clownish wordplay in return.
5.1.C Shakespeare draws out the moment of horrible realiza-
Clown Won’t tion, by giving Hamlet a chance to learn the truth but then
Reveal Whose
Grave He Digs snatching it away from him. This outcome moves us from an
ambiguous dramatic beat to a clearly downward one.

5.1.D The gravedigger provides Hamlet with rumors about

himself.
5.1.D Hamlet regains a measure of emotional power here—now
Clown Provides it’s the gravedigger who speaks without knowing the full im-
Rumors About
Hamlet port of his situation. This moment registers as an dramatic
up beat.
You could also score this as a procedural victory for Hamlet, as it con-
firms that his madman ruse is still operational. However, since he gains no
further advantage from this pose for the remainder of the action, it’s scarcely
worth noting.

5.I.E The skull of the jester Yorick sends Hamlet on a nostalgic

reverie.
5.1.E This beat reprises beat 5.1.B, to the same ambiguous dra-
Yorick’s matic effect. Now the source of Hamlet’s upward emotional
Skull
trajectory are his memories of childhood, as opposed to the
more abstract musings heard earlier.

5.I.F Confronting the priest in charge of Ophelia’s funeral, an

angry Laertes demands greater ceremony for Ophelia’s
5.1.F funeral.
Laertes Vents This beat serves as another reminder of Laertes’ temper, and
Anger at Priest
thus his danger to Hamlet. The threat he poses is external
and physical, making this a procedural down beat.

5.1.G Hamlet realizes that the funeral is for Ophelia.

Hamlet now shares the audience’s knowledge of Ophelia’s
5.1.G death. Through him, we re-experience our earlier downward
Hamlet Realizes reaction to it. In game terms, this is the equivalent to the mo-
the Funeral
is Ophelia’s ment when the character is allowed to acknowledge something
horrible that the player has known about for a while.
Ophelia’s death represents a dramatic setback for Hamlet. He may have treat-
 Hamlet | 59

ed her callously in furtherance of his procedural goal, but, assuming we accept the
dramatically strongest choice for the actor playing him, he also loved her.
If you accept the alternate theory mentioned in reference to beat 3.1.D,
that he tried to remove her from Elsinore in preparation of his campaign of
vengeance, this would also count as a procedural loss.

5.1.H Seeing Laertes leap into the grave, Hamlet follows. A

fight ensues as each seeks to prove the greater magnitude of his
5.1.H grief.
Hamlet Scuffles By allowing himself to be overcome with grief and anger,
with Laertes in
Ophelia’s Grave Hamlet sabotages his procedural goal in the course of
seeking a dramatic goal. He’s seeking emotional absolu-
tion, but impulsively employs an aggressive tactic. Not unexpectedly, he fails
to achieve his emotional goal, too. His choice yields another pair of matched
down arrows.
This scene reminds us of games like Pendragon or Dying Earth where
characters must roll to avoid acting on their emotional impulses. It seems as
if Hamlet’s player has been forced by his character’s emotional qualities to act
against his procedural interest.

5.1.I Gertrude and Claudius temporarily smooth the waters as

the scuffling Laertes and Hamlet are separated.
5.1.I Hamlet is spared immediate repercussions for his outburst.
Hamlet and However, we know that Claudius wants the inevitable fight be-
Laertes are
Separated tween Laertes and Hamlet to occur on his terms, so he’s not out
of the procedural woods yet. The outcome of this procedural
beat is ambiguous, and is marked with crossed arrows.

Act V, Scene II
Now we reach the play’s very long final scene.

5.2.A Confiding in Horatio, Hamlet reveals that he had a

restless night, and justifies his graveside indiscretion as possibly
5.2.A useful.
Hamlet Seeks Hamlet seeks assurance from Horatio and, as is usually the case
Assurance
From Horatio with this confidant character, easily gets it. All along Horatio’s
role in the narrative has in large part been to give our hero the
emotional victories that every other character withholds from him.
 Hamlet | 60

This could easily be played as an emotional down moment, on the other

hand, with Hamlet’s self-assurance seeming like a rationalization, and Hora-
tio’s acquiescence coming off as worried or otherwise double-edged.
Under the theory that the choice that a doubtful interpretation should
be decided in favor of the one that grants the greatest rhythmic variation, let’s
treat this as an actual emotional victory for Hamlet, and give it a dramatic up
arrow.

5.2.B Hamlet reveals further details of his escape from exile,

culminating in the news that he’s sent Rosencrantz and Guil-
5.2.B denstern to their deaths.
Hamlet Reveals Here Shakespeare serves up another powerfully equivocal
R. and G.’s Death
Sentence moment. Hamlet’s decision to doom his erstwhile friends
doesn’t actively further his vengeance against Claudius.
Hamlet has swept some pawns from the table, but we’re given no indication
that they were of any further use to the king anyway. Spurred by a sense of
betrayal, Hamlet satisfied an emotional goal by external, active means.
This raises the prospect of a victory for the protagonist that we in the au-
dience don’t share. If we found Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to be buffoon-
ish poltroons, we probably feel (as Horatio will in the forthcoming beat) that
they met a harsher fate than they deserved. The character we’re identifying
with feels a sense of emotional victory, but our sympathies are split. A divide
between audience and protagonist demands crossed dramatic arrows.
Players often supply moments like this, dealing so harshly with rivals and
enemies that an outside observer would have trouble maintaining sympathy
for them.

5.2.C To a doubtful Horatio, Hamlet defends his decision to

send Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to their deaths.
5.2.C As noted above, Horatio is the character who doesn’t push
Hamlet Defends back against Hamlet. So it’s significant that he now privileg-
His Decision;
Blames Claudius es his role as audience stand-in over his position as Hamlet’s
supporter and confidant. Like us, he protests the harshness
of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s fate. Stung, Hamlet simultaneously con-
cedes the point and shifts the blame to Claudius. If he hadn’t killed Hamlet’s
father and married his mother, he wouldn’t have set Hamlet on this corrupt
path, letting “this canker of our nature come in further evil.”
This beat ends in dramatic defeat for Horatio, who, failing to get the
assurance he seeks, shifts to the more comfortable pragmatic issue of how
 Hamlet | 61

quickly Claudius will get news from England. If only by default, that makes
it a victory for Hamlet. We score this with split dramatic arrows for our two
remaining PCs.

5.2.D Another oleaginous courtier, the buffoonish Osric, shows

up to issue an invitation. Hamlet befuddles him with a stream
5.2.D of contemptuous verbiage.
Hamlet Mocks Once again, an apparent intrusion of comic relief introduces
and Befuddles
Osric a darker note. Just as Claudius has corrupted Hamlet, he’s
turning the court into a haven for clowns like Osric. Osric
has no choice but to cheerily deflect Hamlet’s scorn, ceding him the beat’s
emotional power. Hamlet scores a somewhat cheap dramatic up note at his
expense. Since Osric is a ridiculous lackey figure, we feel he deserves it.

5.2.E Osric lays out the terms of the wager and duel with
Laertes.
5.2.E This procedural beat also supplies the pipe needed to fol-
Osric Explains low the final duel. We know that Claudius and Laertes are
the Duel
scheming to secretly kill Hamlet, so his acceptance of the
duel increases our fear for him, registering a down moment.

5.2.F Horatio tries to talk Hamlet out of the duel with Laertes.

Hamlet dismisses his concerns.
5.2.F This is a procedural beat in which both of our remaining
Horatio Fails PCs debate Hamlet’s tactical situation. Horatio’s goal is
to Talk Hamlet
Out of the Duel practical, not emotional. Horatio loses; Hamlet wins. But
the audience, knowing that Claudius intends the duel as
cover for a murder attempt, feels a sense of heightened anxiety. That makes
this a downbeat moment, so we’ll enter the down arrow for Horatio as the
more accurate reflection of audience’s response.

5.2.G Hamlet seeks Laertes’ pardon for wronging him; with

some reservation, Laertes seems to grant it.
5.2.G Here we have a mixed beat, where one participant pursues
Hamlet Asks an emotional goal and the other follows a procedural goal.
for Laertes’
Forgiveness Hamlet’s intent is dramatic; he wants forgiveness from
Laertes. Laertes wants to conceal his intention to harm
Hamlet, and so pretends to accept his attempt to make amends. As audience
members, we know that Hamlet’s victory is only apparent, and that he re-
 Hamlet | 62

mains ignorant of the plot to kill him. This is the second beat in a row in
which his apparent victory in an exchange conceals a threat of defeat—and is
again scored with a downward procedural arrow.

5.2.H Hamlet offends Laertes by praising his reputation for

swordsmanship in overly lofty terms. Laertes accuses him of
5.2.H mockery, which he denies.
Hamlet’s Veiled This brief exchange can be played two ways—either Ham-
Mockery Rattles
Laertes let is cleverly provoking Laertes or has innocently triggered
his opponent’s dangerous temper. All else being equal, the
strongest choice is the one that provides contrast and rhythmic variance. Af-
ter three successive procedural setbacks, Hamlet could use a win, if only a
minor one. Let’s treat this as an intentional and successful attempt to rattle
Laertes. (If Hamlet was a player character, he’d certainly be trash-talking his
antagonist.) Hamlet’s victory is both procedural, rendering Laertes more
prone to error, and dramatic—Hamlet establishes his dominance and supe-
riority by so casually setting Laertes off.

5.2.I Claudius recapitulates the terms of the wager and offers a

toast to the duelists. He offers a pearl to Hamlet if he scores the
5.2.I first hit.
Claudius Offers Claudius acts the benevolent king as part of his ongoing de-
a Regal Toast
ception. Hamlet, presumably preoccupied with his choice of
blades, doesn’t challenge him. Claudius’ speech underlines
our unease, reminding us that Hamlet still hasn’t twigged to the scheme. We
mark the beat with a procedural down arrow.

5.2.J Hamlet scores the first hit, winning the pearl.

Hamlet scores a procedural victory by hitting Laertes first.
5.2.J It may be an equivocal one, since he doesn’t know about the
Hamlet Scores scheme, but a win is a win.
the First Hit

5.2.K Hamlet declines to drink from the cup, which we know

to be poisoned—perhaps by the supposed pearl itself.
5.2.K This unknowing win for Hamlet encourages us to take heart
Hamlet Declines in the possibility that he won’t be poisoned. He scores his
Poisoned Chalice
second procedural up arrow in a row.
 Hamlet | 63

5.2.L Hamlet hits Laertes again.

Another procedural victory! Our hero is winning!
5.2.L Of course, the laws of rhythmic variance being what they
Hamlet Scores are, a bunch of wins at the beginning of a suspenseful se-
Second Hit
quence bode ill for our hero—just as a series of losses is like-
ly to lay the groundwork for a thrilling come-from-behind
triumph.
Note also how many separate beats Shakespeare devotes to this climactic
sequence. The more important it is, the more finely grained its portrayal.
Individual beats are spaced closer together than ever before as the tragedy
spirals to its climax.

5.2.M Gertrude toasts Hamlet from the poisoned cup; Clau-

dius tries to stop her but is too late.
5.2.M Hamlet has always sought to protect his mother. We see her
Gertrude Drinks as a flawed but sympathetic character, and don’t want this
the Poison
to happen to her. Ironically, our failure is also Claudius’; we
are allowed a moment of sympathy for the villain, too. This
beat reverses Hamlet’s previous successes with a vengeance, as marked by an
outsized procedural down arrow.

5.2.N Laertes assures a doubtful Claudius that he can hit

Hamlet.
5.2.N A secondary antagonist fails in his attempt to reassures the
Laertes Fails to main villain. We’re not so much rooting for Laertes to fail
Assure Claudius
as enjoying Claudius’ conclusion that Hamlet will win. This
gives us hope, and even though Hamlet isn’t directly in-
volved, warranting a procedural up arrow.

5.2.O The two duelists resume the match, neither hitting the
other.
5.2.O Shakespeare drags out the suspense by inserting an even-
Inconclusive steven moment, indicated by a lateral procedural arrow.
Sparring
Usually inconclusive results drag the story out without ef-
fect, but in the middle of a tense sequence they can put us
on the edge of our seats. The technique only works when used sparingly.
 Hamlet | 64

5.2.P Laertes wounds Hamlet with the poisoned rapier.

Showing his mastery of pacing, Shakespeare follows the in-
5.2.P conclusive moment with the most conclusive one of all. The
Hamlet Wounded moment we’ve been dreading since Act IV comes to pass.
by Poisned
Rapier Our hero is doomed. You don’t get a more obvious proce-
dural down arrow than that.
Note our string of procedural arrows. We’re in action territory now, with
no dramatic arrows in sight. The beats continue to fall close together as the
climactic sequence plays out.

5.2.Q Hamlet wounds Laertes.

To get to Claudius, Hamlet will have to go through Laertes,
5.2.Q so this counts as a procedural victory toward his still unful-
Laertes filled goal.
Wounded

5.2.R Gertrude collapses.

Hamlet didn’t wish this fate on his mother, and neither did
5.2.R we. This escalation of her situation stands as a procedural
Gertrude loss for him and a down note for us.
Collapses

5.2.S Laertes confesses his treachery, pronouncing himself just-

ly killed.
5.2.S This moment of renunciation serves as a procedural victory
Laertes for Hamlet. Laertes has come over to his side. It seems as if
Confesses
it comes too later to confer any advantage, but in beat 5.2.U,
we’ll see it pay off.
(Hamlet is not a tragedy in the Aristotelian sense because he does not
achieve an anagnorisis—a state of awareness after it’s too late to reverse one’s
horrible error. It’s not even clear that Hamlet has been laid low by the tragic
flaw required by broader definitions of tragedy. Even the indecision he curs-
es himself for is always justified in context. However, if seen from Laertes’
point of view, the play is an Aristotelian tragedy—and this is his moment of
anagnorisis.)
 Hamlet | 65

5.2.T Gertrude dies.

As soon as Hamlet scores an up arrow, he gets a procedural
5.2.T down arrow to balance it out.
Gertrude
Dies

5.2.U Laertes reveals Claudius’ role in the poisoning scheme.

Hamlet’s attempt to win Laertes over at the beginning of the
5.2.U scene, coupled with Laertes’ essential decency, grants him this
Laertes Reveals procedural victory, unequivocally identifying Claudius, in the
Claudius’ Guilt
presence of many witnesses, as a poisoner. This is what he needs
to take his vengeance, and have it regarded as justified.

5.2.V Hamlet kills Claudius.

Hamlet has now achieved his ultimate procedural objec-
5.2.V tive, completing the mission handed him by his father’s
Hamlet Kills ghost at the end of Act One. Everything from here on out is
Claudius
denouement.
The proximity of this and the previous beat give the lie
to the notion, instilled mostly by a self-blaming Hamlet, that he is paralyzed
by indecision. The moment he has what he needs to fulfill his goal, he does so,
without soliloquy or hesitation.

5.2.W Laertes seeks Hamlet’s forgiveness, dying before Hamlet

can speak. Hamlet grants his absolution posthumously.
5.2.W Neither of them has anything left to lose, unless they plan to
Laertes Wins keep on fighting in the afterlife. The interaction’s stakes are not
Hamlet’s
Absolution practical but emotional, indicating a dramatic beat. Here an
NPC is the petitioner, with the PC as a granter. Laertes calls
on Hamlet’s sense of sympathy, a tactic that proves successful. This doesn’t cost
Hamlet anything, and in fact makes him appear nobler to the audience.
Knowing Hamlet to be doomed, the only hope we have left for him is
that he’ll be emotionally redeemed during and after his death. The beat leaves
us with a positive feeling and so is scored with an upward arrow.
It has been twenty beats since we last had a purely dramatic interaction.
That was Hamlet’s mocking of Osric, hardly one of the play’s pivotal mo-
ments. It is a common complaint that Hollywood movies abandon their
drama in order to devolve into action sequences at the end. Given its appear-
ance here, we see that this structural feature boasts a long and distinguished
 Hamlet | 66

pedigree.

5.2.X Hamlet, knowing he’s doomed, asks Horatio to bear wit-

ness to his cause. Horatio responds by declaring his intention
5.2.X to commit suicide. Hamlet successfully dissuades him by in-
Hamlet Convinces voking their friendship.
Horatio to Live
and Tell His Story In the course of this beat Hamlet adds a second intention.
He starts out with a procedural request, to have his case
fairly aired after he dies. When he realizes that Horatio intends to kill him-
self, dramatic stakes are added—he also wants to save his friend. He succeeds
in both. Although Horatio technically loses the exchange by backing down
from his suicide threat, the audience doesn’t feel it as a defeat for him. Ac-
cordingly the beat calls for double up arrows for Hamlet, with no countering
down arrow for Horatio.

5.2.Y Hamlet hears the warlike approach of Fortinbras’ men.

This is the briefest of beats, but if played according to the
5.2.Y meaning of the line, we should feel some apprehension over
Hamlet Hears the arrival of the oft-foreshadowed Fortinbras. Are things
Fortinbras’
Approach about to get even worse, if that’s even possible? This new ele-
ment of possible danger is a procedural moment, and war-
rants a down arrow.

5.2.Z Hamlet tells Horatio that Fortinbras is his choice to be-

come king of Denmark.
5.2.Z This being the denouement, beats are quickly resolved.
Hamlet Makes Hamlet allays our fears by passing the throne along to Fort-
Fortinbras King
inbras. Today, in an age skeptical of autocratic power, this
is often played as an ambiguous or sinister moment. In its
original monarchical era it was meant to be reassuring—legitimate order has
been restored.
This also represents Hamlet’s sole act of governance as king, after killing
Claudius. He exercises power, if only once, if only while dying, and therefore
scores a final procedural victory, complete with up arrow.

5.2.aa Hamlet dies.

Our hero finally fails the last-ditch saving throw that al-
5.2.aa lows him to linger on and conduct business while mortally
Hamlet Dies wounded. Stakes don’t get more physical than death, so this
 Hamlet | 67

is clearly the mother of all procedural setbacks. One might think that Ham-
let’s death forestalls future victories on his part, but we’re about to see that
this is not the case.

5.2.bb Horatio mourns his passing.

Hamlet is more a doomed hero than a tragic figure deserv-
5.2.bb ing of his cathartic fate. We mourn his passing with less am-
Horatio Mourns biguity than we might feel toward Othello, Lear, or Mac-
Hamlet
beth. Horatio’s emotional response to the death of his friend
moves the action back from the realm of the procedural and
into the dramatic. It’s a down moment for us and for him.

5.2.cc Fortinbras reacts with shock and horror to the scene of

carnage at the Danish court.
5.2.cc This beat heightens our sense of the tragedy’s awful impact. We
Fortinbras might feel a little better about this Fortinbras guy now that we
Horrified
see that his reactions to the events parallel ours. Overall, though,
this is a down moment, warranting a dramatic arrow.

5.2.dd An ambassador arrives with the news that Rosencrantz

and Guildenstern are dead.
5.2.dd Here Shakespeare breaks up a series of similar beats by in-
R. and G.’s troducing an ambiguous note. Hamlet was sure that Rosen-
Deaths
Announced crantz and Guildenstern deserved the demises he arranged
for him, but we never quite see them through his eyes. Their
deaths seem out of scale with their crimes, a fact Tom Stoppard will later
make brilliant absurdist hay of in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.
Hamlet has achieved one of his procedural aims, so it warrants an up
arrow. At the same time, the unease we feel at this particular victory deserves
a dramatic down arrow. It doesn’t erase our empathy for Hamlet, but does
remind us of his personal imperfection, and of the collateral damage done by
these events.

5.2.ee Keeping his promise to Hamlet, Horatio begins to tell

his story.
5.2.ee Though dead, Hamlet scores a posthumous victory, as his
Horatio Tells friend makes good on his vow, rather than killing himself.
Hamlet’s Story
Surprising as it is, we mark this beat with a procedural up
arrow. We are still feeling modulations of hope and fear even
 Hamlet | 68

during these final moments of mourning.

5.2.ff Fortinbras claims the throne; Horatio suggests that this

would be in accordance with Hamlet’s wishes.
5.2.ff This beat reiterates 5.2.Z. It puts a period on Hamlet’s sec-
Fortinbras ond posthumous victory, granting another procedural up
Claims the
Throne arrow.

5.2.gg Fortinbras commands a hero’s funeral for Hamlet.

Hamlet didn’t ask or seem to desire a splendid funeral, so
5.2.gg this isn’t a procedural victory. We’re glad that he’s being
Hero’s Funeral treated with respectful fanfare, but mourn his passing. Thus
for Hamlet
we end the play on a mixed emotional moment, with dra-
matic arrows crossed.
If you look at the combined beats from Hamlet’s death onwards, you
see a downward curve that bottoms out in the ambiguous announcement of
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s deaths, and then moves steadily upward to
the end. That’s your diagram of catharsis, right there—the wrenching demise
of our doomed hero, followed by the release of purged emotion.

Summing Up
Looking at the Hamlet narrative map as a whole, we see how Shakespeare
metes out hope and fear in exquisitely calibrated doses. The play never pres-
ents us with more than three unambiguous down beats in a row. Beats 5.1.I
(Claudius and Gertrude stop the fight in Ophelia’s grave) and 5.2.dd (Rosen-
crantz and Guildenstern’s deaths are confirmed) come closest to being fourth
down beats, but are both ambiguous, featuring crossed arrows. Only once do
four up beats cluster together. This streak begins with Laertes’ implication
of Claudius at 5.2.U, encompasses the climax of the play, Hamlet’s killing of
Claudius, at 5.2.V, and concludes with the sound of Fortinbras’ approaching
army.
Crossed or mixed outcomes appear sparingly at first: none appear until
“get thee to a nunnery,” at 3.1.D, nearly halfway into the proceedings. They
cluster most tightly together in the graveyard scene. This preponderance of
mixed beats accounts for its disquieting qualities. Most of the ambiguous
beats revolve around Ophelia or Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. It is Ham-
let’s treatment of these characters that most strongly tests our sympathy for
him.
 Hamlet | 69

Like any narrative map measuring gradations of hope and fear, its basic
line undertakes a slow, incremental movement from beginning to end. To the
extent that it creeps slowly downward over time, it is because clusters of down
beats outnumber corresponding clusters of up beats. Measured in this way,
tragedy’s downward trajectory is a subtle one.
Perhaps surprisingly, the lowest point occurs not with Hamlet’s death,
but with Gertrude’s. After this, an upswing occurs, starting with Laertes’ con-
fession and implication of Claudius. This enables Hamlet the certainty he has
always needed to fulfill his goal and kill Claudius.
The greatest thematic revelation spurred by our beat analysis arises
from Hamlet’s series of post-mortem victories. They establish him as more
a doomed hero than a tragic one. He redeems himself in death, a conclusion
more appropriate to the end of a John Woo movie than to the classic Aristo-
telian model. Unlike tragic heroes, Hamlet is not transgressing under the in-
fluence of a fatal flaw, but reluctantly sacrificing himself to restore the disor-
der caused by Claudius’ illegitimate kingship. In the monarchical Elizabethan
worldview, you can’t kill a king and get away with it, so Hamlet must die. But
we are glad that he did what he did, even if Ophelia and perhaps Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern were wronged along the way. You can’t say the same thing
about Macbeth’s decision to kill Duncan; Othello’s to strangle Desdemona,
or for that matter, Lear’s decision to abdicate in favor of his insincerely flat-
tering daughters.
 Dr. No | 70

Dr. No
Although 1962’s Dr. No was hardly the first movie to feature a mix of inves-
tigation and action, its particular take on these elements exerts a continuing
influence on similar efforts nearly half a century after its release.
Bond may be a spy, but he exists firmly within the structure of the detec-
tive genre. Some of the more enduring precursors include the film adapta-
tions of Dashiell Hammett’s Thin Man (for its emphasis on sophistication,
quippery, and alcohol intake) and Howard Hawks’ film of Raymond Chan-
dler’s The Big Sleep, notably for the gothic weirdness of its hero’s journey, not
to mention his sexual magnetism. 007 spends his time unraveling a mystery,
which begins with a pair of murders no less. Various low-level bad guys at-
tempt violence to stop him from finding the truth. When he gets it, he battles
the perpetrator and, in a wrinkle new to the mystery genre, blows up his com-
plex. A disappointed No underlines the point for those who missed it when
he refers to Bond as a “stupid detective.”
The first film to adapt Ian Fleming’s already-famous iconic hero, Dr. No
compels in part because it has yet to fully coalesce into the classic Bond for-
mula. You can see the pattern begin to emerge. Also striking, given the posi-
tion the franchise would soon exert as mainstream entertainment, is its heady
undercurrent of Sadean/Freudian perversity.
Perhaps because the writers, led by Richard Maibaum, are still feeling their
way toward the cinematic formula that will fully establish itself in Goldfinger,
the film serves as an ideal exemplar of procedural structure. Only a relative
handful of its 215 beats fulfill dramatic or other functions. Even when the
film digresses to explore Bond’s character or gratify the audience, it swerves
unerringly back to Bond’s quest to solve the mystery of Strangways’ death and
prevent an attack on a US missile launch.
In the breakdown that follows, take it as read that a beat is procedural
unless otherwise specified. Beats are numbered sequentially.
Dr. No contains more beats than Hamlet, often of very short duration.
 Dr. No | 71

Each of the various reversals in a piece of physical action can constitute a beat
of its own, even though they zip by quickly on screen. Fortunately, they can
also be described in a few words. Their effect on oscillation between hope and
fear is often self-explanatory.

1. The credits sequence begins, accompanied to the first of three

distinct musical motifs. We begin with the most famous and
1 potent music cue in cinema history: the James Bond theme.
Credits I: The story proper hasn’t begun yet, but the film is already
Bond Theme
providing gratification in the form of a music cue, and
the animated placement of credits. The theme, credited to
Monty Norman but thought by many to be the work of arranger John Barry,
stirringly evokes a sense of dangerous power.
Reinforcing this response is the trademark quasi-animated sequence in
which we look through the barrel of a gun at Bond, only to have him shoot
us. He shoots us so hard, in fact, that the inside of our gun barrel bleeds. But
never mind the merely literal. You’d think that being shot by Bond would be a
down beat, but instead, through a complicated cognitive backflip, we identify
with the powerful figure we can see, rather than the unseen assassin whose
shoes (or gun) the shot composition has placed us in. The hero figure has
established dominance over us. This permits a transference allowing us to vi-
cariously share in his power for the remainder of the narrative. Even though,
as viewers of Dr. No in 1962, we’re not necessarily sure who he is.
As cognitively complex as this one is, gratification beats always conclude
in a free-floating up arrow.
Like most credit sequences, this makes a promise to the audience about
the type of film they’re about to witness. As such, this, like the one to fol-
low, might also be broadly considered an anticipation beat. However, since
its payoff is not a particular anticipated event but the entire film, that would
stretch the definition of that beat type past the point of usefulness.

2. The theme shifts to a sultry calypso beat as the silhouetted

figures of female dancers appear on screen.
2 A second form of gratification is promised, as the credits
Credits II: signal that we will experience a sense of erotic power. (It as-
Dancing Girls
sumes a heterosexual male viewer, as would be the unques-
tioned norm in 1962.) The link between adventurous action
and sexual dominance informs the entire film, so it’s fitting that its first two
beats are devoted to evoking it through the non-literal pairing of music and
 Dr. No | 72

abstracted visuals.
We’d be failing the spirit of Bond if we failed to quip about sexy women
making our free-floating arrow point up.

3. Three blind men with canes stumble across the screen, still in
credit sequence silhouette.
3 Even in silhouette, we can infer that these men are poorly
Credits III: attired; we can even somehow tell that they’re black. The
Blind Mice
nursery song “Three Blind Mice” plays, arranged in strains
suggestive of gentle mockery. It informs us that their pathet-
ic condition is amusing. The film is soon to reverse this impression, but for
the moment it expects us to react to this pairing of image and music as a third
note of gratification.
This is the first of several beats in the film that read differently to a con-
temporary viewer than they would have at the time of their original release.
It’s hard to imagine a current mainstream film hoping to elicit an indulgent
smile at the expense of apparently poor and disabled characters. For the pur-
pose of this analysis, we’ll score narrative beats according to the way they were
meant to land. Which means that this now discordant note was presumed by
the filmmakers to be an up note in 1962.

Together, these three beats remind us of the ability of music to introduce not only
simple moods, but complex expectations of genre. Many GMs use music cues to
excite or scare players. The playing of an rousing intro theme at the beginning of a
session might be considered an up beat of its own, as it is for our audience here.

4. The three blind men, now seen in live action, wend their
way toward the exclusive Queen’s Club.
4 In a later era, the contrast between the poverty of the three
Blind Men at men and the luxury of the club might signal a moment of
Queen’s Club
commentary. This luxury-loving film has something less
caustic on its mind.
Now that we see the three blind mice in the real world, we’re left to ques-
tion their significance in relationship to the club. Once we’re engaged with
the story, questions will be scored as procedural down beats, because they in-
crease our sense of suspense and frustration. At this point we have no reason
to feel either hope or fear and are waiting attentively for the story to engage
us. A lateral arrow seems most appropriate here.
 Dr. No | 73

5. Inside the club, an Englishman we soon identify as Strang-

ways, leaves his card game, to the disappointment of fellow
5 players.
Strangways This outwardly quotidian exchange provokes another ques-
Leaves Card
Game tion: Why does this matter? Without context it provokes
neither hope nor fear, and warrants a lateral arrow.

6. Revealing themselves as sighted assassins in disguise, the

three blind mice shoot and kill Strangways.
6 Now we have enough context to form an emotional re-
Blind Men Kill sponse—dismay, which points the arrow down. We feel hor-
Strangways
ror and pity for Strangways, and are appalled to learn that
we were made to misjudge the killers as humorously hapless
figures.

7. An unseen figure enters Strangways’ compound.

In a common cinema trope we all accept, but which is odd
7 when you stop to think about it, we are put in the POV of
Unseen Figure a menacing, mostly unseen figure, and feel menaced as a re-
Enters S.’s
Compound sult. Realizing that the murder of Strangways is about to be
the first in a series of dismaying events, this beat pushes the
arrow down again.

8. We cut inside the compound to see a shapely radio operator in

mid-transmission.
8 We realize that she is in jeopardy from the unseen figure and
Radio Operator feel fear for her. Another down arrow.
Menaced

9. One of the blind mice assassins guns her down.

Our fears are realized, for another down beat.
9
Radio Operator
Killed
 Dr. No | 74

10. The killers search the office for an item, finding it, and also
seize a folder bearing the name Dr. No.
10 This beat introduces questions: what is the item? Who is
Killers Take Dr. No? Unlike the questions that kicked off the story, we’re
Items and “Dr.
No” Folder now sufficiently oriented—we know there are bad guys, and
victims—to feel a sense of unease until they are answered.
They move the arrow down again.
This ends a sequence of five downbeats—more than you ever see in Ham-
let. But these are the much briefer, more sub-divided narrative units not only
of the procedural form, but of cinematic storytelling technique.
Beats 4 through 10 fulfill the same purpose here that the appearance of
the ghost does in the opening scene of Hamlet. They introduce the proce-
dural goal before we even meet our viewpoint character.

11. Back at headquarters, reassuringly bureaucratic British in-

telligence officers discover the interrupted transmission and
11 alert the chain of command.
HQ Notes In our first up beat since the story got rolling in earnest, we
Stopped
Transmission feel a sense of relief—the murder of the radio operator has
been noticed, and something is being done about it.

12. A functionary looks for Bond at an exclusive casino.

We don’t know who this man is, although the proximity to
12 the last scene infers that he may be a functionary from Brit-
Bond Sought ish intelligence. We also don’t know who Bond is—a luxury
at Le Cercle
denied to future screenwriters. Another question has been
dangled over us; the down arrow marks our frustration.

13. In a sequence of shots ingeniously deployed to suggest his

awesomeness, we see Bond playing baccarat.
13 This reveal partially satisfies the question posed in the last
Baccarat beat. This Bond fellow is clearly a masterful individual—
Establishes B.’s
Awesomeness the sort you’d come to when you have a problem to solve. If
questions point the emotional arrow toward confusion and
fear, answers move us back toward hope and order.
 Dr. No | 75

14. Our assumptions are confirmed as the functionary gives

Bond a message from headquarters.
14 As this second reveal allows us to feel increasingly oriented,
Functionary our sense of assurance builds, for another up arrow.
Gives Bond
Message This apparently innocuous beat marks an important
turning point—the narrative torch has been passed to our
protagonist. With the exception of a single curious sequence starting at beat
66, Bond will remain our focus character for the rest of the film.
Unlike Hamlet, this is clearly a solo game featuring a single PC. Later
we’ll see how even the characters who lend him assistance serve as foils to
him, as opposed to exerting an independent impact on story advancement.

15. Sylvia Trench shows an amorous interest in Bond.

Now that we identify with Bond, we can vicariously enjoy
15 the effects of his sexual magnetism, earning us an up arrow,
Seductive gratification style.
Impression
on Sylvia

16. Bond flirts with her, but in a withholding way.

This beat ups the gratification ante, allowing Bond to seize
16 the power in his nascent relationship with Sylvia. It intro-
Bond duces to the core of Bond’s character, in addition to his pro-
Withholdingly
Flirts With Sylvia cedural competence—his assertion of sexual dominance. To
be desired is not enough: 007 must also be in charge.

17.Back at the office, Bond flirts with Moneypenny.
Bond now immediately recapitulates the gratification beat
17 with a new target. The reiteration confirms sexual domi-
Bond Flirts With nance as his key behavior. First he establishes it over Money-
Moneypenny
penny by moving into and over her space. When she returns
the flirtation, he retains his power by deflecting her. When
she then pulls away from him, he declines to acknowledge her tactic.
She mentions the Strangways situation but provides no further informa-
tion, except to indicate its importance. The reveal is postponed to the next
beat.
 Dr. No | 76

18. M reveals Strangways’ mission.

M informs Bond that Strangways was investigating radio in-
18 terference with Cape Canaveral’s rockets. By granting con-
M Reveals text to the story’s opening beats, this reveal assures us, giving
Strangeways’
Mission us an up arrow.

19. M gives Bond his assignment.

Although Bond’s procedural goal comes into the story at
19 beat 6, he has been unaware of it until now. This reveal is the
M Gives Bond equivalent of beat 1.5.A in Hamlet, where the ghost charges
His Mission
him to seek vengeance against Claudius. Knowing that a
clear goal has been established for our hero, we feel a sense of
relief and can now settle into the story. The emotional dial moves upward.

20. M and his assistant tut-tut Bond for his preferring an out-
moded weapon, the Beretta.
20 In the first dramatic beat of the film, Bond loses emotional
Emasculating power when his boss questions the adequacy of his hand-
Gun Talk
gun. In Dr. No, a cigar may occasionally be just a cigar, but
a gun is always loaded with hollow-point Freudianism. By
denigrating his Beretta, they’re threatening his sexual dominance.
It is M’s role in the Bond universe to not only dispense the assignments,
but to serve as Super-Ego to his Id. Bond’s sociopathy is softened and made
acceptable because he has made himself a weapon of a safely paternalistic
state, as represented by M. (The contemporary decision to cast M as a woman
typifies the series’ ongoing attempts to reconstruct its original sexism. The
hyper-masculinity of today’s Bond is kept in check by a maternal state.)
Although on a thematic level, M’s dominance over Bond allows us to en-
joy our hero’s anti-social behavior, it still registers as a loss of power for the
character we identify with, and warrants a down arrow.

Roasted By the Boss

Moments resembling beat 20 are a staple of RPG sessions, espe-
cially in games where the activities of the player characters take on
a picaresque flavor. Speaking through a leader, patron or other sym-
pathetic yet authoritative NPC, the GM amusingly teases the play-
 Dr. No | 77

ers. These comments might tee off on the PC’s defining character
traits. More typically they roast the players for mistaken decisions
that got them into trouble. In this case, the GM (M) might be kidding
the player (Bond) for his failure to adequately minimax his choice of
handgun from the game’s firearms table.
These burns seem to register as up moments, because they get
everyone at the table laughing, including the player who’s getting
razzed. However, the character is still losing emotional power. As
such, these moments are down moments hidden under a cloak of
amusement. If you’re going to indulge in them—and I have to admit
that I’ve fallen into this trap until this very moment—count them as
down moments and see that you provide compensating opportuni-
ties for the PCs to regain the emotional high ground—if not from
their irascible superiors, from some more fitting GM character.

21. The gun discussion takes a more somber tone as M reminds

Bond of the dangers of his job, including a recent six-month
21 hospital stint.
Dangers of 007 This discussion reminds us that Bond will, despite his dem-
Job Emphasized
onstrated awesomeness, be placing himself in jeopardy. It
culminates in his reluctantly accepting a new and improved
phallus in the form of a Walther PPK. The beat reawakens our fear, pointing
the arrow down.

22. M interrupts Bond’s resumed flirtation with

Moneypenny.
22 Although we read the result as amusing, M is once more emas-
M Interrupts culating Bond by blocking his re-assertion of sexual power over
Repartee With
Moneypenny Moneypenny. He’s on the losing end of the exchange so this is a
dramatic down point, if a lighthearted one.
If you’re questioning this beat’s downward trajectory, imagine your PC in
a game being blocked during a flirtation attempt: it would feel like a defeat,
even if it was also funny.
 Dr. No | 78

23. Bond returns to his apartment to find an intruder inside.

If Bond is in danger, we’re feeling fear—a down beat. This is
23 also a question beat: we’re wondering who’s in his place.
Someone
in Bond’s
Apartment

24. It’s Sylvia, whiling her time with some trouser-free putting
practice.
24 A classic reversal, this reveal shows the previous beat to have
Sylvia Leggily been one of false suspense. Our relief, and possibly our ad-
Golfing
miration for actress Eunice Grayson’s legs, mark this scene
with an up arrow.
False suspense is discussed in regard to beat 4.2.A of Hamlet. Even more
than that scene, in which the threat Rosencrantz and Guildenstern pose to
Hamlet in the wake of Polonius’ murder turns out to be a weak one, this beat
shows how much fun a reversal after a false suspense beat can be. As should
go without saying, this trick would soon wear out its welcome if used too fre-
quently or in a cliched manner. This is why we groan when the thing making
the awful noise in the horror movie turns out to be the cat.

25. Bond gently rebuffs her, then relents.

Although Bond is no physical danger, the dizzyingly liber-
25 ated Sylvia has seized the sexual initiative—tightly gripping
Bond Rebuffs, a golf club, no less. After establishing his ability to resist her,
then Relents
preserving his dominance, he can proceed to bed her. This
is both a gratification, insofar as we enjoy our hero mak-
ing time with a desirable partner, and a dramatic uptick, as we’ve also seen
him recapture the emotional power in the relationship. If there’s drama in the
mix, the beat isn’t free-floating, so this dual-purpose beat is marked with a
single dramatic arrow.

v 26. A mysterious figure rocking a ducktail haircut awaits

Bond’s arrival at the Kingston, Jamaica airport.
26 We don’t know who this is, and his surveillance is composed
Mysterious in a menacing way, so his presence makes us fear for Bond—
Pomaded Figure
a down arrow.
 Dr. No | 79

27. He’s not the only watcher—an angry-looking young wom-

an also observes him.
27 This is a variation of the previous beat, resounding to the
Another Watcher same effect, and thus another down arrow.
(Female)
Letting the players know that their PCs are being
watched is a classic and reliable way of unnerving them.
The only thing better for this purpose than a successful Perception check is
a check they know they’ve failed. This is an example of an instance where
both success and failure lead in the same emotional direction—to a down
arrow, because the players’ fears are brought to the forefront. While failure
almost always leads to a down arrow, success can also provide a downward
emotional trajectory. Especially when the success leads to the discovery of
alarming information. Be sure to track the players’ position on the hope/fear
cycle accordingly.
In a film, the director doesn’t have to indicate that Bond is aware of the
surveillance in order for the audience to be fearful on his behalf. If anything,
it’s more effective for us to know and the hero to remain unaware. Division
between audience and character knowledge is the engine of Hitchcockian
suspense6.
You could argue that the failed roll that yields to no information is the
gaming equivalent of Hitchcockian suspense—the player knows that some-
thing’s wrong, or at least being missed, while the character remains ignorant.
However, in a gaming context it’s often more effective for the characters to be
aware that they’re being watched. Generally it’s more effective if an obstacle
prevents them from immediately catching and identifying their watchers. In
the case of the airport watchers, it’s more satisfying for Bond to identify them
later, which happens in beats 52 and 55.
As we’ll soon see, Bond’s failure to spot or act against these watchers
doesn’t undermine our sense of his mastery, because he does immediately
twig to a third threat waiting for him at the airport.

6: Thriller master Alfred Hitchcock distinguished suspense from surprise, in which something awful
suddenly happens. Although associated primarily with suspense, typified by the poisoned glass of milk
in Notorious, the kidnapped child in The Man Who Knew Too Much or the murderous secret of Uncle
Charley in Shadow Of a Doubt, he also used surprise where effective. A prime example would be the
attack on Arbogast (Martin Balsam) in Psycho.
 Dr. No | 80

28. To Bond’s surprise, a shifty chauffeur, Mr. Jones, greets him

at the airport taxi stand.
28 Directed to telegraph his hinkiness, the actor playing the
Mr. Jones, chauffeur gives us another reason to fear for Bond, and an-
Shifty Chauffeur
other down arrow.

29. Bond calls the Jamaican station to confirm that they sent
no chauffeur.
29 After apparently missing his first two watchers, we’re hap-
Bond Confirms py to see that Bond has cottoned on to one of the seeming
Jones is Hinky
threats awaiting him at the airport. An up arrow breaks the
previous string of three down beats.

30. A predatory smile plays across Bond’s lips.

This brief close-up, relying entirely on Connery’s expression,
30 alters the emotional temperature, giving us a moment of
Predatory anticipation. We see that Bond is looking forward to deal-
Smirk
ing with the chauffeur. Through him, we look forward to
this moment of dominance and mastery, and a moment of
deserving comeuppance. We no longer fear the coming confrontation, but
instead look forward to it, with perhaps a sense of righteous sadism.
RPG encounters tend by default to challenge the PCs. Some wear them
down, depriving them of resources and making later fights tougher than they
otherwise would be. Then you get the extremely tough boss fights, requiring
luck, skill and heavy preparation to get to.
Moments like this remind us of the value of encounters that are meant to
be easily mastered. To achieve the effect, though, you have to let the players
know as a given that they can overcome the opposition. By saying, “You know
you can take this guy,” as Bond’s GM is clearly whispering in his ear, you cre-
ate anticipation, and the special kind of up note like the one presented here.

31. Now on the road, the chauffeur announces that they’re be-

ing followed.
31 Intriguingly, the anticipation beat is followed by a new wrin-
“Someone’s kle suggesting that Bond’s victory might not be so assured
Following Us”
after all—he didn’t account for a car following them.
This isn’t a cheat, as the film does deliver a corresponding
gratification to its anticipation a few beats from now. However, it shows us
that there’s nothing wrong with a little doubt sown along the way. (Later, in a
 Dr. No | 81

spate of thread-tying dialogue at beat 54, we’ll learn that this is a moment of
false suspense: it’s good guy Felix Leiter in that car.)

32. The chauffeur loses his pursuer.

The effect of this beat on our hope and fear depends on how
32 carefully we’re following the plot. It’s shot and scored as if
Pursuer Lost the pursuing car jeopardizes Bond. But if we ignore these
cues, we remember that Mr. Jones is trouble, and might
conclude that any force that makes him nervous is good for
Bond. This moment of deliberately obscured suspense warrants crossed pro-
cedural arrows.
Introducing a beat whose true impact on the hope and fear depends on
careful reasoning is a risky move, and should be used sparingly. The beat is
satisfying in retrospect, when the viewers/players figure it out, and recall an
earlier scene in a new light. Introducing cognitive dissonance is risky: if play-
ers spend too much time unsure as to whether a given event puts them in
lesser or greater danger, they’ll lose the ability to accurately picture in-game
events.

33. Now stopped, the chauffeur discovers that Bond has the
drop on him.
33 The film revels in the chauffeur’s discomfiture as he realizes
Bond Gets the that Bond has achieved physical dominance over him. We
Drop on Jones
see a close-up of Jones’ surprised take, and Bond as a loom-
ing, masterful figure. Thus we get the first installment of a
gratification that will be split up over two separated beats.
Since the situation has yet to fully resolve, a chance of reversal still exists.
This is still a procedural beat—albeit one concluding on an up arrow.

34. Bond stops Jones from grabbing a gun hidden in the car’s
glove compartment.
34 Bond’s continued dominance of the situation earns us an-
Bond Stops other up arrow.
Jones From
Getting the Gun
 Dr. No | 82

35. Mr. Jones attacks him unarmed.

We’re forced to wonder if our gratification was premature as
35 Jones escalates to a physical fight. This beat scores as a down
Jones arrow.
Attacks

36. Bond punches him out.

There’s no up arrow more unequivocal than our hero deci-
36 sively whaling on a bad guy.
007 Punches
Jones Out

37. Bond gets Jones to agree to talk.

Victory is apparently at hand. Not only has Bond evaded
37 the jeopardy Jones put him in, but he’s about to gain infor-
Bond Gets Jones mation that will bring him actively toward his procedural
to Agree to Talk
goal—warranting an up arrow.

38. Jones swallows cyanide.

The additional advantage of Bond’s victory evaporates as
38 Jones commits suicide before his eyes. This is a procedural
Jones Swallows downbeat.
Cyanide

39. Arriving at the British station in Jamaica, Bond drops off

Jones’ corpse with a quip.
39 Jones may have frustrated us in the last beat, but here he pro-
Bond Drops vides us with a spot of unseemly gratification, as we enjoy
Off Corpse
With a Quip Bond’s joke at his expense. This is the second payoff of the
anticipation created in beat 30. Jones proved such a poor
match for Bond that his death can be dismissed with a contemptuous joke.
RPG characters often pursue their players’ anti-social fantasies to the
detriment of a plot where intelligent protagonists act with an awareness of
action and consequence. They may kill walk-on characters who represent mi-
nor annoyances to them, rip up the town out of boredom, or exploit a useful
rules conceit by deciding to stage a raid on the local magic shop. Beats like
this show the value of engineering plot events so that the impulse toward
irresponsible celebration of power is channeled to acceptable ends. Bond’s
disrespect for this poor sap is thrillingly naughty, but the guy deserves it, and
 Dr. No | 83

our hero indulges it while pursuing a virtuous goal—and furthering the main
plot. Having been given a chance to exercise acceptable dominance here, his
player won’t get itchy and suddenly launch an attack on the Queen’s Club or
raid a gun shop.

40. Bond is briefed by the station chief.

This reveal of information comforts us; the more we and
40 Bond understand about the situation, the happier we are—
Station Chief garnering an up arrow.
Briefing
Note how exposition is doled out in bite-sized beats;
the last reveal of information relevant to the plot occurred
twenty-two beats ago. We’re now, however, about to enter a sustained infor-
mation-gathering phase. The difference is that Bond is going to go out and
actively acquire clues, rather than listening to briefings.

41. Investigating Strangways’ place, Bond finds an invoice

from Professor Dent’s geological lab.
41 Bond has secured a point of information allowing him to
Clue: move forward toward his procedural goal, earning an up
Dent Labs/
Geology Test arrow.
This is the sort of clue you want to ensure that the PCs
can easily gather, because without it, the GM has to scramble to find an alter-
nate way to launch them into the story. This insight underpins the Gumshoe
rules system, which specializes in investigative play7. It defines essential clues
like this as core clues, and ensures that the characters can’t fail when looking
for them. A failed check here, as with most information-gathering scenes,
wouldn’t lead anywhere interesting.

42. Bond spots a photo of Quarrel, identifying him as having

been in the car that pursued him and Jones.
42 Like any information that promises greater understanding
Bond Spots of the mystery, this earns an up arrow.
Photo of Quarrel

7: Yet more full disclosure: this example comes readily to mind because the author designed
Gumshoe.
 Dr. No | 84

43. Bond secures his hotel room.

Preparations undertaken by the hero can engender suspense
43 or anticipation. As in this beat, they may be defensive in na-
Bond Secures ture, reminding us of the jeopardy the hero is in and the care
Hotel Room
he must take to protect himself. This beat moves us toward
fear.
Preparation for aggressive action, for example the classic suiting-up se-
quence, inspires the hope of righteous ass-kickery to come, and would regis-
ter as an up arrow.
RPG prep tends to be flat, dead time, suggesting that the GM should
look for descriptions that intensify unease when PCs are engaged in defen-
sive prep. Likewise, they might encourage players to describe their aggressive
prep in loving, gung-ho detail, so that it carries the emotional charge you’d
get in the equivalent movie sequence.

44. During a social interview at the club, Dent remarks

louchely on the attractiveness of Strangways’ murdered
44 secretary.
Dent Remarks As this beat occurs, it seems to be an oddly jarring character
on Dead
Secretary note (which would register as drama.) Later we’ll see that
this disguises a piece of pipe; Dent’s awareness of the sec-
retary is incriminating. Though it lowers our sympathy for Dent, the fleeting
moment seems to get Bond no closer to or further from his goal, warranting a
lateral procedural arrow. We use that arrow type instead of a free-floating one
because Bond engages Dent in pursuit of his mission.

45. Bond learns about Quarrel.

Although Dent has given him nothing, Bond still has a plot
45 thread to pursue, which bodes well for his success—so this
Bond Learns reveal adds an up arrow to the hope/fear map.
About Quarrel

46. Bond finds Quarrel casually resistant to his queries.

This initial failure to gain information impedes Bond’s pro-
46 cedural progress, hitting us with a down arrow.
Quarrel Casually
Resistant
 Dr. No | 85

47. Bond follows Quarrel to a nearby open-air restaurant.

007’s decision to persist implies the possibility of success after
47 the first failure.
Bond Follows (To pursue is to take emotional power and establish
Quarrel to
Restaurant dominance, and is, as here, associated with upward move-
ment. To be pursued indicates weakness, jeopardy, and the
dreaded down arrow—unless you’ve set up anticipation that the hunted party
plans to reverse the positions of hunter and prey.)

48. Quarrel agrees to talk in the back room.

This seems promising—must be an up arrow.
48
Quarrel Says
He’ll Talk
in Back

49. Quarrel pulls a knife; club proprietor Puss Feller grabs

Bond in a bear hug.
49 Bond is in danger, and the previous promise of information
Quarrel Pulls has been withheld. We’re headed down.
Knife; Feller
Grabs Bond

50. Bond breaks free and overcomes them, training his PPK on
them.
50 As reversal follows reversal, Bond’s seizure of the upper hand
Bond Gets the moves us back up.
Drop on Them

51. The pompadoured man from the airport gets the drop on
Bond.
51 In the third consecutive reversal, Bond surrenders his physi-
Leiter Gets the cal dominance to a figure we have been primed to regard as
Drop on Bond
menacing. The arrow goes down.

52. The man reveals himself as an ally: Felix Leiter, CIA

operative.
52 This fourth reversal is a reveal, and yields an up arrow.
Leiter IDs
Himself as CIA
 Dr. No | 86

53. Night comes to Puss Feller’s, and with it, a brief calypso

break.
53 Appearing at the dawn of the tourism age, the early Bond
Calypso at flicks serve as both thrillers and exotic travelogues. Like
Puss Feller’s
most musical interludes, this number acts as gratification
and provides us a free-floating up arrow.
Bar scenes in which the heroes relax and swap information have always
been an RPG staple. Until you look at them as a source of gratification, in
which jeopardy and challenge is temporarily suspended, the form’s reliance
on them seems peculiar. Depending on regional and national vagaries, gam-
ers may or may not enjoy hanging around in pubs. But they universally seem
to enjoy imagining their characters hanging around in pubs.

54. Bond learns that Strangways was investigating the nearby

island of Crab Key when he was killed.
54 This reveal promises literal as well as metaphorical move-
Key Clue: ment toward Bond’s goal, and earns an up arrow.
Crab Key

55. Bond spots the last of the airport watchers—a young pho-
tographer in a glamorous Chinese-style outfit.
55 Paying off the beat 27, the woman spying on him in the air-
Bond Spots port returns. The idea that Bond is still under surveillance
Shady
Photographer wakes us from our calypso-lulled complacence, reminding
us of the jeopardy he faces. The arrow goes down.

56. Quarrel captures her.

By neutralizing the threat of surveillance, Bond’s new ally
56 moves us from fear to hope, and the arrow back up.
Quarrel Grabs
Photographer

57. She resists interrogation.

Our hope that this will lead to progress for Bond fades, mov-
57 ing the arrow down, as she stonewalls him.
Photographer
Resists
Interrogation
 Dr. No | 87

58. She cuts Quarrel with a broken flashbulb.

We react in dismay as Bond’s new ally is injured. The arrow
58 heads further down.
Photographer
Cuts Quarrel

59. Quarrel shrugs it off and asks Bond if he wants her arm
broken. “Another time,” an insouciant Bond replies.
59 With their willingness to treat the young woman to the
“Want Me to same violence they’d use on a male attacker, our heroes re-
Break Her Arm?”
tain and extend their dominance. We are meant to enjoy this
as a transgressive up beat.

60. They release her; Bond wonders who can inspire such fear
as to render her, like Jones, impervious to intimidation?
60 The departed photographer reassumes dominance, becom-
Who Inspires ing, if not a figure of fear herself, a reminder of the fear in-
Such Fear?
spired by her unknown boss. If we’re feeling fear, the arrow
must be moving down.

61. Bond, Leiter and Quarrel discuss the mystery and danger
of Crab Key.
61 More fear equals more downward movement.
Crab Key
is Scary

62. Quarrel establishes that Strangways’ samples came from

Crab Key.
62 This reveal solidifies Bond’s, and our, understanding of the
Strangeways’ mystery, pointing the arrow up.
Samples From
Crab Key

63. Leiter supplies the ominous name of Crab Key’s master:

Dr. No.
63 The movie reveals its titular villain in careful increments,
Leiter Supplies each of them ominous. This is an example of a reveal whose
Ominous
Name: Dr. No effect is predominantly menacing, moving us toward fear.
 Dr. No | 88

64. We see two of the Blind Mice lurking around, armed with
a rifle.
64 This beat begins on an ominous cut—we don’t know where
Two Blind Mice or when we are, but we know these guys are deadly. Our dis-
Creeping About
orientation contributes to our increased fear, marked by a
down arrow.

65. Their shot at Bond, who gets out of a cab at his hotel, is
ruined by a passing car.
65 This deflation of procedural tension moves the emotional
Shot at Bond trajectory back up again.
Ruined
Here we have an example of an outcome that happens
all the time in action movies but is rarely accounted for by
game rules: a passive success. Bond did nothing to cause the vehicle to pass
by and wreck their shot at him. Yet we get the uptick in the hope/fear cycle
nonetheless.
You could argue that the RPG versions of the blind mice have missed
their roll, and that the GM has found an interesting way to describe their
failure. (This observation sets aside the POV limitation issue: Bond never
becomes aware of his close call.) This type of incongruent suspense beat, in
which the assassins’ shooting ability seems to be pitted against Bond’s luck,
is best handled by a narrative-style rules set, like HeroQuest, than one that
strictly models the physical interactions of weapon and target. Perhaps Bond’s
player spent a narrative resource, like a hero point, to cancel out a hit, which
was then represented in story as the passing vehicle.

66. Armed with new knowledge of Crab Key and Strangways’

samples, Bond interviews Dent in his office. He gets nothing
66 but clearly rattles Dent.
Bond Gets Bond fails to get anything useful out of Dent, even as his
Nothing But
Rattles Dent demeanor confirms 007’s suspicions of him. This setback
scores a down arrow.
We might think that he has scored an advantage by rattling Dent, and
may continue to assume this for several beats to come. However, nothing
actually comes of this. In fact, Bond will not seize the initiative and find a
means of moving forward in the story again until beat 82, when he realizes
that Miss Taro is working for the enemy.
 Dr. No | 89

Seizing Dominance
Sometimes players may surprise you by failing to seize the emo-
tional high ground in an interaction scene. Good drama dictates that
NPCs who are meant to provide up moments for the PCs put up
strong resistance and then crumble. Watch out for situations where
the players accept the tough front and get steamrollered when
they’re meant to do the steamrollering. You may need to telegraph
NPCs’ weaknesses more strongly for players unaccustomed to seiz-
ing the emotional high ground. Even when the rules provide a means
to do so, they may fail to use them. Often they’re reacting more as
the shy or laid-back people they are in real life than as the dominant
badasses they’re playing. Rather than lean back and let this hap-
pen, the GM should intervene to remind the player of the character’s
emotional wherewithal.
(This is another lesson the author now resolves to take into ac-
count in his own future GMing.)

67. A rattled Dent breaks procedure to seek a daylight trip to

Crab Key.
67 Something very peculiar now happens. For the next eight
Dent Demands beats, Dent takes over as protagonist. Using a device un-
Trip to Crab Key
available to GMs due to POV limitations, the script sustains
suspense even as Bond is momentarily stymied by following
the actions of a minor antagonist.
The voyeuristic quality of the film medium allows quicksilver shifts in
sympathy and identification that defy rational logic. A classic example occurs
after the shower murder in Psycho. Having identified with the Janet Leigh
character for the first act of the film, we suddenly find ourselves rooting for
Norman Bates, even as he cleans up the bloodied bathroom. A moment ago,
we were feeling horrified for the vulnerable victim of the killing. Now our
hope is that Norman successfully hide the evidence of her death, and fearing
that he’ll fail.
A subtler version of the same shift occurs here. Dent, still visibly agitated
from his meeting with Bond, surprises a boatman who evidently works for
Dr. No. He domineers the reluctant henchman into complying with his re-
quest. The boatman nervously says, “I hope you know what you’re doing.”
Shifting sympathies complicate our effort to identify our hopes and fears
 Dr. No | 90

for the scene.

We might be thinking that Dent’s nervousness is all part of Bond’s
plan. Perhaps 007 rattled him in the hopes of following him to his boss. If
we’re thinking that, the scene warrants a procedural up arrow—but this
turns out not to be the case. Bond, we’ll later discover, is waiting around
at his hotel, unaware of any of this. We’ve already encountered false sus-
pense; now we see that mistaken hope is also a force that moves the hope/
fear needle. We’ll indicate this misplaced hope by shading our upward-
pointing procedural arrow.
However, we also, thanks to the boatman’s discomfort, find ourselves
oddly fearful for Dent, who heretofore has registered as a louche and shifty
character. That points the needle down.

68. We see the bauxite mine on Crab Key, which we’ve previ-
ously heard about.
68 The audience gets information about something we’ve been
The Bauxite extensively teased about. Even if Bond isn’t seeing it, we’re
Mine
satisfied by the infusion of knowledge, and register this as a
positive reveal.

69. Then we start to wonder why the mine is a tense armed

camp.
69 This beat emphasizes the danger of the place, which we feel
…is an on Bond’s behalf even though he isn’t present. A mirror of
Armed Camp
the previous beat, we respond to this as a negative reveal.

70. One of the uniformed guards shoots a menacing glare at an

oblivious Dent.
70 In case we’d forgotten to worry about Dent, this fleeting
Guard Gives moment keeps that fear on the boil. Fear points the arrow
Dent a Dirty
Look down.

71. Dent is ushered into a vast, loomingly ominous interview

chamber.
71 The building concern we feel for Dent in this downward
Ominous procedural beat is generated largely by the brilliant produc-
Meeting
Chamber tion design of Bond series stalwart Ken Adam. The off-kilter
geometry of this vast space dominates Dent on behalf of its
unseen owner.
 Dr. No | 91

72. Dr. No, heard only through a menacingly reverberant

speaker, scolds Dent.
72 Here we have another stage in the intricate multi-step reveal
Dr. No as of our main villain. Our concern, meriting a downbeat, is
Disembodied
Voice both for Dent, our temporary protagonist, and for Bond,
who we know will have to eventually confront this unnerv-
ingly withheld figure.

73. Dr. No renews calls for Bond’s assassination, revealing the

terrifying weapon they’ll use—a tarantula!
73 Oh, for the innocent bygone days of 1962, when you could
Kill Bond With induce a heart-stopping down beat by whipping the cover
This Tarantula
off a tarantula cage. Here our concern has shifted from
Dent, who we see is not going to be appallingly punished
for his breach of protocol, back to Bond.

74. A foxy hotel clerk checks Bond out as he picks up his car.
You could argue that this otherwise innocuous scene in-
74 creases suspense by showing Bond to be unaware of his up-
Foxy Hotel Clerk coming appointment with a terrifyingly deadly arachnid.
Checks 007 Out
However, the use of the Bond theme, with its signals of vi-
carious power and dominance, tips us to its primary intent,
as a gratification beat. Speaking of the theme music, note the heavy lifting it
performs in adding excitement to a decidedly routine transaction.

75. Bond enters his darkened hotel room.

Now the shift to suspense music earns us a down beat by telling
75 us to be frightened for Bond. In a game, you could use a music
Bond Enters cue for this, or you could lay on the prose description. The mere
Darkened
Hotel Room phrase “Okay, so you enter your darkened hotel room…” is gen-
erally enough to set off players’ paranoia meters.

Instant Beat Shifts

Need to move the emotional arrow in a game session you’re run-
ning? A simple line or two of narrated description can do the trick.
These examples will suggest others tailored specifically to your
genre, characters, and the situation of the moment.
 Dr. No | 92

To move the arrow down:

• “Suddenly, the forest goes quiet.”

• “You feel like you’re being watched.”
• “You catch fleeting movement in your peripheral vision.”
• “Storm clouds darken the sky.”
• “Make a Perception check.”

To move the arrow up:

• “At the crest of the ridge, your allies triumphantly appear.”

• “Intuition tells you that you have all the pieces of the puzzle.
Now you just have to put them together.”
• “In the corner, you spy the tell-tale glint of gold and gems.”
• “A [beautiful woman/gorgeous man] greets you at the door.”
• “From yonder clearing wafts the smell of bacon.”

76. Bond keeps his cool even as he encounters signs of

intrusion.
76 Although the discovery confirms that Bond is in danger, we
Bond Keeps nonetheless experience an up beat here, both because of the
Cool Over Signs
of Intrusion confidence he projects, and because it pays off the prep scene
in beat 43.

Narrative Neatness as
Player Reward
Roleplaying games sacrifice the comforts of structure for the spon-
taneous discoveries of collective creativity. Some players, burned
by bad experiences with uncollaborative GMs, have learned to fear
structure as a sign of that dreaded bugaboo, railroading.
However, if within the bounds of a truly spontaneous and col-
laborative game, moments that pay off previous beats, as if they were
planned, provide a jolt of pleasure equivalent to a free-floating up beat.
This is especially so when they feel like planned moments, even though
 Dr. No | 93

both payoff and setup were clearly improvised separately.

Stories possess internal rhyming schemes. The ending of a
well-constructed story “rhymes” with the opening by resolving the
questions it answers. It often mirrors the imagery of the opening, or
allows it to be seen in a new light.
Any beat that recalls and enlarges on or completes a previous one
instills a feeling of structural unity. The further apart paired setup and
payoff beats appear, the greater the sense of pleasantly surprising neat-
ness. (An exception occurs when they’re separated by so much time
that the setup has been forgotten when the payoff occurs.)
Expected connections, like Bond taking precautions against
intrusion and then seeing them violated, effectively serve our innate
desire for order. Beats that pay off previous ones in unexpected
ways pack an even stronger punch.

77. In a tiny gesture of vulnerability, Bond holds his cold drink

glass to his forehead.
77 This hairline fracture in Bond’s poise suggests his sense of
Cold Glass strain. It humanizes him while also making us fear for him,
Gesture
turning the arrow down.

78. The tarantula crawls onto Bond as he sleeps.

Although every schoolboy can now tell you that tarantulas
78 pose no great threat to humans, this scene remains unnerv-
Tarantula! ing today. The beat’s downward power arises mostly from
the controlled alarm Connery projects when Bond becomes
aware of the spider.
Obviously this beat works more strongly on certified arachnophobes
than on others. This raises the gaming ethics question of how ruthless you’re
willing to be as a GM in exploiting specific real-world fears you know your
players have. The makers of Dr. No were aware that many members of the
audience would be especially terrified of spiders, but they weren’t targeting
particular individuals, whose sore spots they knew first hand.
 Dr. No | 94

79. Bond stays cool until the spider makes the mistake of crawl-
ing onto his sheet, then flips it onto the floor and kills it with his
79 shoe.
Bond Smashes Note the simplicity of the suspense rhythm exhibited by this
Tarantula
famous sequence: down, then up.

80. Consulting the station chief, Bond is unsurprised to learn

that the station’s files on Crab Key have gone missing.
80 This is Bond’s first active move since his meeting with Leiter
Station Chief: and Quarrel at Puss Feller’s, which concluded seventeen
Crab Key File
Missing beats ago. He doesn’t really find a new way forward toward
his goal until beat 82. Still, the fact that Bond has resumed
inquiries, and is unfazed by the files’ disappearance, puts him in some degree
of emotional control, enough to warrant a minor up beat.

81. Bond receives a mysterious package.

This beat tantalizes the audience with a question, one that
81 comes at us from an unusual angle. We want to know what’s
Mystery Box in the box, but it’s not part of the mystery Bond is work-
for 007
ing to uncover. Instead, it’s information he, our protagonist,
is withholding from us (and from the station chief ). So it
creates less a sense of dissatisfaction, as is typical for question beats, than of
anticipation.
Wow! When we finally find out what’s in this box, we’re going to be totally
blown away!
This situation, common enough in other narrative forms, has no evident
RPG equivalent. In a game, a mysterious box whose contents are known only
to one player would most definitely spur nagging unease and dissatisfaction
in the others.

82. Bond catches the station chief ’s secretary, Miss Taro, eaves-
dropping on his conversation with the station chief.
82 This reveal not only establishes Bond’s dominance (he
Bond Catches catches her kneeling) but promises a new avenue of investi-
Miss Taro
Eavesdropping gation, scoring a solid up beat.
 Dr. No | 95

83. Bond aggressively flirts her into agreeing to accompany him

on a future sightseeing expedition.
83 In contrast to his withholding interactions with Sylvia
007 Agressively Trench and Moneypenny, Bond takes the initiative here and
Flirts Taro into
Sightseeing pursues Miss Taro. However, taking on the role of petitioner
doesn’t cost him his emotional power, as we intuit that he’s
only doing it to achieve his procedural goals and has nothing dramatic at
stake should she turn him down. Her resistance is visible; without overtly
referring to it, he overcomes her by leveraging the compromising position he
caught her in during the previous beat.
In gaming terms, he might be applying a bonus gained from a previous
Perception check to his Seduce, Persuade or Intimidate check.

84. Bond confirms that Strangways’ rock samples from Crab

Key are radioactive, establishing that Dent probably lied to
84 him about them.
Samples Just as a tarantula serves as a perfectly adequate menace in
Radioactive;
Dent Lied this first installment of the Bond series, the reveal shows us
that the exciting item inside the package teased in beat 80
is… a Geiger counter. We’re far from the outlandish gadgetry we’ll see as the
formula solidifies.
As it relieves our satisfaction about the mystery box and sheds more light
on the mystery, this beat earns an up arrow.

85. Quarrel resists going to Crab Key, on the grounds that it

would tempt providence. And plus, there’s a dragon there.
85 As a foil to Bond, Quarrel is allowed to feel the fear we’d reject
Quarrel Resists in our hero. His objections build on the sense of menace already
Crab Key Trip
surrounding Crab Key, particularly with the introduction of
the dragon. They push the arrow back toward fear.

86. Bond offers to go without Quarrel.

This prospect increases our admiration for Bond, singling
86 him out as an iconic figure who can take action on his own.
007 Willing to This beat makes Bond seem less culpable when Quarrel’s
Go On Without
Quarrel fear of being killed by a dragon turns out to be warranted, as
happens in beat 148.
 Dr. No | 96

The Iconic Hero

An iconic hero re-imposes order on the world by reasserting his es-
sential selfhood. The nature of his radical individuality can be summed
up with a statement of his iconic ethos. It is the ethos that grants
higher meaning to the hero’s actions, and a clue to his creator’s inten-
tions. An iconic hero’s ethos motivates and empowers him.

• Sherlock Holmes solves mysteries using rigorous deductive

logic.
• Miss Marple solves mysteries with a sharp mind, hidden be-
hind a deceptively doddering demeanor.
• Conan uses his barbaric superiority to overturn the false order
of corrupt civilization.
• Dr. Gregory House caustically tramples social decencies
to solve medical mysteries, temporarily assuaging his self-
loathing.
• Batman brings justice to cowardly and superstitious wrongdo-
ers, doing for others what he could not do for his murdered
parents.
• Storm overcomes the enemies of human- and mutant-kind by
wielding nature’s untamed power.
• Tarzan upholds the noble values of the jungle against the
predatory outsiders who would despoil it.
• Aldo Raines brutalizes the brutalizers, marking them to strike
terror into their compatriots, and to prevent those he spares
from escaping their crimes.
• Philip Marlowe goes down mean streets, without himself be-
coming mean.

An iconic ethos implies both action and motivation, and is thus a

powerful tool for defining player characters in roleplaying games.
The ethos refers to something we, the audience want to see
happen. Thus it ensures sympathy for what is often eccentric, anti-
social or cruel behavior. The iconic hero is free of society’s con-
straints, yet acts to restore order. This order may be different from
our own, as it is for Conan and Tarzan, but is privileged within the
moral framework provided by the author. In real life, you might be a
PR rep for a firm engaged in clear-cutting old growth forest, but if
you disconnect your own values from the ethical universe portrayed
 Dr. No | 97

by Edgar Rice Burroughs, you can still enjoy rooting for Tarzan.
Where the iconic hero trope is used in an ironic or revisionist fash-
ion, we might be made to feel conflicted about the outcome. This
occurs with Raines, centerpiece of Inglourious Basterds’ disorienting
moral universe.

87. Quarrel agrees to go anyway.

With 007 now preemptively absolved for his foil’s later
87 demise, Quarrel relents. With him along, we are less con-
Quarrel cerned for Bond and his mission, so the arrow points up.
Relents

88. A purring, seductively posed Miss Taro, seen on the phone,

invites Bond to come to her. He accepts.
88 As it has already been heavily indicated that Miss Taro works
Seductive for Dr. No, Bond’s acceptance of her invitation puts him in
Invitation
From Taro jeopardy, moving the arrow down.
Dr. No telegraphs the villainy of its treacherous charac-
ters rather than withholding their identities from us. This sequence works on
suspense, rather than the sudden jolt of surprise you might get if Taro were
suddenly revealed to be an enemy agent.
The same moment happens in a game whenever the PCs head into a situ-
ation believing that it might be a trap.

89. An extremely long dissolve suggests that Bond is penetrat-

ing her with his car.
89 Rarely has a transition between shots evoked the same de-
Suggestive Car gree of psychosexual anticipation as this particular edit.
Dissolves
This visual cue subliminally invites us to share in Bond’s
sense of dominance over Taro, and the situation in general,
as he heads knowingly into a trap. The fear for him we felt in the previous
beat transforms into an up arrow.
 Dr. No | 98

90. The bleakness of the cement plant Bond’s car passes suggests
that something other than romance lies ahead.
90 In a break from the prevailing exoticism of the Jamaican
Cement Plant landscape, Bond finds himself in an industrial no man’s
Blackness
land—subtly cuing our sense of unease, and earning a down
arrow.

91. Bond is pursued by a car.

The trap has been sprung, jeopardy is in play, and the arrow
91 moves toward fear.
Bond Pursued
by Car

92. Bond out-drives them, steering his car under a construc-

tion equipment obstacle.
92 His successful move grants him the upper hand, and the au-
Bond Navigates dience an up arrow.
Equipment
Obstacle

93. The pursuers turn to avoid the obstacle and plunge into a
ravine, dying in a fiery crash.
93 Bond has won the exchange, and his enemies (presumably
Pursuers’ the blind mice, who otherwise disappear from the film after
Fiery Plunge
beat 65) are destroyed. He racks up another up arrow.

94. Bond treats a shocked construction worker to a mordant

quip: “I think they were on the way to a funeral.”
94 Recapitulating beat 39, Bond again uses sardonic wit in a
Quip: On Their display of dominance. As before, it is gratuitous, in that it
Way to a Funeral
doesn’t further his procedural goal. This must then be an-
other gratification beat, concluding on a free-floating up
arrow.

95. Miss Taro appears at her villa door, wrapped in a post-

shower towel and clearly surprised to see Bond alive.
95 Bond has the upper hand, and another up arrow is scored. We
Taro Surprised are encouraged to enjoy both the prospect of his securing an
to See Bond
advantage that will move him closer to his goal, and her sexual
vulnerability. The situation supplies us a justifying permission
 Dr. No | 99

for this unseemly gratification: she tried to have him killed, after all.

96. Bond tests her imposture by coming onto her. She’s forced by
her precarious position to appear receptive.
96 Here Bond successfully presses the advantage implied by the
Bond Amorously previous beat: another up arrow.
Tests Taro’s
Imposture

97. Miss Taro takes a phone call from her superior, who we
presume to be Dent.
97 This beat clarifies the situation for those whose drive-in
Taro Takes Call speakers may have momentarily shorted out, but doesn’t
From Dent
really alter our sense of hope or fear. The beat is a reveal,
albeit a weak one. If you didn’t get that Taro is a bad guy, or
that Bond is playing a delaying game in hopes that reinforcements will come,
you realize it here.
Screenwriters work to avoid moments of reiteration like this, but some-
times succumb out of necessity. The typical GM resorts to them all the time.
It’s much harder to convey information in an RPG than in other forms, as it
relies on off-the-cuff verbal descriptions to foster a set of shared mental im-
ages. Players easily make mistaken assumptions about their situations, which
the GM must periodically rectify. At times it even becomes necessary to re-
wind to a past event and revise a series of beats which came about due to a
misunderstood plot point. Though little spoken of, this ability to self-correct
is unique to RPGs.

98. Bond casually advances on her, while holding a towel like a

garotte.
98 In case we didn’t notice that we’ve been rooting for our hero
Bond Advances to engage in an act of sexual coercion, here we go. The film
With Garrote-
like Towel now flaunts its awareness of our darker hopes with a cheeky
suavity. It’s a moment of deeply ambiguous wish fulfillment
that few actors other than Connery could pull off.
We are meant to be with Bond here, savoring the transgressive edge of
what we want him to do. Today, under a very different set of social mores, we
may react to this entire sequence with more queasiness than greasy delight.
This thought brings us to another advantage of the RPG form. The audi-
ence consists only of a group of participants at a given gaming table. Except at
convention or other pick-up games, GMs know their preferences, prejudices
 Dr. No | 100

and expectations. Game masters can tailor the events they introduce into play
accordingly. With one group you might be willing to explore a contemporary
equivalent of this now-uncomfortable sequence. With another, you might
know to stay a million miles away from territory that would prove troubling
or uncomfortable.

99. He pulls her into a clinch, followed by a dissolve. And we

all know what that means.
99 Bond completes his achievement of dominance over Miss
Bond Pulls Taro Taro by sexually possessing her. He gains the power in the
Into Another
Dissolve scene. 007 has a procedural aim in mind, as we’ll see when
Dent shows up (beat 107), but this is not yet apparent to us.
Although Taro yields to his advances with still-evident reluctance, music cues
and a light comedy playing style encourage us to treat this as a gratification
beat, marked by a free-floating up arrow.
If we care to peer behind the veil of style to consider what’s really happen-
ing in front of our eyes, the beat takes on a darker tone. Miss Taro’s consent is
granted under duress: she must fear Bond, as an enemy agent. It has also been
established (in beat 60, for example) that Dr. No’s agents have good reason to
be terrified of him. Though played as seduction, Bond’s conquest is actually a
quasi-rape, and we are meant to root for him as he slyly commits it.

100. In a scene of parodic domesticity, Bond tests her to see if

she’s trying to keep him at her place. He suggests that they go
100 out to a restaurant; she insists on cooking for him.
Parody Domestic The discerning viewer can spot Bond’s procedural aim in
Scene
this cat-and-mouse verbal duel disguised as post-coital chat-
ter. Taro isn’t sure if Bond has twigged to her, but must pre-
tend that he hasn’t, just in case. Bond, surer of the situation than she is, retains
power, earning an up arrow.

101. Taro wonders why Bond has ordered a taxi if he drove to

her place—then backs off her questioning when she realizes
101 she’s giving herself away by seeming overly sharp and
Taro Slips, inquisitive.
But Recovers
Taro’s recovery from her tantalizing slip frustrates us, push-
ing the arrow down.
 Dr. No | 101

102. As a delaying tactic, and because he enjoys it, Bond presses

Taro into a second bout of questionably consensual
102 lovemaking.
Bond Coerces Bond’s predatory sexuality may seem more blatant the sec-
Taro Into a
Second Fuck ond time around, but now sensing his procedural objective,
we score this as another victory for Bond. The cruelly gratu-
itous nature of his action merely adds to the beat’s transgressive bite. (Or is
meant to, under the moral system the film expects us to buy into.)

103. The supposed taxi Bond ordered turns out to be an agent

to take Taro into custody.
103 This surprise played on Taro gives us a moment to exult in
Bond Has Taro the hero’s power over her—an up arrow. Bond has fucked
Arrested
her for a third time, this time metaphorically.

104. Taro spits in his face.

Although this act betrays Taro’s relative weakness, it is also
104 a threat to the dignity of the figure we’re identifying with.
Taro Spits in Nothing procedural is at stake here, but we fear for the emo-
Bond’s Face
tional state of our hero, so this beat resolves with a dramatic
down arrow.

105. Bond keeps his cool.

We regain our emotional equilibrium as Bond maintains
105 his, yielding a dramatic up arrow countering the downward
Bond Keeps move of the previous beat.
His Cool

106. With Taro spirited away, Bond secures her place, expect-
ing trouble.
106 In echo of beat 43, which took place in his own hotel room,
Bond Secures Bond increases our anxiety for him by taking defensive
Taro’s Place,
Expecting Trouble preparations.
Though the threat of having one’s physical space violated
by intruders is a staple of the espionage genre, it takes on a special tang here,
given the film’s Freudian undercurrents. The hero and villains establish domi-
nance over one another by entering each other’s living environments, just as
Bond establishes dominance over Taro by literally entering her. In Dr. No,
infiltration isn’t just breaking and entering, it’s metaphorical sexual assault.
 Dr. No | 102

107. Dent enters Taro’s bungalow, thrusts a gun through the

door, and shoots an obvious dummy in the bed. Bond gets the
107 drop on him.
Dent Shoots You could arguably split this into two beats, but director
Dummy; 007
Gets the Drop Terence Young milks the moment of menace so little that
it scarcely registers as a down beat. Instead the focus is on
Dent’s falling into Bond’s trap—a moment of power for us and our hero.
Note the extension of the home invasion as sexual penetration metaphor.
Unfortunately for Dent, he’s a premature shooter, unable to compete with a
true alpha male.

108. Bond cites Dent’s comment about the murdered secretary

as his first inkling that he was working for the enemy.
108 The pipe laid in beat 44 pays off in this moment, where Bond
Bond Cites furthers his dominance over Dent by confronting him with
Dent’s Secretary
Comment his error.

109. Dent grabs the pistol he’s been surreptitiously moving to-

ward himself by pulling on a throw rug with his foot. He pulls
109 the trigger, but it’s out of ammo, leading to the quintessential
“Smith & Wesson, Bond line: “It’s a Smith and Wesson, and you’ve had your six.”
and You’ve Had
Your Six.” Bond executes him.
If you’re a woman and you try to have Bond killed, he will
merely rape you a couple of times. If you’re a man and you shoot at him with
no hope of success, you deserve summary execution. We are happy to enjoy
the cold display of 007’s power, just as, a generation later, we will delight
when a weary Indiana Jones whips out his gun and shoots down the Arab
killer flashily whipping his scimitar about. An up arrow.
Bond is able to kill Dent because he needs nothing more from him. The
entire Taro ambush sequence, beginning at beat 88, would be seen in game
terms as an optional plot branch. 007 sweeps some pawns off the board, but
takes nothing from his encounters with Taro and Dent he needs in order to
move on to the Crab Key exploration, which has already been planned. In a
game, the player might easily skip straight to Crab Key before you could have
Miss Taro issue her invitation. You’d miss some interesting scenes but nothing
essential to the progress of the story.
 Dr. No | 103

110. Regret flits fleetingly across Bond’s face, indicating that

he’s not entirely without feelings for those he must dispatch.
110 Here the film allows us a hint of moral absolution for enjoy-
Moment of ing Dent’s execution. Bond loses emotional power, resulting
Disquiet
in a dramatic down arrow. At the same time, our sympathies
for him are strengthened—and we get to forgive ourselves
for the dark impulses the last beat slaked.

111. Quarrel resists Bond’s efforts to reassure him as they pre-

pare for Crab Key.
111 This recapitulation of beat 61 puts us in an appropriately ap-
Crab Key prehensive state of mind as we embark on the series of linked
Preparation:
Quarrel Nervous sequences that take us to the end of the film.

112. Bond rebuffs Leiter’s offer to come along.

By showing his confidence in the face of danger, Bond reas-
112 sures us, moving the arrow up.
Bond Rebuffs
Leiter’s Bid to Go

113. Leiter cracks wise at Quarrel’s expense, quipping that he’ll

be able to breathe on the dragon, killing it with his rum-soaked
113 breath.
Leiter Makes This strained moment of comedy relief might not yield
Quarrel Rum
Breath Joke much gratification but is intended as such. If we mark it ac-
cording to the response it was meant to engender, it resolves
upwards.

114. Bond and Quarrel land on Crab Key without incident.

Successfully penetrating the lush virgin jungle of his enemy’s
114 hideout, Bond scores an initial up arrow.
Successful
Landing

115. Quarrel takes a drink.

If you thought the crypto-rape sequence was going to pro-
115 vide the film’s queasiest moment of culture shock, this com-
Quarrel Takes edy relief beat discordantly drops us into Stepin Fetchit
a Drink
territory.
 Dr. No | 104

We’re supposed to find this funny because Quarrel is black, and because
funny music is playing, and because he presumably needs his rum for cour-
age and blacks are cowardly. Of course Bond drinks like a fish but suave or
suspenseful music plays when he does it.
Though you’ll find more blatant racism than this in the Fleming nov-
els, it’s hard to shrug this one off. This moment was glaringly dated at the
time of the film’s release, at the height of the civil rights movement. The beat
reverberates unfortunately through the rest of the piece, casting otherwise
borderline scenes in the worst possible light. Quarrel serves as a foil to Bond,
showing fear in situations where the filmmakers want us to be afraid, while
protecting 007’s heroism. Given the history of the stereotypically cowardly
black character, the choice to place an Afro-Caribbean in the foil role gives
rise to a host of unwanted associations, which this beat brings crashing home.
It undermines beats in which Quarrel is shown to be brave and competent,
like his unflinching response to being cut with the broken flashbulb in beat
59.
For the purposes of this exercise, we’ll score it the way it was intended to
land, as a gratification beat with a free-floating up arrow. If we noted it as it
plays today, it would be as an unintentional bringdown, with its free-floating
arrow pointed down.

Failed Beats
Discordant beats occur all the time in storytelling. Any beat can fail
to exert its intended effect, and not just because it falls out of step
with evolving societal values. A scary moment might fall flat, or invite
ridicule. Dramatic scenes meant to uplift or upset us deflate when
we withdraw our sympathies from the protagonists. Narrative confu-
sion can prevent any beat from hitting its mark.
RPGs differ from passively-consumed, predetermined story
forms in that they allow you to adjust for failed beats on the fly. If a
suspenseful moment fails to bring the players to the edge of their
seats—whether because it was misconceived, or one of the play-
ers chose an unfortunate time to insert a pop culture quip—you can
regroup, up the stakes and try again. If they treat a supporting char-
acter you expect them to care about with indifference or hostility,
you can reroute the developing story so that it no longer depends on
their affection for him.
 Dr. No | 105

We notated Quarrel’s Stepin Fetchit beat as it was intended to

play. However, when keeping your mental or literal narrative map of
an RPG session, follow the example given on p. 25 and mark the
up and down notes as they actually hit. This allows you to modulate
forthcoming beats to maintain the desired balance between hope
and fear.

116. In one of cinema’s all-time classic entrances, Honey Ryder

appears on the beach, like Venus emerging from a conch shell.
116 This racy glamor shot arouses our anticipation of sexual
Enter Honey fireworks between Bond and this new arrival, scoring an up
Ryder
arrow.
Most of the dramatic material of Dr. No, such as it is, re-
volves around the formation of a relationship between Bond and Honey. We
can tell that the piece lodges firmly on the procedural side of the continuum
because she doesn’t even appear until an hour into the picture.

117. Bond tries to approach her reassuringly; she keeps him at

bay.
117 Bond makes the first move in their courtship, and is rebuffed,
Honey Resists losing emotional power. This is a dramatic down beat.
007’s Approach,
Reassurances Although 007 has a procedural reason for trying to fig-
ure out who she is and deal with her, viewers familiar with
movie tropes know what’s going on here. The dramatic courtship beats will
soon dovetail with the procedural goal of investigating Dr. No, but at this
stage Bond is starting by trying to establish a personal connection with her.

118. Honey softens her attitude to Bond after overreacting and

pulling a knife on him.
118 This initial show of trust moves Bond toward his unstated, if
Honey Asserts audience-presumed goal, of forming a relationship with her,
Herself w/ Knife,
Then Relents and earns a dramatic up arrow.
 Dr. No | 106

119. Questions about Dr. No’s awareness of her provide a text

for their courtship.
119 Dramatically, this beat brings the couple closer, which we
Bond Courts hope for, and reminds us of the danger they’re in, and hence
Honey With
Questions our fears. An upward dramatic arrow crosses a downward
procedural one.

120. Quarrel warns them of an approaching boat.

Their danger goes from hypothetical to imminent, pushing
120 the procedural arrow down.
Quarrel Warns of In a game, you might be tempted to mark this as a vic-
an Approaching
Boat tory, as presumably Quarrel’s player succeeded at his Per-
ception check. But the check reveals alarming information,
which exerts a greater emotional impact than the fact of the successful roll
that preceded it. Being in less trouble than you otherwise would be (if you’d
missed the check and allowed an ambush) still counts as a down moment.
From here on out, with occasional pauses, the procedural beats get short-
er and more numerous. The rhythm has grown faster. We’ve seen this happen
before, in the final act of Hamlet.

121. The boat’s crew, blindly calling on a bullhorn, demands

their surrender.
121 Their jeopardy increases—another down arrow.
Henchmen
Demand
Surrendur

122. They fire machine guns on the beach.

Another escalation of their jeopardy, with down arrow.
122
Henchmen Fire
Machine Guns

123. The henchmen threaten to return with dogs.

Even though they’re leaving, dogs don’t sound good. Over-
123 all, this beat still puts our hero in a worse procedural spot.
Henchmen
Threaten to
Return With Dogs
 Dr. No | 107

124. Honey confirms the presence of a dragon.

A dragon sounds even worse than dogs. Another down
124 arrow.
Honey Confirms
Dragon

125. Bond wonders what the so-called dragon could really be.
This beat introduces a nagging question, and so also moves
125 the procedural arrow down.
What is it That
Looks Like
a Dragon?

126. Honey defends her natural and experiential viewpoint

against Bond’s rationalist worldview.
126 In a delightfully bizarre speech that would warm the cockles
“Ever Seen a of Werner Herzog’s heart, Honey challenges Bond: “Have
Scorpion With
Sunstroke?” you ever seen a mongoose dance? A scorpion with sunstroke
sting itself to death?” Her monologue places a roadblock be-
tween her and Bond, moving them away from our hoped-for union. It gives
her greater character shading than either Trench or Taro, while establishing
her as a more difficult conquest. The dramatic arrow dips.

127. Bond overcomes her reluctance to depart in daylight.

We want Bond to protect this civilian from harm, and react
127 with hope when he successfully convinces her on this tacti-
H.’s Reluctance cal point.
to Leave in Day
Overcome

128. They see that her boat is riddled with bullets from the
prior machine gun fire.
128 This new complication reverses the victory of the previous
Honey’s Boat is beat, pushing the arrow down again.
Bullet-riddled
 Dr. No | 108

129. Honey blames him for the damage to her boat.

The procedural setback has now become a dramatic one,
129 too. Our hopes for romance dim, with as indicated by a
Honey Blames down arrow. The two streams have now dovetailed—in or-
Bond
der to win Honey, Bond must get her safely off the island.

130. Bond, his sidekick and his love interest undertake a tough
journey to a good hiding place.
130 The arduous journey beat is another staple of adventure fic-
Slog to Hiding tion. It increases our sense of tension—and drives the pro-
Place
cedural arrow down—by emphasizing the toll taken on its
slogging heroes.
Tolkien relies heavily on the arduous journey; it is a dominant trope of
both The Hobbit and the The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Through his influence,
it has also become a staple of RPGs—perhaps to an extent that outweighs
their narrative interest.

Making Arduous Journeys Dramatic

It’s sometimes effective to use journey beats simply to wear down
a group’s resources. This creates useful tension. That said, if you
look at a journey beat and see that dropping it wouldn’t change your
broader narrative at all, it could probably benefit from a rethink.
The arduous journeys in The Lord of the Rings bear dramatic
weight by testing and deepening the bonds between the characters.
Frodo and Sam’s trek through Mordor typifies this. They’re not about
getting from one point to another in physical space, but about the
limits of loyalty and love between friends.
Make your journey sequences earn their keep, becoming more
than just confrontations with meaningless plot impediments. Con-
struct obstacles so that they activate a PC’s internal conflicts, or
provide the opportunity to alter relationships within the group. If
supporting characters are along for the ride, relationships with them
might likewise be sharpened by procedural beats encountered dur-
ing a journey.
Even on a strictly procedural level, the consequences of well-
constructed journey beats exert an influence on subsequent scenes:
 Dr. No | 109

• The object gained as a possible benefit from obstacle A aids

in overcoming obstacle B.
• Eating those tempting eggs triggers the wrath of the bird
goddess.
• Success in dealing with the tribesmen of Vho gives the team
an earned rescue if they need it later.

131. Applying a remedy against mosquitoes, Honey rubs salt

water on Bond.
131 In this dramatic beat, hopes for romance leap upwards as
Honey Rubs our heroine finds a pretext to get sensual with our hero.
Bond to Ward
Off Mosquitoes

132. The henchmen return, with the promised dogs.

Jeopardy resumes; the arrow moves down.
132
Pursuers
With Dogs

133. Our heroes stand waist deep in water. Honey cries out;
something has bitten her foot.
133 Her cry increases our fear and earns a down arrow.
Honey Cries
Out; Bitten
Underwater

134. Instead of finding Bond, the dogs flush a covey of birds.

Bond and company are now a little safer, moving the arrow
134 up.
Dogs Find Birds
Instead of Bond

135. The group comes out of hiding, not realizing that there’s
still one patrolling gunman left.
135 Unseen danger points the arrow down.
There’s a
Gunman They
Don’t See
 Dr. No | 110

136. They spot him in time. Bond ambushes and kills the
guard.
136 The danger dealt with, the arrow points up again.
Bond Ambushes
and Kills
Gunman

137. Honey appalled, asks why Bond had to kill the guard.
Returning to the dramatic territory of their nascent ro-
137 mance, Honey is again distanced from Bond, earning a
Honey: “Why?” down arrow. Bond justifies his actions as necessary. As we’re
Bond: “Because
I Had To.” about to see, their courtship revolves around a most 007ish
issue: when it is acceptable to kill.

138. The three plunge deeper toward No’s base.

Here jeopardy is represented with a shot of a literal danger
138 sign, complete with skull and crossbones. There might as well
Past the be a sign below it reading procedural down arrow.
DANGER Zone

139. Honey and Bond have a flirtatious moment as they bathe

together.
139 This water, one must presume, is cleaner than the stuff
“You Smell they’ve just been trudging through. Honey remarks that
Nice Already.”
Bond already smells good. Clearly she likes a man who works
up a sweat while engaged in manly activities. The beat brings
them closer together, registering an upward dramatic arrow.

140. They spot dragon tracks, which seem ominous even when
obviously made by tires.
140 A reminder of danger earns a down arrow. Like Dr. No
Dragon Tracks himself, his “dragon” is introduced in stages, for maximal
Made by Tires
Still Ominous impact.

141. Honey supplies her backstory, including the fact that she
attributes the death of her father to Dr. No.
141 In this reveal, a dramatic up arrow (because Honey is open-
Honey: “Dr. ing up to Bond, bringing them closer) crosses a procedural
No Killed My
Father.” down arrow (because Dr. No is made more menacing).
 Dr. No | 111

142. Honey tells Bond that she once used a black widow spider
to kill a would-be protector who wanted to take advantage of
142 her.
She Also Kills Suddenly, and in curious contrast to her concern for the
With Spiders
guard just a few beats ago, it turns out that Honey isn’t such
an outsider to Bond’s deadly world after all. Now she re-
veals herself to be a counterpart to Bond, coldly dispatching those who need
and deserve to be killed. At the same time, she’s his symbolic opposite: her
weapon is the natural world. Use of spider as murder weapon also connects
her symbolically to the bad guy, who we have seen deploy a tarantula in an
attempt to assassinate Bond.
Bond’s oddly priggish reply, “Well it wouldn’t do to make a habit of it,”
shows an amusing discomfort as he finds an apparent equal who has given
herself license to kill. She is untamed and independent, where he has to ac-
cept occasional fusty emasculations from M in order to keep his own license
in proper order.
Despite the violence of the imagery and Bond’s ruffled reaction, the shar-
ing of information brings them closer together and works as a dramatic up ar-
row. In the world of James Bond, murder talk is the equivalent of an intimate
coffee date.

143. Honey leaves Bond momentarily speechless by asking if he

has a woman of his own.
143 Although it’s amusing to see Bond’s savoir faire momentarily
She Asks 007 If deflated, his failure to keep up with her lessens his emotional
He Has a Woman
Of His Own power and is a setback toward our hope of seeing them to-
gether—even as it suggests that she might mean something
more to him than his previous conquests. A dramatic down arrow resolves
the beat.

144. Quarrel reports a dragon sighting.

Jeopardy interrupts their last romantic interlude, driving
144 the arrow down. Quarrel is the one to spot both the dragon
Quarrel Sights here, and the boat, earlier, because as Bond’s foil, he is al-
the Dragon
lowed to exhibit the fear response the filmmakers want to
convey to the audience. Bond is protected from seeming
afraid, although we are afraid for him.
 Dr. No | 112

Procedural Foils
In RPGs we tend to view sidekicks, allies and other supporting char-
acters as resources for the heroes to draw on. They extend the PCs’
capabilities, allowing them to perform tasks that would otherwise
seem out of character for them. Sidekicks, servants and retainers
help collapse time by performing uninteresting tasks off-screen. All
of these are useful qualities.
We tend to forget, however, the emotional value of foil charac-
ters, which is to establish the hero’s dominance. Quarrel is allowed
to feel frightened and ultimately get killed, without tarnishing Bond’s
aura of mastery. Felix demonstrates Bond’s dominance by being
almost as cool and well-placed as he is, but still left admiring on the
sidelines, whether 007 is infiltrating Crab Key or snogging Honey
Ryder.
Help to build your PCs’ sense of dominance and competence
by arraying foil characters around them. Like Star Trek red shirts,
they can demonstrate the dangers the heroes avoid, registering
down beats without saddling the PCs with direct failures. Periodic
interactions with admiring foils allow for easy up beats, which leaven
interactions with antagonistic or amusingly frustrating witnesses,
guards, and other NPCs who act as obstacles to their aims.

145. They are spotted by the crew of the flamethrower-equipped

jeep.
145 Jeopardy increases; the arrow dips.
Spotted by the
“Dragon” Crew

146. Bond fires on the jeep, hitting a headlight.

Bond gains an advantage, moving the arrow up.
146 In a game, any hit scored by one of the PCs in a combat
Bond Fires on scores as a procedural up arrow. Any other advantage gained,
Jeep, Hits a
Headlight including actions that decrease enemies’ ability to attack,
does likewise. Conversely, hits suffered by the PCs, or effects
lowering their combat effectiveness, act as procedural down arrows.
Running RPG fights involves enough bookkeeping as it is without stopping
 Dr. No | 113

to map their many up and down beats. As an exercise, it might be enlightening to

record a combat in your game system of choice and map it out later.

147. A panicked Honey runs to Bond’s side, distracting him

and preventing him from shooting out the other headlight.
147 As we’re about to see, this down beat will bring about a ma-
Honey Distracts jor setback for Bond. It’s staged, however, to protect our con-
007; He Misses
Second Light ception of him as heroically ultra-competent. Bond doesn’t
simply miss the second headlight. The setback comes about
because an outside force—in this case, a frightened Honey—intervenes.
In RPGs, the default practice is to treat setbacks as direct failures of the
protagonist. Bond’s player would roll and fail to hit. Honey’s distraction
might be taken into account as a negative modifier on the roll. If the modifier
made the difference between success and failure, it would be interpreted by
the player as having made the difference. Otherwise, it would be discounted
as irrelevant.
Where we wish to emulate the ethos of iconic heroism found in most
serial adventure material, including the Bond series, we might do better
to depict setbacks as the effect of outside factors. In this model, the player
would roll and fail. Then the GM or player would supply description that
recognized the setback while protecting the character’s sense of compe-
tence—only then deciding that Bond’s shot is spoiled by Honey’s sudden
appearance at his side. (In keeping with today’s preference for gender-
equal adventure, you’d probably pick a distraction other than a panicking
love interest.)

148. Quarrel is killed by the flamethrower.

In this down beat, Quarrel’s earlier fear of dragons proves
148 to be justified. If we remember that moment, we feel an ad-
Quarrel Burned ditional degree of dismay at his demise.
to Death
The unheeded prophecy goes back to the mythic roots
of narrative. It is an example of a paired set of beats which
point downwards both times—when the feared outcome is initially predict-
ed, and when it comes true.
In a game, any prediction of doom might go either way—it could be a
pair of down beats, as with Quarrel’s demise, or a suspense note paid off by an
up beat, when the prophesied fate is avoided.
Here Quarrel completes his arc as an exemplar of unfortunate racial ste-
reotyping, by proving himself to be the expendable black sidekick. This trope
 Dr. No | 114

will persist long after the blatant minstrelsy seen in beat 115 disappears from
the cinematic playbook.

149. Bond and Honey are taken prisoner.

Being captured is always a down beat. Bond loses his domi-
149 nance and with it his ability to act. This moment would play
Bond and Honey as an even deeper down beat in a game, where players tradi-
Taken Prisoner
tionally find the capture of their characters extremely upset-
ting. While we vicariously identify with characters in passive
media, we expect to control the destinies of our PCs. When that control is
taken away from us, the sense of loss can prove surprisingly vehement. To suc-
cessfully emulate the Bond universe, or any other genre in which heroes are
routinely captured, GMs may need to strongly telegraph the fact that they
will soon be able to escape. It also helps to remind them that imprisonment
typically provides a hero with vital advantages of information or access.

150. Bond is taken inside No’s base, where he sees its army of
radiation-suited minions.
150 Some reveals are satisfyingly informative and others omi-
They’re Taken nous. This reveal is both, leading out on a set of crossed
Inside the Base
arrows.

151. No’s minions discover that Bond and Honey are

radioactive.
151 This note of danger moves the arrow down.
They Need
Radioactive
Decontamination

152. Bond and Honey are stripped and showered.

Danger turns to gratification as we get a racy (by 1962 stan-
152 dards) eyeful of our appealing leads.
Connery and Despite the occasional vogue for cheesecake art in pub-
Andress Hit
the Showers lished game products, sex appeal is harder to evoke in an
RPG context than in passively consumed media. It’s one
thing to quietly enjoy a peek at a fetchingly dampened Andress or Connery as
a private jolt of pleasure. Entering into a participatory evocation of titillation
with one’s friends and acquaintances crosses an intimacy boundary. Sexiness
in gaming sessions may be one effect that becomes more unwelcome the more
successfully it is evoked.
 Dr. No | 115

153. Bond and Honey are deemed decontaminated.

Whew! Thank goodness that threat was so easily overcome!
153 An up arrow.
Successfully Joking aside, these three beats, though played to set up
Decontaminated
and play out the previous gratification beat, prefigure a dark-
er sense of sexual vulnerability that will later become appar-
ent as Bond’s imprisonment continues.

154. They are welcomed by ominously solicitous attendants.

The suspense here comes from reversed expectations: the at-
154 tendants are friendly… too friendly. A down arrow. Overly
Ominously friendly bad guys are a staple element of the GM’s kitbag.
Solicitous
Welcome

155. Bond and Honey are escorted into a luxurious guest

suite.
155 Just as audiences of stage productions (especially those of a
Opulent certain age), ooh and awe predictably at pretty chandeliers,
Guest Suite
the audience is here invited to enjoy the visual sumptuous-
ness of No’s complex. This indulgence in vicarious wealth
fantasy registers as gratification.

156. Bond demonstrates his cool by eating the food his captors
have supplied for them.
156 Bond asserts dominance in what is intended to be an off-
Bond Shows His putting, if opulent, environment by showing his lack of fear.
Cool by Eating
Their Meal In a moment, this show of sang froid will prove to be unwise,
but for now it scores an up arrow.

157. He warns Honey that the place is probably bugged.

After several up arrows, Bond reminds us, through Honey,
157 of the jeopardy they face, moving the arrow down.
Bond Warns
Honey the Place
is Likely Bugged
 Dr. No | 116

158. Bond and Honey pass out, drugged by the coffee they just
drank.
158 With this down beat, Bond’s insouciance in beat 156 is now
Drugged Coffee; shown to be misplaced. This is a rare instance of Bond mak-
They Pass Out
ing an outright mistake. However, as we’re about to see, the
consequences of his error are more creepy than disastrous.

159. Dr. No enters, seen only as a pair of shadowy feet.

The step-by-step unveiling of our main villain continues in
159 this menacing down beat.
Dr. No Entrance
as Pair of
Shadowy Feet

160. Dr. No pulls back the sheets to peer at a sleeping Bond.

In this downward suspense beat, our helpless and unaware
160 hero is at the mercy of our gleaming-handed villain. It es-
Dr. No Peeps at tablishes an unmistakable sexual undertone to No’s upcom-
Bond in Bed
ing dealings with Bond. No’s brand of sexual dominance, in
contrast to our charming hero’s, occurs at a cowardly, voy-
euristic remove. In case there are any doubts about No’s predilections, we see
him check out Bond but not Honey.
The series’ depiction of gayness as perverse and sinister becomes particu-
larly stark with Diamonds Are Forever and its hitman lovers, Mr. Wint and
Mr. Kidd. They aren’t the only villains whose attitude toward Bond takes on
a sexual subtext. Blofeld’s cat is surely a signifier of something. Enemies have
been trying to castrate him since Goldfinger’s laser table, a tradition carried
on by Mads Mikkelsen’s Le Chiffre in the revisionist Casino Royale.

161. The next morning, Bond and Honey are summoned to

meet their host. Bond reassures her by admitting to being
161 scared.
Bond Reassures This beat serves both dramatic and procedural purposes.
Honey by
Admitting Fear Dramatically, it brings our couple closer together. Procedur-
ally, it increases the sense of threat and tension—even our
hero is anxious. Once more the script protects Bond’s iconic heroism. By hav-
ing Bond admit his fears in the context of calming Honey, he retains a sense
of dominance—his admission is not cowardly, but gallant.
 Dr. No | 117

162. They head into Dr. No’s imposing inner sanctum.

No’s weirdly luxurious apartment is yet another step on his
162 multi-staged reveal. As they come closer to meeting this ter-
Into Dr. No’s rifying figure, the tension mounts, for another down beat.
Sanctum

163. No establishes dominance with talk of his extremely im-

pressive aquarium, not to mention his spookily precise knowl-
163 edge of Bond’s martini requirements.
Dominance Dominance for the villain is a down beat for the hero.
by Aquariums
and Martinis

164. Bond wryly notes No’s portrait of Napoleon.

This beat, consisting of a look from Connery and a single co-
164 medic soundtrack sting, arouses our anticipation that Bond
Bond Wryly has found something to use against No in what is clearly an
Notes Napoleon
Portrait imminent verbal duel. It scores an up note.

165. Bond flatters No.

Bond takes the verbal initiative with a gambit we think
165 might work, given the megalomania signaled in the previ-
Bond Flatters ous beat. He scores the first up arrow of the verbal contest.
Dr. No
So far we’re scoring this as a purely procedural interaction:
Bond wants No to satisfy his practical needs, not his emo-
tional ones.

166. Bond subtly needles him regarding his use of atomic pow-
er, while also pumping him for information.
166 Bond retains the floor, upshifting to a more aggressive verbal
Bond Needles tactic. Another uptick in his—and our—favor.
No, Pumps Him
For Information

167. Bond oversteps, claiming to have sent information back to

headquarters. No calls him on it.
167 The advantage shifts to No: a down arrow.
Bond Claims He
Checked In; No
Calls His Bluff
 Dr. No | 118

168. Bond tries to rattle him with a list of his enemies. No

coolly deflects him: “I only gratify your curiosity because you’re
168 the one man capable of appreciating what I’ve done.”
No Stays Cool 007’s next gambit fails, too, for another down arrow. No’s
as 007 Lists
His Enemies response suggests that their verbal contest is asymmetrical.
Bond may not want anything emotional from No, but No
seeks validation from Bond. His earlier voyeuristic gazing session with the
sleeping Bond indicates that what he seeks from him isn’t entirely platonic,
either.
Bond wants to learn about and disrupt No’s rocket scheme.
No wants Bond to love him.
The audience doesn’t have a rooting interest in the subtextual motiva-
tions of our antagonist, absolving us of the need to track his dramatic arrow.

169. Bond argues for Honey’s freedom; No appears to agree.

We’re more worried for Honey than for Bond, so this de-
169 velopment raises our hopes. It moves Bond closer to the
007 Argues For secondary procedural goal (rescuing Honey) that fulfills his
H.’s Freedom; No
Seems to Agree dramatic goal (winning Honey), and earns an uptick.

170. No immediately withdraws his offer, threatening her with

rape: “I’m sure the guards will amuse her.”
170 No sadistically reclaims dominance by threatening the sexual
Honey Taken violation of Bond’s woman. Our fears increase, pushing the
Away; Rape
Threatened arrow down. Note that any raping of Honey will be done by
proxy. No’s interests are apparently elsewhere, and, as we’ll
soon see, he is a metaphorical eunuch.

171. A guard gets the drop on Bond, preventing him from in-
tervening as Honey is led away.
171 Bond’s failure to save her earns a downtick.
Guard Thwarts
Bond’s
Rescue Bid
 Dr. No | 119

172. No sees that Bond has seized a champagne bottle to use as

a club. Bond recovers verbal dominance by one-upping him in
172 a duel of wine snobbery.
Bottle Sparks Bond’s maintenance of his cool even as Honey is being
Duel of Wine
Snobbery dragged off to a degrading fate earns him an uptick. If we’d
seen Bond take the bottle before No spots it, the discovery
of the bottle might count as separate beat, in which Bond is defeated again.
Since we are never given time to hope that the bottle will be used, it doesn’t
register as a moment separate from the dueling quips about the best year for
Dom Perignon.

v 173. No expresses disappointment as he sees that Bond has also

grabbed a knife.
173 No has begun to sour on the object of his affections, but what
No Disappointed we register is the down beat telling us that Bond isn’t going
Bond Has Tried
to Steal a Knife to get out of this one, at least not with a hidden weapon.

174. Bond mocks his insecurities, in overtly Freudian terms:

“Does the toppling of American missiles really compensate for
174 having no hands?” Thus baited, No reveals the wider scope of
Bond Mocks plan and his membership in (and the existence of )
No; No Reveals
SPECTRE SPECTRE.
Bond retakes the verbal initiative with a direct strike at No’s
sexual inadequacies, making a metaphorical eunuch of him. In response, No
gives him what he wants—a massive reveal, and an up arrow to go with it.

175. Bond continues provoking him, referring to his Napoleon

complex and dismissively uttering another classic line: “World
175 domination, that same old dream.” In response, No switches to
More Needling a display of physical dominance, crushing a brass Buddha stat-
Prompts No to
Crush Buddha uette with his prosthetic hand.
Here Bond pushes his luck, repeating a successful tactic
more forcefully, and gets shut down. The result of this is ambiguous from
a procedural point of view. No is displaying both literal strength and emo-
tional weakness by shifting from the verbal to the physical. Bond succeeds in
ruffling him but gets no further reveals. The mixed outcome yields crossed
procedural arrows.
This scene embodies a principle seen in some story-based rules sets, in-
cluding Over the Edge and HeroQuest, where repeated uses of the same tactic
 Dr. No | 120

are penalized. Bond should have switched to a new tactic against No, but
tried to double down. The logic of the hope/fear cycle explains why this must
be so. Each beat must be distinct from the one that came before it. If the situ-
ation is repeated, the only opportunity for rhythmic variance comes from a
different outcome.

176. A miffed Dr. No lays a guilt trip on Bond.

No goes on the attack without success, leaving Bond with
176 an uptick. He peevishly complains that Bond has cost him
No Attempts time and money, and even admits that Bond’s rejection of
Guilt Trip; Bond
Quips Back him has damaged his pride. Further, he confesses to having
had a place in SPECTRE picked out for Bond. His clipped,
hurt tones indicate that this place would have been very close by No’s side.
Like any guilt trip, it’s a bid to force the other party to give in, to assuage the
petitioner’s injured feelings. In response, Bond hits him with a quip.

177. No abandons his seduction attempt, curtly calling Bond

“A stupid policeman whose luck has run out.”
177 Having run out of tactics in his bid for Bond’s love, No ends
No Calls Bond the contest. We might be happy to see him fail in achieving
“A Stupid
Policeman” his goal, but any joy there is outweighed by his threat to our
hero, which drives the arrow down.

178. The countdown is about to begin.

The tension ratchets up again, as No draws closer to complet-
178 ing his scheme. If that happens, Bond loses his primary pro-
Countdown cedural objective, so that prospect triggers a down arrow.
About to Begin

179. No orders the guards to beat Bond, which they proceed to

do.
179 A beatdown for the hero spells a down arrow for the audi-
No Directs ence. No tells the guard to “soften him up”—that is, to make
Guards to Soften
Bond Up Bond submissive and rob him of his masculinity. This ends
an extended contest between No and Bond that began with
beat 163. Both Bond and No have lost the entire sequence. Aside from some
info on SPECTRE which is of no immediate consequence, Bond has gained
 Dr. No | 121

no advantage that he doesn’t have simply for being in the complex already8.
No has failed to win Bond’s love or affirmation. Their losses were in a sense
fore-ordained, as neither is prepared to grant what the other petitions.

180. Bond regains consciousness in a prison cell.

At first sight, this cell seems like it will be much harder to get
180 out of than the luxury guest suite, so we assume that Bond is
Bond Wakes Up in a worse position. The arrow dips.
in a Tougher Cell

181. Bond’s attempt to break a grate covering the cell’s duct

work results in electric shock.
181 The arrow drops further as the obstacle to his escape proves
Grate-breaking to be greater than anticipated.
Attempt Gets
007 Zapped In traditional RPG practice, the GM would decide in
advance that the grate is electrified and penalize the char-
acter with a hit point loss or other ill effect for failing to spot and overcome
the obstacle. Here we see that the dramatic rhythm requires that Bond suffer
at least nominal resistance to his escape attempt. Otherwise this sequence,
which is already about to stretch its credibility, would break it altogether. The
electrification doesn’t cost Bond resources or add to his ongoing burdens. It
is the reason why he can’t get out on his first try. This beat might be better
rendered in game terms by having Bond make his Escape or Athletics check
against a high resistance. When he fails, the GM explains it by describing the
electrical shock.

182. Bond uses his shoe to break through the grate.

The apparently tough cell turns out to be fairly easy to get out
182 of—although this is just the first stage in a multi-step escape
Shoe Beats that continues for another six beats.
Electric Grate
In our hypothetical game session, the player has been
challenged to change the circumstances of the grate-break-
ing attempt, gaining permission to repeat a failed check. The GM, knowing
that escapes must be as easy in RPGs as they are in adventure stories, gener-
ously allows the shoe justification. She drops the resistance significantly to
avoid the repetitive stall of forward momentum that would occur if Bond
8: After the events of the film, Bond presumably reports the information he’s gained about SPECTRE
back to headquarters. As this victory exists only in theory, outside the confines of the narrative, it by
definition can’t give us the sense of vicarious triumph that would earn an up arrow here.
 Dr. No | 122

fails again. He makes his check against the lowered resistance and moves on
to the next stage of the escape.

183. Bond climbs through a weird duct network.

Disturbing sound effects and the strange ribbed structure of
183 the wet piping lend a foreboding quality to Bond’s new en-
Eerie Tunnel vironment, moving the arrow down again. In a film as laced
Network
with Freudian dominance as Dr. No, it is sadly impossible
not to note the intestinal quality of the duct network de-
sign. Bond is now crawling up his enemy’s metaphorical nether regions.

184. Bond falls.

This action beat shows the difficulty of Bond’s situation, for
184 another down arrow.
Bond
Falls

185. He counters too-hot tunnel surface by tearing off his

jacket.
185 After an ominous beat and an explicit setback, Bond earns
Jacket Beats an up arrow by overcoming an obstacle.
Hot Tunnel

186. The tunnel floods.

Then he’s in danger again, for another down arrow.
186
Tunnel
Floods

187. Bond holds on, withstanding the deluge.

The arrow moves back up with this successful action.
187
Bond
Holds On
 Dr. No | 123

188. 007 crawls through even hotter piping and escapes through
a grate into a holding area.
188 Bond completes the entire escape sequence on a upward
Bond Escapes beat.
Into Holding
Area

189. He overpowers a techie to steal his conveniently disguising

radiation suit.
189 Advantage—Bond. Another up arrow.
007 Overpowers
Guard, Steals
Hazmat Suit

190. He enters the control center, where he watches No prepare

for his toppling attempt.
190 Bond is now in position to wreak havoc on No’s plans, mov-
Bond Infiltrates ing the arrow up.
Command
Center

191. 007 waits for the ideal moment to strike.

Although Bond doesn’t lose an advantage here, having to
191 wait for the right moment to act always ratchets up the ten-
Bond Waits for sion. It implies that the chance to act may not come, increas-
the Moment
to Strike ing our sense of worry and putting us on the edge of our
seats. A down arrow.
The suspense of waiting is easiest to pull off in movies or on stage, where
moments can be held and extended in real time. In verbal or written forms,
including fiction and RPGs, the effect becomes more difficult. Impatient
readers can jump ahead through text that attempts to draw out temporal ten-
sion. Likewise, it’s hard for a GM to dilate time through simple description,
as players can jump in at any time to ask questions, engage in side talk, or
jump forward in time to their characters’ next actions.

192. No sees that Bond is out of place and orders him out of
striking distance.
192 What we feared has come to pass—Bond missed his chance.
No Spots A down arrow.
Bond, Orders
Him Away
 Dr. No | 124

193. Bond waits as the countdown to launch ticks away.

007 is waiting again but in a worse position, increasing our
193 worry. Ticking clocks are always hope/fear downticks.
Bond Waits as
Countdown
Ticks

194. No’s scheme is about to come to fruition. The radio beam

has been synchronized for toppling!
194 We’ve never gotten a clear explanation of what No’s rocket-
Radio Beam toppling plan is meant to achieve or what disaster it foretells,
Synchronized
For Toppling but his person and his fiefdom of Crab Key are sufficiently
sinister that we know it must be bad. The tension surround-
ing the launch has now reached its peak—and on a hope/fear map, tension
points us down, toward fear.

195. Bond exposes the control rods of No’s nuclear reactor.

Our hero finally takes concrete action to stop No’s scheme.
195 The arrow ticks up.
Bond Exposes
Control Rods

196. A techie tries to compensate for Bond’s sabotage.

The prospect of Bond’s action being reversed moves the ar-
196 row toward fear.
Techie Tries
Countermeasure

197. Bond punches the techie over a railing.

007 counters the countermeasure, scoring an up arrow.
197
007 Punches
Techie Over
Railing

198. No spots Bond, ordering a shutdown.

This is a mixed procedural beat, marking a success on Bond’s
198 part while at the same time increasing our worry for him.
No Spots Although Bond has succeeded in foiling No’s plans, it can’t
Bond, Orders
Shutdown be good news that his enemy is now aware of his presence
and able to take action against him. Until No has been per-
 Dr. No | 125

sonally brought to heel, Bond’s procedural goal remains incomplete.

199. Techies abandon the control center.

A second mixed beat follows: it’s good that the henchmen
199 are fleeing, but if they’re evacuating, the control center must
Techies Flee be about to blow.
Control Center

200. No attacks Bond with his super-strong hands.

No attacks, seizing the upper hand, so to speak, and chalking
200 up a down arrow for Bond. Students of 007ology will note
No Attacks With that Dr. No is both the mastermind and the wielder of the
Super-hands
gimmick-weapon, a role that will in future be split between
a primary and secondary antagonist.

201. The fight takes them onto the control rod platform.
Their struggle has just become more dangerous, creating an
201 additional reason to fear for Bond. In the end it turns out to
Fight Goes to be worse for No than for 007, but that’s not what this beat
Control Rod
Platform telegraphs.

202. Bond escapes No’s grip and climbs away.

As Bond moves toward safety, he pushes the arrow up.
202
007 Escapes
No’s Grip and
Climbs Away

203. No dies, falling into the radioactive cooling pool when his

metal hands can’t find purchase on the slippery railing.
203 Bond’s equation of No’s metal hands with impotence proves
No Doomed by metaphorically prophetic as our primary antagonist’s
Slippery Hands
source of strength leads to his ironic demise. An up arrow
is scored.
With his main goal taken care of, Bond shifts to secondary goals: to save
himself (thus avoiding Hamlet’s fate, that of the doomed hero) and to rescue
Honey, fulfilling both his secondary procedural goal and his late-breaking
dramatic goal.
 Dr. No | 126

204. A battered Bond staggers out of the control room.

Though he’s paid a price for his fight with No, Bond has
204 emerged victorious and is moving away from the center of
007 Staggers the coming blast. Our worry for him decreases, tilting the
Out of Control
Room arrow up.

205. Bond can’t find Honey.

The shift in goals from defeating No to saving Honey now
205 becomes explicit. Our worry is now for her—and thus that
Bond Can’t Bond might fail in his remaining goals. The arrow moves
Find Honey
down.

206. 007 punches a random techie to demand her whereabouts,

but he doesn’t know.
206 Our worry increases: a down arrow.
Bond Grabs
Techie, Who
Doesn’t Know

207. Bond finds an attendant who does know where Honey

is.
207 He moves closer to success, and the arrow shifts up.
Bond Grabs
Attendant Who
Does Know

208. He finds Honey manacled to a ramp leading to an ex-

haust pool.
208 The situation allows us to register as a victory for Bond, with
Bond Finds its attendant up arrow. The nasty implications of her predic-
Honey in
Manacles ament are buried in the film’s subtext and are never referred
to by the characters. The last time we saw Honey, No was
giving his guards implicit permission to rape her. Now we find her mana-
cled in a distinctly sexualized bondage pose. The manacles are permanently
installed in an extremely unlikely location, a ramp in an industrial-looking
sector of the complex. Were we encouraged to dwell on this, which we are
not, we might find ourselves wondering what just kind of Sadean orgies No’s
henchfolk get up to on a boring Saturday night.
 Dr. No | 127

209. Bond frees her.

When the manacles turn out to be a negligible obstacle, we
209 get another uptick.
Bond Frees
Honey

210. They seek an exit from the complex amid general evacua-
tion panic.
210 Although we don’t particularly care what happens to the
Evacuation various henchmen and attendants, their fear reminds us
Panic
of the danger Bond and Honey are in. This ominous note
pushes the needle down after three successive up beats. It is
also the very last suspense beat of the film—it’s all uphill from here. This is ap-
propriate, because now that Bond has Honey, his goals have essentially been
met. Additional suspense beats at this point would only serve to drag out the
story.
At the gaming table, GMs often find themselves vamping and extending
storylines in order to hit a predetermined end point. When the heroes beat
the main villain with an hour left to go, good options grow scarce. You can
reveal a new goal with bigger stakes, but might be better off to allow the story
to reach a natural end point, perhaps followed by downtime, a quick stand-
alone sequence, or a simple break into out-of-character chatting. An extend-
ed denouement, in which the characters get to enjoy their victory free from
down beats, might also prove gratifying. You wouldn’t want to do this in any
other narrative, but RPG players are often content to explore their characters’
situations while under minimal procedural or dramatic pressure.

211. Bond overcomes two escaping men to seize a motorboat.

This is Bond’s last active procedural victory.
211
Bond Overcomes
Two Guys to
Grab Boat

212. The complex blows up.

Audiences love a good explosion. This gratification beat
212 adds a big exclamation mark to Bond’s adventure. It’s an
Complex after-effect of his action from beat 195, and occurs when
Blows Up
he is already out of danger and all of his goals have been
achieved.
 Dr. No | 128

213. Bond and Honey clinch.

This beat confirms that his courtship of Honey, as final-
213 ized by his rescue of her, is now complete. It gives us the
Bond Clinches ritual gratification of the big final kiss between our fetching
With Honey
leads.

214. Felix shows up to give them a tow, supplying a jealous quip

affirming Bond’s status as master womanizer.
214 Here Bond’s personal satisfaction widens out into a moment
Leiter’s Rescue of social gratification. Acting as foil, Felix sarcastically un-
Party
derlines Bond’s status as the movie’s alpha male. By identify-
ing ourselves with Bond, we not only get to vicariously make
out with Ursula Andress, but establish our dominant status over other men.
British viewers get an extra jolt of gratification, in that the usual tropes of
masculinity are reversed, with the Englishman as emblem of swaggering mas-
culinity and the American reduced to grudging admiration.

215. While making out with Honey, Bond releases the rope

towing the boat.
215 In this closing gratification beat, 007 asserts his dominance
Bond Release by abandoning social obligation in favor of private pleasure.
Tow Rope to
Claim Honey Even a friendly tow rope is too much bondage for Bond. The
moment slyly tweaks the prevailing sexual conventions of
Hollywood film, implying more strongly than would be usual for the period
just what Bond and Honey are going to do in that boat.

Summing Up
Although Dr. No is very much an escapist entertainment, its overall direc-
tion still slopes downward—though not as steeply as Hamlet’s procedural/
dramatic mix or Casablanca’s predominantly dramatic arc. Its lowest point
occurs very near the climax of the film, at beat 207. This is the minor moment
when Bond fails to get information on Honey’s location from a random guard
he’s grabbed and punched. This shows strong procedural construction—the
tension is not relieved until as close to the end as possible. It’s this continu-
ing jeopardy that prevents us from relaxing after the main villain has been
dispatched.
The highest points on our map are the alternating beats 117 and 119,
which occur soon after the entrance of Honey Ryder. They correspond to the
 Dr. No | 129

early flirtations between our newly evident romantic couple.

The length of uninterrupted down sequences exceeds that of Hamlet. A
sequence of seven down beats occurs, starting at beat 120, when the boat full
of henchmen shows up to hunt Bond, Honey, and Quarrel. This is attribut-
able in large part to the shorter beats of an action movie as compared to an
Elizabethan drama. Dr. No in fact presents us with more beats than either of
our other narratives.
The longest streak of up beats we get is five. This occurs twice, from
Bond’s survival of the highway assassination attempt to Taro’s call from Dent
(beats 92–97) and during the preparations for and arrival at Crab Key (beats
112–116).
Like Hamlet, it includes a relatively small number of crossed beats—sev-
en all told. Moreover, most of these are procedural beats, where we see a mix
of hopeful and ominous implications arise from the unfolding action.
 Casablanca | 130

Casablanca
Of the many movie masterpieces arising from the heyday of the Hollywood
studio system, none are more emblematic of its strengths than 1942’s Casa-
blanca. The film bears the unmistakable flair for movement and staging that
characterizes the work of Michael Curtiz, the most chameleonic of studio-
era master directors. Movie stars Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman
deliver searing performances in roles perfectly suited for them. An array of
Warner Brothers’ most memorable contract players fill out the seething mix
of its exotic setting. Claude Rains steals every scene he’s in, and when he’s
not around, someone on the order of Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, Paul
Dooley, Conrad Veidt, or S. Z. Sakall is. Paul Henreid, whose other perfor-
mances tend toward the flat and stolid, skillfully balances the challenge of
being both more admirable and less charismatic than Bogart.
Beat analysis of Hamlet and Dr. No revealed their stories in a sharply
different light. Hamlet showed itself to be the story of a doomed hero. The
Freudian weirdness of Dr. No leaps into plain view when you break down
the villain’s sexually fraught petitions to its hero. Our Casablanca analysis
will yield no such surprises. The shock here, if any, is to be again confronted
with the airtight symmetry of its construction. This is all the more remark-
able if you buy the legend of its creation, in which screenwriting brothers
Julius and Philip Epstein dropped a half-finished script in the hands of junior
writer Howard Koch, who was left frantically churning out pages just in time
for Curtiz to film them. One wants this to be true, if only as an roleplaying-
friendly fable of the powers of inspiration and improvisation. For all we know,
the true genius of Casablanca was its editor, Owen Marks.
Our default beat here is the dramatic. All other beats are called out spe-
cifically. Read any beat not explicitly categorized as a dramatic one.
 Casablanca | 131

1. Credits I: a stirring score superimposed over a map of Africa

foretell exoticism and intrigue.
1 Together these elements build anticipation for the story to
Credits: Exotic come. Unlike the Dr. No title sequence, this much shorter
Intrigue
prelude is less about luxuriating in a gratifying fantasy than in
ushering the viewer into the story. It telegraphs the genre and
setting, and the general excitement of what we’re about to watch, and then moves
briskly on. Like any anticipation beat it resolves on an up arrow. We don’t have
enough context yet to mark it as anything other than a free-floating arrow.

2. Credits II: the strains of the Marseillaise strike a note of war-

time defiance.
2 This even shorter soundtrack sting acts as another antici-
Credits: pation beat, this time injecting a note of propgagandistic
Marseillaise
fervor into the proceedings. Along with it comes another
free-floating up arrow.

3. A globe, maps and newsreel-style footage illustrate the flight

of refugees from France to Casablanca in the wake of the Ger-
3 man invasion.
Refugee Route This beat supplies pipe which we will need to understand
Explained
the importance of the film’s propelling plot device, a pair of
exit visas. Although we’ll eventually develop a set of hopes
and fears regarding those visas, for the moment we have no one to identify
with. The beat resolves on a free-floating lateral arrow.

4. A French police officer sends orders to round up suspects in the

hunt for murderers who stole important official documents and
4 are believed headed for Casablanca.
Alert Sounded This beat poses a question, regarding the identity of the killers,
for Document
Thieves and a diffuse sense of jeopardy. It establishes a problem, one that
we might conclude will be our central problem. We’ll soon find
out that we’re not actually watching a movie about the hunt for the killers, but for
now this beat supplies a modicum of suspense regarding this external problem,
earning it a procedural down arrow.
In one of the film’s many symmetrical constructions, its call to round up
the usual suspects is invoked at the end of the film, in beat 171.
 Casablanca | 132

5. The police round up suspicious characters on the streets of

Casablanca.
5 This pipe beat fills us in on the environment our charac-
Suspects ters will be operating in. It concerns an external goal—the
Rounded Up
capture of the document thieves—and as such registers as
a procedural moment, with no apparent dramatic stakes.
We’re still not sure who we’re identifying with or rooting for or why exactly
we care, so this resolves laterally.

6. A shifty-looking refugee without current papers flees police

and is shot dead. Pamphlets found on his body show that he’s
6 with the French resistance.
Shot Refugee This pipe beat further establishes the political situation our
is With the
Resistance as-yet-unseen characters will navigate. The exposition leaves
us on an emotional down note while scoring a propagan-
distic point. The refugee is shot in front of a mural depicting the collabora-
tionist French leader Pétain. After his pamphlets are found, the camera cuts
to the French national slogan emblazoned over an archway: Liberté, Égalité,
Fraternité. The contrast between the meaning of the words and the killing
of the refugee serves as a commentary meant to shock wartime audiences
into a feeling of solidarity with the French resistance. An extra measure of
irony appears moments later, when the camera pans down to show that the
words appear on the Palais de Justice. Through this combination of pipe and
commentary, the beat establishes one of our secondary hopes for the coming
action, that those responsible for this act will be punished. That hope is satis-
fied, at least on a metaphorical level, with the killing of Strasser in beat 168.

7. A Frenchman at a café explains the situation to a fusty pair

of English tourists, lifting the man’s wallet in the process.
7 This beat reinforces the pipe for those slow to follow the
Man Reiterates complicated foreign situation, while injecting a moment of
Exposition,
Steals Wallet gratification in the form of comedy relief. The contrast be-
tween the man’s words (in which he warns that Casablanca
has filled with the scum of Europe) and his actions (in which he proves him-
self to be a member of that selfsame scum) gives us an up beat to leaven the
grim preceding moments. The victims are portrayed as rich and silly, allowing
us to enjoy a chuckle at their expense.
 Casablanca | 133

8. Excited crowds watch a plane descend; it flies over the sign

for Rick’s Café Americain.
8 Pipe continues to be laid: an expectant crowd looks at the
Plane Overflies plane as a symbol of their hopes for escape. The beat estab-
Rick’s Café
lishes the importance of secondary characters Annina and
Jan, given a close-up in a previous crowd shot. She voices
the hope that they’ll get on that plane next, giving the beat a yearning quality.
It establishes hopes for these characters without clearly raising or lowering
them.

9. An airport delegation awaits the arrival of grinning Ge-

stapo officer Major Strasser (Conrad Veidt) who is introduced
9 to charming local police prefect Captain Renault (Claude
Delegation Rains).
Greets Strasser
In a reversal, our symbol of hope turns out to contain a
figure of menace. However, the friendly bonhomie of this
pipe-laying scene (complete with a gratifyingly amusing moment in which
an Italian representative reacts with ruffled feathers to a casual brush-off ) is
more interested in conveying information than building our unease, and so
leads out with a lateral free-floating arrow. It ends with dialogue establishing
the importance of its main setting, Rick’s Café.

10. To a musical performance by Dooley Wilson as Sam, a se-

ries of wide shots plunges us into the exotic atmosphere of Rick’s
10 Café.
Meet Sam, See Music, exoticism and glamor combine to provide gratifica-
Rick’s Café
tion as we take a tour of our central location.

11. Vignettes featuring café patrons underline the desperate

need to get out of Casablanca.
11 The film continues to reinforce its pipe regarding the im-
Café Patrons portance of exit papers, creating the fear that our characters,
Desperate to
Flee Casablanca who we haven’t even met yet, will be trapped here. The issue
of exit papers is an external one, and so warrants a proce-
dural down arrow.
 Casablanca | 134

12. Well-heeled patrons ask to have a drink with Rick, and are
informed by the maitre d’ that he never does such a thing.
12 Like Hamlet and Bond, Rick is established as an impressive
Carl Rebuffs figure before we meet him. In this instance, he establishes
Entitled Parton
on Rick’s Behalf dramatic dominance while absent, through his proxy, the
head waiter Carl. The importuning guests are the petition-
ers, seeking Rick’s approval. Their tactic is to cite their social and economic
importance. Carl shuts them down, indicating that status means nothing
to Rick—especially when privilege isn’t what it used to be. (The requesting
guest may be with the second largest bank of Amsterdam, but the president
of the largest bank is in the kitchen washing dishes.) We don’t know Rick yet
but like his place, and we’re cued to disapprove of the sense of entitlement
projected by the guests. So we score this as a dramatic up arrow, rooting for
our hero before we lay eyes on him.
This is the first dramatic beat of a predominantly dramatic piece, setting
up Rick as an admirable figure who gains emotional power by withholding
his approval—the essence of modern cool.
For an example of a procedural victory in absentia, see Hamlet, beat 4.6.C.
POV limitations make both types of victory in absentia uncommon in RPGs.

13. We meet Rick.

Like Bond in beat 13 of Dr. No, Rick’s emotional dominance
13 is established with a slow reveal that introduces him in stag-
Meet es: first his hand, then his hand signing a check, a lingering
Rick
pause, and only then a pan up and out to show his whole
face. Also like Bond, we meet him while playing a game, but
here he’s playing a chess game solo. This shows us that, unlike Bond, his strug-
gle is primarily internal. Bond battles external threats. Rick will be at war with
his own competing impulses, from which the drama of the piece will arise.
This beat creates anticipation—we know we’re impressed by this guy
and want to see what happens if we follow him—and sets up a question: why
is he so pained? Crossed dramatic arrows reflect the mixture of identification
and information-seeking invited by the introduction of our protagonist.
 Casablanca | 135

14. Rick refuses a haughty would-be gambler access to his back

room casino.
14 This is a reiteration of beat 12, this time with Rick actually
Rick Rebuffs present. Again he establishes his dominance by refusing to
Demanding
Gambler acknowledge an entitled fop’s self-proclaimed status, scoring
a dramatic victory.
Note how the screenwriters repeat themselves without being repetitive:
the variation of Rick’s presence makes this beat feel different, even when it’s
making the same point in the same way.
This beat contains a small pipe element, as Peter Lorre’s Ugarte squeezes
through the doorway in mid-interaction. GMs might swipe this technique,
disguising expository material by dropping it as a descriptive aside in the
midst of an interaction scene.

15. Ugarte tries to buddy up to Rick and is rebuffed.

Ugarte is the petitioner, his tactic presumed intimacy. Rick,
15 the granter, shuts him out with curt evasion. He retains pow-
Ugarte Tries er in the scene, achieving dramatic victory, for an up arrow.
to Buddy Up
to Rick

16. Ugarte asks Rick to hold the letters of transit.

After failing to win Rick’s approval, Ugarte shifts intentions
16 from the emotional to the practical. A procedural interac-
Rick Asked to tion ensues, in which petitioner Ugarte deploys an ironic sin-
Hold Letters
of Transit cerity: “Perhaps because you despise me you are the only one
I trust.” His manner is rather like that of Renault, who we’ll
meet later, but with an anxious neediness that sabotages the effect. Granter
Rick employs a wary reluctance but ultimately agrees. It’s been established
that the letters of transit are dangerous to hold onto9, and we’ve started to
like this sardonically dominant Rick fellow. His acceptance promises to bring
him into jeopardy, resolving the beat on a down note.

9: Other commentators, including Roger Ebert, have gone into detail on the wobbly logic behind the
letters of transit. Papers signed by resistance leader Charles de Gaulle would not carry inviolable au-
thority in quasi-occupied Morocco. But the film believes that they would, and so we do too.
 Casablanca | 136

17. Ugarte makes a more overt bid for Rick’s approval: “I hope
you’re more impressed by me now.”
17 Even with this tertiary character, the main import of the
Ugarte Hopes transit papers is their status as unit of emotional exchange.
Rick is
Impressed Now Here, having achieved his aims in a procedural negotiation,
Ugarte switches back to a dramatic exchange. While Casa-
blanca based itself on an unproduced play called Everybody Comes To Rick’s,
the title that best describes its subtext is Everybody Wants Rick To Love Them.
The problem, as we’ll eventually see, is that Rick does not love himself.
Ugarte goes all out with a naked plea for Rick’s admiration. Rick, as grant-
er, gets tough with him, invoking the fate of the murdered couriers. The beat
resolves in a densely layered fashion. Bogart plays as if Rick is a little more
impressed by Ugarte, now that he has shown himself to be capable of mur-
der. At the same time, his delivery includes a cynical undertone that makes
it clear Rick still holds the power of judgment over Ugarte. He is simultane-
ously granting and withholding. At any rate, as figure of judgment, he retains
the emotional power and scores an up arrow.

18. Paul Dooley as Sam performs “Knock On Wood.”

This musical interlude registers as gratification, with its
18 typical free-floating up arrow.
“Knock On
Wood” Interlude

19. Rick nervously surveys his guest list.

We’re never really sure why Rick is concerned, but given this
19 beat’s proximity to his receipt of the transit letters, we may
Rick Nervously assume it’s anxiety about the danger they’ve put him in. If so,
Checks the
Guest List this is a procedural down beat.

20. Enter Signor Ferrari (Sydney Greenstreet) who exchanges

significant glances with Rick.
20 A mysterious entrance poses a question, with its attendant
Rick Exchanges down arrow. We don’t know whether Ferrari’s significance is
Glances With
Ferrari procedural or dramatic, so the arrow is a free-floating one.
 Casablanca | 137

21. Ferrari wants to buy Rick’s place, hire away Sam, and/or
recruit Rick’s partnership in black market activities.
21 Ferrari is the petitioner, employing a cheery cynicism: “iso-
Ferrari Wants lation is no longer a practical policy.” He references the
Bar, Sam, and
Partnership film’s core theme, the choice between self-interest and al-
truism, but in an inverted manner. Ferrari’s using the rheto-
ric of engagement to argue for greed. His objective is asymmetrical: he offers
cash, an external, practical good, hoping Rick will give him his freedom and
loyalty, which are internal values. As the dialogue suggests, he buys and sells
people, the main commodity of Casablanca. Where Ugarte bids for Rick’s
admiration with a show of his ability, Ferrari wants to purchase it. Rick, the
granter, responds with blunt refusal. Ferrari is not yet satisfied, so the ex-
change continues to a new beat featuring a new participant.

22. Rick calls Ferrari’s bluff by asking Sam if he wants to work

at the Blue Parrot.
22 Ferrari stands by as Rick makes himself petitioner and Sam
Rick Calls the granter. This is the first time Rick has taken this role.
Ferrari’s Bluff
by Asking Sam His tactic is to show the trust he places in Sam, as granter.
Indeed, Sam gives him what he wants: an affirmation that
loyalty is more important to him than money. The beat also serves as pipe,
establishing his relationship with Sam.

23. Sascha the bartender plies Yvonne with Rick’s special stock;
she rebuffs him.
23 Sascha is the petitioner, seeking sex from Yvonne. His tac-
Yvonne Rebuffs tic is to display his status, which is a reflection of Rick’s.
Bartender
Yvonne, the granter, wants nothing from him. She easily bats
him away, looking at Rick as she does it. As we’ll see in the
next beat, Yvonne wants the real Rick, not a substitute. Once we understand
the situation, we retroactively register this as a proxy victory for Rick. Even
though he’s only present by invocation, he’s the one who holds the power in
this scene.

24. Yvonne gets possessive, asking Rick where he’s been and
whether she’ll see him.
24 Yvonne is the petitioner, projecting hurt. Rick, the granter,
Yvonne Gets adopts a coldly withholding stance: “I never make plans that
Clingy
far in advance.”
 Casablanca | 138

This is a victory for Rick, but an ambiguous one. We might not admire
the desperately clingy Yvonne, but aren’t so happy to see her bested as we
were the variously sleazy Ugarte and Ferrari.
Not only does Rick mostly act as granter during this early sequence, but
he tends to use variations of the same tactic, remaining aloof and withhold-
ing. Ordinarily you’d want more variation from our protagonist but here the
unity of his position and tactics is central to the story. Our initial sequence
with Rick establishes the status quo for him, and makes us admire him for the
power he’s found in it. Gradually the film strips that away from us, eventually
revealing his stance as wounded and self-destructive. By the end, we root for
him to abandon it. This becomes his dramatic goal for the entire piece.
Rick concludes the beat by having Sascha take Yvonne home, but not
before deep-sixing the bartender’s designs on her. Thus he establishes domi-
nance over Sascha, too. (This brief moment is too brief and tossed-off to war-
rant its own position on the narrative map. It really functions as a capper to
his proxy defeat of Sascha in beat 23.)

25. In an exchange of banter, Renault asks Rick what brought

him to Casablanca.
25 “I came to Casablanca for the waters.”
“I Came to “Waters? What waters?”
Casablanca For
the Waters” “I was misinformed.”
Petitioner Renault offers up a breezy wit in his quest for
information from, and thus intimacy with, Rick. His ironic distance seems
a more promising tactic than the neediness of Yvonne or Ugarte. Rick, the
granter, returns the outwardly friendly banter, while withholding the answers
Renault seeks. He scores another dramatic victory, this time against a wilier,
worthier opponent. The arrow goes up.

26. Rick reassures his casino manager, who apologizes for a loss
at the gaming tables.
26 The manager petitions, with apologetic submission.
Rick Reassures Rick magnanimously gives him what he seeks, which is
Casino Manager
reassurance.
This beat shows that a granting character can win a dra-
matic exchange even if he accedes to the petition, provided he retains emo-
tional dominance. It is not what is asked for that defines victory, but who is
more powerful at the end of the transaction.
A game system emulating the structure of dramatic exchanges would have
 Casablanca | 139

to account for the possibility of an uncontested exchange like this, in which

the granter offers no resistance, grants the petition, but still retains emotional
power.

27. Renault warns him he’s about to make an arrest, and not
to interfere.
27 Thematically, this beat crystallizes Rick’s self-interested,
Renault Warns neutralist stance: “I stick my neck out for nobody.” In case
Rick of Coming
Arrest anyone fails to see the broader political metaphor, Renault
wittily describes this as “a wise foreign policy.”
The exchange is procedural: in beat 25, petitioner Louis wanted to deepen
his friendship with Rick. Here he wants to nail down a practical matter. His
tactic is a genteel proffering of respect. Rick, the granter, accedes, responding
with reassurance.
The beat serves as a question; we wonder who’s about to be arrested. The
development is lateral. We’re not worried for Rick. It isn’t a dramatic defeat,
as Renault’s negotiating tactic is carefully calibrated not to encroach upon
Rick’s emotional power or control over his domain.

28. Renault doubles down by asking Rick to accept the pres-

ence of Major Strasser.
28 A new objective ushers in a fresh beat. Louis’ goal here is
Rnault Asks still practical—he needs to kowtow to Strasser to preserve
Rick to Accept
Strasser his position, so it’s a procedural interaction. Renault’s tac-
tic has him showing vulnerability—again offering Rick the
chance to accede without losing emotional ground. Rick, as granter, deflects
him with a wisecrack. By sidestepping the issue with neither agreement nor
refusal, Rick ends the beat on an inconclusive note, shown by a lateral arrow.

29. Renault warns against helping incoming resistance leader

Victor Laszlo.
29 Again Louis brings in a new objective, this one also practi-
Renault Warns cal. After having carefully preserved Rick’s emotional power
Rick Against
Helping Laszlo through his previous tactics, he now introduces a degree of
silky threat: “Letters of passage are sold here, but not by you.
That’s why we allow you to remain open.”
By turning it into a bet as to whether Laszlo will escape, the granter, Rick
defuses the fraught situation while retaining emotional power. This success-
ful defense yields him a procedural victory.
 Casablanca | 140

The beat also provides plenty of pipe concerning Victor Laszlo.

30. Renault explains that Laszlo is traveling with a woman he

won’t leave behind, and thus will need two exit visas. This seg-
30 ues into a verbal duel regarding Rick’s hidden sentimentalism
Verbel Duel: and past political commitment.
Sentiment vs.
Cynicism The exchange segues midway through from a purely practi-
cal matter into a dramatic exchange, in which Louis attempts
to establish his right of friendship over Rick by showing that he knows what
really makes him tick. Louis’ approach seems to say, I respect and fear you
enough to do my homework, so acknowledge me. Rick defends by attacking his
pride, invoking the Gestapo’s dominant position over him. Rick achieves a
dramatic victory, and the procedural matter goes unaddressed.
This is the film’s hope/fear high point. A series of dramatic victories have
left us comfortably assured in the dominance and control of our identifica-
tion figure. We have yet to discover that the source of his strength is really the
weakness that, in the end, we’ll hope for him to overcome. From here on in,
we’ll enter a series of long down swings, punctuated by stretches of relatively
even emotional terrain.

31. Renault nervously sees to Strasser’s comfort at Rick’s.

This suspense beat establishes Strasser’s power and makes us
31 fear for what he might do with it. It resolves on a procedural
Renault Fusses down arrow.
Over Strasser

32. Ugarte is arrested, makes a break for it, and fires on the
cops.
32 In this suspense beat, we fear not for our hero but for a ter-
Ugarte Arrested; tiary character. Still, fear is fear, striking a procedural down
Runs For It
note. The beat also serves as the reveal for the question
posed in beat 27.

33. Ugarte begs Rick to help him.

Petitioner Ugarte begs; granter Rick responds with silence.
33 Begging is a weak tactic, relying on the granter’s sense of pity.
Ugarte Begs for Silence is a powerful tactic, because there’s no way to coun-
Rick’s Help
ter it. Rick scores what seems to be an emotional victory.
 Casablanca | 141

34. A stricken Rick watches as Ugarte is dragged away.

We see, from Rick’s expression as Ugarte is taken away, the
34 cost of winning the previous exchange. He did feel pity for
R. Remorsefully Ugarte, but suppressed his impulse to act on it. The stakes
Watches Ugarte
Dragged Off here would seem to be procedural, but here we focus less on
the fate of Ugarte than on this cost of the exchange to Rick.
After our long upswing, empowered by his walled-off inaccessibility, we are
now called on to question the very quality that made us like and admire him.
The beat resolves on an emotional down note.

35. A patron reproaches Rick for not helping.

Here the patron is the petitioner, using reproach as a tactic.
35 Rick, the granter, defends himself by invoking his credo: “I
Rick Rebuffs stick my neck out for nobody.” He recovers emotional pow-
Patron’s
Approach er, winning a dramatic victory. Rick can reproach himself,
but nobody else can.

36. At Renault’s request, Rick joins the Nazis at their table.

Rick accepts a loss of dominance. We’ve already been told
36 that Rick never drinks with the patrons, but here he’s forced
Rick Drinks to break his own rule. He’s making a practical choice, so this
With Renault
and Strasser is a procedural defeat. This completes the unresolved beat
28, in which Renault asked Rick to make nice with Strasser.

37. Rick parries Strasser’s inquiries about his loyalties.

This recapitulates the Renault and Rick debate from beat
37 30, but with potentially darker consequences, given that the
Rick Parries petitioner is our primary antagonist. The beat lays further
Strasser’s
Questions pipe on both Rick and Laszlo.
Strasser’s tactic is to lay out threats beneath a veneer of
politesse. He has also done homework on Rick. Strasser establishes himself as
a shadow of Renault, in that he repeats many of Renault’s tactics, but without
Renault’s charm. This makes him, twistingly enough, a foil to a character who
serves as a foil to our hero.
Rick, the granter, defends by deflecting and stonewalling Strasser. The
scene is procedural; neither man shows any great emotional investment in the
other.
 Casablanca | 142

Dramatic Foils
Foil characters in drama can admire the hero and establish his or
her dominance, as they do in the procedural. We find this in Casa-
blanca with the admiring, supportive sidekicks Sam and Carl. Even
Sam and Carl are opposing figures, as Sam counsels for evasion of
trouble while Carl sticks his neck out for others as a member of the
underground.
In drama, foils go beyond establishment of dominance to act as
thematic counterparts to the hero. They highlight the choices made
by the protagonist by making, or at least espousing, contrary ac-
tions or philosophies.
A foil embodying a better path than the hero is presently taking
might be described as angelic. That role is taken in Casablanca by
Victor Laszlo, who has what Rick wants and acts heroically, the way
Rick used to.
Demonic foils tempt the hero or espouse the choices we don’t
want him to make. Renault acts as an intriguingly contradictory foil.
He speaks up enthusiastically for cynicism, but in the end seems to
have been testing Rick, hoping he was ready to make a leap he was
preparing himself. Ferrari is a more straightforward demonic foil,
even if he confuses the issue by cloaking his pursuit of self-interest
in the rhetoric of internationalism.
Angelic and demonic foils may appear in procedurals, often as
a mentor and antagonist respectively. Obi Wan Kenobi and Darth
Vader fill these roles in the original Star Wars.
GMs and players can collaborate to highlight PC dramatic arcs
by creating foils that throw them into contrast. Player characters
might serve as one another’s dramatic foils, but this requires a dual
focus that may be hard to pull off. Typically a player has a tough
enough challenge maintaining his own arc without worrying about
how to consistently serve another character’s arc.
 Casablanca | 143

38. Enter Victor and Ilsa; Sam and Ilsa are apprehensive.
We don’t know the cause of the shared distress but can tell
38 that something’s wrong. This dramatic down beat begins the
Victor and Ilsa film’s second act, where we’ll explore the downside of the
Enter; Sam
Apprhensive sardonic detachment that buoyed Rick, and us, for most of
the first.

39. Victor looks for Ugarte; Ilsa is nervous.

The dramatic down beat is followed by a suspense down
39 beat. Although we don’t know who these people are, out-of-
Victor Here narrative cues, including the fact that one of the characters
For Ugarte
concerned is played by leading lady Ingrid Bergman, tell us
that we should share their apparent fear. We’ll soon under-
stand that this beat concerns their external goal and physical jeopardy, and so
belongs to the procedural sub-plot.

40. A bar patron reveals himself to Victor as a resistance

agent.
40 The suspense continues; we know that Strasser sits a few
Resistance Agent tables away. A procedural down beat ensues.
Approaches
Victor

41. Laszlo seems to smoothly cover as Renault approaches.

Laszlo’s aplomb under pressure allows us a procedural up
41 beat, reducing our fear for him. For much of the rest of the
Victor Covers film, its procedural beats will revolve around Laszlo. We’ll
as Renault
Approaches fear for his physical safety, and for Rick’s emotional state.

42. Ilsa inquires about Sam and Rick; Renault confesses that if

he were a woman, he’d be in love with Rick.
42 This beat introduces a question; we want to know why she
Ilsa Asks cares. Like any question, it points the arrow down. (The re-
Renault About
Sam and Rick veal that resolves the question is so slowly doled out that it
can’t be pinned down to a single beat.)
We’ve already seen Renault, like everyone this side of Major Strasser, seek
Rick’s approval, so his effusion isn’t much of a reveal.
 Casablanca | 144

43. Strasser visits their table for an intimidation session.

Victor stands up to him, leading Strasser to postpone their
43 interrogation until a police station meeting the next day.
Strasser This feels like a dramatic impasse, but immediately after-
Comes By to
Intimidate wards Renault ironically praises Strasser for his brilliant tac-
tical retreat. He’s clearly tweaking the Major for losing the
interaction. As it would be the height of folly to argue with Captain Louis
Renault in matters of subtle gamesmanship, we’ll score this as a dramatic vic-
tory for Laszlo, the secondary character to whom we’ve momentarily shifted
our sense of identification. Although you’d expect exchanges between Laszlo
and Strasser to be primarily procedural, since neither seems to want anything
emotional from the other, this beat plays as a preliminary game of dominance-
seeking chicken. Each seeks a show of weakness from the other, with nothing
of practical consequence yet on the table.

44. Victor is left worried by the exchange, but reassures Ilsa

when she echoes his anxiety.
44 Then the beat reverses itself, increasing the tension right af-
Victor and Ilsa ter leavening it. We’re back in pure suspense territory again,
Exchange a
Worried Glance for the first of several procedural downbeats.

45. Cops and conspirators exchange nervous glances as a fla-

menco singer performs.
45 More tension equals a downward procedural beat.
Flamenco and
Nervous Glances

46. Laszlo departs to meet with the resistance contact; Ilsa

urges him to be careful.
46 And another tense procedural beat pushes the arrow fur-
Laszlo Off to ther down. With Bogie suddenly off screen, the arrow has
Meet Contact
started turning down. When he’s been present, we’ve seen a
series of dramatic victories, in which he secures dominance
from those around him, usually with ease. Now that Laszlo has momentarily
become the focus of the narrative, we’re in a suspenseful espionage flick in
which he mostly suffers tension-building downbeats.
 Casablanca | 145

47. Wordlessly, Ilsa seeks reassurance from Sam, who responds

with evident distress.
47 In this quicksilver dramatic beat, Ilsa is the petitioner and
Ilsa’s Glance Sam the granter. He declines to give her the signs of comfort
Seeks Sam’s
Reassurance she wants, for a dramatic down arrow.

48. Victor learns that Ugarte has been arrested, and that
there’s a meeting of the resistance coming up.
48 This pipe fills Laszlo in on what we already know, and es-
Berger Briefs tablishes the upcoming meeting. Although conducted un-
Laszlo
der tense circumstances it leaves his situation unchanged,
for a lateral procedural arrow.
We see more inconclusive procedural beats here than in either Hamlet or
Dr. No. The suspense angle of the story is a sideshow, and as such doesn’t have
to constantly modulate our emotional responses.

49. Renault, who seems all too familiar with Berger, breaks up
his talk with Laszlo. He orders champagne and settles in for a
49 tête-à-tête..
Renault Settles In this twosome, Renault seems to be the cat to Laszlo’s
In for Tête-à-tête
mouse, leaving us worried for him. We don’t know anything
emotional Louis might want from the resistance leader, so
our downbeat is procedural.

50. Ilsa approaches Sam, asking him to play the old songs.
Ilsa is still seeking reassurance and something that might be
50 forgiveness from Sam. She’s the petitioner; she seeks it by
Ilsa Asks Sam presenting a wounded dignity. As granter, Sam uses polite
for Old Songs
detachment in an attempt to deny her. He gives in.
Without enough information to go on, our sympathies
are unclear. Ilsa gains the emotional power, but we’re not sure if this is a good
or bad thing. Sam’s response to her indicates that she’s bad news for our hero,
so we score this with a downward dramatic arrow.

51. She quizzes him on Rick’s current status; Sam lies poorly
and gives her unpromising news.
51 Both participants are petitioning here. Ilsa wants informa-
Play “As Time tion on Rick. Sam wants to discourage her. His tactic is to
Goes By”
show concern for Rick: “You’re bad luck to him.” She re-
 Casablanca | 146

sponds with a dazzling smile, followed by an insistent, tortured sadness. He

plays as “Time Goes By,” her contained distress engaging our sympathies.
This beat is ambiguous not because we see her as a threat to Rick, but because
we’re now on her side, and don’t know whether the victory she achieves here
really serves her best interests.

52. Rick appears and sees Ilsa; they exchange tortured glances.
With both our preexisting and our new identification fig-
52 ures in obvious distress, this can only be a dramatic down
Rick Sees Ilsa beat. Neither has time to engage in a full dramatic exchange,
however, as…

53. Renault interrupts, introducing Victor to Rick.

The two men exchange admiring comments, each granting
53 the other emotional power. A dramatic up arrow ensues.
Rick and Laszlo Our worries for Laszlo in beat 48 seem to have been un-
Admire One
Another founded. We see no evidence that Renault somehow tripped
him up.

54. Renault prompts Ilsa to recount her acquaintanceship

with Rick, leading to shared reminiscences of their last day in
54 Paris, on the day of the occupation.
“The Germans Both are petitioning here, though their exchange, in the
Wore Gray. You
Wore Blue.” presence of Renault and Laszlo, is pushed down into the
subtext. Rick wants her to feel the hurt he still feels over
their parting, using cutting wit as his tactic: “I remember every detail. The
Germans wore gray. You wore blue.” Ilsa seeks forgiveness from him, while
retaining her composure. The exchange ends inconclusively, with neither sur-
rendering power nor granting what the other seeks. It is marked by a lateral
arrow.
Although they seem like null results, lateral arrows in dramatic scenes
increase our engagement by building our desire for the inevitable resolution,
when a rematch occurs. Lateral procedural arrows occasionally work this way,
particularly when a resolution is interrupted by an outside force. For example,
the hero and villain might duke it out for a while but then have to end their
fight prematurely. It’s more natural for dramatic situations to be interrupted
or end on an impasse than standard action-adventure scenes, where a failure
to maintain forward momentum is more likely to induce frustration than
heightened engagement.
 Casablanca | 147

At any rate, we have now reached the 54th beat of the film, and have
passed the thirty minute mark, before the hero’s emotional goal has become
apparent. Rick Blaine’s struggle is to overcome his grief at the loss of his re-
lationship with Ilsa. It will not become fully clear that this is his goal until
the moment that he achieves it, and explains his success to Ilsa in his famous
monologue at the end of the film, beat 159.

Dramatic Arcs
Dramatic protagonists are encountered in a state of crisis or incom-
pletion, often expressible as a conflict between contradictory inner
impulses. Through the action of the narrative, they either:

• Resolve the crisis, and are transformed by its outcome

• Fail to resolve the crisis or contradiction, and are destroyed

A character’s dramatic arc can be summed up in a sentence that

mentions the crisis and, where applicable, the inner conflict:

• Rick Blaine, paralyzed by a sense of loss and betrayal, must

resolve his conflict between self-interest and altruism.
• Fanny Brawne, as portrayed in Jane Campion’s Bright Star,
doesn’t understand poetry, until she learns to live by loving
the dying John Keats.
• Nora of A Doll’s House must resolve her desire to obey society’s
expectations for her against her desire to free herself from them,
as personified by her smothering, paternalistic husband.
• Daniel Plainview (There Will Be Blood) fails to reconcile his de-
sire for family and community with the competition in him, that
wants no one else to succeed.
• Mildred Pierce struggles to reconcile her desire to establish
herself in the world with her love for her ungrateful daughter.
• Shelley Levene (Glengarry Glen Ross) struggles to maintain his
dignity and usefulness, but has paradoxically invested it in a
system that views both qualities as disposable.

Coming of age stories feature a classic dramatic arc. The charac-

ter’s crisis is simply his or her youth; she must navigate between
 Casablanca | 148

innocence and experience. In this time-honored formula, experience

almost invariably wins.
When clumsily executed, the dramatic arc takes on a homiletic
quality, where the hero learns an obvious life lesson and is improved
by it.
A dramatic character’s story concludes when his conflict is re-
solved, successfully or otherwise. For this reason, RPGs, typically
driven by serial characters in campaigns of indefinite duration, rarely
feature true dramatic characters.
Long-form television serials, which elongate and reiterate a pro-
tagonist’s central conflict for many seasons before resolving it, may
bear a closer resemblance to dramatic characters in an ongoing
game campaign. Tony Soprano’s conflict between his identities as
a family man and a Family man is elliptically resolved, and not in his
favor, in the finale of The Sopranos. Don Draper’s conflict between
authenticity and deception will presumably continue until the end of
Mad Men, whenever that may be.

55. A departing Ilsa tells Rick, in code, that she still loves
him.
55 When Renault breaks up the conversation, Ilsa switches to a
Ilsa’s Coded new objective. She tells Rick, “There’s still no one who plays
Confession
of Love ‘As Time Goes By’ like Sam,” but Bergman plays the line
as if she’s telling Rick she still loves him. Rick rebuffs her:
“He hasn’t played it in a long time.” Ilsa’s face falls, showing the sting of the
rejection.
By refusing her proffer of love, Rick wins the exchange and retains the
emotional power in the scene. However, our identification is now split and
our hopes confused. We find ourselves sympathizing with Ilsa as well, and
feel hurt on her behalf. We’re not necessarily sure at this point that we want
the lovers to reconcile, but the combination of hurt and confusion tips the
dramatic arrow downward.
 Casablanca | 149

56. With Ilsa out of sight, a shaken Rick slumps back into the
nearest chair.
56 The last positive element of the previous beat—Rick’s reten-
Shaken Rick tion of emotional power—is reversed, as we see that he was
Slumps Into
Chair putting up a front. The arrow dips again.

57. Laszlo asks Ilsa about Rick; she gives him a noncommittal
answer.
57 As a matter of pipe, we learn that Laszlo is unaware of the
Ilsa Deceives obvious prior relationship between Rick and Ilsa. Given
Laszlo About
Past With Rick the blazingly clear subtext of the previous scene, we assume
that, for all of his heroism, he isn’t particularly attuned to his
wife’s emotional state. He readily accepts her none-too-smooth denial. The
success of her lie gives her the emotional power: she has the upper hand over
him because she knows more about the situation than he does. Our sympathy
rests more with her than with him, so this beat registers as an up arrow.
Later we’ll learn that Laszlo is not quite as clued-out as he appears, and
that he’s granting her the victory by not letting on, but that doesn’t change
our response to the seeming action in this beat.

58. Renault regards the departing couple with a calculating

expression.
58 Laszlo might not seem too perceptive, but we saw Renault
Renault Sees pick up on the strange effect she had on Rick. Given his con-
Something’s Up
nection to the menacing Strasser, Louis’ attention implies
jeopardy for someone. This suspense beat rings in a proce-
dural down note.

59. A wary Sam urges Rick, tortured and hitting the bottle, to
go to bed.
59 Sam is the petitioner; his tactic is to express hesitant concern.
Sam Urges Rick Rick, the granter, rebuffs him with an angry response. He forces
to Go to Bed
Sam to abandon his present tactic but, by giving in to anger,
sacrifices his emotional power. The arrow goes down.
 Casablanca | 150

60. Sam begs Rick to flee.

Sam ups the ante to a more desperate tactic: outright plead-
60 ing. He urges Rick to avoid the trouble Ilsa represents. Rick
Sam Urges again shuts him down, arguing that Ilsa is coming back. Rick
Rick to Flee
has lost his emotional power to the absent Ilsa. The arrow
noses down.

61. Rick pounds the table and laments Ilsa’s appearance at his

place.
61 In a soliloquy of despair not unlike Hamlet’s “to be or not to
“Of All the Gin be” beat, Rick delivers the classic “Of all the gin joints in all
Joints… She
Walks Into Mine” the towns in all the world, she walks into mine” speech.
This down beat presents the hero’s dramatic goal by
showing the condition he’s in without having achieved it. Unless he over-
comes his sense of longing and betrayal, he’ll be mired in this aching state of
self-pity.

62. Rick demands that Sam play “As Time Goes By.”

Rick decides to increase the degree of his self-laceration from
62 the previous beat. In a rare reversal, he assumes the role of
Rick Demands petitioner; he resorts to angry barking to get what he wants.
“As Time
Goes By” Sam adopts a pose of hapless inability, but Rick steamrolls
him just as Ilsa did in beat 50. Even in his suffering, Rick has
regained a measure of dominance—if only over a concerned and compliant
friend—but it’s enough to register an up arrow.

63. As he listens, he lapses into silent torment.

The sense of victory quickly fades as we see that it has only
63 intensified his suffering.
Rick Lapses
Into Wordless
Torment

64. Cut to flashback as Rick remembers his time with Ilsa in

Paris.
64 Joyous music cues a falling-in-love montage. Even though
Flashback this material is bittersweet, given the origin point of the
Montage: In
Love in Paris flashback, it nonetheless moves the emotional arrow up, giv-
ing us momentary relief from Rick’s present agony.
This sequence proves the eternal truism that you fall in love in montage
 Casablanca | 151

and fall out of it in a series of dramatic exchanges.

65. Over champagne, flashback Rick asks flashback Ilsa about

her past; she deflects him.
65 Rick is the petitioner; he wants to deepen his intimacy with
“We Said No Ilsa beyond what seems to be a carefree fling. Ilsa, the granter,
Questions,
Remember?” easily deflects him with a charming smile and a reminder of
the terms of their affair: “We said no questions.” Ilsa main-
tains the emotional power by keeping the relationship as it is. Even though
the beat is an outwardly happy one, it registers as a down arrow for Rick. It
hasn’t taken long for us to start layering our knowledge of present events over
the flashback’s sweetness.

66. They dance in a ballroom, to the strains of “Perfidia.”

This gratification beat evokes elegance and romance. It en-
66 genders positive, hopeful feelings, so the arrow points up.
Dance to Because it serves the dramatic purpose of the flashback—to
“Perfidia”
show us what Rick has lost—it resolves on a dramatic arrow,
rather than the free-floating one reserved for moments of
gratification which are less directly wired into the narrative line.

67. Rick obliquely asks why there isn’t another man in her life.
She says that there was, but that he’s dead.
67 This unusual beat is both reveal and question at once. It
The Other provides a partial answer to the question posed by Ilsa’s ap-
Man is Dead
pearance with Laszlo in tow, yet increases our desire to know
the full story. Crossed dramatic arrows indicate its effect as
it suspends us between satisfaction and curiosity.

68. The Germans invade France.

This intrusion of the external world into the central love
68 affair acts as a classic bringdown—the first pure instance
Germans we’ve seen in any of our three story breakdowns. We’re not
Invade France
sure how yet, but it somehow impacts on Rick and Ilsa’s
separation. Its obligatory down arrow is therefore dramatic
rather than free-floating.
 Casablanca | 152

69. Ilsa reminds Rick that he’s on the German blacklist, and
will be in trouble if he’s still present when they reach Paris.
69 Although the beat is about a practical problem and threat-
Rick is On the ens jeopardy for Rick, it occurs in flashback, and we assume
German Blacklist
that he got out safely. It therefore registers more as a reveal
than as a suspense beat. We’re assured that Rick comes out
safely but suffers a devastating emotional blow. This reveal takes us closer to a
feared yet certain outcome, marked by a dramatic down arrow.

70. An establishing shot whisks us to the Belle Aurore, which

we know as the last place Rick and Ilsa saw each other in
70 Paris.
La Belle Thanks to pipe laid in beat 53, when the bar was specified
Aurore
as the site of their last meeting, we know that we’re headed
toward the emotional rocks. Although establishing shots
are usually simple pipe beats too basic to note in a beat breakdown, director
Curtiz lingers over this one long enough to make it a bringdown unto itself.
Like its near neighbor, 66, this one swells with dramatic import.

71. Ilsa remains silently preoccupied as Rick and Sam keep up

their spirits with champagne and pre-occupation bravado.
71 This is not a dramatic exchange, but a beat in which both
Rick Fails to characters pursue their emotional objectives in parallel with-
Pick Up on
Ilsa’s Distress out challenging the other. Ilsa’s aim is to avoid discussing
what’s worrying her. Rick and Sam, focused on their bubbly
morale-building effort, remain oblivious to the distress we see in her expres-
sion and body language. It is still a dramatic beat, though, in that we want
Rick to notice and are frustrated in this desire. Rick maintains his emotional
power falsely, by failing to see the warning signs. Our concern for the coming
emotional disaster intensifies, warranting a down arrow.

72. The Gestapo are in the streets of Paris, using loudspeaker

trucks to prepare the city for tomorrow’s troop influx.
72 This is a reiteration and intensification of beat 68. Note the
Gestapo alternation of dramatic and bringdown beats; it provides
Loudspeakers
rhythmic variation even though all the arrows in this se-
quence point in the same direction.
 Casablanca | 153

73. Amid the sound of approaching artillery, Rick and Ilsa ex-
change tentative details of their past.
73 Just as we expect to see them torn apart, they come closer
R. & I. Exchange together. Rick initiates the exchange, to take their minds of
Details of
Their Pasts the lousy timing of falling in love on the eve of an invasion.
This time Ilsa grants his petition. Fortunately for Rick, his
question—about where they were ten years ago—stretches back in time far
enough to leave her marriage to Laszlo out of the picture. Both participants
gain emotional power from the exchange, giving us a much-needed up note
after five consecutive down arrows.

74. Rick makes plans to meet up the next day for their flight
from Paris; Ilsa changes proposed meeting place from her hotel
74 to the train station.
Plans to Our foreknowledge that this is their last meeting, coupled
Flee Paris
with her evasiveness about her hotel, remind us that the mo-
ment of intimacy we just experienced will come to nothing.
The arrow noses down. Though the text concerns Rick’s practical plans to
escape, it’s the subtext of Ilsa’s evasion that matters here, keeping this beat
within the dramatic realm.

75. Rick proposes marriage; Ilsa noncommittally refuses:

“That’s too far ahead to plan.”
75 He’s the petitioner, making a straightforward play for com-
Rick mitment. She’s the granter, using evasion to keep him at bay.
Proposes
She gets him to agree, allowing him to lose without sacrific-
ing his emotional power. Still, we have an idea what her eva-
sion portends, and we don’t like it, so the arrow goes down.

76. Rick asks her why she seems strangely upset; she declares her
love for him, then obliquely alludes to the obligations prevent-
76 ing her from being with him.
Ilsa Revealingly As if anticipating the desires of the audience, Rick finally
Conceals Cause
of Her Distress spots her disquiet and attempts to bring it to light. There’s
a new objective—he wants to know what’s up, and she
wants to conceal it—allowing the tactics to remain the same. He’s loving and
straightforward. She’s evasive without really lying to him, and tells him the
truth in a way that prevents him from grasping it. Rick has lost emotional
power, and we’re headed to our feared and inevitable emotional outcome,
 Casablanca | 154

Rick’s abandonment. The arrow moves further down.

77. They kiss.

If we were in any doubt that Ilsa already knows she has to
77 leave him, she asks him to “kiss me as if for the last time.”
“Kiss Me Bringing our lovers closer together while reminding us that
As If For the
Last Time” they will now be torn apart, this is the very essence of a
crossed dramatic outcome. The final image of the beat sym-
bolizes this wrenching ambiguity as a champagne glass, an image of pleasure,
knocked over as they embrace.

78. Rick waits for her at the rain-drenched station; Sam brings

the note ending their affair.
78 This is the horrible moment we’ve known would come since
Rick Receives this flashback sequence began, back at beat 64. Although it
Ilsa’s Note at
the Station retains the internal contradictions of the previous beats—
the note tells Rick that she loves him even though they can
never see each other again—the final effect takes us a point we dreaded reach-
ing. The arrow moves downward.
The beat serves as a key dramatic moment while intensifying our central
unanswered question.: Ilsa’s letter alludes to her circumstances without ex-
plaining them.

79. In the present, Rick drops sorrowfully out of reverie.

Rhyming the action from the end of beat 77, Rick knocks
79 over a whiskey glass. This down beat mirrors the last one,
Back to the a shared emotional response providing the connection be-
Woeful Present
tween two moments separated by time.

80. Ilsa returns, hoping to explain herself.

This exchange echoes the one from beat 54, but with a varia-
80 tion: now that Laszlo and Renault are no longer present, it
Ilsa Wants to can be conducted overtly and not through subtext. She pe-
Explain Herself
titions for understanding with apologetic words and body
language. He, the granter, counters with bitter reproaches
which, in their own angry way, paradoxically serve as declarations of love. By
withholding what she seeks, Rick retains the emotional power. But now we’re
identifying with both characters and wanting them to be together. Rick gets
what he wants but we now want him to seek something else. This contradic-
 Casablanca | 155

tion ends the beat on a crossed note.

81. Ilsa describes her past with Laszlo as a sort of fairy tale.

Having failed in the previous beat, Ilsa keeps the exchange
81 alive by switching tactics. She depersonalizes her story by
She Tells It in casting it in the second person. In doing so, she supplies
Fairy Tale Form
the reveal we’ve been waiting for ever since beat 54. Ilsa de-
scribes her relationship to Laszlo as one of mentor and pro-
tégé. She explains that she mistook her worship for him as romantic love.
Rick’s counter contemptuously parodies her storytelling conceit, but he
abandons this tactic, hanging his head midway through. He has shut her out
again, repeating the crossed resolution of the previous beat.

82. Rick asks if there were other lovers in between Laszlo and

him.
82 Rick has now become petitioner; he seeks to hurt her, fling-
Rick Flings ing out nasty insinuations. She doesn’t defend herself, and
Out a Hurtful
Insinuation leaves the table. Again he’s maintained the power in the
scene in pursuit of a goal we don’t want him to win, for a
third consecutive crossed outcome.

83. As soon as she goes, his head drops in defeat.

In an exact echo of beat 56, we see that any emotional victory
83 from the previous beat is really a self-inflicted wound. This
Rick’s Head resolves the ambiguity of beats 80–82 by recasting them as
Drops in Defeat
defeats for our hero, with the attendant down arrow.

84. Strasser seeks a search of Rick’s place; Renault uses Rick’s

cleverness as an argument to deflect action against him.
84 After twenty-five uninterrupted dramatic beats, we now re-
Renault Deflects turn to the procedural storyline and two of our secondary
Strasser’s
Raid Request characters. Their polite dispute is primarily tactical in nature.
Strasser wants the letters of transit and Renault, for the mo-
ment, wants Strasser to be happy. At the same time, he seems to want Strasser
to share his admiration for Rick. As always with this slippery character, the
sincerity of his argument against raiding Rick’s is impossible to determine.
He may believe what he says, or may be protecting the man he’d be in love
with if he were a woman.
Rick is in less jeopardy than he was before, but then we’d temporarily forgot-
 Casablanca | 156

ten the danger posed by Strasser, and here it is again. This is a lightly sounded
beat, and hence a tough call. Let’s score it as a down beat, on the grounds that the
reintroduction of the principal antagonist augurs ill for somebody.
This beat also supplies a piece of pipe: prefiguring Renault’s later loyalty
shift. He amusingly tweaks Strasser by revealing that he was with the Ameri-
cans when they took Berlin in 1918.

85. Renault and Strasser run a good cop-Nazi cop routine on

Laszlo. Strasser offers him a visa in exchange for the names
85 and whereabouts of Europe’s resistance leaders.
Strasser Offers In this procedural beat, Laszlo retains dominance by re-
Laszlo a Visa
to Turn Traitor maining steadfast in the face of Strasser’s various threats and
inducements. He’s our hero for the purposes of this sub-plot,
so his victory registers as an up arrow.

86. Renault rattles Laszlo by revealing that Ugarte has been

killed in custody.
86 With his smooth cynicism, Renault scores a procedural vic-
Renault Rattles tory denied to the more overtly sinister Strasser. He takes
Laszlo with
Ugarte’s Death power at Laszlo’s expense, ending the beat on a down note.

87. We discover that Renault trades visas for sex.

A set-up and punchline disguise this bit of pipe, which will
87 come into play in beat 109. The exposition appears in the
Renault Trades form of a joke and thus resolves on a free-floating up arrow.
Visas for Sex

88. A bazaar merchant directs a visa-seeker to Signor Ferrari

at the Blue Parrot.
88 These unnamed walk-on characters kindly remind us who
Visa Seeker Sidney Greenstreet is in this movie. Depending on how
Directed to
Ferrari sharp our recollections are, their memory-jogging pipe
may come in handy, as we haven’t seen him since beat 22.
The brief scene activates neither our hopes or our fears, warranting a lateral
free-floating arrow.
 Casablanca | 157

89. Rick heads into the Blue Parrot.

Rick gave Ferrari the brush-off the last time we saw him. His
89 presence invites us to wonder what his purpose might be.
Rick Heads Into We aren’t sure whether his purpose is emotional or external,
Blue Parrot
so the nagging down arrow that accompanies an unanswered
question registers as free-floating.

90. Ferrari is seen consoling Annina and Jan, the so-far un-
named émigré couple last seen in beat 7. “Perhaps you can
90 come to terms with Captain Renault,” he suggests.
Ferrari Doing This tossed-off beat lays pipe which will pay off in beat 109.
Business With
Émigré Couple We barely process it, much less form a hope/fear reaction
to it, so this too leads out on a lateral free-floating arrow.

91. Rick’s business turns out to be less than mysterious—he’s

trying to get a shipment out of Ferrari without being shorted.
91 This reveal may register as disappointing. If we were hop-
Rick Wants ing that Rick was about to take the initiative and do some-
Shipment Without
Shrinkage thing to achieve some greater goal, we’ve now been briskly
disabused. Unlike most reveals, this resolves on a down ar-
row, if a mild one. It is as neutral and free-floating as the question it so flatly
resolves.

92. Ferrari, who believes Rick is in possession of the letters of

transit, offers to buy them from him. Rick reveals that he’s
92 come to the Blue Parrot to give Strasser and Renault time to
Ferrari Offers ransack his place.
to Buy Letters
of Transit In a procedural interaction over a practical matter, Ferrari
is the petitioner and Rick the granter. He deflects Ferrari’s
offer—and Ferrari’s guess that Rick has the letters in his possession—and re-
tains the power in the scene. Also, we learn that our earlier disappointment
over the last beat’s weak reveal turns out to be unwarranted. Rick is up to
something clever after all. This satisfying reveal reverses that feeling, pointing
the arrow up.
 Casablanca | 158

93. Rick, leaving the Blue Parrot to head toward Ilsa, who he
has seen in the bazaar, passes Laszlo, headed in. He startles
93 Laszlo by correctly presuming that he’s looking for Ferrari.
Rick Knows In this quick scene, Rick gains emotional power over his ri-
Laszlo’s Looking
for Ferrari val for Ilsa’s affections by demonstrating his deductive wit.
The arrow points up.

94. Rick and Ilsa reverse roles as he seeks forgiveness for his be-

havior the previous night.
94 He’s the petitioner, excusing himself in formal language and
Rick Apologizes; alluding to his drunkenness. She rejects his entreaties by di-
Ilsa Diminishes
minishing the stakes of the interaction: “It doesn’t matter,”
she says. Ilsa takes the emotional power as the scene with-
holds our hoped-for reconciliation. The dramatic arrow points down.
This sequence plays out in counterpoint to the haggling shtick of a comi-
cally unscrupulous bazaar vendor, which supplies some contrapuntal gratifi-
cation. A free-floating arrow crosses the dramatic arrow.

95. Rick asks her to provide the explanation she wanted to give

him last night. She declines.
95 Rick switches to a new goal, getting information from her.
Rick Wants the He adopts the tactic of aiming his cutting wit at himself. She
Explanation;
She Declines gently plunges the knife in, saying that she could have ex-
plained to the Rick she knew in Paris, but not the man he’s
become. Instead, she proposes to drop the whole matter, so they’ll remember
their time in Paris and not their meeting in Casablanca.
The scene’s objective and tactic have changed, but the outcome remains
the same: she holds the power, and takes us further from our hopes.

96. Rick guesses that she left him because she feared a life of
flight and argues that he’s settled and well-established now.
96 Ilsa declines to correct him.
Rick Asks If She Rick lovesickness has taken the edge off his cleverness. We
Ran Out to Avoid
Life of Flight know that she’s opted for a life of flight and risk by being
with Laszlo. Our cool and dominant identification figure is
making an obvious blunder. By telling him that he’s free to believe this, Ilsa
pulls back even further from him. Though hurt and unwilling to defend her-
self, she’s still a refusing granter. The downward emotional trajectory contin-
ues, with the party keeping them apart holding the emotional power.
 Casablanca | 159

97. He invites her to come see him, confident that she’ll lie to

Laszlo to do it. She reveals that he’s her husband, and was even
97 when they knew each other in Paris.
Ilsa: Laszlo Is Losing the emotional power struggle, Rick ups the ante by
and Was My
Husband challenging her. He forces her to drop her bombshell, by fi-
nally and harshly revealing the true status of her relation-
ship to Laszlo. She emerges victorious and our hopes recede even further, for
another down arrow.
See how these four consecutive dramatic down beats are cushioned by
their context in the story. Rick gets a couple of minor up beats before heading
into this second devastating sequence with Ilsa. Comic relief is interwoven
into beat 94, for additional emotional variation.

98. Ferrari explains to Laszlo and Ilsa that he might be able to

secure a visa for her, but not for him.
98 This piece of pipe sets up the next beat. It presents sympa-
Ferrari Might thetic characters with bad practical news and registers as a
Get Visa For Ilsa,
But Not Laszlo procedural down beat.

99. Laszlo suggests that Ilsa go without her; she declines, citing

his prior refusals to go ahead when she was the one who was
99 trapped.
Ilsa Turns Down Laszlo is the petitioner, Ilsa the granter. He uses rational ar-
Chance to Go
Without Laszlo gument; she easily overcomes him with emotional logic. The
moment is an ambiguous one on the hope/fear axis. We are
touched by the warmth of their relationship, and to see them brought closer
together at the end of the exchange. On the other hand, we see that their
love is based on loyalty and shared adversity and not so much on romantic
passion. The greater the bond between these two, the less chance we have of
seeing our hope, the union of Rick and Ilsa, come to pass. A crossed dramatic
arrow marks these contradictions.

100. Ferrari tells them that Rick probably has the letters of
transit.
100 This pipe beat gives Ilsa a reason to talk to Rick again after
Ferrari Tells conclusively breaking with him just a few beats ago. As such,
Them Rick Has
the Letters it renews our hope of their getting together, and points the
dramatic arrow up.
 Casablanca | 160

101. The pickpocket from beat 7 engages in some comic business

inside Rick’s, involving a customer and the maitre d’, Carl.
101 As straight-up comic relief, this beat is a gratification re-
Pickpocket solving on a free-floating up arrow.
Comic Relief

102. Carl and then Renault remark on Rick’s drinking.

This lightly delivered double reminder of our hero’s declin-
102 ing emotional state does not develop into a dramatic ex-
Carl and Renault change. It nonetheless increases our worry for him, and thus
Note Rick’s
Drinking rates a down arrow.

103. Rick and Renault trade verbal volleys over the letters of

transit.
103 In a series of quick lobs back and forth:
Rick and Renault Rick complains about the trashing Renault’s men gave
in a Duel of Wits
his bar.
Renault deflects with a quip at the expense of the Ger-
mans, then presses the question of transit papers.
Rick asks him where his loyalties lie.
Renault surrenders.
You could break this down into a couple of mini-beats, but ultimately it’s
a duel of wits to establish dominance, with Rick winning by playing a reliable
trump card. He winds up with the emotional power, for a dramatic up beat.

104. A fight breaks out between a German and a French officer

when the latter has harsh words for Yvonne, who has appeared
104 on the former’s arm.
French and We can tell that this is bad, but for whom and in what way is
German
Officers Fight not yet apparent. This is a bringdown, followed by its char-
acteristic down arrow.

105. Rick breaks up the fight, invoking his anti-politics policy.

Rick shows dominance and gains emotional power while
105 reiterating his personal credo. At the same time, we sense
Rick Breaks a heightening of tensions in his bar that he has not entirely
It Up
defused, presaging further trouble ahead. The beat resolves
on crossed arrows: dramatic up, procedural down.
 Casablanca | 161

106. Strasser uses the incident to pressure Renault for a definite

show of loyalty.
106 Strasser is the petitioner, Renault the granter. Renault deftly
Strasser Presses parries him as always. We’re not sure whose side he’s on—as
Renault’s
Loyalties he cheerfully admits in this scene, he goes where the wind
blows him—but we’re sure we don’t like Strasser, so we re-
spond to this as a dramatic victory.

107. Strasser muses that Laszlo may be too dangerous either in

or out of Casablanca.
107 This beat increases our worry for Laszlo, focus of our proce-
Strasser May dural sub-plot, and earns a down arrow. At the same time, it
Have to Rub
Out Laszlo lays pipe for the idea that scattered resisters through French
North Africa are crying out for a charismatic leader—this
will pay off at the very end, with the suggestion that, between the tough-
minded Rick and wily Louis, they’ll get two of them.

108. Carl brings out the good brandy for an elderly German
couple who have finally gained permission to emigrate to
108 America.
Good Brandy This moment of warmth and humor serves as gratification
for Departing
Refugees and commentary. In the latter role, it serves a social purpose
outside the film, encouraging the American audience of the
time to proudly accept their role as protectors of foreign refugees. This was
not an uncontroversial point to make at the time, especially given the un-
spoken implication that these particular émigrés are Jews. Thematically the
beat contrasts with Rick and Renault’s recent declarations of neutrality. It
encourages the audience to come down on the side of engagement. Although
it might seem detached from the narrative, this thematic connection ties into
the drama, as we’re about to see in the next beat. Its arrow is not free-floating
but dramatic.

109. The refugee Annina asks Rick if Renault is trustworthy—

asking if he’ll make good on his sex for visa trade. He answers,
109 uncomfortably, in the affirmative. Then she asks him if her
Annina Seeks husband will forgive her for going through with it.
Reassurance
From Rick This dramatic beat establishes Annina and Jan as foils for
the main Rick-Ilsa pairing. Rick is wounded by her question,
which she puts in the second person: “If someone loved you very much… and
 Casablanca | 162

she did a bad thing… could you ever forgive her?” Unlike Carl before him, it
seems like he’s sticking to his neutralist stance: “Everyone in Casablanca has
problems.” He wishes her luck and bolts from the table.
Annina is the petitioner, with distraught sincerity as her manner of ap-
proach. Rick denies her the assurance she seeks with detached withdrawal.
However, since she’s struck a nerve and reminded him of his own pain, it’s a
lose-lose dramatic exchange. The arrow points down.

110. Rick greets Ilsa and Victor as they enter, needling her with

references to Sam’s playing “As Time Goes By.”
110 This beat shows that the relationship between them has re-
Rick Greets Ilsa turned to unhappy form, with Rick, the petitioner, trying
With Needling
Remarks to hurt her and her, the granter, curtly parrying his gibes.
Neither emerges a clear winner, and we are moved toward
our fear that they will never reconcile. The arrow dips further.

111. Rick rigs the roulette game in favor of Annina’s husband.

Our hero can’t forgive Ilsa, but he can arrange matters so
111 that Jan doesn’t have to forgive Annina. His change of heart,
Rick Rigs seen with adoration by Carl and dismay by Renault, has
Roulette for
Annina and Jan clearly been triggered by Ilsa’s appearance. We are happy to
see him perform this act of altruism and to move toward en-
gagement. This is what he will do at the end of the story, satisfying our hopes
for him in a way that trumps our competing desire to see him with Ilsa. The
dramatic arrow points up.

112. Overcome by gratitude, Annina hugs and kisses Rick,

who unhappily peels her away.
112 Rick has only dealt with his problem symbolically, and so
Annina Grateful; neither he nor we get lasting relief. Annina’s sweet gesture
Rick Unfulfilled
reminds us only that we want to see Ilsa embracing him in-
stead of her. The illusory nature of Rick’s victory is revealed,
reversing the previous up beat.

113. Annina and Jan make arrangements with Renault to buy

the visa with Jan’s gambling winnings.
113 This beat is all about Renault’s reaction to Rick’s action. As
Renault Reacts Rick’s foil in the move from neutrality to commitment, his
to Rick’s
Generosity amused, admiring reaction gives us hope. The resolution
 Casablanca | 163

of the Annina subplot has introduced a new element to our hope/fear axis.
Where before we were hoping for him to unite with Ilsa, or at least recover
from the pain of losing her, now we’re hoping for him to recommit to the
world around him. These two strands dovetail symbolically here and will
dovetail literally at the film’s climax.

114. Sascha and Carl reward him with, respectively, overly ef-
fusive and quietly understanding gratitude.
114 In case we hadn’t noticed this new element of our hope/
Rick Praised by fear axis, we get an immediately subsequent hit of positive
Carl and Sascha
reinforcement from two of our chorus characters. Another
dramatic up arrow.

115. Renault tweaks him over his sudden display of altruism,

then lets him know that he’ll brook no repeat when tomorrow
115 night’s target shows up.
Renault Expects Though his intervention is gentle, Renault’s speaking up
Tomorrow’s
Blond to Lose for selfishness over commitment reminds us that Rick has a
ways to go in fulfilling our burgeoning hope for him. It also
serves as a reminder of the practical, if not the emotional, power Louis holds
over Rick. The arrow moves down.

116. Laszlo seeks the letters of transit from Rick, by invoking

his past.
116 This interaction is procedural from Laszlo’s point of view
Seeking Letters, as the petitioner. He attempts to achieve a practical goal by
Laszlo Invokes
Rick’s Past pushing the granter’s emotional buttons. As it becomes a
pitch for Rick to resume his known habit of fighting for the
underdog, we see that it is dramatic on Rick’s part. He has withdrawn from
the world after losing Ilsa. By asking him to return to action, Laszlo is unwit-
tingly asking Rick to forgive Ilsa and move on.
Rick shuts down Laszlo’s impassioned political argument with cool dis-
interest. He maintains his emotional power, resolving the beat ambiguously.
On one hand, we now want Rick to engage. On the other, we relate to Rick’s
flawed humanity over Laszlo’s lofty heroism. We’re not happy to see Laszlo
pressing Rick emotionally when he’s part of his predicament.
 Casablanca | 164

117. Laszlo offers money for the letters. Rick refuses, telling

him that his wife can explain.
117 Victor switches from an emotional to a practical argument;
Laszlo Offers Rick completes the reversal by pressing Laszlo’s buttons in-
Money; Rick:
“Ask Your Wife” stead. Rick has regained the emotional power, but in a way
that makes him a heel. His jab at Laszlo lowers our hopes
both for his reconciliation with Ilsa and for his re-enagement with the world.
A down arrow marks this self-defeating victory. (We may feel some degree of
satisfaction to see Laszlo punished for his ignorant presumption, but it’s not
the beat’s dominant note.)

118. Rick emerges from his office to find Germans singing a

nationalistic song down in the bar.
118 First Rick takes a tiny step toward engagement. Then Laszlo
Singing pushes him back to self-pitying selfishness with his bid for
Nazis
the transit papers. Now, as if in thematic rebuke, the Nazis
are singing in his bar. The thematic connection makes this a
dramatic beat. Singing Nazis always push the arrow down.

119. Renault shoots Rick a loaded glance, either encouraging

or daring him to act.
119 Renault, ever attentive to the direction of the wind, chal-
Renault’s lenges Rick to stake out a claim. Is he the neutralist he
Challenging
Glance claims to be, or the sentimentalist Louis sees beneath the
facade? This quick beat extends and heightens Rick’s inter-
nal conflict without resolving it, and earns a lateral arrow.

120. Laszlo tells the band to play the French anthem, “La
Marseillaise.”
120 Now Laszlo heightens the challenge, taking action as we
Laszlo Requests would expect him to do. We’re happy that someone’s stand-
Marseillaise
ing up to the Nazis, even if it’s the expected party, and score
this with an up arrow.

121. The band looks to Rick; he nods his approval.

Despite his cruel turn with Laszlo moments ago, the beat
121 resolves toward hope as Rick chooses engagement over self-
Rick Gives interest. An up arrow.
the Nod
 Casablanca | 165

122. After attempting to out-sing the other patrons, Strasser

gives up in disgust.
122 Unhappy Nazis are always an up arrow.
Strasser’s Men
Drowned Out

123. A tearful Yvonne, who a short while ago came in on a

German officer’s arm, tearfully sings the French anthem.
123 Yvonne is now revealed as another foil figure for Rick. She
Tearful Yvonne has completed the leap we want him to make, choosing en-
Joins In
gagement over self-interest. The arrow moves up again. (And
if you’re like me, you get choked up by this beat every time
you see it.)

124. Ilsa gazes with moved admiration at her husband.

And this beat delivers the gut punch, in which our hopes
124 are exposed as contradictory. We want engagement over self-
Ilsa Gazes interest, but we don’t want Ilsa gazing lovingly at Laszlo! We
Lovingly at
Laszlo want her with Rick! The moment’s profound ambiguity re-
quires crossed dramatic arrows.

125. Strasser demands that Renault close the bar.

This beat shows us that the problem with acting against your
125 self-interest is that it’s against your self-interest. The bar, the
Strasser source of Rick’s emotional power, is now under threat. Rick
Demands Bar
Closure is about to pay for his nod, evoking concern on his behalf. If
this were a story about a man struggling to maintain a night-
club in the difficult environment of wartime Casablanca, this would be a pro-
cedural defeat. Here it’s a symbol of an internal tug of war between retreat
and engagement. The practical problem of the threat to the bar is nonetheless
scored as a dramatic downturn. (Ultimately we want Rick to lose his attach-
ment to the Café Americain, as it represents his disengagement. But the film
hasn’t taken us to that point yet, and here the score cues us to be concerned.)

126. When Rick protests the closure, Renault voices his shock
to discover gambling, then collects his winnings.
126 This classic moment of comic relief serves as gratification,
Renault and a lighter up beat, after the stirring emotions of the previ-
Shocked!
Gambling! ous sequence. It also hints that maybe the loss of the bar isn’t
 Casablanca | 166

the worst thing that could happen.

127. Strasser gives Ilsa two choices: Laszlo can return to an

uncertain fate in occupied France, or be murdered in
127 Casablanca.
Strasser: It’s This beat returns us to the procedural sub-plot concerning
France or Death
for Laszlo Victor’s attempt to escape the Nazis, and increases our con-
cern for him. The arrow points down.

128. Ilsa urges Victor not to go to the planned underground

meeting.
128 The film continues its variations on its basic themes: here
Ilsa Urges Ilsa presses Laszlo to opt for self-interest over engagement.
Laszlo Not To
Go to Meeting She’s the imploring petitioner. He deflects her with a joke
that ironically undermines the very basis of their relation-
ship: “It’s not often that a man has a chance to display heroics before his wife.”
The problem is that she is bound to him by his heroism, even though her real
passion is for Rick.
The beat resolves on paired down arrows. Procedurally, the beat makes
us worry for Laszlo’s physical safety. Dramatically, it engages our pity for him,
showing how completely in the dark he is about the love between Ilsa and
Rick.

129. Ilsa asks him to explain what happened with Rick. He

asks her what “ask your wife” might mean, and if she was with
129 anyone else while he was in a concentration camp. She denies it
“He Said, ‘Ask explicitly, then obliquely asks for forgiveness.
Your Wife’”
Victor is the petitioner, seeking information he suspects he
doesn’t want the answer to. The text of the scene is her de-
nial; subtextually he acknowledges what has happened and she asks for for-
giveness. When he tells her he loves her, she says, “I know”—among the worst
possible responses one can get or give to that statement. The beat highlights
that Ilsa too is torn between self-interest and engagement. Our hopes are
pulled in contradictory directions, feeling for Laszlo but still wanting her to
somehow resolve this mess and be with Rick. Our arrows cross again.
 Casablanca | 167

130. Carl tells Rick that he can stay afloat for a couple of
weeks.
130 This piece of pipe lets us know that the situation with the
The Bar is Ok bar closing represents a setback but is not our main concern.
For a Couple
of Weeks As previously noted, we’re not watching a movie about a
man struggling to run a successful nightclub in Casablanca.
The relaxation of concern over this practical matter warrants a procedural up
arrow.

131. A desperate Ilsa asks Rick for the transit papers; he rebuffs
her with his usual cruel disdain.
131 Ilsa, imploring petitioner, directly evokes Rick’s central in-
Ilsa Asks Rick ternal conflict, asking him to put aside the personal in fa-
For the Letters
vor of something greater. In harshly rejecting her, he’s now
acting against both of our paradoxical hopes for him. He’s
neither getting closer to her, or moving from disengagement to engagement.
The arrow points down.

132. She moves from a political to a personal argument, invok-

ing their time in Paris, offering to finally explain. He shuts her
132 down, saying he can’t trust what she says.
Ilsa Invokes The objective and positions of petitioner and granter remain
Paris
the same. Ilsa shifts tactics and makes the stakes more per-
sonal, so Rick does the same and makes his most hurtful ac-
cusation yet. The arrow still points down.

133. Ilsa goes on the attack, calling him a coward and a

weakling.
133 Ilsa’s objective shifts—now she wants to hurt Rick, retaliat-
Ilsa Lashes ing for his lashing out at her. This exchange remains one-
Out at Rick
sided, as she relents and changes course before Rick has
a chance to respond. Still, it’s easy to see where the arrow
points—both of our leads are in pain, and neither of our paradoxical hopes
for Rick are coming any closer to fruition.
 Casablanca | 168

134. Catching herself, she switches back to her original objec-

tive—getting the letters.
134 Ilsa’s tactic is tearful begging; he responds with callous disre-
Ilsa Begs For gard. She tells him that Victor will die in Casablanca without
Laszlo’s Life
their help. He replies that he’ll die there too: “It’s a good spot
for it.” Although tactics (and, to a lesser extent, objectives)
keep changing, the trajectory of the scene remains the same: downward.

135. She pulls a gun on him.

Ilsa has now shifted modes of interaction, from the dramatic
135 to the procedural. If she can’t get what she needs through
Ilsa Pulls emotional argument, she’ll threaten him physically. “I tried
a Gun
everything. Now I want those letters.” He successfully calls
her bluff, refusing to produce them. Like singing Nazis, one
lover pulling a firearm on another is pretty much always a down arrow.
Although her mode of persuasion has shifted to a procedural footing, any
fear we might have for Rick’s physical safety are quickly dispelled. Our con-
cern is still more for their relationship; the down arrow remains dramatic.

136. She breaks down; he melts, they embrace and kiss. Fade to
black.
136 Intensified anguish turns suddenly into hope as our sepa-
Ilsa Breaks rated lovers finally reunite—an up arrow.
Down; Rick
Embraces Her

137. Ilsa explains her relationship with Laszlo, including her

belief that he was dead, and the reasons for her abandoning
137 Rick in Paris.
Ilsa Explains After finally getting the reconciliation we’ve been hoping
Laszlo, and Why
She Left Rick for, we get the long-delayed reveal. Long-desired informa-
tion leads to an up arrow.

138. Rick asks what happens now; she’s torn but says she won’t
have the strength to leave him again.
138 We seem to be getting what we want here, as our lovers seem
Rick and Ilsa to have a future together. The beat resolves on an up arrow.
Talk of a Future
Together
 Casablanca | 169

139. She asks him to help Victor; he realizes that Laszlo will

have everything he needs to keep up the struggle—except for
139 her.
Rick Sees Cost Having achieved his apparent goal—reuniting with Ilsa—
of Separating
Ilsa and Laszlo Rick undergoes a shift in understanding. Now he’s the one
to see the conflict between engagement and self-interest.
Our contradictory hopes rise to the surface again, bringing back the crossed
dramatic arrows.
Ilsa tells him, “You have to think for both of us. For all of us.” Which is
another way of saying, “As protagonist, the outcome of the narrative revolves
around your choices.”

140. Underground figures Laszlo and Carl evade police

pursuit.
140 In a repeat of a familiar pattern, a major development in the
Carl and Laszlo Rick-Ilsa dramatic plot is followed by a return to the Laszlo
Evade the Police
procedural sub-plot. This beat is also ambiguous: although
he and Carl get away, the beat mostly serves to remind us of
the continuing danger Victor faces.

141. Carl brings Laszlo into the bar. Rick and Ilsa hear some-
one downstairs.
141 A new fear arises—that Victor’s presence will shatter the
Carl Brings new-found reconciliation between Rick and Ilsa. The dra-
Laszlo Into
the Bar matic arrow turns down.

142. Rick summons Carl to his office under false pretenses,

then asks him to escort Ilsa home.
142 This beat counters the dramatic threat from the previous
Rick Gets Carl one. Our sense of relief tips the arrow back up.
to his Office to
Take Ilsa Home

143. As Laszlo tends to a minor injury, Rick asks him if he ever

wonders whether self-sacrifice is worth it.
143 Here we have a reversed reflection of beat 30—a debate
Rick and Laszlo about cynicism versus altruism. This time Rick’s counterpart
Debate Cynicism
and Altruism is not Renault, spokesman for the former, but Laszlo, para-
gon of the latter. Laszlo argues that Rick is trying to escape
his true nature. His words, and Rick’s less than forceful pushback, edge us
 Casablanca | 170

toward one of our hopes—that Rick will re-engage with the world. The arrow
moves up.

144. Laszlo reveals that he knows about Rick’s love for Ilsa. He
asks Rick to get her, if not him, away from Casablanca.
144 Victor toughens our choice between our two paradoxical
Laszlo Knows, hopes by declaring his love for Ilsa. This reminder that we
Asks Rick to
Get Ilsa Out can’t have it both ways pulls the arrow down.

145. The police burst in to arrest Laszlo.

Our procedural fears for him reactivate, lodging a down
145 arrow.
Laszlo
Arrested

146. “It seems like destiny has taken a hand,” says an sphinx-

like Rick.
146 We’re left to wonder what Rick is thinking, but his expres-
“Destiny Has sion suggests a look of unseemly triumph. It makes us fear
Taken a Hand”
that he’s about to act the heel, cheaply achieving one of our
hopes (being with Ilsa) at the expense of the other (that he
embrace altruism). Not knowing our hero’s intentions at this crucial juncture
counts as a question and is enough to point the arrow down. The chance that
he’s about to do something terrible makes it all the more certain.

147. Rick argues to Renault for Laszlo’s release. Renault warns

him not to assist Victor’s escape.
147 Rick is the petitioner; Renault the granter. Rick doesn’t
Rick Argues want an emotional concession from Renault, but a practi-
Laszlo’s Case
to Renault cal result. Their negotiation consists of logical arguments
about actions and their consequences. This is a procedural
rather than a dramatic interaction. After our reflection of beat 30’s cynicism
vs. altruism debate in beat 143, we get a straight-up recapitulation of it here,
complete with a reminder of the bet Rick and Louis placed in that scene.
Although clearly their exchange concerns externals, the beat mixes ele-
ments of drama and procedural. Rick has entered Laszlo’s procedural sub-
plot, but has failed to advance it. On the other hand, he is acting with appar-
ent altruism, satisfying one of our hopes for him. A dramatic upswing crosses
a procedural downtick.
 Casablanca | 171

148. Rick admits he has the transit papers but insists that he’s
planning to use them to escape with Ilsa.
148 If we didn’t suspect that Rick is attempting to pull one over
Rick Claims to on Renault, Renault certainly does. By claiming unconvinc-
be Escaping
with Ilsa ingly to be doing the wrong thing, we figure he’s doing the
right thing, and start to root for him. The dramatic arrow
goes up.

149. Rick offers to help entrap Laszlo on a more serious

charge.
149 Just as Bond’s procedural goal (stop Dr. No) dovetails in
Rick Offers to the late stages of the plot with a dramatic one (win over
Entrap Laszlo
Honey), Rick must pursue a procedural scheme in order to
achieve his dramatic goal.
His plan’s objective is currently withheld from us. Later we’ll look back
on this beat and realize that he has already completed his inner transforma-
tion from wounded neutralist to self-sacrificing activist. The rest of the film
concerns his demonstration of the change.
By blocking our understanding of Rick’s actions, the script not only
heightens suspense, but postpones the moment where we recognize Rick’s
transformation to a point much closer to the ending of the film.
Rick is petitioner, again seeking a practical rather than emotional benefit
from Renault. The scene cuts before we see Renault agree, but we presume
that he’s been successful. He wins by casting himself as a Renault-like figure,
underhandedly using the power of the state to get a woman he wants. Thus
his history as a cynic arms him with the weapon he needs to act altruistically.
At any rate, he seems to have gotten the upper hand after encountering initial
resistance. The procedural arrow points up.
The dramatic arrow depends on whether we really fear that Rick will
betray Laszlo. This ambiguity is expressed as a crossed arrow. We wind up
with two up arrows, one dramatic and one procedural, crossed with a down-
ward dramatic arrow—our most fraught and laden beat in any of our three
narratives.
 Casablanca | 172

150. Renault appears at Rick’s, ready to execute the scheme.

This beat offers up a series of small reveals and a larger ques-
150 tion. On the first front, we learn where Rick hid the letters
Scheme Begins during Renault’s earlier search, and that Ferrari will be tak-
With Renault
at Rick’s ing over the club. The question concerns the real nature of
Rick’s plan. And to top it all off, the soundtrack cues us to
feel tension at the prospect of the unexplained scheme going awry. All of
these disparate threads add up to a crossed set of procedural arrows.

151. Ilsa, distraught, seeks reassurance from Rick: Laszlo still

thinks she’s leaving with him.
151 Each is petitioner and granter. She wants reassurance. He
Ilsa Seeks needs her to be calm and play along. Her tactic is to freely
Reassurance
From Rick express her dismay; his is to exude calm and invoke her trust
for him. These two goals prove compatible, and both get
what they want. Rick, as the dispenser of calm, maintains the power in the
scene. Yet, paradoxically, our trust in Rick is now thrown into question—if
he’s scheming on Laszlo’s behalf, why is he in the dark? He gets his procedural
goal but our dramatic fears are stoked.
The crossed arrows are coming thick and fast as the film hurtles toward
its conclusion.

152. Laszlo appears to complete the transaction for the papers.

Renault appears to arrest him. Ilsa reacts with horror.
152 Our dramatic fear swells as we worry that Rick has indeed
Renault Arrests betrayed Laszlo. Even if we trust him, we’re made to feel
Laszlo
dismay through Ilsa. The arrow drops twice—once for the
dramatic impact of Rick’s betrayal, once for Laszlo’s setback
in his procedural subplot.

153. Renault crows on Rick’s behalf, announcing that he be-

trayed Laszlo for love of Ilsa.
153 The dramatic arrow dips further as our mouthpiece for cyni-
Renault Exults: cism exults in its victory.
Desire Beats
Heroism
 Casablanca | 173

154. But wait—Renault’s face falls as he sees that Rick has him
at gunpoint.
154 The dramatic arrow reverses as our hopes are realized. It’s
Renault not our paragon of altruism who Rick is deceiving but our
Shocked: Rick
Has Gun on Him ambassador for self-interest.

155. An offended Renault retains some of his customary

aplomb as he follows Rick’s instructions.
155 The brilliance of Claude Rains’ performance shines here
Ruffled Renault as he keeps Renault funny, likeable and menacing all at the
Complies
same time. (He needs all of these qualities to execute his fa-
mous final turn at the end.) We take gratification from the
humor of the scene at the same time as we worry about the procedural con-
sequences for Rick.

156. Renault cleverly throws a spanner into Rick’s plans by

calling Strasser instead of the airport. Strasser orders a squad
156 of police to the airport.
Renault Calls This increases our fears for Rick’s procedural success, for a
Strasser Instead
of Airport down arrow.

157. An airport traffic controller announces that the flight for

Lisbon leaves in ten minutes.
157 Placing the action under a time limit is a classic way of in-
Flight Departs creasing our worry for the hero. The procedural arrow dips
in Ten Minutes
down.

158. Rick and company arrive at the airport, with Renault

still apparently compliant. Rick reveals that it’s Ilsa and Vic-
158 tor’s names he wants Renault to fill out on the letters of
Rick Wants Ilsa transit.
and Laszlo on
Letters of Transit Finally we see that Rick is doing what we hoped he’d do—
put altruism over self. The dramatic arrow goes up. But at
the same time, we realize that he and Ilsa will be parted. A down arrow crosses
the up arrow.
 Casablanca | 174

159. Rick explains to Ilsa that they have to part, for the greater
good.
159 In one of cinema’s most famous pieces of dialogue, Rick lays
Rick Explains out the conclusive argument for altruism over selfishness,
to Ilsa: They
Must Part revealing the completion of his character arc. We thought
we wanted him to get Ilsa back, but now the real goal stands
revealed—to recover from the shock of losing her. He even casts their parting
as an act of love, granting us a partial fulfillment of our other dramatic desire.
Still, it’s a bittersweet moment, merging sadness and triumph, and registers as
a crossed dramatic arrow.

160. Strasser roars onto the scene in a speeding car.

The main dramatic arc has concluded, but, as this down ar-
160 row reminds us, there are still some procedural worries to
Strasser’s resolve.
Coming

161. Renault seems to be pulling something as Rick and Laszlo

confer.
161 A second procedural suspense beat, with down arrow.
Renault is Up
To Something

162. Rick convinces Laszlo that there’s nothing between him

and Ilsa.
162 We want Rick to succeed in this deception, which is neces-
R. Convinces L.: sary so that his sacrifice isn’t in vain. He does, granting us
Nothing Between
Rick and Ilsa a dramatic up arrow. The beat also contains a moment of
patriotic gratification as Laszlo assures Rick, and us, that
we’re going to win the war.

163. Final longing glances are exchanged; Laszlo and Ilsa

depart.
163 The bittersweet romanticism of beat 159 is briefly reprised,
Final Departing to the same crossed effect.
Glances
 Casablanca | 175

164. With grudging admiration, Renault accuses Rick of

sentimentalism.
164 The film’s spokesman for altruism might not know what’s
Renault going on, but our resident cynic does. In doing so, we get to
Identifies Rick’s
Sentimentalism enjoy a beat of admiration for our hero without the previous
countervailing sadness.

165. Renault says he’ll have to arrest Rick.

We accept Rick’s sacrifice of his chance to be with Ilsa, but
165 now we worry that he’ll lose his freedom, too. The proce-
Renault dural subplot that for the bulk of the film revolved around
Will Have To
Arrest Rick Laszlo has now been taken on by our protagonist. The arrow
dips.

166. Strasser appears, is informed by Renault that Laszlo has

left, and heads for the phone.
166 The jeopardy intensifies—another procedural down arrow.
Strasser
Appears

167. Rick threatens to shoot him, but he takes the phone in an

attempt to stop the plane.
167 The external expression of Rick’s dramatic arc, Victor and
Rick Threatens Ilsa’s escape, remains in play. Strasser threatens to undo the
To Shoot
Strasser benefit of his painful sacrifice. This suspense note folds to-
gether our worries for the dramatic and procedural threads
of the story.

168. Rick shoots him.

Rick dispatches the main antagonist, protecting his sacri-
168 fice. Both arrows move up.
Rick Shoots This beat satisfies the secondary hope of the audience, es-
Strasser
tablished in beat 6, that someone will pay for the crimes of
the Germans and their collaborators, as symbolically repre-
sented by the death of the resistance agent. Strasser becomes a stand-in for a
greater evil, one which, in 1942, was still very much extant. The film gratifies
the audience by giving them a measure of justice, while encouraging them to
bring a positive attitude toward the real-life continuing struggle.
 Casablanca | 176

169. The cops roll up.

The procedural threat shifts back to the prospect of Rick’s
169 arrest. The arrow moves down.
The Police
Arrive

170. Renault tells them that Major Strasser has been shot.
With his expert control of pacing, Curtiz teases out the sus-
170 pense, for another procedural down arrow.
“Major Strasser
Has Been Shot”

171. Renault orders his men to round up the usual suspects.

Rains’ pause between the previous beat and this one is timed
171 to exquisite perfection.
Round Up the In a hallmark display of narrative symmetry, the tension
Usual Suspects
is released with a callback to the beginning of the film. As
such it serves as both gratification and the positive resolu-
tion of a procedural threat.

172. Renault executes his pivot to patriotism, throwing out a

bottle of Vichy water.
172 Rick’s dramatic arc may be complete, but here we see its
Renault Pivots continuing effect on the storyline—his transformation has
to Patriotism
brought about a similar one in his primary foil.

173. The plane takes off.

The practical fruits of Rick’s dramatic transformation are
173 confirmed, for another up arrow.
Plane Takes
Off for Lisbon

174. Louis offers Rick passage to a Free French garrison.

This beat fosters the hope that Rick’s move toward altruism
174 will continue.
Renault Offers
Rick Passage
 Casablanca | 177

175. Louis announces that he’s coming along as well.

The hero and foil-turned-ally walk off into the foggy dis-
175 tance together, ending the film on an unusual note of an-
Renault Will ticipation. We’re left to imagine the wily havoc they’ll wreak
Come As Well
on the Germans in their new roles as resistance fighters. If
we were to see them again, it would be as iconic procedural
heroes in a wartime espionage flick.

Summing Up
Like our beat maps for Hamlet and Dr. No, Casablanca modulates con-
tinually while also moving slowly downward over time. Like Hamlet, it avoids
clusters of beats that resolve in the same direction. It longest streak is five
consecutive down arrows. Notably, they occur as prelude to the longed-for
reunion of Rick and Ilsa in beat 136.
The film’s hope/fear high point occurs early, at beat 30, in the first of the
Rick-Louis verbal duels pitting altruism against cynicism. The narrative line
slides downward from there to beat 99 (Ferrari with Jan and Annina), enters
a plateau until beat 110, undergoes an up-and-down curve with Renault’s
shock at gambling in the casino as a high point and Ilsa’s pulling a gun on
Rick as its low point. The rest of the film modulates tightly, maintaining a
more or less straight line, until its conclusion. The lowest point occurs during
the climax, at beat 170, with Renault’s “Major Strasser has been shot.”
Revolving around the protagonist’s internal struggle, in which he fre-
quently acts against our hopes for him, Casablanca features many more am-
biguous beats than either Dr. No or Hamlet. It presents twenty-two of them,
as opposed to their seven crossed beats apiece.
 Applying the System | 178

Applying the System

Now that we’ve put beat analysis through our three example workouts, it’s
time to conclude with a quick look at its practical applications in your gam-
ing life, and beyond.

Analyzing Existing Works

The beat analysis system exists not as an end in itself, but as a way of helping
gamers to identify, understand, and internalize basic narrative techniques.
Reading the breakdowns given here serves as a first step. To really get story
technique into your metaphorical bloodstream, perform a similar analysis or
two yourself.
Start by picking a work that you like and respect. Choosing a piece you
already know well will help you to spot the information beats, identify pro-
tagonists, and zero in on dramatic characters’ arcs and contradictions. Poorly
constructed stories don’t teach us as much as strong ones: you’re looking for
tricks to emulate rather than mistakes to avoid.
If you’re basing an upcoming game on a particular work, choose that.
If you want to evoke a broader style, select your favorite or most exemplary
piece in that mode.
Analyzing a work you haven’t seen before is like watching a DVD in com-
mentary mode before checking out its main audio track.
To separate the moments in a work into beats, start by looking for emo-
tional shifts. Each time your sense of hope or fear fluctuates, the creator has
introduced a new beat.
 Applying the System | 179

Identify beat types by first asking yourself:

If the moment primarily concerns an inner state or emotional conflict

or
Revolves around a practical dilemma or depends on
the character’s actions in physical space

In the first instance, you’ve got a dramatic beat; in the second, a procedural
beat.
Whether it conforms to one of these types or not, go through the list of
secondary beat types to see if it matches any of them.
If it concerns a piece of information, it’s either a question, a reveal, or
a pipe beat. Questions make you want to know more. Reveals satisfy a pre-
viously established mystery. Pipe gives you information you need later on,
without creating a hunger for it first.
If the beat promises a gratifying result later on, it’s an anticipation.
If it hasn’t done any of these things, including furthering a dramatic or
procedural plot or sub-plot, but it nonetheless changes the emotional tem-
perature, it’s a gratification if it makes you feel good, or a bringdown if it
makes you feel bad.
If you’ve gone through the whole list and still not identified it, it’s prob-
ably an instance of commentary. In a well-constructed work, the author’s edi-
torializing at least sheds some light on the theme. Even Shakespeare’s know-
ing breaks to complain about child acting companies and actors who ignore
the intent of the text also relate to the play’s theme of the confusion between
reality and outward appearance.
If your beat fits none of these purposes, it’s probably still a gratification
or bringdown. But let us know—maybe you’ve discovered a new type that
requires an addition to the system.
Beat analysis can be time-consuming, so if pressed for time you might
prefer to select a favorite sequence and break it down first. If you find this
process informative, you can then go back and break down the entire piece at
your leisure.
Once you’ve done this a time or two, you’ll start to notice the types and
resolutions at work in other media. With prolonged thought, the system’s
categories will slosh around in your consciousness until you find yourself
ready to apply it to your own storymaking.
One worry surrounding any analysis of story technique is that you might
not be able to turn it off on command. No one wants to be distracted by
 Applying the System | 180

seeing the gears and pulleys at work when sitting down in front of a movie
or cracking open a book by a favorite author. While it’s possible that your
prefrontal cortex might be so overactive that any whiff of critical analysis for-
ever damages your ability to consume entertainment, this is not a likely fear
for most. Compelling narratives pull you out of your conscious thought, and
require effort to analyze. You may, however, find yourself thinking about the
building blocks of a story after it has already bored you and allowed your
mind to wander. You may notice that the pipe doesn’t pay off or is too obvi-
ously laid. Or that the rhythmic variance typical of an involving story isn’t
quite present. Or that the creator has failed to devise situations that activate
your hopes or fears.

Avenues For Further Exploration

Hamlet, Dr. No, and Casablanca may be three classic narratives of
high interest to the gamer tribe, but they’re just a drop in the statisti-
cal bucket when you consider the incalculable number of stories
available to the modern reader/viewer. Other types of stories will
consist of the same basic building blocks, but may show strikingly
different narrative lines. A Lovecraftian horror story may be a long
slide downwards, with few if any up notes—or it could surprise us
by displaying a steadily but modestly declining line pattern similar to
the works we’ve looked at here. I suspect comedies bear a shock-
ingly similar pattern to tragedies, even if we’re laughing when dread-
ful things happen to their protagonists. Since this volume is already
gristly enough, given its theoretical nature, we’ll have to make those
inquiries elsewhere. Contact us at gameplaywright.net to share your
discoveries and insights as you widen beat analysis to the further
reaches of the narrative tradition.

Scenario Beats
When creating a scenario, use beat analysis to create a hypothetical map of
its essential turning points. You can likewise use it to better prepare a sce-
nario written by someone else. Be careful that this process doesn’t lock you
into a single conception of what might happen when the players get involved
 Applying the System | 181

and set to work determining the direction of the story. You’re not mapping
what must happen, but one or more of the likeliest outcomes. To ensure the
possibility of meaningful branching, you might want to create a non-linear
arrangement of possible scenes, and allow events as they occur in-game to
connect the dots between them. Resolutions don’t appear on this sort of pro-
visional map, as you can’t predict which obstacles the PCs will overcome and
which will set them back.
You can, however, plan for a variety of beat types. By thinking about
information as separate question and reveal beats, you can unveil it to your
players in a way that maximizes their impact. You might look for ways to fold
pipe into other beats, to avoid telegraphing its significance. Look for ways to
build the players’ sense of dominance and competence by finding anticipa-
tions allowing them to savor in advance the occasional easy victory.
If you spot a comparatively large number of the non-central gratifica-
tion, bringdown, and commentary beats on your preliminary breakdown, cut
them or find ways to fold them into your procedural or dramatic storylines.
For example, your adventure notes may consist of reams of detail on a cool
place, culture or historical event. Matching these elements up with beat types
helps you to turn them from passive narration into active events the players
can shape through their decisions and die rolls.

Session Beats
Tracking actual events in your game sessions will help to sharpen your game’s
pacing and vary its emotional rhythm. During play, jot down major beats,
indicating their emotional impact with up or down arrows. Player disen-
gagement may be explained by too many up arrows or, more likely, too many
down arrows in a row. Even on your rough sheet, you’ll be able to spot this.
Equipped with the sense of narrative rhythm you’ve internalized from study-
ing other works, you can then throw in new moments of gratification, domi-
nance and victory as needed. In the unlikely event you’re making matters too
easy for the heroes, foreshadow danger, increase difficulties, and pump up the
capabilities of the opposition.
Players may add down arrows of their own, even to a carefully balanced
set of scenario beats. In many groups, conflict between player characters typi-
cally registers as a procedural and/or dramatic down note. When these start
to cluster together, you may need to compensate, getting the up arrows roll-
ing again. This might entail acting as a mediator to help reach a decision, or
removing the point they’re stuck on with a sudden change of situation.
 Applying the System | 182

In games built around inter-PC dramatic conflict, you can use your map
to identify the evolving nature of their disputes. By isolating the beats, you
can tailor upcoming events under your control so that they reflect and inten-
sify the beats your players are laying down for you.
Post-session, you may learn more to enhance your game by formally map-
ping out your jotted-down beat descriptors and resolutions. You might find
that you’re missing your reveals, that players aren’t picking up on questions, or
that the players keep constructing unexpected impediments for themselves.
You might also expand your map’s purpose beyond straight beat analysis
to identify other stumbling blocks. For example, you might find it useful to
add symbols representing each of your players to the major beats. From this
you might discover that certain players are dominating the plot while oth-
ers languish on the periphery. Assuming that players haven’t sidelined them-
selves on purpose because they prefer a supporting role, you can use this as a
hint that you need to engage them more, while making an effort to curb your
resident spotlight hogs.
If you find yourself layering multiple orders of information into your ses-
sion beat maps, you may find it useful to use a graphics package that enables
layers, which can be switched on and off. Beat types may appear on one layer,
player icons on another. The rough versions of the diagrams for this book
were created on Profantasy’s Campaign Cartographer. It handles the task
splendidly, even if it’s like using chess-playing supercomputer Deep Blue to
calculate a restaurant tip.

Moving the Arrows as a Player

Keeping a beat map of another GM’s game would constitute a mas-
sive feat of passive-aggressiveness. Short of this appalling step, you
can remain mindful of emotional rhythm as a player, and step up to
your responsibility as a collaborator to aid in varying it.
Players do this instinctively as it is, most notably by joking and
kibitzing to reduce tension during tough moments. This traditional
method of lightening the mood brings its own problems, by distract-
ing the group and breaking the fictional illusion. Challenge yourself
to find in-character comments and asides that move the arrow up at
crucial moments without sidetracking the story.
When tactical disagreements bog you down, use your under-
standing of the petitioner-granter structure to move the discussion
 Applying the System | 183

on and clarify what everyone wants. Identify the other PCs’ objec-
tives and think of ways to realize them while also securing the con-
cessions you seek. Grant strategic concessions to others to move
past the logjam and back onto a cooperative footing.
Some of the most useful work in building for engaging narrative
rhythms occurs before you start play, during character generation.
Build in an engaging inner conflict giving the GM grist for drama.
Create a supporting cast around your PC, which you can draw on
when you need to reestablish sympathy or dominance.
In a heroic campaign, envision yourself as an iconic character.
Venture boldly into situations with a Bondian suavity, confident that
the GM’s universe will conspire with you to present you with solv-
able problems.

Outlining Traditional Narratives

Although largely beyond the purview of this book, beat analysis also allows
you to create a useful visual aid when outlining stories for traditional media.
It allows you to quickly pinpoint and adjust sections of the story that occur
on the same emotional level. Watch out for clusters of all kinds. Consecutive
pipe beats are bad news: your audience can only absorb so much informa-
tion at once. Reveals are more effective if separated from the questions they
satisfy, but not so much that the audience has forgotten to hanker for the
information. A succession of secondary beat types suggests that you’ve lost
track of your main story threads.
In the case of stories featuring multiple protagonists, you might want to
add character tracking, as suggested above, to your beat map. You can then
see when major characters go missing from your narrative. Sometimes you’ll
want them to, but this should be a choice you’re aware of and not a failure to
keep all of your juggled objects airborne.
Your story isn’t guaranteed to have the impact of Hamlet, Dr. No or Casa-
blanca just because your beat analysis map looks like theirs, but it can’t hurt.

The beat icons and arrows used in Hamlet’s Hit Points are available for use un-
der a Creative Commons license. Visit gameplaywright.net/hamlets-hit-points
to download them.
 Writer and game designer Robin D. Laws is the
eponymous force behind Robin’s Laws Of Good
Game Mastering, acclaimed as a seminal work on the
running of tabletop roleplaying games. His practical
design contributions to the field appear in such games
as Feng Shui, The Dying Earth Roleplaying Game,
HeroQuest, The Esoterrorists, and Skulduggery. D&D
players know his work on various supplements,
including sections of the Dungeon Master’s Guide 2
for both the third and fourth editions of that game. His fiction chops can be
seen in his six novels and various serials and short stories. The analysis found
in Hamlet’s Hit Points first surfaced in his blog, a cavalcade of hobby games,
film, culture, narrative structure, and gun-toting avians.

Gameplaywright Press is a small publisher of books about games, sto-

ries, and the place where they meet. Visit us online at gameplaywright.net or
send us an e-mail at [email protected]. We’d love to hear from you.

If you enjoyed Hamlet’s Hit Points, please consider recommending

it to a friend. Or, write a review for your favorite book-sharing website, online
bookseller, or game forum. We’d appreciate that a lot.
 A l s o f r o m G a m e p l ay w r i g h t P r e s s

Things We Think
About Games
“It is rare that I actually shout ‘Yes, goddamn it!’ when reading a book.”
— Richard Dansky, manager of design at Red Storm Entertainment

“An unholy mixture of helpful guide-

book and jabbing provocation, it will
earn its right to rattle around your
brain. It is essential reading for de-
signer, critic, and straight-up rank ‘n’
file gamer alike.”
— Robin D. Laws, author of
Hamlet’s Hit Points

Things We Think About Games

collects dozens on dozens of bite-
sized thoughts about games. From
the absurd to the magnificent, the
demonstrable to the dogmatic, it spans
both the breadth of games—board,
card, roleplaying, and more—and
the depth of gaming, offering insights
about collecting, playing, critiquing,
designing, and publishing.

Written by Will Hindmarch & Jeff Tidball

Foreword by Robin D. Laws • Introduction by Wil Wheaton
With John August, Pat Harrigan, Fred Hicks, Kenneth Hite,
John Kovalic, Michelle Nephew, Philip Reed, S. John Ross,
Mike Selinker, and Noah Wardrip-Fruin

Trade Paperback, 160 pages

ISBN 13: 978-0-9818840-0-4
ISBN 10: 0-9818840-0-8
Stock No. GPW0001
$20 US

Read more online at gameplaywright.net/thingswethinkaboutgames

 A l s o f r o m G a m e p l ay w r i g h t P r e s s

the bones:
us and our dice
“A book of gamer joy.”
— Ryan Macklin, lead project developer, The Dresden Files Roleplaying Game

“What are these small, insignificant

things, these dice, and why do they
disturb us so, with their vertiginous
surplus of meaning?”
— Pat Harrigan, from his
The Bones essay “The Unrollable”

The Bones gathers writing about

fandom and family—about gamers,
camaraderie, and memories—and ties
them together where they meet: our
dice. These are essays and anecdotes
about the ways dice make us crazy,
about the stakes we play for and the
thrill we get from not knowing what
the next roll will bring.

Edited by Will Hindmarch

Foreword by John Kovalic
Written by Keith Baker, Jason L Blair, Greg Costikyan, Ray Fawkes, Matt Forbeck, Pat
Harrigan, Jess Hartley, Fred Hicks, Will Hindmarch, Kenneth Hite, John Kovalic, James
Lowder, Russ Pitts, Jesse Scoble, Mike Selinker, Jared Sorensen, Paul Tevis, Jeff Tidball,
Monica Valentinelli, Chuck Wendig, and Wil Wheaton
Including interviews with Irving Finkel, Scott Nesin, and Cardell Kerr

Trade Paperback, 224 pages ATOMIC

ISBN 13: 978-0-9818840-1-1 OVERMIND
Published in partnership with PRESS
ISBN 10: 0-9818840-1-6
Atomic Overmind Press
Stock No. AOP9001 or GPW0002
$18.95 US

Read more online at gameplaywright.net/thebones