D&D General Player-generated fiction in D&D

[KYRON45]

For Fun.



This is true, but this also attracts the wrong sort of player.

A good player players the game.

A bad player alters game reality on a whim and demands the DM agree and always say "yes player". And you really don't want to game with that sort of person.


This is a good point as letting the players generate stuff takes them right out of the fiction. The players are deeply immersed in the game....until one player says something silly "gosh sure wish there were dragonriding monk tortles. Now the DM has to drop everything and end the game to make ...oh, look dragonriding monk tortles right over there. And the player will be happy and dance around the table. Then do it for the rest of the players...and, oh look game is over.

Doesn’t a good DM learn to say no?
Internal consistency is important.

 

[Clint_L]

My games bear little resemblance to board games, I would have expected better from you to be honest. On the other hand, individual goals don't really mean much to the vast majority of people I've played with over decades. I know who my PC is. I know why they're an adventurer, their morale compass and what motivates them. But I don't typically have any specific desires, I certainly don't want to generate content outside of what my character says and does with a small amount of background lore and potentially some things I do in downtime.

I didn't realize you were discussing your own games, specifically. But in any case, I am very emphatic that I love board games and do not see playing a story heavy TTRPG as any better than a story light one. They are somewhat different experiences, and part of the appeal of a story light game is that it is low pressure. I believe you referred to it as relaxing and rolling dice. I have zero problem or condescension towards that; I've done it, and I think it's super fun.

Whether it's the intent or not, you are sounding quite condescending, that you know the one true way and everything else is a "board game". I have plenty of interesting and engaging stories and games on both sides of the DM's screen without "... the characters to have needs that are not always aligned with those wants".

I don't know the one true way and I think have been very emphatic about that, in just about every post I've ever made. I do think that it doesn't make sense to use the term role playing if you're not playing a role. When I used the term "interesting" I used it specifically in the context of interesting stories. Stories with theme and character development. But just plot can be equally or more fun, depending on mood and taste. Which, again, is fine. Often a feature, not a flaw.

There is no one true way to play the game. You want a more player narrative driven game, great. I'm glad that works for you. Don't belittle other types of play.

I'm definitely not belittling other types of play. I enjoy many different types of play. I get the impression that you are annoyed because I compared D&D played without character development, relaxing and rolling dice, to playing a board game. But I don't see playing a board game as lesser than playing story first TTRPG. Just different.

 

[Oofta]

I didn't realize you were discussing your own games, specifically.

That should not matter one bit.

But in any case, I am very emphatic that I love board games and do not see playing a story heavy TTRPG as any better than a story light one. They are somewhat different experiences, and part of the appeal of a story light game is that it is low pressure. I believe you referred to it as relaxing and rolling dice. I have zero problem or condescension towards that; I've done it, and I think it's super fun.

I don't know the one true way and I think have been very emphatic about that, in just about every post I've ever made. I do think that it doesn't make sense to use the term role playing if you're not playing a role. When I used the term "interesting" I used it specifically in the context of interesting stories. Stories with theme and character development. But just plot can be equally or more fun, depending on mood and taste. Which, again, is fine. Often a feature, not a flaw.

I'm definitely not belittling other types of play. I enjoy many different types of play. I get the impression that you annoyed because I compared D&D played without character development, relaxing and rolling dice, to playing a board game. But I don't see playing a board game as lesser than playing story first TTRPG. Just different.

But you insist that a different style of playing the game is effectively "a board game". Right? You don't see how that is condescending of other styles of play, whether or not you like board games? Even in a hack-and-slash game, which is not what I run or play, it's quite different from a board game. You can have plenty of RP, outside the box actions, memorable moments that are impossible with a board game. I like board games as well, but they are by their very nature far more restrictive than D&D.

Maybe I'm just not understanding, or communicating correctly. The games I've played, personal goals rarely matter. For that matter most DMs and modules are terrible at setting up moral dilemmas and difficult choices; it usually comes down to things like making you LG PC choose between two flavors of evil. It's also not in any way required for a good story to emerge from play.

On the other hand the party absolutely has goals. That may be as simple as they're working for a mercenary company that tries to only take contracts that help people. The complexity, the story is in what kind of adversaries they face, what allies they can make.

I simply don't understand where the disconnect is here.

 

[GMMichael]

I'm not sure what you mean by "ownership". But anyway, the "why" is to have fun RPGing.

Ownership over the game: to feel that one is entitled to the use, benefits, and responsibility of what happens. It's easy (easier) to walk away or not care about the game if you don't feel ownership of it. Player-generated fiction increases ownership.

 

[pemerton]

Whether players should add to the fiction of the world outside of their character actions and some character specific details is a preferred style. It has nothing to do with the GM having a precious world, demanding people respect their authority or anything like that. Repeatedly saying that is insulting.

<snip>

Stop telling me and everyone else that my preferences are stunted, that I simply don't understand the glory of your personal take on things because other game approaches don't appeal to me and I'll do the same.

I don't know who this is addressed to. Who is telling you and "everyone else" that their preferences are stunted?

I'm saying that people often tell people like pemerton that they are the ones using D&D wrong. That's all.

I don't know that I've seen that, although some people have me blocked.

In a recent thread, you posted this, addressing me:

D&D is not a designed as a shared narrative and never has been.

<snip>

It's fine that you don't like a core tenet of D&D.

I don't know if that post is what @Aldarc had in mind, but it occurred to me right away.

Suffice it to say that I don't agree with you about the "core tenets" of D&D. If your answer to the OP is my game does not include a high volume of player-generated fiction, that's cool. Thanks for responding.

 

[pemerton]

What if the player asks, “is there a ladder?”

The structure of resolution, in a "try not to say no" game, seems to me to be the same for this as for the market stall.

In 4e D&D, this sort of scavenging would still be a Streetwise check.

A market stall implies a creative, cinematic idea of how the story could progress in a fun way. A challenge that I have found with such approaches is that they depend on players not defaulting to the easy, obvious route.

As you point out, the puzzle solving element of play is reduced. That’s only worthwhile if the story element is enhanced.

In the OP, I quoted from p 42 of the 4e DMG. Here is a fuller quote:

Shiera the 8th-level rogue wants to try the classic swashbuckling move of swinging on a chandelier and kicking an ogre in the chest on her way down to the ground, hoping to push the ogre into the brazier of burning coals behind it. An Acrobatics check seems reasonable.

This sort of action is exactly the kind of thinking you want to encourage, so you pick an easy DC:​

If the ladder is less interesting that the market stall, that's a reason to call for the Streetwise check rather than to just say "OK", and might also be a reason to set a higher DC.

 

[pemerton]

when I DM, many people would be like deer caught in the headlights if I asked them to make up lore about the world around them.

The kind of story first style that you are describing works great with certain types of players, in my experience.

That's a very good point. I've had players that are quite uncomfortable with having to make up fiction and prefer to have the GM provide it for them at all times.

Any sort of game is good with some people and not others.

I've left games because the GM was not responsive to player efforts to generate fiction around background and focus of the action. And have had players join the game I'm GMing because they were looking for more of that.

As I've often posted on these forums, I'm not a very good dungeon crawl GM. I lack the required patience and discipline. This isn't a criticism of classic D&D play, though - it's just a fact about me as a RPGer!

 

[pemerton]

quite frequently character needs and wants are paper thin and pretty meaningless.

This has not been my experience in my past 30+ years of RPGing.

 

[mamba]

Is there anything to the thought that when we categorize things like, trad...neo-trad...story now etc. (terms i have never and will never use outside of this forum) that we are pigeon holing ourselves to play a "certain way"?

we need a common terminology if we want to discuss things, that does not mean our style has to strictly fall into one of the categories, and it likely doesn’t

Doesn't being rigid in what were doing that saying NO regularly often back us into a corner?

a corner of our choosing, unlike frequently saying yes, which drags us into a corner of someone else’s choosing

I have no problem saying yes, saying no, or roll some dice to find out, you will need all three if you want a consistent world

 

[grankless]

I want a game where I'm not making contributions to the world's fiction when I play because I don't want to. It would totally take me out of investing in my character's motivations and thought process.

A good example of how this really does just mostly come down to pure opinion - for me and my players, this helps us get more invested in everything!