Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 4207673" data-attributes="member: 5143">Well, that comes down to how you define narrativistic.&nbsp; It may not be the best word but I'm at a loss to find one that I like.What I mean when I say narrativistic is probably closer to &quot;story driven&quot; and &quot;structured&quot;.&nbsp; What I mean by this is that the DM comes up with a storyline and a plot and everything that happens in the game is designed to further that plot or relate to that plot.&nbsp; The game revolves around it.It is similar to the fact that you don't expect to see a scene in a Star Wars movie where the characters sit in a bar and chat about that girl they met last week and how awesome that party was.&nbsp; The characters certainly MIGHT have that conversation, but the movie never shows us it because it doesn't relate to the plot of the movie.&nbsp; Because the writer and director of the movie know the plot and they arrange the scenes of the movie around it.So, that's what I refer to as narrativistic, even if it isn't the same definition other people use.&nbsp; The same concept can be applied to DMing a D&amp;D game.&nbsp; You know the plot and theme of the adventure.&nbsp; You steer the players towards the &quot;ending&quot; of the game.&nbsp; You put NPCs in their path that remind them of what their goal is, you design the responses of the NPCs in order to give them hints exactly when you want to give them out, and so on.&nbsp; You carefully control the pacing of the plot, speeding it up or slowing it down as you need to.&nbsp; You give players choices when you think it is appropriate but you take away nearly all of their choices when it is critical for the plot to continue.&nbsp; You just disguise it so it looks like they had control all along.&nbsp; However, you plan decision points into your adventure where the PCs truly have the ability to choose multiple paths.&nbsp; You just control which paths they can take so you have a plan for each choice.Thus, why I said before that I don't think &quot;Railroading&quot; is always bad.&nbsp; As a player, I know that every dungeon I've ever walked into is pretty much railroading.&nbsp; I know that once I step in there I will have a very small number of choices(maybe even none), all of them decided upon by the DM.&nbsp; I see no problem with structuring an adventure that isn't a dungeon crawl in the same manner.&nbsp; The only difference is that the walls of the dungeon are replaced by &quot;walls&quot; of plot that carefully keep the players on one of a couple of paths you have chosen for them.&nbsp; They can choose to go &quot;left&quot; or &quot;right&quot; but &quot;forward&quot; there is a &quot;wall&quot; in their way.&nbsp; If you can do it well, players don't even see the &quot;walls&quot;.&nbsp; They even think it is their decision to follow the &quot;hallways&quot;.This philosophy is in direct opposition of what I see as &quot;simulation&quot; which I define as &quot;let the rules define the world and let the players do whatever they want and then react to it.&quot;It's a philosophy that says to plan in terms of &quot;The players will have to find an artifact.&nbsp; It is across the ocean on another continent.&nbsp; The Duke has a map that leads to it.&quot;&nbsp; then see if the players can figure out that the Duke has the map, see if they figure out to go talk to him, see if they can find a way to convince the Duke and let them use whatever skills they want to do it.&nbsp; It is more a focus on the rules and less on the &quot;whys&quot; behind the scene.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Majoru Oakheart, post: 4207673, member: 5143"] Well, that comes down to how you define narrativistic. It may not be the best word but I'm at a loss to find one that I like. What I mean when I say narrativistic is probably closer to "story driven" and "structured". What I mean by this is that the DM comes up with a storyline and a plot and everything that happens in the game is designed to further that plot or relate to that plot. The game revolves around it. It is similar to the fact that you don't expect to see a scene in a Star Wars movie where the characters sit in a bar and chat about that girl they met last week and how awesome that party was. The characters certainly MIGHT have that conversation, but the movie never shows us it because it doesn't relate to the plot of the movie. Because the writer and director of the movie know the plot and they arrange the scenes of the movie around it. So, that's what I refer to as narrativistic, even if it isn't the same definition other people use. The same concept can be applied to DMing a D&D game. You know the plot and theme of the adventure. You steer the players towards the "ending" of the game. You put NPCs in their path that remind them of what their goal is, you design the responses of the NPCs in order to give them hints exactly when you want to give them out, and so on. You carefully control the pacing of the plot, speeding it up or slowing it down as you need to. You give players choices when you think it is appropriate but you take away nearly all of their choices when it is critical for the plot to continue. You just disguise it so it looks like they had control all along. However, you plan decision points into your adventure where the PCs truly have the ability to choose multiple paths. You just control which paths they can take so you have a plan for each choice. Thus, why I said before that I don't think "Railroading" is always bad. As a player, I know that every dungeon I've ever walked into is pretty much railroading. I know that once I step in there I will have a very small number of choices(maybe even none), all of them decided upon by the DM. I see no problem with structuring an adventure that isn't a dungeon crawl in the same manner. The only difference is that the walls of the dungeon are replaced by "walls" of plot that carefully keep the players on one of a couple of paths you have chosen for them. They can choose to go "left" or "right" but "forward" there is a "wall" in their way. If you can do it well, players don't even see the "walls". They even think it is their decision to follow the "hallways". This philosophy is in direct opposition of what I see as "simulation" which I define as "let the rules define the world and let the players do whatever they want and then react to it." It's a philosophy that says to plan in terms of "The players will have to find an artifact. It is across the ocean on another continent. The Duke has a map that leads to it." then see if the players can figure out that the Duke has the map, see if they figure out to go talk to him, see if they can find a way to convince the Duke and let them use whatever skills they want to do it. It is more a focus on the rules and less on the "whys" behind the scene. [/QUOTE]

Verification