L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
I absolutely agree with this! As a writer and a long time game master or Dungeon Master as it was once called, I can tell you it makes all difference in the world in the gamer's experience and causes them to remember the game more so. My team of players have been with me for over thirty years and that is because when I create a game and add those finer details that make them want to play more. Games without good story are not for me. Its all about the story.Going with one of the OED's definitions of literary:
"Concerned with depicting or representing a story or other literary work; that refers or relates to a text; that creates a complex or finely crafted narrative like that of a work of literature."
Gaming can be literary, based on that particular definition. We draw influences from a variety of sources, after all. Two of the published AD&D modules are inspired by the works of Lewis Carroll. Many years ago, I ran a campaign that was pretty much Hamlet. Not in quality, mind you, I'd never go that far. But the plot was directly taken from Hamlet, albeit with an evil wizard and whatnot.
And we can absolutely have a "finely crafted narrative" in gaming. The difference is that that narrative creates itself collaboratively, as we play, rather than being written out.
I didn't have to mine your posts, man. I have a memory- it's not like it's hard to remember the last time this happened (thread was pulled out, etc.).
It's unfortunate that you don't see the irony in your post, perhaps next time it will be your ox (again).
Anyway, I am done. Please do not respond again.
On the 13 kobolds on a hill.
Ok. It’s conversation. Player asks, “What do they look like?” Fairly reasonable question. Particularly if you trade kobolds for something new that the player has never seen before.
Now describe your 13 kobolds without being literary. Do you really just say three foot tall dog men? Oh wait, wrong edition. Three foot tall lizard dudes armed with spears? That’s clear but hardly what I’d call good dming.
Better yet. You see a Vengaurak on the hill. What do you do?
Also to those getting angry, please consider that at the very worst you are getting angry because people are asserting descriptions are not all that important to them in an RPG. Even if they are wrong, just being stubborn and closed minded, this is a fairly narrow slice of life to get heated over. Even within gaming it is a fairly specific thing to get emotional about.
I think you're reading or projecting too much into these replies.
No, that isn’t literary. Hack novels use descriptions. Doesn’t make them literary novels.
Again like so many play style arguments based on definitions here people are advancing a broad definition of literary so they can equivocate and advance a playstyle position.
The argument presents broad definitions of literary in order to claim RPGs are literary but then end up advocating for more narrow definitions of literary when it gets into what RPGs should do and how they should be written.
You can’t say RPGs are literary because words are involved therefore they should have the hallmarks of good literature.
From this, it seems that what you and @Maxperson mean by presenting a situation well enough is that the situation is described. I agree that description is necessary, but I fail to see how merely describing a situation makes the formal qualities of that description the focus of the activity.
What some players find interesting, other players will not. Different players have different interests. Is that surprising?