Choose the Illusion: Dungeon Mastering

Mercutio01 · Dec 31, 2011

Gentlegamer said:
Any human activity can create a story. That does not mean the purpose of that activity is to create a story. This is a meaningful distinction when analyzing the form and execution of that activity.

To be honest, in 20 years of gaming I've not yet heard people argue that role-playing is not a form of story-telling.

So, since making stuff up and pretending to be someone else is, apparently, NOT story-telling, what exactly is the purpose when you sit around a table with a bottle of coke and a bag of cheetos, surrounded by some guys and girls who are pretending to be someone else?

JamesonCourage · Dec 31, 2011

Hussar said:
But, Exploder Wizard, creation of a story is unavoidable. You can't play an RPG without it. It might not be your intent to create a story, but, without fail, that's what you are doing.

Like I've said, you cannot play an RPG without creating a story. It's not possible. Therefore, RPG's are collaborative story telling games.

I disagree with you (finally!). A quick look at wiki (reliable as always) reveals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storytelling_game said:
Storytelling game

A storytelling game is a game where two or more persons collaborate on telling a spontaneous story. Usually, each player takes care of one or more characters in the developing story. Some games in the tradition of role-playing games require one participant to take the roles of the various supporting characters, as well as introducing non-character forces (for example, a flood), but other systems dispense with this figure and distribute this function among all players.

Since this person usually sets the ground and setting for the story, he or she is often referred to as the "storyteller" (often contracted to "ST") or "narrator". Any number of other alternate forms may be used, many of which are variations on the term "gamemaster"; these variants are especially common in storytelling games derived from or similar to role-playing games.

Role-playing games

The most popular modern storytelling games originated as a sub-genre of role-playing games, where the game rules and statistics are heavily de-emphasised in favor of creating a believable story and immersive experience for all involved. So while in a conventional game the announcement that one's character is going to leap over a seven-meters-wide canyon will be greeted with the request to roll a number of dice, a player in a storytelling game who wishes to have a character perform a similar feat will have to convince the others (especially the storyteller) why it is both probable and keeping within the established traits of their character to successfully do so. As such, these games are a subclass of diceless role-playing games.

Not all players find the storytelling style of role-playing satisfying. Many role-playing gamers are more comfortable in a system that gives them less freedom, but where they do not need to police themselves; others find it easier to enjoy a system where a more concrete framework of rules is already present. These three types of player are discussed by the GNS theory.

Some role-playing game systems which describe themselves as "storytelling games" nevertheless use randomisers rather than story in the arbitration of the rules, often in the form of a contest of Rock, Paper, Scissors or a card drawn from a deck of cards. Such "storytelling" games are instead simplified or streamlined forms of traditional role-playing games. Conversely, most modern role-playing games encourage gamemasters to ignore their gaming systems if it makes for a more enjoyable story, even though they may not describe themselves as "storytelling" games.

I think, from a more colloquial standpoint, that most people would not classify all RPGs are "collaborative storytelling." While I do agree that all RPG play will produce a story that can be told, I think that most people use something akin to the above definition to separate "collaborative storytelling" from other forms of RPGs. The article even mentions GNS theory, which is a good example of how people will attempt to divide RPGs into different subtypes to help discuss the subject.

Just my thoughts on it, though. I agree that RPGs produce a story, but I think that, colloquially, a collaborative storytelling RPG is an RPG that includes the intent of all the players to produce a compelling story as its main goal, rather than see one emerge through decisions in-game. As always, play what you like

S'mon · Dec 31, 2011

Gentlegamer said:
By your terms, what game can be played without a story?

NOOO!!!!

Don't start it up all over again!

S'mon · Dec 31, 2011

Mercutio01 said:
To be honest, in 20 years of gaming I've not yet heard people argue that role-playing is not a form of story-telling.

So, since making stuff up and pretending to be someone else is, apparently, NOT story-telling, what exactly is the purpose when you sit around a table with a bottle of coke and a bag of cheetos, surrounded by some guys and girls who are pretending to be someone else?

To win the game?

howandwhy99 · Jan 1, 2012

Hussar said:
Like I said, you cannot play an RPG without a story. It's not possible.

I've heard story defined as "stuff happening", or "expressing", which can then turns into an absolutist definition of everything. "You can never have stuff not happening", "even absence is a story", and "we are always expressing."

To me, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's a means to manipulate others to think and talk about what they are doing and who they are as someone else desires them to. Something is story, if we choose to address it as story. It isn't, if we don't. If story means we use these ideas and those words and these other concepts to describe what's going on - and not others - then it is limiting the people engaging in the enterprise. That's good, now we have focus, but to force others to obey the same thinking isn't. Let them focus how they choose to. Think, speak, play, and design games according to your own way and let others have theirs.

If you want to "smurf" story by removing all definition to it, that's up to you. But then the entirety of narrative and the narrative vocabulary is in no way relevant to telling a story nor is it what the term story refers to. That may be okay with you.

I use mathematical game theory and focus on pattern recognition in games. I don't happen to think games like Go should only be construed as anemic storytelling games, but that's me. For me, memory matters. And removing the vocabulary to conceive or address it is a nihilistic act, not a creative one - however much one may hold it as an illusion.

"All things are possible"

howandwhy99 · Jan 1, 2012

To be clear, I'm not trying to be antagonistic above. My point is there are many ways of addressing gaming in this Land of Maybe of ours. I'd like if we could avoid certainties and absolutes in regards to how we engage in them. Conclusions are one thing, impossibilities quite another. I hope you have a happy new year and are enjoying the holidays.

Hussar · Jan 1, 2012

S'mon said:
To win the game?

How does one win an RPG?

Hussar · Jan 1, 2012

Again, HowandWhy99, can you give me an example of playing an RPG that doesn't result in a story with the holy triumvirate- character, setting and plot?

I'm sorry about the Talisman example, but, cut and pasting the text from the back of the box really doesn't answer the question. Nor, does it actually counter my point. Even if playing some board games results in a story, that doesn't change anything. It just means that some board games are closer to RPG's than other games. I'm pretty sure that Talisman comes under this umbrella.

You can play non-RPG's without generating a story. Bingo and Poker, no matter what, will not result in a story. You cannot play an RPG without generating a story. It's impossible. Thus, all RPG's are an exercise in collaborative storytelling.