A discussion of forms.

[Umbran]

Any other comments on the topic of the basics of roleplaying?

Yes, one that I think is prety important - aside from being a literary form for storytelling, rpgs are a social activity. When you read a book or watch a movie, even if friends are present, you essentially take in the presentation alone. RPGs have a much stronger social aspect that is both a strength and a limitation. Ignoring the social aspect can ruin a game. Using it intelligently can enhance the presentation.

 

[The Other Librarian]

I guess tabletop RPGs are a lot like theatre (or radio plays with a narrator), while PBEMs feel very literary - many literary genres I think can be done better in PBEM play than in a tabletop game.

I tend to agree here, and I think the reason is the disparity between theory and practice. Many Gm's would like to encourage the improvisational aspect of a troupe of pc's, but reality falls short of this.

In my experience, most players are not great actors/improvisers, and most people suffer some form of "stage fright". Playing style often rests somewhere in-between 1st and 3rd person, with even dialogue getting a '3rd person gloss.' I think the d20 core books even mention this as the most common style of play.

PBEM on the other hand gives players a secure anonimity which allows them to more fully explore the character in 1st person. But PBEM are often "rewritten" by the dm to provide a better narrative flow, thus becoming closer to novelistic writing than improv. The Storyhours too are often heavily rewritten to make the narrative more accessable, and have more in common with a novel than actual gameplay.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

It's been noted that of of ENWorld's story hours are better than quite a few commercally available novels. While that is in large part due to the author's talent and dedication, a lot of it has to do with the strengths in tabletop RPGs.

In most tabletop games, the DM writes the plot, but only some of the dialogue. Many of the stories are told through NPCs (even in character-driven games). The DM sets things up and the players make it go. RPGs also enforce an element of visual description. ("What does the keep look like? Do we notice any unsual insignia on the orcs' tabbards?") In literature, writers can easily forget to include character movitvation, that isn't possible with a solid RPG group.

Essentially, the DM has to deal with a group of people who do not just act as improvisational actors; they are also editors and critics.

 

[DonAdam]

I think it is important to realize that, whereas books can afford to define some aspects of the character using inner monologue or omniscient narration, character in an RPG almost always have to be defined in relation to one another and NPC's. This is because RPG's, as a group activity, involve some sort of interaction.

Thus, in D&D, things like party roles become of utmost importance in defining who a character is; the player may or may not have some idea of what goes to the heart of the character, but the character that appears in the experience of the game is the character as he interacts with the imagined world around him. Dialogue, as others have pointed out, is critical. There is also the question of the manner in which a character overcomes challenges, a distinguishing characteristic of RPG's as opposed to simiple war games.

 

[Moulin Rogue]

Well, if tabletop is like theater and PBEM is like a novel, IRC/chatroom has a feel closer to the theater while the log ends up reading like a movie script in my experience. Descriptions of rooms and NPCs provided by the DM can be detailed if they're worked up ahead of time, but PCs tend to be closer to the tabletop dynamic, delivering lines that go to the point, with maybe a word or two noting inflection, and the scene does its best to roll along like a movie does. Combat in IRC both takes a really long time AND has everybody waiting around on it, so descriptions tend to be really quick *I swing at his head again*, that kind of thing. I don't know if this is interesting to anyone, but there it is.

 

[mythusmage]

Two Things.

A story is a history. A session is the events as they occur. Think about it.

 

[S'mon]

Well, if tabletop is like theater and PBEM is like a novel, IRC/chatroom has a feel closer to the theater while the log ends up reading like a movie script in my experience.

Yeah, IRC/chat does feel closer to tabletop play and the logs can feel like scripts, whether movie, theatre or radio scripts - though radio plays for some reason usually avoid having a narrator/GM to set the scene, relying purely on dialogue - a mistake I think; probably why I much prefer read-aloud novels on the radio rather than plays written purely for radio. (Do you have plays on US radio BTW? Maybe on PBS? I know Cracker Barrel rents lots of books-on-tape for the long-distance driver!)

In tabletop play or IM games, the one thing you really can't do is an internal monologue, and this they share with movies & TV. By contrast PBEMs are potentially able to explore the internal state of a character in the way books can, which opens up a lot of possibilities, just as the PBEM format is unsuitable for others - in a dungeon crawl it can easily take a PBEM party a week to decide whether to go down the left corridor or the right!

 

[shilsen]

A story is a history. A session is the events as they occur. Think about it.

Actually, I'd amend that to say that while a session consists of events as they occur, a story may or may not be a history.

A very large number of stories are not histories, do not occur in chronological order, may not even incorporate events of any kind. For example, a post-modern stream of consciousness novel may occur purely in someone's head, with no real sense of chronological movement. That's rare (if even existent) in RPGs.

 

[Liquidsabre]

Actually, I'd amend that to say that while a session consists of events as they occur, a story may or may not be a history.

I think what mithusmage is going for here isn't that a story is established history but is simply the retelling of events that have already happened (whether fictional or not).

A novel is a narrative that has already happened in the authors head who transcribed it onto paper and published in fixed media form for others to partake. An rpg is a narrative in-progress. Story-plot is planned and written, Rpg-plot is created in-game as a cooperative, improvisational process.

An RPG game session is essentially the creation of plot. Plot isn't something crafted or planned by the DM (that's railroading or a written novel) but instead plot is something that the DM and players create as they play in-game.

 

[Liquidsabre]

Some more thoughts...

Hey great topic btw RangerWicket! As a writer/GM I've always found the study of RPGs as a unique story-telling media to be entirely unique and fascinating.

Where story-telling media has learned to primarily make use of the audience-author relationship and the successful methods to telling good stories, the same rules do not apply to RPGs. This is because in RPGs the lines between author-audience are blurred as the participants (GM-Players) take on aspects of both of the roles of audience and author. Both the GM and Players contribute in "crafting" the story and plot in an RPG but also simultaneously get to sit back and enjoy the show as part of the audience while the others you are cooperating with craft the story (watching a fellow player speak in character to amusing affect, watching NPC actions unfold by DM description, etc.).

Never has there existed such a medium for entertainment and story-telling as RPGs that cross-breeds the audience-author relationship. Often we see this leads to amusing and less-than-amusing effects as the relationships can become confused since most people only know and understand (having only had exposure to) mediums that keep the audience-author relationship separate. Such as when an inexperienced DM tries to craft plot/story all alone = railroading, or Players who try to act all-audience = uninvolved PCs.

*ahem* Well, I think I've rambled enough heh, I've put alot of thought on this in the past and always meant to post a thread on something to this effect, so thanks RangerWicket for letting me put it out there! It rather funnels directly into my thoughts on plot-based DMing vs. situational-based DMing, but I'll leave that one till later.

Cheers!