Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?

[Lanefan]

One, your individual play experiences with your group of 20+ years does not translate into universal play. This is the usual, "An anecdote is not data." (Technically, an anecdote can be a datum, but you know what I mean). Heck, my play experiences with my old group (aka, grognards) is decidedly different than when I DM to teach kids.

Second, you usually reference games that are ... well, not universally played or known (often indie games). There is nothing wrong with that, but given your frames of references are usually IIRC Prince Valiant, BiTD, and now Cthulhu Dark ...

In fairness, [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] also sometimes references 4e D&D and - a bit less often - Moldvay Basic D&D; both of which were a fair bit closer to the mainstream in their day. That said, I'm not sure he runs/ran either system entirely as written (but then, do any of us?) preferring instead to overlay a story-now aesthetic on them.

Also, if memory serves he's more into Burning Wheel than BitD, but I could be wrong on this one.

 

[pemerton]

if memory serves he's more into Burning Wheel than BitD, but I could be wrong on this one.

Your memory is correct - I've never played BitD. The only PbtA game I've played is a bit (not a lot) of Dungeon World.

 

[pemerton]

I'm not saying that content isn't important.

<snip>

I don't see RPG's as anything remotely like anything other than a (somewhat complicated) game. That's all they are. I could have a great time playing Euchre for three hours as well. And, part of playing an RPG is the performance aspect of it.

I agree that RPGs are games. But it would be a cold day in hell before I'd trade in my RPG time for euchre!

I'm not sure that content quite captures what I'm talking about, although it's clearly in the neighbourhood. It's the participatory creation, which - on the player side - is about response as protagonist.

people use their time sub-optimally all the time.

It would be a sad thing if the best pitch we could make for RPGing is Would you like to spend your leisure time sub-optimally?

 

[Bedrockgames]

Some recent threads have discussed aspects of GM and player narration in RPGing. Which hase prompted me to start this thread.

My answer to the question in the thread title is a firm No.

RPGing requires narration: GMs describe situations, and players declare actions for their PCs that respond to those situations. But I don't think the literary quality of that narration is important.

What matters to me is that the players feel the significance of the situations the GM describes - that they feel the pull to action, and the threats of inaction. That is, that the situation engage and motivate the players as players, not as an audience to a performance. And player narration should, in my view, engage with and build on this fiction in ways that display the player's view of the fiction, perhaps challenge other players (and even the GM), that make the other pariticpants go "I didn't see that coming!"

This is how I see RPGs, with their emphasis on participation in the creation of a fiction that is structured through distinct player an d GM roles, working. And it's how I see them differening from more directly narrative mediums such as books and films.

I pretty much agree. My feelings on this are whenever I've encountered efforts to make the game more literary, you end up fighting against the nature of the medium. The biggest thing being you really can't control what players do. In a novel the characters are under the control of the writer. It would be more like trying to write a novel in a computer program where the characters have free will and respond to the author's descriptions. But that strikes me as very non-literary and more in the realm of game.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Bedrockgames]

The issue of authorial intent with interactive media is hardly new; I remember the issue of authorial intent with hypertext (in the context of philosophy) in 1994 when Mosaic was still a thing.

Just because it's different, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


*To a certain extent, you have the issue of terms, as well, as in, "What does "literary" mean?" Which is why I keep going back to the reason that this thread was created; specifically, that the OP did not believe that narration or presentation (or "performance") was important (from either the DM or the players), and that emotional states should not, and could not, be generated in RPGs from that, but only through framing and decision-making. Which others disagree with.

In other words, it's an issue not about "plotting out a campaign," but rather about whether or not we should care about any performative aspects in RPGs, or if they are meaningless- mere ribbons, the same as "acting out" your alien in Cosmic Encounter.

I honestly am not sure what you are saying

 

[Imaro]

I honestly am not sure what you are saying

He's clarifying how [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] is using "literary" in the context of this thread.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Meh. Humans are over rated.

Ok, that was a joke.

Some jokes're funny 'cause they're true...

It would be a sad thing if the best pitch we could make for RPGing is Would you like to spend your leisure time sub-optimally?

You would? Then you might as well go all the way and play a Fighter, while you're at it!

 

[Hussar]

I honestly am not sure what you are saying

Just to add to what [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] said, and hopefully clarify the point of this thread. At least, to the point to which I understand it anyway (which, given previous history, might not be understanding what's going on at all... )

From what I understand, we are positing that there are two main elements of an RPG - what I've termed content and what I've termed performance.

I define content, in the context of this thread, to mean all the stuff that goes into playing an RPG. Laying out a scenario, building a scene with the players and the DM creating a back and forth conversation which resolves the scenario, rolling dice, that sort of thing. All the stuff that's, more or less, specifically called out by the rules of whatever RPG you're playing. IOW, content=stuff that you need to play the game. You cannot play an RPG without content, well, unless your RPG is akin to Godot: The Waitening.

Performance, on the other hand, isn't really defined by the rules of an RPG. It might be referenced, but, it's generally not actually specifically needed. An RPG without any performance probably looks a lot like a computer game, IMO. You lay out the scenario, and then click the buttons in a certain way and resolve the scenario. The only real difference between tabletop and computer game is complexity - you can obviously do more to resolve a scenario in a tabletop RPG. However, while performance isn't specifically called out by the rules of an RPG, it is absolutely vital to play. How you present the scenario will drastically change the nature of that scenario. Simply dropping bare bones description in a monotone voice with nothing but the most essential of adjectives makes for a really boring game, despite the fact that it has all the content in the world.

Really, I think this is why horror is so difficult to do in a TTRPG. It's so easy for someone to drop a fart joke in the middle of a scene and turn it into farce. Something about picking up dice seems to bring out the inner 12 year old in a lot of us. Which makes the performance aspect more difficult that it might seem.

I've got a decent example here actually. I just finished running Dragon Heist for my bunch. Now, in the final scenario, it's a dungeon crawl. But, there's no boxed text at all - just point form descriptions of the rooms. Bare bones stuff. There's a fresco on the wall, there's carvings of dwarves on the door, that sort of thing. No actual performance at all. And the scene totally fell flat. The players just went through the whole adventure without really giving a damn because, well, whoopee, there's carvings of dwarves. It wasn't until I started getting a lot more expressive about my description of this lost, dwarven tomb, created by a dwarven empire that had fallen a thousand years before Waterdeep was founded, crumbling walkways, smells, etc that the players actually started getting into the feel of the adventure.

Content is important. Totally agree. But, content without performance has no soul. Has no impact. Your performance, as a DM, AND as a player (give the DM something to work with here, you lazy assed players), is needed to really bring the game to life.