Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?

[Bedrockgames]

He's clarifying how [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] is using "literary" in the context of this thread.

I am seriously not following any of this.

 

[Hussar]

I am seriously not following any of this.

Sorry, but, which part aren't you following? I thought I was pretty clear in my definitions.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Sorry, but, which part aren't you following? I thought I was pretty clear in my definitions.

I thought I grasped Permerton's OP and responded accordingly in agreement. But the subsequent replies I responded to I understood 0% of. I wasn't responding to anything you said though. I haven't even seen your post.

 

[aramis erak]

Then again, no, I don't see RPG's as anything remotely like anything other than a (somewhat complicated) game. That's all they are. I could have a great time playing Euchre for three hours as well. And, part of playing an RPG is the performance aspect of it. Performance is a big part - whether it's the art for my virtual tabletop game, or selecting a decent soundtrack to go with the session, or my own personal performance, it's all important to the experience.

That triggers the following thoughts (I'm not challenging your statement; I'm riffing off of it because it made me think...)

RPGs can be played entirely without the performance aspect, entirely in direct statements in the 3rd person or even second person ("you see him ...").

I've run games for tables that saw the game as a detailed minis wargame... and almost entirely in 3rd person.

For me, the defining part is the intent to form a story by play of the game. I'm almost as happy when it's all 3rd person as when it's all 1st person provided an interesting story results.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[pemerton]

That said, yes, TTRPGs can be played without performance, in the same way that a novel can be written without punctuation, or a dramatic movie can cast only terrible actors. That doesn't mean that a person would reasonably say that punctuation isn't reasonably important to writing, or that acting isn't reasonably important to film.

You seem fairly outraged by my posts in this thread, but I didn't compare anyone's game to movies with terrible actors or unpunctuated writing.

Which appears to be what you're doing here.

What makes a movie with terrible acting suck is that a movie is, to a significant extent, constituted by its acting. But what about RPGing demands thespianism?

I'm playing my character. I'm exploring the tower of the mysterious, probably sinister, possibly deceased great master Evard. And in a chamber I find old letters which seem to have been written by my mother as a child, acknolwedging Evard as her father. What do I do?

That situation is intense because of the pressure it puts on me as my character. I don't need to enjoy someone else performing the tension (through acting, lighting, staging) - I'm experiencing it! I don't need the GM to persuade me that I should care about this situation - I bring that with me in my conception of, and play of, my character!

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Imaro]

I'm playing my character. I'm exploring the tower of the mysterious, probably sinister, possibly deceased great master Evard. And in a chamber I find old letters which seem to have been written by my mother as a child, acknolwedging Evard as her father. What do I do?

That situation is intense because of the pressure it puts on me as my character. I don't need to enjoy someone else performing the tension (through acting, lighting, staging) - I'm experiencing it! I don't need the GM to persuade me that I should care about this situation - I bring that with me in my conception of, and play of, my character!

Question... Do you agree that for others the delivery of this information would be paramount to the intensity they feel around it or whether they even feel inclined to engage with it? You're extrapolating what is intrinsic for YOU to participate in/enjoy a rpg... but without acting, lighting, staging, description, etc... the game wouldn't even grab the interest others who play... for them this is intrinsic to the expereince of a roleplaying game. I can honestly say I would have never continued playing rpg's if my first DM had relayed only the absolute minimum of necessary information in a monotone voice with no theatrics. For me, at least a minimum of that is necessary for a roleplaying game.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You seem fairly outraged by my posts in this thread, but I didn't compare anyone's game to movies with terrible actors or unpunctuated writing.

Which appears to be what you're doing here.

What makes a movie with terrible acting suck is that a movie is, to a significant extent, constituted by its acting. But what about RPGing demands thespianism?

I'm playing my character. I'm exploring the tower of the mysterious, probably sinister, possibly deceased great master Evard. And in a chamber I find old letters which seem to have been written by my mother as a child, acknolwedging Evard as her father. What do I do?

That situation is intense because of the pressure it puts on me as my character. I don't need to enjoy someone else performing the tension (through acting, lighting, staging) - I'm experiencing it! I don't need the GM to persuade me that I should care about this situation - I bring that with me in my conception of, and play of, my character!

And you don't need to act it well to enjoy yourself. I think half the fun of roleplaying comes from speaking in character but I don't think it needs to be done with the charisma of a professional actor. As long as you and the group are feeling it, it is fine. For me the game is all about immersion into a character and I lean toward first person style gaming. Sometimes when people bring too much acting chops to that, it makes it more about them than the character and what is going on (at least for me). I know a few people who can pull that off well, while also helping bring the group together. But I also have met players who just use it to turn the spotlight on them.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Question... Do you agree that for others the delivery of this information would be paramount to the intensity they feel around it or whether they even feel inclined to engage with it? You're extrapolating what is intrinsic for YOU to participate in/enjoy a rpg... but without acting, lighting, staging, description, etc... the game wouldn't even grab the interest others who play... for them this is intrinsic to the expereince of a roleplaying game. I can honestly say I would have never continued playing rpg's if my first DM had relayed only the absolute minimum of necessary information in a monotone voice with no theatrics. For me, at least a minimum of that is necessary for a roleplaying game.

I don't know Pemerton's answer, but mine is it isn't so much the delivery as whether there is enthusiasm behind it. I want the GM and the players to be interested and invested. If some can deliver lines well, that is great. But I don't want to be in a group of improv actors.