The Problem of Evil [Forked From Ampersand: Wizards & Worlds]

[The Ghost]

I think this is a major misunderstanding about RPGs. You can tell stories about D&D, but you can't tell stories within D&D.

I disagree with this point. D&D is a great vehicle for telling a story. In fact, I will state that its best use is in telling a story.

Playing a "human DM" RPG (as opposed to playing pre-defined game like Baldur's Gate II or Neverwinter Nights) is quite different than "telling a story." No one has editorial control.

Everyone has editorial control. The DM over the larger story arc and the players over their individual characters.

If the DM was just "Telling a story" there'd be no need for dice or character sheets. You can tell stories later about how the game went down, but you can't tell a story during the game.

The existence of rules governing the limits of a characters actions does not define what is or is not a story. Nor does the introduction of a random element define what a story is.

You can only explore possibilities and roleplay your character (as opposed to anyone else's).

That's why comparing D&D to Battlestar Gallactica or Watchmen ultimately breaks down. There's no Ron/Alan Moore equivalent who has control over where the story is going or how it's going to end, or when characters will die or redeem themselves.

Yes. It is an exercise of collective story-telling. Each player in the game has control over a part of the narration. Each player can make decisions about the world and advance their part of the collective story. And each person can choose to go into long discussions about morality, the nature the universe, right and wrong, etc. Or they can choose to tell a much more black and white story were good is always us and evil is always them. Either way you are still telling a story.

Your definition of what a story is is much more narrow than what I believe or what I was taught in college.

 

[Xath]

Folks, please remember that there's no wrong way to play the game. Keep it civil.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Your definition of what a story is is much more narrow than what I believe

Yup.

As I understand the word the act of telling a story requires active and passive parties with the flow of information passing in one direction only. This is an accurate description of movies, TV shows, books, plays and verbally spoken tales (inclusive). RPGs are obviously different from these things in many respects (even if there are some similarities), as I think we all agree. We need to have a word that distinguishes between these activities, don't you think?

If you expand the word "storytelling" to include what goes on at a gaming table the word loses the characteristics that define what I consider to be "real" storytelling activities. If you want to use a different word to distinguish these very different activities you can nominate one and I'll consider using it, but I do believe storytelling is the best word for distinguishing Hamlet from Against the Giants.

 

[Mallus]

As I understand the word the act of telling a story requires active and passive parties with the flow of information passing in one direction only.

Call it 'collaborative story-writing' then.

 

[Imaro]

Yup.

As I understand the word the act of telling a story requires active and passive parties with the flow of information passing in one direction only. This is an accurate description of movies, TV shows, books, plays and verbally spoken tales (inclusive). RPGs are obviously different from these things in many respects (even if there are some similarities), as I think we all agree. We need to have a word that distinguishes between these activities, don't you think?

If you expand the word "storytelling" to include what goes on at a gaming table the word loses the characteristics that define what I consider to be "real" storytelling activities. If you want to use a different word to distinguish these very different activities you can nominate one and I'll consider using it, but I do believe storytelling is the best word for distinguishing Hamlet from Against the Giants.

That's because in an rpg you aren't telling a story... you're creating one collaboratively... Do you really not understand or are you purposefully being this pedantic about semantics.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Sure you can, if that 'argument' takes the form of fiction, or a less-filling fiction-like substitute, such as RPG play sometimes is.

No, you really can't. I think you misunderstood what I was saying though.

My argument is that the active party cannot let the dice decide a moral outcome. The other people at the table get to "see what happens" by watching him make that decision, but the particular player who makes the decision cannot roll a d20 to find out whether it's okay to kill the goblin.

Laugh and start rolling dice?

You can't roll dice to answer these questions. Perhaps you misunderstood me again.

I'll be more blunt. Suppose Bob's character kills someone and the group determines that it wasn't "just", but rather murder. Does your group then punish him in accordance with law, be cool with that, or "laugh and roll dice", thus simply ignoring the presence of a question?

Because your only choices here are morality, immorality, or amorality. There's no rule in D&D that will tell you what to do.

Instead of Cosmic Evil, I prefer campaigns that either 1) admit that protagonists are essentially gleefully immoral freebooters--the standard S&S approach-- or keep the Cosmic Evil to a bare minimum, using plain old-fashion conflicting goals/desires instead.

I'm pretty sure those are the same thing.

 

[Irda Ranger]

That's because in an rpg you aren't telling a story... you're creating one collaboratively... Do you really not understand or are you purposefully being this pedantic about semantics.

You do realize we are discussing the term "storytelling", right?

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

That's because in an rpg you aren't telling a story... you're creating one collaboratively...

This right here. It's cooperative storytelling.

 

[Imaro]

You do realize we are discussing the term "storytelling", right?

And you do realize that each participant is in fact telling their particular part(s) of the story each time they narrate something right? Again why I asked if you were purposefully being that pedantic about semantics.

 

[The Ghost]

Yup.

As I understand the word the act of telling a story requires active and passive parties with the flow of information passing in one direction only. This is an accurate description of movies, TV shows, books, plays and verbally spoken tales (inclusive). RPGs are obviously different from these things in many respects (even if there are some similarities), as I think we all agree. We need to have a word that distinguishes between these activities, don't you think?

If you expand the word "storytelling" to include what goes on at a gaming table the word loses the characteristics that define what I consider to be "real" storytelling activities. If you want to use a different word to distinguish these very different activities you can nominate one and I'll consider using it, but I do believe storytelling is the best word for distinguishing Hamlet from Against the Giants.

Allow me to give you a couple of examples...

I was recently in a class on creative writing. One of the things we did in class was sit around in a circle and the professor started off by saying Five people walk into a bar. Then, we went around the circle with each person adding something to what has already been said. Was what we did considered storytelling? I think so.

How about an improv play? Does it require an audience to be considered a story? Can the actors not enjoy the story for themselves only?

What about all the writing I do in my journals? Are they not stories because there is no one other than me who reads them?

Those examples are pretty close to what I see being done at every game table I have ever sat down at. I think that there is a lot more to D&D than just the game mechanics. I think that Scott Rouse had some interesting story ideas that sparked this thread. I would have preferred to see this thread explore those ideas and how they can be used at a game table rather than a debate about whether D&D is a good vehicle for exploring those ideas. I happen to think that D&D is an excellent way to explore not just the heroic good versus evil stories but also those stories that are more nuanced - more shades of grey. It is up to individual groups to tell the stories that they are most comfortable with.