Ilbranteloth
Explorer
I was building a PC, which led to me pulling out my copy of BW Gold, which led to me rereading the opening few pages. Some stuff in there seemed relevant to this thread, in so far as it sets out a particular approach to what I have been calling "player-driven" RPGing.
From the Foreword, by Jake Norwood (The Riddle of Steel designer, and HEMA guy):
So how do you play Burning Wheel? Fight for what you believe. Or, since it’s a roleplaying game: Fight for what your character believes. Everything else in the rules tells either how to craft that character’s beliefs or how to fight for them.
Burning Wheel’s character creation drips with character history. History breeds conflict. Conflict means taking a stand. What will your character stand for?
Burning Wheel’s core mechanics, advancement and Artha rules demand more-than-usual attention from the player. Skill or stat advancement isn’t an afterthought, but rather a crucial part of the game. The decision to solve a problem with cold steel or silken words isn’t just one of better numerical values - it’s a question of who you, the player, want your character to become. Every action - pass or fail - is growth. Every decision affects how your character matures, shifts, changes. Even little decisions impact the character in permanent, subtle ways. . . .
The game is meant to be played as written. Each rule has been lovingly crafted . . . to support player-driven stories of white-knuckled action, heart-rending decisions and triumph against the odds.
And from the introduction, pp 9-11, 13:
The Burning Wheel is a roleplaying game. Its mood and feel are reminiscent of the lands created by Ursula K Le Guin, Stephen R Donaldson and JRR Tolkien in their works of fantasy fiction. It is also heavily influenced by the brilliant medieval historical accounts of Barbara Tuchman and Desmond Seward; a dirty, complicated world full of uncertainty, but not without hope or opportunity for change.
Unlike many other roleplaying games, there is no set world in which you play. Burning Wheel is an heir to a long legacy of fantasy roleplaying games, most of which contain far better worlds and settings than could be provided here. Also, it is my strong belief that players of these games are adept at manufacturing their own worlds for gameplay; my own world pales in comparison to what you will create.
In the game, players take on the roles of characters inspired by history and works of fantasy fiction. These characters are a list of abilities rated with numbers and a list of player-determined priorities. The synergy of inspiration, imagination, numbers and priorities is the most fundamental element of Burning Wheel. Expressing these numbers and priorities within situations presented by the game master (GM) is what the game is all about.
Though the game has no world full of ethics and laws, the rules do contain a philosophy that implies a certain type of place. There are consequences to your choices in this game. They range from the very black and white, “If I engage in this duel, my character might die,” to the more complex, “If my character undertakes this task, he’ll be changed, and I don’t know exactly how.” Recognizing that the system enforces these choices will help you navigate play. I always encourage players to think before they test their characters. Are you prepared to accept the consequences of your actions? . . .
Burning Wheel is best played sitting around a table with your friends - face to face. It is inherently a social game. The players interact with one another to come to decisions and have the characters undertake actions.
One of you takes on the role of the game master. The GM is responsible for challenging the players. He also plays the roles of all of those characters not taken on by other players; he guides the pacing of the events of the story; and he arbitrates rules calls and interpretations so that play progresses smoothly.
Everyone else plays a protagonist in the story. Even if the players decide to take on the roles of destitute wastrels, no matter how unsavory their exploits, they are the focus of the story. The GM presents the players with problems based on the players’ priorities. The players use their characters’ abilities to overcome these obstacles. To do this, dice are rolled and the results are interpreted using the rules presented in this book. . . .
Burning Wheel is very much a game. While players undertake the roles of their characters and embellish their actions with performance and description, rolling the dice determines success or failure and, hence, where the story goes.
All the key ideas are there: the GM responding to player-established priorities; the PCs (and thereby their players) being tested in relation to both their abilities and those priorities, and potentially changed, in both respects, as a result; the setting as a venue for play, not as an end in itself; the results of checks ("rolling the dice") as binding on all participants.
One thing that makes the BW books among my favourite RPG rulebooks is how forthrightly they state the way to play the game. The 4e rulebooks could have benefitted, I think, from greater clarity along these sorts of lines.
Which is all well and good, assuming that's the way you want to play the game. And I think that's what bothers a lot of RPG players too - they don't like somebody else telling them how to play the game.
Yes, BW benefits from its focus. If that's the style of game you want to play, then that's the starting point for that style of game. One of the main reasons that D&D suffers in that regard is that it's designed to accommodate multiple styles of play. This isn't anything new, though. There have been plenty of games over time that have picked a specific aspect of how D&D or AD&D were played and focused on that specifically. It started with both in-house releases like the articles in Dragon magazine (and really the alternate combat system in Men and Magic, and then 3rd party publishers like ICE with Arms Law and Spell Law before rolling it into their own RPG based on their principles.
But right from the beginning "Burning Wheel’s character creation drips with character history. History breeds conflict. Conflict means taking a stand. What will your character stand for?" is something that's not always a goal of me or my campaigns.
I absolutely love the character finding themselves style of story. You start as a simple farmer, or the son of the town smith, or something else in a world where your life is pretty much known from an early age. You will work the family farm, until the farm is yours. And for many folks like this, they have no other ambitions.
Like that majority of the world. Sure, I want to have nice things for us, and make money, and give my kids the chance to follow whatever path they aspire to. But most of us think in terms of job/career, have a few hobbies, save money for the kid's college fund, and hope to be able to retire at some point.
Luke in Star Wars is a great example of this. He had no ambitions, no aspirations to be something great. Sure, he has some history - more than the average farmer. But for Luke (and the player if an RPG), a lot of it is potentially hidden/secret history to be introduced later. He's not dripping with anything, and certainly not anticipating on breeding conflict. The biggest stand he's trying to make (and failing) is that he wants to go to university.
The feel of my game is based as much on TV series like legal and police shows as Game of Thrones. The intrigue and drama isn't always based on conflict and taking a stand. There's a difference between challenges and conflict. My game is more commonly centered on challenges than conflict. Mysteries, secrets, and lost treasures and legends, etc.
The focus is on building the stories of a group of characters that are friends, and work together to accomplish whatever their goals are. Some of them may be happenstance, like stumbling upon the ruins of a long forgotten tomb that they decide to explore. There might be conflict, but it's simply because they chose to explore a tomb where there are traps, constructs, and undead. The character growth isn't due to the conflict or taking a stand, it's between a group of friends experiencing life together.
I have had some groups that prefer that style, the more epic style, single primary story arc with the BBEG at the end. And I can do that too. But it's not our primary approach.