Vincent Baker on narrativist RPGing, then and now

[zakael19]

Can that mechanical progression be slowed down without crashing the system?

Sure, there’s suggestions in the game on slowing it down or speeding it up (core is 6+2x level xp for next level, extending that out is easy enough but does have some knock on effects). I think that going generational is more interesting personally.

 

[Fenris-77]

Sure, there’s suggestions in the game on slowing it down or speeding it up (core is 6+2x level xp for next level, extending that out is easy enough but does have some knock on effects). I think that going generational is more interesting personally.

Yup. TV source material that inspired the game usually goes this route. Characters come and go, sometimes even the main characters. There's a bit from His Majesty the Worm that handles this really well - when your character completes their core quest you have the choice to retire that character and make a new one (with some bonuses) or pick a new core quest that drives the character. I think that some character concepts are much better at changing through multiple arcs than others and the game should actively press players to think about this.

The notion that you have the play the same character throughout a long campaign is just an artifact of the hobby not a shining goal that some games simply don't live up to.

 

[Neonchameleon]

How many sessions do you think can done before the systems run out of headroom? Or is that a nonsensical question?

Apocalypse World is canonically aimed at a dozen sessions from memory. It plays fast and hard. Most PbtA games are similar length.

Corollary question: what happens if that character progression is greatly slowed down; equivalent, say, to slowing down D&D level advancement by making each level take 5x what the books say for xp? Or can this even be done?

IME I've found that slowing down character (mechanical) advancement is by far the most important element in preserving a long campaign.

I tend to break PbtA games into "classic player character Vs enemy or environment" and "player characters Vs themselves".

Monster of the Week is classic PvE. You can have an episodic story about investigating monsters go on as long as Supernatural if you really have to.

Masks by contrast is a PCs Vs themselves game; you start out as a group of teenage superheroes with poor control of their powers and who are bags of hormones in a coming of age story. And, for example, your starting move to use your powers impressively is Unleash Your Powers while later on you can replace it with the far safer and more effective Wield Your Powers. And this growth is a part of the game; spreading it out indefinitely would make for a much more frustrating game.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Just seems an odd tack to take for a revolutionary trying to get his message to the widest audience possible, is all.

You must be thrilled with the Star Wars prequels.

My point being not catering to everyone is not an odd take.
Games place all sorts of limiting factors for their audience

• Style
• Theme
• Complexity
• Language

...etc

 

[Fenris-77]

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

I've currently got 15 players scattered across 5 games (there's some repetition), I think (1) of them is interested in RPG theory and discussions that go beyond relatively simple pointers on how to run a games (stuff like Colville etc videos).

I've played games with the same players that meet the old and new definitions of narrativism, but definitely fit the newer one better. My Tuesday Daggerheart game ticks all the boxes he presents there, but that's something we've brought to the game inadvertently around premise and then how these players responded.

My Thursday Daggerheart game is pretty "casual" stuff in comparison, a la Justin Alexander's "situations not plots" for fairly conventional play. About on par with the average 5e home-brew game I see around, if perhaps more player-centric when it comes to world and impact?

So let me unpack my apparently somewhat cryptic statement. I don't assume that any significant portion of the RPG playing public actively cares about RPG theory in terms of finding and consuming it. What I do think is that the folks who play RPGs are often very conerned with ideas like "how can I play better" and spend some time trying to figure that out. Participation in high-level discourse isn't a passport to being heard. Lots of people who really enjoy RPG play have ideas and things they want to say (and hear) that aren't framed by any kind of high-falutin' vocabulary or discourse, and I wanted to be very clear that I thought what those people have to say is important to any ongoing conversation we might be having here.

 

[zakael19]

it. What I do think is that the folks who play RPGs are often very conerned with ideas like "how can I play better" and spend some time trying to figure that out.

I’ll be honest, I’m not sure I’ve ever really seen this (apart from maybe a little Reddit reading for optimizing).

Edit: apart from the handful of players I’ve had who are also really into GMing/theory!

 

[Fenris-77]

I’ll be honest, I’m not sure I’ve ever really seen this (apart from maybe a little Reddit reading for optimizing).

Edit: apart from the handful of players I’ve had who are also really into GMing/theory!

I meant in an entirely personal way, not in any way that involves social media or forums. If someone like to roleplay they are going to have some concern about being better at it. Not everyone, but lots of them. In that regard it's not different than any other hobby.

 

[TwoSix]

I’ll be honest, I’m not sure I’ve ever really seen this (apart from maybe a little Reddit reading for optimizing).

Edit: apart from the handful of players I’ve had who are also really into GMing/theory!

I don't know a lot of people who know RPG "theory", but I have RL several players/GMs in my groups who quite enjoy discussing ways to improve the game, in ways that are fairly "high-concept" (as opposed to "how can I make this monster tougher").

 

[zakael19]

Yeah, I guess if my players are doing stuff off on their own I don’t really know! Some write fiction about the world, or muse on poetry or ideas for the future; others have mentioned watching YT vids from various creators once in a while; a few read subreddits occasionally. As you say, pretty stock “hobby participation.” If that’s what you meant, got it.

 

[Fenris-77]

This is all great evidence that we should[n't] confine out thoughts about 'player engagement' to matters that appear on forums like this one.