Is RPGing a *literary* endeavour?

[Bedrockgames]

(You understand that some of us don't appreciate comments like, oh, that "genre" stuff isn't literary, or that there is some "hack" quality to it- I thought this was ended no later than the 1950s, man, at least with Cahiers Du Cinema (Hitchcock?) and our ability to understand that literary quality isn't confined to high art, and that today's low art is tomorrow's high art. I mean- that's they type of comment used to keep the preferences of nerds like us in the shadows for so long. It's terrible that we see it parroted here.

I read primary genre stuff these days. While some genre works rise to the level of literature, there is also a lot of schlock. Just being a genre trope doesn't make it part of a literary endeavor, just as if I write a pulp novel about sexy vampires solving murder mysteries in Detroit, that doesn't mean it is literature. It certainly could be. If I were talented enough to elevate that premise and execute it well. But it also could be, and most likely is, just going to a be a schlocky vampire story.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Maybe, maybe not... but it certainly can be the deciding factor on whether the players choose to interact with said situation... and thus whether said content ever gets to be a part of the game.

Of course, but I don't think the literary quality matters as much as the GM fairly trying to communicate with the players and the players making a solid effort to engage with the GM. I really think, if you observe how most groups interact, you hear a conversation.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Imaro]

I don't think that's the same as saying presentation can't matter, but I don't think it's what is most important.

All most/all of us on the other side are saying is that it matters... Just because something is a core aspect of something doesn't mean it's the most important aspect of something. Headlights in modern times are a core component of a car... I wouldn't say they are the most important though.

 

[Imaro]

Of course, but I don't think the literary quality matters as much as the GM fairly trying to communicate with the players and the players making a solid effort to engage with the GM. I really think, if you observe how most groups interact, you hear a conversation.

But no one is arguing how much it does or doesn't matter... only that it does matter. That it is a core component of playing an rpg... not THE core component of playing.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Generally speaking, we don't hold folks to literary standards when speaking to each other in that capacity.

I don't think that's the same as saying presentation can't matter, but I don't think it's what is most important.

And again this is key. The reason books as a medium have a higher standard than talking face to face, or at least one important reason, is the writer only has one shot to convey what he or she means, because a novel is a one-way form of communication (you can't ask the author for clarification while you are reading unless you have them there). Roleplaying games are a totally different medium, based on people interacting and conversing. You don't need strong literary style descriptions (or descriptions that adhere to good writing style advice) because it is so easy to ask the GM 'when you say big; how big exactly is it?. Half the fun is asking questions like that (for me at least). Sure the GM may just say 'there are 13 kobolds on the hill'. And that might not impress someone like Hussar. For me, that is really all I need to start asking relevant questions to help me build both a fleshed out sense of the world and to know what kinds of meaningful choices and options might be present for me. I really don't care if the GM describes a kobold in vidid detail or mentions a lingering odor that is particularly evacuate. In all honesty those are not the things that will pull me into the setting as much as the interaction between what the GM establishes and the conversation for clarity that follows.

 

[Bedrockgames]

But no one is arguing how much it does or doesn't matter... only that it does matter. That it is a core component of playing an rpg... not THE core component of playing.

I don't think the literary quality matters all that much at all. Certainly not enough for me to lose sleep over if someone thinks my descriptions, my writing, or my speaking style isn't sufficiently literary. And certainly not enough for me to label a core feature of play. As a player I am not looking for literary stylings either. It can be a part of play. Doesn't have to be.

I think the conversation has largely played out. You think it is important. I think it isn't. We both have our reasons. We've both stated them again and again. I don't think we are going to persuade one another. It is just an honest disagreement over what gaming is about.

 

[Bedrockgames]

All most/all of us on the other side are saying is that it matters... Just because something is a core aspect of something doesn't mean it's the most important aspect of something. Headlights in modern times are a core component of a car... I wouldn't say they are the most important though.

You can't safely drive without headlights at night. They are essential to driving if you want to drive safely. I can easily run a campaign without using literary level descriptions of things and instead just having a basic conversation with my players.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Bedrockgames]

.... and .... what if you are playing a game other than D&D?

What if you are playing, say, Call of Cthulhu (Horror)?

What if you are playing Paranoia (Humor)?

What if you are playing Amber?

Why do you think that the quality of your narration, and the improv qualities your questioning has, aren't an issue of presentation? Do you believe that interactive media can't be art? Do you think that it is impossible for a videogame to be literary?

For that matter, why do you think it is appropriate to remove conversations or interaction from the realm of the evocative and literary?


...Finally, why do you think that your style (we will call it Hemmingway-esque) is both devoid of presentation, and also the default standard that other people play to in other RPGs?




EDIT- In case you aren't picking up on it, I do disagree with you. But, for the sake of argument, a person could say that, for example, "literary" isn't a core component of books .... because no one is forcing a book to be "quality."

That's just not an argument I would want to make. You can make any argument by defining things, but in the end, many of us enjoy quality- and if your quality in your conversation, more power to you.

There are way too many questions to answer here. I will try to give a general response instead. With games like Cthulu, or say Ravenloft (which I just ran more often so am more familiar with), I think stuff like narrating evocatively, adhering to good rules of writing while talking, etc are not that important. I used to feel that way. I followed that horror gaming advice to the letter. But I realized the things that really matter are more specific to how conversations and human interaction operate, rather than how literature does. You can occasionally draw on things that work in literature that also happen to work in games. That is fine. But using literature as your model...I think that leads to problems. And I think the atmosphere of a horror game has much more to do with what is going on than with how you present it (again though, I can do really over the top things to undermine it, but I just don't think doing things like talking in a whisper or getting all vincent price helps as much as it hurts). I just see it more as facilitating a discussion and in recent years I have been a lot less precious in my approach to play as a GM.

I will try to address some of the other questions in a separate post