D&D General How Often Should a PC Die in D&D 5e?

[CreamCloud0]

The creativity itself and the process thereof exists in the "now", sure. No argument there.

But the result - the story, the music, whatever - doesn't exist in any useful form until after it is created; when the music reaches the ear of the listener either then or, via a recording, later; or when a written story reaches the eyes of its readers. And here the result - i.e. the end output as seen/heard later - is what we're talking about as being story.

Put another way, I could (and do) have story ideas in my head right now but until I get on and do something with them that's all they are: ideas. And if I put down some notes on those ideas that's all they are: notes (or, to use a sometimes more accurate term, game prep ). But any story that might grow out of those notes doesn't yet exist.

There's another possible delimiter here: that a story doesn't functionally exist until someone else other than its creator(s) has access to it via reading it, hearing it, seeing it performed, or whatever means, even if that access is never used.

why aren't the other people at the table and myself enough of an audience for the session to count as a story, if a band plays to themselves are they not still performing music? so why are the events of the session not 'a story' til it's recounted to a third party? what's the difference?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Story Now isn't about creating a result to be enjoyed later. It's about experiencing the story in the moment, as it's created, and being part of that creation not an audience member to it.

It sounds like it's about creating a fun play experience for the participants in the present, with little concern, generally, with a perspective before or after the game. But like I said our definitions of what constitutes a story are different. I know a lot of people here want and enjoy exactly that experience.

 

[Lanefan]

Story Now isn't about creating a result to be enjoyed later. It's about experiencing the story in the moment, as it's created, and being part of that creation not an audience member to it.

That, like playing freeform jazz or doing completely-improv theatre, is about experiencing the creative process in the moment; the process that produces music or a story or whatever, but not experiencing the finished product in part because they're still too busy creating more of it.

The audience (if any) gets to experience the finished product then and there, the creators don't until-unless they go back and listen to or watch a recording of what they created in that moment.

 

[Micah Sweet]

why aren't the other people at the table and myself enough of an audience for the session to count as a story, if a band plays to themselves are they not still performing music? so why are the events of the session not 'a story' til it's recounted to a third party? what's the difference?

Are the actors in a play, even an improvisational one, also the audience? To my mind that is very much a matter of debate.

 

[tetrasodium]

i don't see why not, why can't the cult from party's plot be an offshoot from the cleric's church, why can't the rogue's deeds against said cult be approved of by the nobles, or the cult being researching and having information on the relics the artificer is collecting,

and okay so maybe everyone's plots can't each be the main focus at the same time, but that doesn't mean only one plot can be part of the focus at a time.

Because there is more than one player, imagine a table of 4-5 players all tossing in that quickly untrackable rats nest of connections. That game of thrones level interconnected tapestry either takes decades to write like jrrm did or it requires large swaths of the fiction in play to be introduced and remain in some kind of quantum ogre type state where it's in flux until it is briefly locked but could be immediately reverted to that prior quantum state.

 

[soviet]

It sounds like it's about creating a fun play experience for the participants in the present, with little concern, generally, with a perspective before or after the game.

That's a good way of putting it, yes. And the game will generally involve a lot of deliberate 'story fuel', in term

But like I said our definitions of what constitutes a story are different. I know a lot of people here want and enjoy exactly that experience.

I don't think it's about definitions of story. It's about different approaches to play. I don't think there is a singular useful definition of story in the context of a roleplaying game.

 

[soviet]

That, like playing freeform jazz or doing completely-improv theatre, is about experiencing the creative process in the moment; the process that produces music or a story or whatever, but not experiencing the finished product in part because they're still too busy creating more of it.

The audience (if any) gets to experience the finished product then and there, the creators don't until-unless they go back and listen to or watch a recording of what they created in that moment.

Yes, exactly.

 

[Lanefan]

why aren't the other people at the table and myself enough of an audience for the session to count as a story, if a band plays to themselves are they not still performing music?

They are*, but if it's not being recorded it's ephemeral - they experience the moments of playing it and maybe learn something - e.g. a new technique or a good sound mix - to use later. They haven't actually produced anything, though.

* - I know because I've done a whole lot of just this over the years.

so why are the events of the session not 'a story' til it's recounted to a third party? what's the difference?

Doesn't have to be a third party; the creators recounting it to themselves later also makes it a story.

An analogy: I could have hundreds of parts scattered around the lawn and (if I had the know how!) I could take all those parts and properly put them together to build a Ford F-150. I might even enjoy the process of building that truck, but it still ain't a truck until I'm finished; and I don't get to enjoy driving it until after I'm finished.

Driving the truck - that's the story. Everything that came before that point - including standing there and admiring my handiwork when the truck is finished but I haven't started 'er up yet - is part of the creative process of (in this case, literally) building that story.

 

[soviet]

They are*, but if it's not being recorded it's ephemeral - they experience the moments of playing it and maybe learn something - e.g. a new technique or a good sound mix - to use later. They haven't actually produced anything, though.

* - I know because I've done a whole lot of just this over the years.

Doesn't have to be a third party; the creators recounting it to themselves later also makes it a story.

An analogy: I could have hundreds of parts scattered around the lawn and (if I had the know how!) I could take all those parts and properly put them together to build a Ford F-150. I might even enjoy the process of building that truck, but it still ain't a truck until I'm finished; and I don't get to enjoy driving it until after I'm finished.

Driving the truck - that's the story. Everything that came before that point - including standing there and admiring my handiwork when the truck is finished but I haven't started 'er up yet - is part of the creative process of (in this case, literally) building that story.

If you take one part off it, does it stop being a truck?

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's a good way of putting it, yes. And the game will generally involve a lot of deliberate 'story fuel', in term


I don't think it's about definitions of story. It's about different approaches to play. I don't think there is a singular useful definition of story in the context of a roleplaying game.

Perhaps, but if so roleplaying games should probably stop using the term over and over again in their text with varying meanings.