[There is a structure to the early part of the first book (and maybe to the whole thing — I can’t recall and I’m not finished yet)]

This may be a bit illusionary. The book was originally a series of short stories and later organized into a book.

And wait till you get to the Mule.

You do have to remember though that Foundation itself, at least the first and I believe second books, were not originally written as chapters of a book. They were short stories. In this light, much of the structure makes sense — Asimov had to cater to readers who might not have read the previous stories (the second two were published 2 years after the first two).

Whether this observation has anything to say about its connection to RPGs, I dunno. But I do think that not making explicit the fallout of a big fight that ends the session or a few sessions, and just addressing the attendant consequences with a summary (that may leave out some details to be explored later) in the next session, could actually work quite well in some RPG contexts, especially with players who are comfortable filling in gaps as they go. This might be a better way to play a longer-term Spirit of the Century game, with a rotating cast depending on who’s around that night, than Diaspora, but I don’t think it’s inherently problematic for RPGs in general.

Usually what happens in a serialization, though, is that you get the gunfight *and* the summary. The interesting part of the structure so far (first half of the first book) is that the primary conflicts are *only* resolved through subsequent summary. Even (maybe especially) as short stories, that seems unusual.

I don’t think it really was. Remember, these are short stories which were published in Astounding in the golden John Campbell years, and he was an editor who didn’t let much that could be cut through to his magazine (and he had the power, de facto if not de jure, to basically rewrite his authors’ submitted work). It’s not part of the first story what changes in Foundation society will be wrought by Hardin’s tenure as Mayor; the conflict has been resolved and the Encyclopedists have lost. The really important part of the denouement, that a reader might not have guessed, is that Seldon knew it was coming all along — and that part we see. In an RPG, I probably would have played it very similarly, assuming I as GM was planning a time-jump after this first story… it’s just a matter of what timescales you want to show in play, where you think the conflicts are.

Think about an Ars Magica game. You have a story set one year, then, after the magi set up their preferred candidate as the local Baron so they can work in peace, you say ‘OK. You have 3 years of seasonal work until my next story; let’s work out any societal changes that happened. Then the Baron dies of pneumonia without an heir, and …. ” I think the Foundation stories are just like that.

If you like the Foundation series, you should definitely read Donald Kingsbury’s Psychohistorical Crisis, his homage/pastiche/deconstruction of Asimov.

Just finished with part 3, which does not follow the “pattern”. I’m a little relieved — while it’s a clever technique, I’m not sure it would have been sustainable through a complete novel.

Robert, I am indeed interested in the homage you mention. Sadly there’s no Kindle edition. Someone yell at Donald Kingsbury’s publishers!

Alas, HJ! I’m currently working my way through Banks’s Against a Dark Background. Total Diaspora fodder.

“Microscope” has the potential to play out like this, if the players are so inclined.

Hey cool, Roger — I’ve been meaning to look at “Microscope” and now I’m motivated some more.

Microscope is what came to my mind too. There’s a game of it running on Wave right now that is open to spectators. You can become a lurker by joining the (now misnamed) mgbbs09 Google Group, then looking in at the game’s directory of waves.