What makes an TTRPG a "Narrative Game" (Daggerheart Discussion)

[Emberashh]

Several APs, such Rime of the Frostmaiden and call of the Netherdeep try to do something about that, but there is only so much an author can do when they can’t read the PC’s backstories.

Perhaps they should print “this is only an outline, the GM is expected to add material of personal relevance to the PCs” in giant block capitals on the cover?

Something I intend to do for my game is introducing what I've dubbed the "Campaign Builder". With the way my Questing system works (ie, living world that will readily act on its own), its capable of delivering conventional AP-like storylines without infringing on the pure sandbox of the game, but also while not cheapening the idea of the living world.

To that end the Campaign Builder is not only a setting book, more or less, but also serves as a way for Keepers to begin populating the world and timeline with ongoing events and happenings, with support for all of these to tailor them to any level of player involvement.

A lot of what makes that work is the idea that the gameworld can solve its own problems if the players don't want to, and that agency can only be real if failure and/or missing out is possible. This is also why in terms of character development that PCs can be absurdly powerful relative to the typical RPG PC, as if you can command 10,000 Skeletons you're probably going to want to go conquer something, and not sit in a cave just making more Skeletons (though they wouldn't be the only ones who chose to do just that ), and as such you're going to have a lot of reason to get involved in the world one way or another, as progression gently, but firmly, nudges you that way.

As a matter of fact, even those that opt to simply become bakers will find themselves in the thick of it eventually unless they actively pack up shop and leave everytime something starts to happen around them. And thats assuming they luck out and don't get drawn into something just as a result of supporting their Bakery.

While from one perspective a lot of the games heavy integration between all of its systems can be a bit pushy, from another, the players are a part of the gameworld, and like everyone else in it they can't trust that the Big Bad will just sit around forever waiting for the real life humans to decide to do something.

Other Heroes will rise, instead, and may be, they'll come buy a muffin one day, and tell you the tale. Either way, its a wonderful story being created.

 

[Campbell]

Yes. And you're again back at the APs. If your point is that APs tend not to produce particularly player driven play, then that is obviously trivially true. But can you comprehend that one doesn't have to play APs?


No you couldn't. Hell, look at Critical role. Huge chunks of the content revolves around personal stories of the characters. Swapping different characters would produce completely different campaign.

I think people are massively overvaluing the impact of the system on any of this. I really don't see my Blades play to be anymore player driven than my D&D campaign, and the one person who is a player in both agrees. They are different in ways how player influence manifests and what limits it, but the overall level of influence is not drastically different.

This is going to be a really hard conversation to have because you likely do not consider things I consider to be instrumental to the design of a game like Apocalypse World to be part of the system. Things like the way hard and soft moves work, PC-NPC-PC triangles, threats, gigs, GMing principles, etc. By far I consider the most important part of game design outlining player and GM responsibilities (and I think you assume that game design should not have a say over those things).

Removing the parts of the game designs where indie designers put most of their emphasis and then denying the value add is kind of a little sketch.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

This is going to be a really hard conversation to have because you likely do not consider things I consider to be instrumental to the design of a game like Apocalypse World to be part of the system. Things like the way hard and soft moves work, PC-NPC-PC triangles, threats, gigs, GMing principles, etc. By far I consider the most important part of game design outlining player and GM responsibilities (and I think you assume that game design should not have a say over those things).

Removing the parts of the game designs where indie designers put most of their emphasis and then denying the value add is kind of a little sketch.

Those are valuable, and if the argument is that AW gives better advice than 5e D&D for running a character driven game, then sure, no argument here. But I don't think the claim was just that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is going to be a really hard conversation to have because you likely do not consider things I consider to be instrumental to the design of a game like Apocalypse World to be part of the system. Things like the way hard and soft moves work, PC-NPC-PC triangles, threats, gigs, GMing principles, etc. By far I consider the most important part of game design outlining player and GM responsibilities (and I think you assume that game design should not have a say over those things).

Removing the parts of the game designs where indie designers put most of their emphasis and then denying the value add is kind of a little sketch.

Unless of course one doesn't consider those things a value add for their preferences. But then again, games should probably be evaluated on their own terms.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Those are valuable, and if the argument is that AW gives better advice than 5e D&D for running a character driven game, then sure, no argument here. But I don't think the claim was just that.

The argument is that it gives better support (such as the intertwined backgrounds and encouragement to roll Hx) and has less that gets in the way by taking time and adding almost nothing (like very slow fights and dozens of pages of spells).

As I said dozens of pages ago, you can carry goods in a sports car, and you can drive fast in a van. But each is going to be better at what they are designed for.

 

[Wolfpack48]

I almost think narrative purposes would be better served by introducing a system or mechanism that can be overlaid on and agnostic of any particular game system. Basically, compatible with 5e, GURPs, Rolemaster, RQ, Traveller, whatever. Use the pieces of it that you want, ignore the others. I think a big issue many players have is feeling locked into a particular narrative philosophy. Give players narrative tools, make them quick and easy to use (important!), optional and modular, and I think some of these principles would filter down better (and be less contentious with) the various camps.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The argument is that it gives better support (such as the intertwined backgrounds and encouragement to roll Hx) and has less that gets in the way by taking time and adding almost nothing (like very slow fights and dozens of pages of spells).

As I said dozens of pages ago, you can carry goods in a sports car, and you can drive fast in a van. But each is going to be better at what they are designed for.

I am only judging by the end results. Perhaps it is true for AW, I haven't played it (or maybe once, but I don't recall.) I don't think it is true for the Blades. There are certain things where you can insert player driveness where in D&D you couldn't, but it also is very formulaic in how the session is structured and what kind of things you can do which are limiting. I am also not sure that the common occurrence of setbacks via consequences is beneficial to player driveness, as it makes things very unpredictable and chaotic.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

We’re getting reports that show some of the rhetoric in here is pushing the limits on civility. Can we please tone down the snide & snark?

If not, this discussion will be shut down.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I almost think narrative purposes would be better served by introducing a system or mechanism that can be overlaid on and agnostic of any particular game system. Basically, compatible with 5e, GURPs, Rolemaster, RQ, Traveller, whatever. Use the pieces of it that you want, ignore the others. I think a big issue many players have is feeling locked into a particular narrative philosophy. Give players narrative tools, make them quick and easy to use (important!), optional and modular, and I think some of these principles would filter down better (and be less contentious with) the various camps.

Why? The goal of narrative games is not to win arguments on the internet. It's to have good games. And the people who talk about narrative games (on any side) are basically statistically irrelevant. A modular system is always always going to be worse than a tailored experience, all else being equal.

And there are some things (such as entwined backstories) that are easy to add while others (like success-with-consequences mechanics) need to be put in there from design up. And some of the techniques that work do filter down.

I am only judging by the end results. Perhaps it is true for AW, I haven't played it (or maybe once, but I don't recall.) I don't think it is true for the Blades. There are certain things where you can insert player driveness where in D&D you couldn't, but it also is very formulaic in how the session is structured and what kind of things you can do which are limiting. I am also not sure that the common occurrence of setbacks via consequences is beneficial to player driveness, as it makes things very unpredictable and chaotic.

I listed some factors from Apocalypse World - and they aren't ones shared by Blades. Intertwined backstories and Hx meaning you slowly get XP for interacting with each other as PCs aren't in Blades. Blades lacks the things that get in the way and has some good things from Apocalypse World but the characters are (as in D&D) at level zero basically a set of randos with no necessary historic connection to each other who have been dropped down in this pre-existing world. And the character growth is much more about Number Go Up in Blades than AW, while there's a lot less possibility to change who you are.

This is not a criticism of Blades; it is a great game. But what it focuses on (a heist team and heists) is different from the hard narrative of AW. I'm going to link where I span off an AW description; Blades has most of the first, fourth, and fifth categories but is almost entirely missing the second and third.

 

[thefutilist]

I almost think narrative purposes would be better served by introducing a system or mechanism that can be overlaid on and agnostic of any particular game system. Basically, compatible with 5e, GURPs, Rolemaster, RQ, Traveller, whatever. Use the pieces of it that you want, ignore the others. I think a big issue many players have is feeling locked into a particular narrative philosophy. Give players narrative tools, make them quick and easy to use (important!), optional and modular, and I think some of these principles would filter down better (and be less contentious with) the various camps.

At one point I thought about doing this for 5E but then I realised to do it well would require a lot of work. I could probably write a really bad guide for doing it.