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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gradine" data-source="post: 7476412" data-attributes="member: 57112">Story games, at least those in which players inhabit and act out the actions of their characters, are role-playing games. There are some story games in which who and how many how many of the players have full narrative control is a little (to a lot) less defined, but if you're trying to get me to accept a definition of role-playing game that doesn't include, say, Dresden Files, then I'm afraid you've lost me.And here the onetruewayism rears its ugly head yet again. I appreciate that there are plenty of people who don't care about the storytelling aspects of D&D as a system or any particular campaign in specific. What you are failing to appreciate is that this does not match the experience of everyone who plays D&D; for many people, the idea of collaborative storytelling is the entire appeal of D&D. And while we can have an amusing if utterly pointless argument over the "intention" behind systems and whether some systems serve different functions better (obviously, if I am entertaining the idea that there is even a worthwhile distinction between storytelling games and role-playing games, which I'm not at all sold in, I can agree that there are games and even fantasy games that are better suited towards collaborative storytelling than the current iteration of D&D), and the reason it would be pointless is because we are talking about Dungeons & Dragons, that great progenitor wyrm, with its reputation of being "all things to all people". While there are many great games well-suited to many different styles and aesthetics of gameplay, D&D is still the One Game to Rule Them All. It is the Gateway Game. This is why it's "all things to all people"; because for many people it's the first (and only) RPG, and they've used it to fulfill whatever sort of ends they've needed to.That said, I don't need to even really debate the philosophy of play aesthetics or the semantics of telling a story versus playing a role, and how the two relate differently to games in general or D&D in specific. I need only crack open the Preface to the 5th Edition Player's Handbook, and let Mike Mearls finish. I'll bold the relevant sections.D&D may or may not fit any individual's definition of what a "storytelling game" is in relation to a "roleplaying game" (and again, I question the value of such a distinction), but what is not in debate, at all, is the fact that D&D is game about telling stories. The idea that "the story is, at best, incidental to the role-playing" in D&D, as a universal generalization, is demonstrably false. It may not be necessary for you, or the people you play with, and that's totally fine. But you don't have any authority to decide what D&D is or is not, and therefore dictate who is or is not playing the wrong. I don't think anybody has the right to claim that authority. Certainly the person who could come closest to is Mearls, and judging by his preface to the game I daresay he would disagree with you on this particular point.</blockquote>

Verification