Varicella is an interactive fiction by Adam Cadre. You play the part of Primo Varicella the palace minister in an Italian court. King Charles has died leaving a five year old heir. It is your aim to eliminate your competitors for the regency using whatever underhanded and devious means you can muster. In their article “Face it tiger you just hit the jackpot” Montfort and Moulthrop (2003) contend:

Varicella functions as enjoyably and meaningfully as it does because it is a good game, because it also generates good reading, and because both of these aspects work together to allow it to offer sorts of engagement that neither the traditional story nor a more purely ludic game could provide.

While this contention is essentially accurate it requires qualification. Montfort suggests that both narrative and gaming work together in a fairly equal relationship. I contend that the narrative features are subordinate to the gaming features and engagement in narrative does not take place in the ordinary sense.

The narrative is essentially a mechanism of the game play. The focus of the reader is distracted from an ordinary reading because game play demands a particular type of focus with the text. Information is being interpreted in terms of its game playing relevance and then constructed in a way that furthers the player’s endeavours.

Certain characteristics of gaming are dominant in Varicella than demand such a interpretive focus. Rules and boundries exist in the programmings that limit possible actions and outcomes. Puzzle solving is a large part of what stimulates our interest. This game is also being played to win. As Primo Varicella we eliminate all rivals and avoid being killed. This is the only path to success.

I contend that in Varicella we must consider the narrative, though detailed and imaginative, to be subordinate this overarching and dominant gaming experience.