Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[Reynard]

This started in another thread but I thought I would spin it off into its own thread before it goes wild.

What do you think of TTRPGs (broadly) in relation to "story." Are RPGs "stories." Are they "story generators"? Something else? How do the particular mechanics of a game interact with what you think the relationship is? How about adventure structure, particularly for campaign length adventures, from At The Mountains of Madness to The Enemy Within to Curse of Strahd?

For you, personally, are you telling a story when you play a TTRPG?

For my part, I think you are creating a story through play, but that story is not what happens at the table per se. Rather, the story is how we talk about it after the game is done. Stories have a structure that does not really work in play. RPGs are messy, ephemeral things in play, with terrible pacing and contradictory plot elements. But once play is done, the thing that remains with us is the story that RPG play generated. Perhaps most interestingly, that story is different for every participant.

Now, you can force games to be more like stories by demanding certain beats be present and forcing pacing, etc... But every single element that makes play more like a story makes it less like an RPG -- because RPGs are defined by their embrace of player agency. In trad games this is mostly the GM, but more modern games give players tools to put their fingers on the scale as well.

As is probably obvious, I am an advocate of playing to find out and presenting situations rather than plots or adventures.

Where do you stand? What is your preference when it comes to TTRPG play and story?

 

[sevenbastard]

This

As is probably obvious, I am an advocate of playing to find out and presenting situations rather than plots or adventures.

As a DM I want to set up a situation and then let the players solve it. I dont have a correct/preferred way for it to be solved.

My entertainment is being along for the ride as the story emerges.

No different than sports where the "story" emerges during the game. The QB who throws 3 picks might redemption himself in the 4th quarter, a rookie might suddenly have the best game of thier life, or a coach might make a desperate decision that secures victory or ensures defeat.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This started in another thread but I thought I would spin it off into its own thread before it goes wild.

What do you think of TTRPGs (broadly) in relation to "story." Are RPGs "stories." Are they "story generators"? Something else? How do the particular mechanics of a game interact with what you think the relationship is? How about adventure structure, particularly for campaign length adventures, from At The Mountains of Madness to The Enemy Within to Curse of Strahd?

For you, personally, are you telling a story when you play a TTRPG?

For my part, I think you are creating a story through play, but that story is not what happens at the table per se. Rather, the story is how we talk about it after the game is done. Stories have a structure that does not really work in play. RPGs are messy, ephemeral things in play, with terrible pacing and contradictory plot elements. But once play is done, the thing that remains with us is the story that RPG play generated. Perhaps most interestingly, that story is different for every participant.

Now, you can force games to be more like stories by demanding certain beats be present and forcing pacing, etc... But every single element that makes play more like a story makes it less like an RPG -- because RPGs are defined by their embrace of player agency. In trad games this is mostly the GM, but more modern games give players tools to put their fingers on the scale as well.

As is probably obvious, I am an advocate of playing to find out and presenting situations rather than plots or adventures.

Where do you stand? What is your preference when it comes to TTRPG play and story?

Thank you for starting this thread. I was very interested in the other discussion but have been locked out of "D&D General" threads.

I agree with your position. There is no "story" in RPGs until the situation has been played out and retold. Until then, to me it's just a bunch of stuff that happening. Stories have structure, and that structure is our into place after the events by the storyteller. For me, trying to force those story elements into place by any means before or during play is awkward and (again, for me) unfun.

Play the game, explore the world through your character, make choices. Tell the story of all that afterward.

 

[Deset Gled]

What do you think of TTRPGs (broadly) in relation to "story." Are RPGs "stories." Are they "story generators"? Something else?

Personally, I play TTRPGs because I like games. If I just wanted a story generator, I'd do collaborative writing with my friends. I've done that. It's fun. But it's a poor excuse for a game session.

OTOH, I absolutely believe that TTRPGs also have story elements. Playing to develop characters and plots, both collaboratively and personally, for both DMs and players, is a major element of what makes a TTRPG different from a board game or a miniatures wargame.

IMNSHO it's the combination that's important. As soon as you start talking about stories without games or games without stories is when RPGs stop working for me. There are some TTRPGers that I've played with that would be happier going back to wargaming. And there are some hardcore "story game" advocates that I really think should just go write a book. The nuanced balance that you get from socialization and rules is where TTRPGs live. Unfortunately, balance and nuance is often a difficult type of socialization for the internet at large.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This



As a DM I want to set up a situation and then let the players solve it. I dont have a correct/preferred way for it to be solved.

My entertainment is being along for the ride as the story emerges.

No different than sports where the "story" emerges during the game. The QB who throws 3 picks might redemption himself in the 4th quarter, a rookie might suddenly have the best game of thier life, or a coach might make a desperate decision that secures victory or ensures defeat.

Great analogy! So far as I know, no one presently watching or playing a football game sees it as a story until the game is over, if at all.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Given the terms you used, I'd call RPGs "story generators."

IMO there should be no inherent plot or story, but the GM should provide situations and characters who have motives and action. How the PCs interact with the world and its denizens generates stories; long term interaction with NPC motivations can result in a meta-plot. The world changes the PCs and the PCs change the world through play.

 

[GobHag]

because RPGs are defined by their embrace of player agency.

All RPGs also have their own restrictions, what's wrong if the restriction is 'At the end, you will betray the person who trusts you the most' instead of something more concretely like 'there's a 50 feet high stone wall'? Is deciding at Session 0/CharGen/between sessions on how your character's arc would develop also be an expression of player agency?

 

[Basic Expert]

I believe this is true even in more narrative or "story"-based games, like Fate, Quest, PbtA, Sorcerer or what have you. These games often have an element of collaborative story-telling, but are usually guided or constrained by mechanics and there isn't a pre-determined ending (such as "By the end of the story we will have killed the dragon and saved the kingdom.") It is still "play to find out".

This is perhaps the greatest strength of TTRPGs. One that can't be replicated in any other medium. A film or novel goes where the creators design. In a computer game you are constrained by limitations of what was programmed. In a TTRPG you can literal end up anywhere imaginable. And one of the great joys of GMing (and playing) is being totally surprised by what twists and choices others in your group make.

 

[Reynard]

All RPGs also have their own restrictions, what's wrong if the restriction is 'At the end, you will betray the person who trusts you the most' instead of something more concretely like 'there's a 50 feet high stone wall'? Is deciding at Session 0/CharGen/between sessions on how your character's arc would develop also be an expression of player agency?

I do think that deciding that a thing will definitely happen -- or more specifically, that your character will definitely do a thing -- before it comes up in play does impinge upon player agency (at least insofar as I am defining it here). I agree that there is agency in the player choosing that thing early, but I think the choosing of it must by definition restrict play until that thing happens/is confronted.

 

[GobHag]

I do think that deciding that a thing will definitely happen -- or more specifically, that your character will definitely do a thing -- before it comes up in play does impinge upon player agency (at least insofar as I am defining it here). I agree that there is agency in the player choosing that thing early, but I think the choosing of it must by definition restrict play until that thing happens/is confronted.

Mind explaining what your definition of player agency is?