Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Odhanan" data-source="post: 2741981" data-attributes="member: 12324">That's the neverending debate of RPGs. Game versus Storytelling. The problem I think is that you consider that the game and its mechanics serve the story being told, while I and a few others consider a RPG doesn't tell a story at all. We think the story is the consequence of RPG sessions after they occur.I.e. what Gary says: The aim of the RPG is not to eventually create a story. Any story that evolves during or after play is a bonus that is developed by the participants who enjoyed playing a game.That's two different point of views right there. Conciliation didn't happen for the last thirty years on this topic. I doubt it will happen now.In fact, in gameplay here's what I do: the guy triggers the trap, takes 48 points of damage, but I still describe the action immersively. Immersion shouldn't in this case be mixed up with storytelling/a &quot;novelist&quot; approach to game mastering. These are two different things.A particular focus on immersion in RPGs can often result in a novelist approach to RPG and adventure design/game mastering. But this is just one of the possible consequences and one concept doesn't replace the other. I know because I've been a novelist GM when running Vampire The Masquerade. I came back from it because I was realizing that the focus of the game wasn't having fun anymore. It was to flatter my wanna-be-writer's ego by enacting stories and getting them to go as I wanted them to. And I would make the game less fun for the other players if the game didn't go the way I wanted it to. Which is a mistake.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Odhanan, post: 2741981, member: 12324"] That's the neverending debate of RPGs. Game versus Storytelling. The problem I think is that you consider that the game and its mechanics serve the story being told, while I and a few others consider a RPG doesn't tell a story at all. We think the story is the consequence of RPG sessions after they occur. I.e. what Gary says: The aim of the RPG is not to eventually create a story. Any story that evolves during or after play is a bonus that is developed by the participants who enjoyed playing a game. That's two different point of views right there. Conciliation didn't happen for the last thirty years on this topic. I doubt it will happen now. In fact, in gameplay here's what I do: the guy triggers the trap, takes 48 points of damage, but I still describe the action immersively. [b]Immersion shouldn't in this case be mixed up with storytelling/a "novelist" approach to game mastering. These are two different things.[/b] A particular focus on immersion in RPGs can often result in a novelist approach to RPG and adventure design/game mastering. But this is just one of the possible consequences and one concept doesn't replace the other. I know because I've been a novelist GM when running Vampire The Masquerade. I came back from it because I was realizing that the focus of the game wasn't having fun anymore. It was to flatter my wanna-be-writer's ego by enacting stories and getting them to go as I wanted them to. And I would make the game less fun for the other players if the game didn't go the way I wanted it to. Which is a mistake. [/QUOTE]

Verification