Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?

[Bedrockgames]

Denying the whole concept just because you don't like it seems a bit over-the-top somehow.

No one is denying the concept. We are questioning the language being used (because it is advancing an argument about playstyle----and this is very clear in Hussar's posts), and we are saying it isn't half of the RPG experience (which is literally what posters like Hussar are saying). Make no mistake, a GMing and player style is being advocated here and that style is being advanced through the language of this discussion. There is no visible utility in dividing the RPG experience into these two categories other than to suggest performing for the other players at the table is essential to the gaming experience. Very few here would deny the importance of presentation, or of being invested. But a lot of people bristle at the idea of 'performance' because that is a playstyle issue (not an essential part of play).

 

[Bedrockgames]

You might not need it, but some of us do. Ideally the GM is giving as much portrayal and expression and voice to each of her NPCs as each player is to her character(s); of course some GMs are better at this than others and those that aren't any good at it are better off not trying. That said, a GM who can't act is in my view starting at a disadvantage over one who can.
.

Again, this is just a matter of preference. I am sure this does enhance the experience for you. What you have to understand is for me, and for a lot other people, when the GM starts 'acting' or when the GM insists on doing funny voices and behaving like a voice actor, I dislike it. I much prefer a dry, casual delivery from someone who is good at describing things clearly or selecting the right words to evoke a situation, than someone who thinks they are reading a book on tape. But all we are here is in the realm of preference, not in the realm of the basic things that constitute an RPG

EDIT: Just to clarify this, I do know a handful of GMs who can pull off the voice acting. In those cases, it adds to play and works fine. But the bulk of the time, it detracts from my experience (especially when the point of play becomes watching other people perform----not here to watch your improv acting)

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'm not talking about "silly voice when it isn't appropriate" and I don't think anyone else is either. I'm talking about a) voice appropriate to the character whose words are being spoken and to a lesser extent b) voice appropriate to the scene being narrated or described e.g. the horror-scene example noted upthread.

Well, the poster I was responding to was talking about a silly voice being used in an inappropriate situation (I wasn't responding to you, I was answering the question directed to me in this post):

I feel like I am talking presentation in general and you are focusing on a specific example in our exchanges... So let me go extreme to try and stress my general point... would you be ok with them doing say a silly voice for a horror game?

 

[Imaro]

Well, the poster I was responding to was talking about a silly voice being used in an inappropriate situation (I wasn't responding to you, I was answering the question directed to me in this post):

To be fair... I called out that it was an exaggeration to make a point about presentation and it being an integral part of roleplaying IMO.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Bedrockgames]

So, again, this isn't about funny voices.

Look, some people prefer Lovecraft. Some people prefer Hemingway. Both of them have a "style" even if they are quite different.

Just because you prefer a certain type of delivery, does not mean that there is an absence of delivery, or "presentation"*, in the style your prefer. Whether it's an economy of language, or the pacing, or the phrasing, or the choice of words, this all is a matter of performance presentation.

Rhetoric is the analysis of argument, knowing that argument is implicit in all forms of communication. Just because you don't see how the interactions of different people within a structured environment (aka, TTRPG) constitutes a form of communication, which involves presentation and the ability of the participants to convey and evoke emotions through performance presentation, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that it all has to be self-generated.

Nor does it mean that it's all the DM doing funny voices.

Finally, acknowledging that the participants in a TTRPG communicate with each other and can affect each other does not indicate a playstyle preference, any more than acknowledging that D&D involved dice states that D&D must be a game of optimization.**


*Since you seem to think that "performance" is a "playstyle" why don't we use that word?


**Straight into the veins!

i never said presentation wasn’t a part of play. I have taken issue with the specific way the idea of ‘perfirmance’ Is being used to advance a playstyle agenda

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Bedrockgames]

um ......

a playstyle agenda?

.....


Today’s comment thread is the product of forum denizens, which is the product of a roleplaying culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called playstyle agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some performance activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to improv comedy.

Let me be clear that I have nothing against improv comedy troupes, or any other group, promoting their playstyle agenda through normal democratic means. Social perceptions of perfomance and other funny voices and even Wayne Brady change over time, and every group has the right to persuade its fellow citizens that Whose Line Is It Anyway is a deserving television comedy.

That these performance activists have achieved some success in that enterprise is attested to by the fact that throngs of impressionable young minds watch their supposed "comedic stylings" in TTRPGs on such youtube dens of iniquity such as Critical Role. But persuading one’s fellow citizens is one thing, and imposing one’s views of your playstyle agenda upon me is something else.

-A. Curmudgeon

Dude half this discussion is about playstyle

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Satyrn]

I thought half was about jokes?

The other half was about beating a horse. Probably, if not definitely, dead.

We should whack it a few more times- you never know!

I'm too busy chasing that squirrel.

And you might as well leave the horse alone. It's the moose we're after.