Why do RPGs have rules?

[pemerton]

I wanted to query - by "where it is present" do you intend the implication that it need not be present?

Yes.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You can't "explore" or "discover" what's not there. So if play is focused on discovering things, someone has to put those things there. Putting those things there: loading. Doing it in advance of play: pre-. Hence "preloading"!

If I understand your use, yes this does exist in sandbox play but that is maybe half of what is going on. Improv, spontaneity, creating things in response to what the players are doing is at least 50 percent of it in my view.

I gave particular examples. The drama in DL is put there in advance of play, via the plotting of the story. The stuff that one might discover and re-discover playing a FR campaign, from knowing the heraldry of Cormyr to enjoying an interaction with Elminster, is put there in advance, via the work of Ed Greenwood et al. Likewise, the work on creating metaplot in the setting is what permits players to enjoy experiencing it, and knowing they are experiencing it, in play. In the case of a more "mechanically" or "system"-focused sim, like RM or RQ, the "pre-loading" takes the forms of writing the possible results of actions into the resolution tables/processes. Both make a particularly big deal of combat.

Keep in mind the plotting of story as seen in stuff like Dragonlance (which I am not knocking to be clear) would be seen as quite antithetical to most sandbox campaigns. Yes certainly you can have setting lore too. That is often an important component. But more critical to sandbox is the promise that the players can set their own goals, do what they want, go where they want (obviously within the constraints of what is plausible). So a majority of the time you are creating in response to player actions. Even when you create material between sessions that is often a direct result of what the players are choosing to focus on.

But if preloading includes everything from the lists provided I am not sure how useful it is as an idea. The examples range from tables to NPCS, to the system itself. That seems overly broad here to me (and not something I would say is limited to styles labeled simulation).

 

[Bedrockgames]

Do you have examples in mind?

Tables and NPCs are the two I would focus on here. Those are by no means limited to sandbox or sim in my opinion.

 

[pemerton]

Keep in mind the plotting of story as seen in stuff like Dragonlance (which I am not knocking to be clear) would be seen as quite antithetical to most sandbox campaigns.

I'm aware. I'm not setting out to post about sandbox play in particular. I'm answering your question about what "pre-loading" is.

In the context of a sandbox, as I understand the standard approaches (based on my own experience, plus reading around), the "preloading" would consist in the methods for working out what happens next, which will be a mixture of GM notes (eg "If X is approached about Y, then X will do such-and-such"), the use of tables (eg reaction tables, events tables), and GM extrapolation and decision-making intended to emulate the sorts of results that notes and tables would produce if they were available.

more critical to sandbox is the promise that the players can set their own goals, do what they want, go where they want (obviously within the constraints of what is plausible).

Sure. This is orthogonal to the notion of "pre-loading".

So a majority of the time you are creating in response to player actions. Even when you create material between sessions that is often a direct result of what the players are choosing to focus on.

How are the responses to player actions decided? If the goal is to extrapolate so as to produce the sorts of results that notes and tables might, then we have sim of the sort I described just above. If this is done using, roughly, the sorts of principles set out in Apocalypse World, then you're playing narrativist. In this latter case, one thing you might find over time - at least in my experience - is that using the sim methods (tables, notes about what X will do in situation Z etc), and extrapolation intended to emulate sim methods, will get in the way.

if preloading includes everything from the lists provided I am not sure how useful it is as an idea.

I think my reply to @clearstream, where I used the term, was pretty clear. I was discussing how it is that simulationist play achieves the goal of having internal cause be king.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'm aware. I'm not setting out to post about sandbox play in particular. I'm answering your question about what "pre-loading" is.

In the context of a sandbox, as I understand the standard approaches (based on my own experience, plus reading around), the "preloading" would consist in the methods for working out what happens next, which will be a mixture of GM notes (eg "If X is approached about Y, then X will do such-and-such"), the use of tables (eg reaction tables, events tables), and GM extrapolation and decision-making intended to emulate the sorts of results that notes and tables would produce if they were available.

Sure. This is orthogonal to the notion of "pre-loading".

How are the responses to player actions decided? If the goal is to extrapolate so as to produce the sorts of results that notes and tables might, then we have sim of the sort I described just above. If this is done using, roughly, the sorts of principles set out in Apocalypse World, then you're playing narrativist. In this latter case, one thing you might find over time - at least in my experience - is that using the sim methods (tables, notes about what X will do in situation Z etc), and extrapolation intended to emulate sim methods, will get in the way.

I think my reply to @clearstream, where I used the term, was pretty clear. I was discussing how it is that simulationist play achieves the goal of having internal cause be king.

I am out and about but in my view you can use any kind of reasoning, procedure, etc in a sandbox. It is more standard for people to lean on plausibility, internal world consistency etc but you could certainly base it on other things, even more narrative criteria. I tend to lean heavily on genre emulation blended with an eye towards what makes sense (and to me what makes sense and us internally consistent is less about things like physics and more about NPCs having clear goals, consistent motivations, etc. I also rely heavily on tables. But that is just me. The crucial thing in sandbox play is when players go ‘off map’, ‘reject hooks’, ‘choose a goal’, ‘smash the scenery’ (anything that might be considered a headache or failure state in a lot of other campaigns) you honor that

 

[clearstream]

You can't "explore" or "discover" what's not there.

In short, you can through authorship. In order for players to explore or discover what's not there, they need the freedom to say what is there.

This isn't in disagreement with preloading - now it has been clarified I would say all TTRPGs preload. What is preloaded can readily leave vistas open for exploration. For example, Ironsworn's Oracles offer evocative words and statements - randomly selected from among - to inspire player authors to discover their version of the Ironlands.

 

[innerdude]

If I understand your use, yes this does exist in sandbox play but that is maybe half of what is going on. Improv, spontaneity, creating things in response to what the players are doing is at least 50 percent of it in my view.

So the story now / narrativist play with which I am most familiar using Ironsworn, there is actually significant crossover between the improv / spontaneous authoring as you describe.

There is a strong current of "instant discovery", or discovery in the moment, as fiction is authored through play that can be unexpected (and welcome and exciting).

The primary differences are 1) that for critical components of the fiction, in Ironsworn the player is authorized, via rule through successfully completing a "move" action within the game, to state some parts of the fiction that are true outside of the control of the GM, and the GM cannot gainsay those aspects as determined by the player (though Ironsworn is much more judicious about this than say, Dungeon World).

And 2) there is a GM mindset that is explicitly expressed in a way to allow player input, gameplay resolution inputs, inputs from "the Oracles", and other elements of play to override or unmoor prior GM prep and to put something more impactful or immediately relevant into play.

From page 200 of the Ironsworn PDF:

If you find it helpful, you can envision and write down the main narrative steps in your quest. What journeys must you undertake? Which enemies will oppose you? What information must be found? Who do you need help from?

Your outline should give you ideas for the scenes and challenges which can be part of your quest, with each major step an opportunity to make the Reach a Milestone move (page 100). However, you should consider it a sketchy, unreliable plan at best. It is like an ancient map with “here there be monsters” written in blank spaces.

If you are a GM and have some ideas for challenges and events in the quest, make note of them. However, don’t get locked into a specific path which must be followed. Whether you are a GM or a player, leave yourself open to surprises, new ideas, input from others at your table, and the whims of fate. Be prepared to toss even the mostly loosely defined plan out the window.

Put simply, play to see what happens.

But if preloading includes everything from the lists provided I am not sure how useful it is as an idea. The examples range from tables to NPCS, to the system itself. That seems overly broad here to me (and not something I would say is limited to styles labeled simulation).

It's not the amount or elements of preloading that are the primary consideration; it's the the level of integration / tightness of coupling the preloaded elements to the determinism of outcome in gameplay.

Massive amounts of preloading, but loosely held/coupled by the GM as requisite matter to the in-fiction gamestate, is not opposed to the tenets of narrativism.

For Ironsworn, for example, massive up-front preloading is likely not the best possible method of starting the game, but it's not untenable as long as the GM adheres to the general system premises.

 

[niklinna]

In short, you can through authorship. In order for players to explore or discover what's not there, they need the freedom to say what is there.

This isn't in disagreement with preloading - now it has been clarified I would say all TTRPGs preload. What is preloaded can readily leave vistas open for exploration. For example, Ironsworn's Oracles offer evocative words and statements - randomly selected from among - to inspire player authors to discover their version of the Ironlands.

Authorship (creation) is neither exploration nor discovery, and conflating the two is really seriously muddying the water.

 

[Campbell]

Right to Dream oriented play is built on a foundation of extrapolation from preceding events based on details of the established fiction and often prepared material. Story Now play is built on a foundation of actively framing conflicts that directly address both the premise of the particular game (and the premise of the particular characters). You cannot both extrapolate and actively frame conflicts at the same time.

You can in your situation and setting design setup a play environment where addressing premise is possible, but play will often feature some addressing of premise, but that is not some sort of magical El Darado. It's just a different sort of play experience. One I personally enjoy. It's how my home group runs/plays Vampire, Infinity and L5R. It is still no replacement or substitute for Apocalypse World or Sorcerer.

 

[aramis erak]

Authorship (creation) is neither exploration nor discovery, and conflating the two is really seriously muddying the water.

QFT... however...

• The act of creating X can lead to self-discovery.
• The shared acts of creation of persons A, B, & C, each adding bits can lead to each providing exploration of the conceptual space behind each other's additions.
• The experiencing of others creations can, and often does, lead to self discovery

The thing that makes RPGs nigh-unique is the ability to explore the setting materials' inclusions.

Several friends explored their gender identity and sexuality via RPGs (back when it was still seriously taboo to do so). Two have since switched legal gender, one of whom is entirely post surgical; at least 3 more have decided they are homosexual. The exploration of such was not something I put into the settings they played in. It was entirely their choice to make it an element of play; all I had to do as a GM was let them. Enable their journey of self discovery. In the process, I also grew from their discoveries.

RPG play isn't exactly authorship. It's related, but the collaborative aspects make it something different. Adding dice makes it something different, too.