D&D 5E Is Neil Gaiman Wrong?

[TheCosmicKid]

My point is that there are rpgs, lots of them, that do try to simulate stories but they don't have the same sorts of rules that D&D does. There's nothing in D&D to simulate the rising and falling action of a typical action movie for instance. In D&D the GM has to force that kind of thing if they want it.

D&D's rules are fairly simulationist in much the same way that the rules of a wargame are. Frex if a character, or figure, is wearing plate armour then that means they are less likely to die. D&D has all kinds of rules like this. Characters and figures can just die if they take too much damage. They're not protected in the way the protagonist of a story is. D&D has these kinds of rules, what I'm calling wargame-style rules, because it developed from a wargame, Chainmail.

D&D takes elements from fiction but it's not a fiction simulator. Like I said upthread, it takes elements such as dragons and places them in a wargame framework.

EDIT: I should add that I'm not saying that D&D is a wargame. It's a roleplaying game. But it's part of a subset of rpgs that have rules that are closer to those of wargames.

I'm sorry, but I'm still basically asking, "So what?" I used the phrase "fairy tale simulator", so now we're trying to draw a distinction between simulating the rules of the fairy-tale world versus simulating the rules of fairy-tale fiction? Although I could quibble over a couple of things you say, I certainly don't dispute the existence of such a distinction -- but why are we talking about it? My point was just that dragons are beatable in fairy tales, so they should probably be beatable in this game that simulates fairy tales. That's true regardless of its approach to simulating fairy tales.

 

[Schmoe]

What about Infinity War Part 1?

That was only 50%. Totally not a TPK.

 

[Maxperson]

That was only 50%. Totally not a TPK.

Secret Wars was, though.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Lots of games, maybe even most games, don't have mechanics to simulate rising and falling action, or story beats, or any of a host of other story writing techniques and tools. That's because RPGs are more about ways to simluate the action that happens in a certain sort of story, not to simulate the story itself. The rules of a given game generally index a more or less specific set of genre conventions, but that's not about story structure, that's about actions. The creation of the story is up to some mix of the GM and players, the exact mix depends on the rules set and group in question and how they apportion authority over the diagetic frame.

Some games do have suggestions, or frameworks, or mechanics that are designed to aid the construction of narrative elements like you describe, but even those games still aren't 'simulating a story'.

Perhaps.

But I don't think anyone would say that D&D simulates, or is meant to simulate, fairy tales as a genre.

As @Doug McCrae correctly points out, D&D came from the synthesis of Chainmail Fantasy (which itself borrows from a Tolkien Wargame) and Arneson's contributions from his experience with Braunstein et al.; while you could say that certain "fairy tale" elements were borrowed, it's really much more of a pastiche of different 50s, 60s and 70s genre elements grafted onto a wargaming sensibility.

Of course, now there are many more rulesets that map on to different styles of play, including those that allow for more "story-like" styles of play and are quite explicit about it.

 

[Fenris-77]

Perhaps.

But I don't think anyone would say that D&D simulates, or is meant to simulate, fairy tales as a genre.

As @Doug McCrae correctly points out, D&D came from the synthesis of Chainmail Fantasy (which itself borrows from a Tolkien Wargame) and Arneson's contributions from his experience with Braunstein et al.; while you could say that certain "fairy tale" elements were borrowed, it's really much more of a pastiche of different 50s, 60s and 70s genre elements grafted onto a wargaming sensibility.

Of course, now there are many more rulesets that map on to different styles of play, including those that allow for more "story-like" styles of play and are quite explicit about it.

As a genre? No, not at all really. There are elements of the fairy tale in the pastiche of D&D, but that's about it. My comment about modelling the rhythms of fiction writing apply to RPGs generally though. Generally speaking, the rising and falling action is in part generated by the sequencing and encounter design by the DM on the one hand, and the actions of the players on the other. The game rules themselves don't model it at all. Most RPGs do index a genre (or more) that they are designed to model, but they aren't designed to model the fiction (in it's Aristotelian form) so much as they are to allow the fiction to be modeled in play.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

As a genre? No, not at all really. There are elements of the fairy tale in the pastiche of D&D, but that's about it. My comment about modelling the rhythms of fiction writing apply to RPGs generally though. Generally speaking, the rising and falling action is in part generated by the sequencing and encounter design by the DM on the one hand, and the actions of the players on the other. The game rules themselves don't model it at all. Most RPGs do index a genre (or more) that they are designed to model, but they aren't designed to model the fiction (in it's Aristotelian form) so much as they are to allow the fiction to be modeled in play.

I agree with the idea re: "most RPGs," if only because of the standard wargaming/D&D roots that took hold.

That said, there are some RPGs that model the beats of fiction much more closely that D&D and similar RPGs do. And, as you note, D&D itself has certain elements of the rising and falling of those fictional beats within it (modules and adventure paths often have a "Big Bad" at the end, etc.).

 

[Fenris-77]

I agree with the idea re: "most RPGs," if only because of the standard wargaming/D&D roots that took hold.

That said, there are some RPGs that model the beats of fiction much more closely that D&D and similar RPGs do. And, as you note, D&D itself has certain elements of the rising and falling of those fictional beats within it (modules and adventure paths often have a "Big Bad" at the end, etc.).

Yeah, the structure of D&D adventures models the rhythms of fiction, for sure, and the guidelines for adventure writing in the core rules support that. But the actual mechanics of the game don't. That's more about the the nature of RPGs generally than any particular failing on D&D's part though. I'd also agree than games vary in the extent to which they try to model those rhythms.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Yeah, the structure of D&D adventures models the rhythms of fiction, for sure, and the guidelines for adventure writing in the core rules support that. But the actual mechanics of the game don't. That's more about the the nature of RPGs generally than any particular failing on D&D's part though. I'd also agree than games vary in the extent to which they try to model those rhythms.

So, on the bolded part, this is where the question of "what is an RPG" really comes in.

Traditional TTRPGs (and most CRPGs that have followed them) often pride themselves on the unpredictability of play; that the fiction is emergent through the interactions between players and the referee, along with the randomness that dice (or other methods of generating randomness). I would agree that this is the majority of TTRPGs.

But I think that RPGs, as a style, encompasses quite a bit more. Even going back to children's games, or Arneson's first attempts (pre-Chainmail), to more modern rulesets that allow for greater authorial control and less randomness, I think that there are mechanics that facilitate fiction.

This is getting into the weeds, but I think an interesting question is the issue of authorial control of the fiction; traditionally, fiction requires control, so RPGs that are more "fiction-facing" (for lack of a better term) tend to be closer to collaborative fiction.

 

[Fenris-77]

So, on the bolded part, this is where the question of "what is an RPG" really comes in.

Yup. A deep well indeed.

Traditional TTRPGs (and most CRPGs that have followed them) often pride themselves on the unpredictability of play; that the fiction is emergent through the interactions between players and the referee, along with the randomness that dice (or other methods of generating randomness). I would agree that this is the majority of TTRPGs.

But I think that RPGs, as a style, encompasses quite a bit more. Even going back to children's games, or Arneson's first attempts (pre-Chainmail), to more modern rulesets that allow for greater authorial control and less randomness, I think that there are mechanics that facilitate fiction.

I agree completely. I was talking about the 'mechanics' as a specific reference to the rules that govern gameplay - i.e. mostly dice rolling and the like. That's only a part of the whole game though. The goal of RPGs is probably to model the fiction and it's rhythms in most cases, I don't think that's a controversial statement. In some ways all mechanics facilitate that fiction, yes, but I don't think they actually model it's rhythms. If we did some compare and contrast I bet we could find examples of better and worse facilitation, for sure, and possible even some modelling, although an example there escapes me just now.

This is getting into the weeds, but I think an interesting question is the issue of authorial control of the fiction; traditionally, fiction requires control, so RPGs that are more "fiction-facing" (for lack of a better term) tend to be closer to collaborative fiction.

I love the weeds.

 

[Krachek]

It all depends on players expectations,
because in the rules there are hints that allow the DM to fudge everything he need to run its game,