Game vs. Story

[BlueBlackRed]

I reject the notion that a campaign can't be a balance of both.

QFT

I'd like to run a more story oriented game, but not everyone in my group wants to do that.
There's a delicate balance sometimes when trying to maintain everyone's expectations of the game.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Do you read ENWorld?

Yes, do you?

That unnamed person you quoted is an extreme example that you're trying to paint as typical.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I voted for the first option, but I totally disagree with the forced conclusions that the OP makes.

When I play, we are telling a story. It is the story of the characters that is important ... not the gameplan of the DM.

However, that doesn't mean I fudge die rolls so that the story goes in the direction I want. I let the die fall. If that means that the story ends prematurely, then I start telling a new story. Either way, it is the story for which we play, not the game.

EDIT:

Story tellers will fudge to keep the PC alive till a more “appropriate” moment for the story plan. They are telling a story first, playing a game second.

Game players will not fudge and just consider the PC’s death at that moment to be part of the story unfolding. They are playing a game first, telling a story second.

This is basically the premise that I am rejecting. You can be a storyteller and not care what the dice say. We game for the story, but it isn't like we have a preconceived story that we want to force the dice into.

If I wanted that, I'd write more storyhours! <--- Shameless plug, see links in sig!

We play for more than just "playing a game." We play for the interactions and the character development ... not for the dice and "game" aspect. We play for the story. But the story is by no means contrived so much that we find some rolls unacceptable.

 

[Faraer]

Amazingly, the straw-man position has fewer votes!

That unnamed person you quoted is an extreme example that you're trying to paint as typical.

Far more DMs will fudge rolls to prevent PC death than to actively enforce a preconceived plot.

 

[Rl'Halsinor]

I don't in the least see this as an either/or proposition. If experience has taught me anything it is a both/and proposition.

 

[DonTadow]

As a DM, I create an environment of a world with stories, plots and drama. The players interact with the world and shape the story, plot and drama. In the end, an adventure is formed.

Any DM who says he doesnt take part in the story is kidding himself else the players would show up at the game table and there'd be nothing to do. Quas, you've asked two different questions. That should answer the first.

The second question would be a definite no. My arching stories don't involve the pcs, so a pc death wouldn't screw up too much. I never go with the "destined hero" thing because its bait for railroading. The pcs could choose to investigate the disappearance of the emproer or go on some dungeon hunt while the army presses in.

Of course, there will be consequences either way.

 

[TarionzCousin]

However, in my case, as long as it's understood that we're all telling the story--the DM may be guiding it, but he's not the sole author--I'm more story/plot-driven.

I agree, as long as it is the group creating the story and not the GM leading the players down the One True Path(TM) that leads to the GM's one allowed ending.

 

[painandgreed]

A little of both, I've got a story planned out and am interested in if the players will change it in the play of the game. For the most part I don't worry about the players upsetting the story and usually they end up going along with it (usually without even knowing it), sometimes more than I could have ever planned. Sometimes they esculate the timetable of events, others they disrail them, and then occationally they ignore it all. For awhile I was runnning several groups in the same campaign and keeping careful notes and everything always worked out surprisingly well even when on group got far ahead of the others timewise. I remember once case where a player was off by himself and ended up in a chase. Later that week, I played with another group that sometimes played with his character and they just happened to be in the right spot at the right time and I was able to describe see him go running by pursued by other guys. Luckily, they didn't interfere and I didn't have to worry about causality loops.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Neither

Neither. We're simulating an experience we can't have in real life. The game aspects of D&D are part of the simulation, albeit generally an imperfect one, and a story may be told by our actions, but neither is the primary focus of our play.

 

[tx7321]

the players interacting freely with the DM's world create the "story". If the players choose to follow the logical progression of the DMs or module writers plot is up to them.