Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="aramis erak" data-source="post: 9378409" data-attributes="member: 6779310">I think the OP's video is interesting, but the author/presenter overgeneralizes.The biggest overgeneralization  is that all games present obstacles to overcome. This is pretty much invalidated by "games" such as idiot's delight solitaire (which is always winnable, given enough time.)Overgeneralization #2, equally as important, but not as obvious: players playing to overcome some situation or challenge just isn't a universal even for games designed with  obstacles or direct competition. My grandmother never played Sorry with the intent to win. She played it to keep me busy, because I engaged with it. Overgeneralization #3: that sequential events always result in story by design. Several abstract designers have stated they wanted to avoid story and so used as abstract a set of parts as they could.I'll note that it's also a spectrum where the ludofunctional part becomes also narrative is wide. I've met a couple folk who don't get a story out of a game, despite 8 hours of play and in-persona treaty negotiation, while others see checkers as a race war analogy, and it's a personal battle... For me, Checkers ha no narrative to it, save a recollection of abstract decisions and whether or not my opponent won. Hnefatafl has a narrative - the king surrounded by 4 bands of unloyal vassals... Ship-Captain-Crew, a dice  game, has labels, but to me it's just an abstract. Chess feels just shy of a narrative to me. And yet, Car Wars (classic) is very much a Role Playing thing for me, and Star Fleet Battles falls just shy of one.Problem: His citations and academics chapter undermines his whole argument by showing that the existing ludologists and narrativologists don't go as extreme as he is proposing. When you're way off in the woods vs the body of literature you're drawing from and reacting to, your burden of proof is pretty high, and he has pushed it to the point where I can't agree, and feel he's not only failed to support his point, but essentually nulled it.When it comes to boardgames, abstracts especially, pareidolia-like memory overlays a story for some. Clearly, he's one of them. I'm not as extreme. But one gal from church, she's aphantasic; she enjoys boardgames, but gets no story from them, even the ones with strong story. It's not that she's stupid - shes an ANP with an MSN. And a 3.8+ GPA. (And 6 kids at home when she did her MSN). ANd then, there are themed abstracts... Risk Express, Age of War, Stratego... Ship Captain Crew.Let me explain that last one: On their turn, each player antes, then rolls 5d6; to score, you need a 6 (the ship), a 5 (the captain) and as many crew as possible. You get 3 rerolls, hoping to get a captain, a ship, and 3 dice of crew (1-4 each, sum is score). I get no real story out of it . I still enjoy it, especially penny ante... Sometimes, between rerolls, a poker like round of bidding up the pot happens before those still in reroll.Most computer games do have some narrative element, even if it's disconnected from the gameplay... Asteroids? Centipede?Gamers' boardgames are often narrative linked to gameplay... and most RPG playstyles absolutely do include a narrative as part of play...Because<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">D&D has a lot of tropes that don't work for many people,<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I'm one of those.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">WotC and HasBro have behavior patters that many find as reason to not support them by playing their games<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I'm also one of those</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not all settings lend themselves to the tropes enforced by any given D&D ruleset</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">There's no singular D&D to "just enjoy playing D&D."<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">OE, OE+Sups, Holmes, AD&D 1e, BX, AD&D1+UA, AD&D 2e, BECMI, BECMI+Gazateers, AD&D2+PO/CO D&D Rules Cyclopedia, D&D 3e/3.5e, D&D 4e, D&D5e, and the new version releasing later this year.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Note that my distinction is based upon "I can tell this edition from the sheet" - in the case of AD&D1+UA, the additional classes, and the various other changes, plus the extra attribute often make it easy to tell if the group is using UA. AD&D2 with the Player's Option books in force has customizable characters, and 12 attributes...</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The BX, BECMI, and Cyclopedia are generally considered the same; the differences are minor but for the inclusion of more and more content... Cyclopedia includes all of BECM, but not I; it also includes small parts of the Gazetteer content, and some options novel to it.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not many will happily play more than one or two; sites like this one tend to attract more wide tastes than D&D itself</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A lot of people call Pathfinder D&D. A lot more call anything from OSRIC to Mörk Borg D&D. A few people call Classic Traveller D&D. A few call the Buck Rogers XXVcgame D&D... others call it AD&D.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">There are also D&D labeled board games<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">TSR had Mertwig's Maze and The Great Khan Game — neither of which were RPGing — and I've got one of them</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">WotC has some D&D branded boardgames...</li> </ul></li> </ul></li> </ul>So, D&D? Which D&D?If I invite you over for a D&D game, do  you know which I'm going to break out?And even if told the ruleset, am I going to be in minis mode, story mode, hybrid mode?I'll note that Mertwig's Maze never caused me to generate a narrative in recollection, but Great Khan Game, which is essentially a card wargame, often did... And many of the early dungeon crawls we played in middle school were horibly lacking plot... and narrative considerations. It was a minis wargame without the minis.I get a narrative from Star Fleet Battles, too. Especially from ship duels.</blockquote>

Verification