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

[Neonchameleon]

Do you ever run convention games?

Yes - and the trad games (especially D&D) are the most inorganic of the ones I run, with the scenes pre-scripted to a degree.

Meanwhile neither the Daggerheart nor the Crash Pandas or Honey Heist games I've run have needed pre-scripting. Instead the players have more agency than they do in more trad games and they can go in any direction. (Dread is somewhere in the middle).

 

[Reynard]

Yes - and the trad games (especially D&D) are the most inorganic of the ones I run, with the scenes pre-scripted to a degree.

Meanwhile neither the Daggerheart nor the Crash Pandas or Honey Heist games I've run have needed pre-scripting. Instead the players have more agency than they do in more trad games and they can go in any direction. (Dread is somewhere in the middle).

We are clearly using different definitions of organic here.

 

[Neonchameleon]

We are clearly using different definitions of organic here.

Then possibly you'd care to give your definition? As well as your definition of "story mechanics".

Mine considers e.g. most Adventure Paths to be inorganic. Because they involve pre-scripted events rather than are able to respond to the in character actions of the characters in the setting.

 

[pemerton]

Yes - and the trad games (especially D&D) are the most inorganic of the ones I run, with the scenes pre-scripted to a degree.

Meanwhile neither the Daggerheart nor the Crash Pandas or Honey Heist games I've run have needed pre-scripting. Instead the players have more agency than they do in more trad games and they can go in any direction. (Dread is somewhere in the middle).

I only have a very general sense of Daggerheart, know Honey Heist by name and that's it, and have heard of Crash Pandas for the first time in your post.

I am familiar with one type of prepared set-up for play that avoids railroading but is likely to produce a good story-type experience in an hour or three of play: namely, the charged situation that unfolds into a climax. The classic example is the Burning Wheel demo scenario The Sword <Burning Wheel The Sword Demo Adventure PDF>.

Another sort of example is any island for Agon 2e.

But the instances that I have most experience with a Prince Valiant "episodes". When these are designed well - which Greg Stafford's are (he was a genius) and some in the Episode Book are - they have the "tight in, wide out" structure that you mentioned upthread, but also the right mix of elements to produce uncertainty, opportunity, threat and climax.

As I've posted before, one of the cleverest that I've run is Jerry Grayson's The Crimson Bull. It takes full advantage of the fact that movement from place to place, in Prince Valiant, can be fully colour rather than requiring action resolution; and so it uses the PCs travel with the eponymous bull, and some events that occur during that travel, as framing and rising action without needing to railroad in the way that (say) a DL module needs to.

The convention games that I mentioned upthread - railroading for most if it, but with an open climax - are really approximations to the sort of set-up that I've described in this post. Except, because they were generally using some BRP variant (eg Stormbringer, Elric, Pendragon, CoC) it wasn't as easy to establish this sort of structure, and so the preliminary railroading was necessary.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I only have a very general sense of Daggerheart, know Honey Heist by name and that's it, and have heard of Crash Pandas for the first time in your post.

For the record:

• Daggerheart: rules light D&D meets PbtA. No moves, but success-with-consequences as a possibility on the basic roll; Genesys inspired. (IMO it does just about everything Dungeon World or 13th Age do better). Out of combat it reminds me a lot of 4e - but it's theatre of the mind with pretty slick combat
• Honey Heist: Grant Howitt one-pager; you are bears who are also criminals, trying to steal honey
• Crash Pandas: Grant Howitt one-pager. You are a team of street racing racoons in a trench coat

The last two are both ridiculous and silly games. When I run Crash Pandas it normally has two big scenes; a small one taking out one of the intended drivers and a big one using die-cast cars with the raccoons attempting to win their race (normally not ending the race in the car they started in).

 

[Umbran]

...Therefore, planning how I will get through it, making room for dealing with student questions, handling student questions during the course of the lesson, etc are all important factors.

But a RPG session is not like that at all! As a GM, I'm not in a didactic relationship to the players at all.

Another (higher ed) teacher here.
The didactic relationship isn't where the similarity lies.

There's not some pre-established content that I "have" to get through.

In your games, perhaps. But, for many, many GMs, running D&D with published adventures, there is. It is often the same in much traditional play, where the GM has made an adventure.

And while a D&D campaign often doesn't have strict timelines, GMs usually still have a sort of session plans around what is likely from where the characters start, which are not unlike lesson plans.

 

[Scott Christian]

With respect, improv GMing within a collaborative table framework is far more adaptable and easy to run then something like a high-prepped module; and never has that sudden "oh crap" feeling of the players doing stuff that is out of scope and you need to go 'uhhhh, give me a minute guys' or suddenly figure out how much strong arming needs to happen to "get them on track."

I consider it to be far more in line with facilitated collaboration sessions in small-teams (which often have a very short "Goal" which you then flesh out together based on oh, say, procedures like a good "play to find out game" provides) then planned and structured lessons (which I have both given and sat through plenty).

With respect, I never mentioned a high-prepped module. A collaborative table is a great thing. And by collaboration, I assume you mean that the players share, and then the GM reciprocates, meaning they add things the players shared. That is called an RPG table in my world.

And that table is much more consistent if the GM has done a "boatload of prep" than doing no prep.

Again, that is only relevant if your intent is to "tell a story." Which it shouldn't be, because an RPG is going to do that regardless of whether that is your aim or not. it is inherent in the form.

Correct. That is why I said it is both. But, and I am going to assume here, we have all played a video game where one storyline is better than the other. More satisfying perhaps. We have all seen a show or movie where the story unravels or the ending is "meh" and thought, they could have done better.
The reason they could have done better is because they should have told a story.

That's just your bias and is not a universal experience.

I am fine with the fact that you believe so. But it is not true. Be delusional or fill yourself with false beliefs all you want. Then dig down, deep inside, and you know that a story line that is prepped, be it in Hollywood, novels, or RPGs, most of them have greater internal consistency. As I said before, you may be able to come up with an outlier, but it is not the norm. Go ahead and try to find a great RPG computer game that pulled your heart strings and wasn't plot diagrammed. Find a great internally consistent movie where the director just followed random things. Or find a great RPG where the DM had no idea for their world or plot line. All of those might exist... maybe??? but they lean towards internal consistency.

 

[zakael19]

With respect, I never mentioned a high-prepped module. A collaborative table is a great thing. And by collaboration, I assume you mean that the players share, and then the GM reciprocates, meaning they add things the players shared. That is called an RPG table in my world.

And that table is much more consistent if the GM has done a "boatload of prep" than doing no prep.


Correct. That is why I said it is both. But, and I am going to assume here, we have all played a video game where one storyline is better than the other. More satisfying perhaps. We have all seen a show or movie where the story unravels or the ending is "meh" and thought, they could have done better.
The reason they could have done better is because they should have told a story.

I am fine with the fact that you believe so. But it is not true. Be delusional or fill yourself with false beliefs all you want. Then dig down, deep inside, and you know that a story line that is prepped, be it in Hollywood, novels, or RPGs, most of them have greater internal consistency. As I said before, you may be able to come up with an outlier, but it is not the norm. Go ahead and try to find a great RPG computer game that pulled your heart strings and wasn't plot diagrammed. Find a great internally consistent movie where the director just followed random things. Or find a great RPG where the DM had no idea for their world or plot line. All of those might exist... maybe??? but they lean towards internal consistency.

That’s like, your opinion man that you’re casting as truth. My games with a sketch of potential at most have been far more engaging for my players and myself then any pre-scripted adventure I’ve seen. I know this because I’ve run highly prepped stuff and highly improved things with the same groups and we talk about play after. The latter consistently have higher player buy-in, engagement, and excitement on a constant basis.

If you’re now twisting to say that “oh a collaborative table (most conventional D&D is non-collaborative in the sense I mean) is just RPGing” then you’re running off some set of in-house definitions far outside the norm.

 

[Scott Christian]

I don't find the comparison between a lesson and a RPG session very apt. When I take a lesson, there is a certain amount of material that I have to get through, in order to deliver the prescribed curriculum within the timeframe allocated (X hours per less, Y lessons per week, Z weeks per semester). Therefore, planning how I will get through it, making room for dealing with student questions, handling student questions during the course of the lesson, etc are all important factors.

But a RPG session is not like that at all! As a GM, I'm not in a didactic relationship to the players at all. There's not some pre-established content that I "have" to get through. I look to the game system itself, and the unfolding events of play - and the way the former handles the latter - to ensure pacing.

That is fair - you have never had a time limit on an RPG. OK.

You have been in a privileged situation of:
"Hey, Jenn is moving next month. She is being deployed, and she wants closure on the campaign?"
or
"Hey, Jim really wants to run Daggerheart next, so he needs to know when your campaign will end so he can start prepping by buying minis, writing the campaign, printing maps, etc."
or
"Hey, Jean needs to start bringing her kids to the game or leave. Do you think you can add them? We know it will change the entire nature of the adultness of the campaign, but they will only be here six months?"

No one minds if you are in a privileged gaming spot. In fact, most people will applaud it (including me - lucky you). But there are tables out there that do have time limits and restrictions. And that was the whole lesson analogy. Most tables DO have time limits upon them, be it imposed through social constraints, work constraints, or family constraints. Therefore, to me, it is exactly like a lesson plan: Sometimes you need to get through this material by such-and-such a date in order to make the players happy.

 

[pemerton]

We have all seen a show or movie where the story unravels or the ending is "meh" and thought, they could have done better.
The reason they could have done better is because they should have told a story.

<snip>

I am fine with the fact that you believe so. But it is not true. Be delusional or fill yourself with false beliefs all you want. Then dig down, deep inside, and you know that a story line that is prepped, be it in Hollywood, novels, or RPGs, most of them have greater internal consistency. As I said before, you may be able to come up with an outlier, but it is not the norm. Go ahead and try to find a great RPG computer game that pulled your heart strings and wasn't plot diagrammed. Find a great internally consistent movie where the director just followed random things. Or find a great RPG where the DM had no idea for their world or plot line. All of those might exist... maybe??? but they lean towards internal consistency.

Speaking just for myself, if my RPGing produces stories that are comparable to B-movies, or to second-tier late-70s Marvel Comics, I'm pretty happy! Even low-grade commercial entertainment has generally been produced by people who compose stories for a living; me and my group are a bunch of amateurs getting together once every N weeks to have fun!

That said, I don't think the consistency issue is as big a one as you seem to. There are a couple of reasons for that.

First is that not even a great story needs to have every thread tied up. The Big Sleep (who killed the driver) is the famous example here, but there are plenty of other exciting and engaging stories that have bits that aren't really explained, or don't seem to make a lot of sense under scrutiny - eg in the original Star Wars movie, what is going on with Obi-Wan, the last of an ancient order, hanging out on Luke Skywalker's backwater world, just waiting to mentor him but apparently waiting for an external prompt like Leia's message? (And yes, backstory is added in by later films. But when I saw Star Wars when it first came out, these questions were unanswered. That didn't stop the film being awesome!)

Second, moreso than in other forms of fiction, in RPGing if anyone at the table is concerned about some apparent gap or inconsistency, there is the capacity to use play to establish an answer or explanation. Or, if everyone agrees, to "do over" and clear it up.

I think there can be "risks" in improv - eg keeping going back to familiar/comfortable tropes, themes etc - but I don't think (in)consistency is a significant one.