Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Case against continuity
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 9064666" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Well, I think you would be wise to consider the history of RPGs. I was around in the time frame they were invented, so I have some degree of perspective there. In the first place we had war games. These started out as quintessentially chess-like affairs with a fixed starting position and complete general rules, no narrative was required, nor arguably even implied.</p><p></p><p>Soon we reached stage 2, which was the 'scenario' stage. By the mid 19th Century this was well-established, as war game enthusiasts gamed out various battles using terrain, miniatures, and referees. Still, each scenario was disconnected, whether you won or lost your 'Waterloo' on the table top was merely a question of claiming victory and had no impact on tomorrow's version of playing out Valmy. </p><p></p><p>Of course stage 2 has continued to exist as a robust form of war gaming. At the same time stage 3, the stage in which the 'campaign' exists was an obvious evolution. Gamers didn't just want to play individual battles, they wanted to play out entire wars and campaigns. The rules for this level were always very fuzzy. It was the level of play which existed, in dedicated circles, up until the early 1970's.</p><p></p><p>Which is when Dave Arneson married the war game campaign to his experience with Braunstein 'structured RP' and invented the idea of an ongoing campaign focused on the player's alter-egos, characters which are both pieces in a war game type set of scenarios, and have a sort of dramatic life which links these scenarios together, much like military campaign games are linked.</p><p></p><p>I agree, Story Now has moved onward from that model of episodic scenarios defined by a 'Game Master' who authors the scenarios (albeit in response to the outcomes of previous scenarios and perhaps player input and interest). I'm not sure what makes one thing 'narrative' and another 'ludic', so I can't comment on that, the question seems kind of uninteresting frankly. However I think you're fundamentally correct about what [USER=7027139]@loverdrive[/USER] is saying, and its interesting to ask if you can play a 'narrativist' game that way.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 9064666, member: 82106"] Well, I think you would be wise to consider the history of RPGs. I was around in the time frame they were invented, so I have some degree of perspective there. In the first place we had war games. These started out as quintessentially chess-like affairs with a fixed starting position and complete general rules, no narrative was required, nor arguably even implied. Soon we reached stage 2, which was the 'scenario' stage. By the mid 19th Century this was well-established, as war game enthusiasts gamed out various battles using terrain, miniatures, and referees. Still, each scenario was disconnected, whether you won or lost your 'Waterloo' on the table top was merely a question of claiming victory and had no impact on tomorrow's version of playing out Valmy. Of course stage 2 has continued to exist as a robust form of war gaming. At the same time stage 3, the stage in which the 'campaign' exists was an obvious evolution. Gamers didn't just want to play individual battles, they wanted to play out entire wars and campaigns. The rules for this level were always very fuzzy. It was the level of play which existed, in dedicated circles, up until the early 1970's. Which is when Dave Arneson married the war game campaign to his experience with Braunstein 'structured RP' and invented the idea of an ongoing campaign focused on the player's alter-egos, characters which are both pieces in a war game type set of scenarios, and have a sort of dramatic life which links these scenarios together, much like military campaign games are linked. I agree, Story Now has moved onward from that model of episodic scenarios defined by a 'Game Master' who authors the scenarios (albeit in response to the outcomes of previous scenarios and perhaps player input and interest). I'm not sure what makes one thing 'narrative' and another 'ludic', so I can't comment on that, the question seems kind of uninteresting frankly. However I think you're fundamentally correct about what [USER=7027139]@loverdrive[/USER] is saying, and its interesting to ask if you can play a 'narrativist' game that way. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Case against continuity
Top