Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[Reynard]

No, it doesn't. I have made up stories for my kids without rules. Story are inherent in how we communicate in the type of experience than an RPG engenders. A particular system may have rules for it, but not having rules does not mean it can not tell a story, just like not telling us the particular motions of the hand and wrist about how to roll a die doesn't mean it can't use dice. There are things we know and bring to it.

Also, your distinction about "in play" also is misguiding you. A great many RPGs have GM advice that includes plenty that goes along story components, and that's things you see in both long-term and session prep.

Basically I not only disagree with this but feel like the narrow focus to only in-play may blind someone to the copious amount of GM guidance in RPG rulebooks that does provide story DNA.

I think we are talking past each other and failing to use the same meaning for "story" in this context.

 

[zakael19]

This is always interesting to me, although lurking on the BITD subreddit and discord I see a lot of similar things.

The core flow of BITD, once you’ve made an engagement roll generally is:

• PC says they want to do a thing towards the score objective.
• GM checks fictional situation and says if there’s risk (if not, do it and frame the next Scene).
• if risk, player says how they do it and picks and action, avoiding being a weasel.
• P&E stuff happens (what you’ll get) here if needed (almost all the time, we move with Risky/Standard or deploy an item/ability to boost effect).
• roll the dice to see what you get and how bad the risk manifests. Resist as desired.
• GM frames a new scene showing how the fiction evolves.

As far as i remember, the only space in which the game actively suggests soliciting player input on consequences is Bargains - which is a complication that’ll happen regardless. And that’s up to the table and GM to do, I only reached out if I didn’t have a good idea in the moment because 5 minds are more creative then 1.

 

[Blue]

I think we are talking past each other and failing to use the same meaning for "story" in this context.

I'm using story in it's traditional sense. Here's from dictionary.com:

sto·ry1
/ˈstôrē/
noun
noun: story; plural noun: stories

1. an account of imaginary or real people and events told for entertainment.

I'm also referring to parts that make up stories as story DNA.

Your original post seems to use story the same way that I am. What commonly accepted, non-RPG specific meaning for the word story are you using? Because you can't claim it's not a story, and then show it by defining story in a not commonly accepted way.

 

[Reynard]

I'm using story in it's traditional sense. Here's from dictionary.com:

sto·ry1
/ˈstôrē/
noun
noun: story; plural noun: stories

1. an account of imaginary or real people and events told for entertainment.

I'm also referring to parts that make up stories as story DNA.

Your original post seems to use story the same way that I am. What commonly accepted, non-RPG specific meaning for the word story are you using?

I'll try and be concise: you cannot have a story until you have a plot, and a plot is the series of events that make up the story. Therefore, there is no story until the thing is done. After the last die is rolled, the aggregate of what happened at the table, tempered by the recollections and perceptions of the participants defines the story.

RPGs generate story, but you don't play one.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Aesthetic preferences are what they are, of course. But speaking just for myself, those moments of collaboration, where everyone is invested and participating in the fate of one character, are some of my favorite aspects of play.

But, even in trad games like D&D, I've realized over the years that I prefer playing at a bit of a remove from my character. I enjoy steering my characters into drama and conflict much more than I enjoy trying to play them "faithfully" to their concept. My goal in play is always to see my characters challenged, grow, and change.

That is not my goal, just a possible consequence of interacting in the setting as my character. My goal in play is always exploring the setting through my PC.

 

[Nytmare]

My own playstyle ranges back and forth across the spectrum, though it leans far more heavily on the "play to find out" end of things.

But I'm not opposed to pilfering the premise of a published adventure and using its plot as a springboard for possible complications.

 

[Umbran]

I'll try and be concise: you cannot have a story until you have a plot, and a plot is the series of events that make up the story. Therefore, there is no story until the thing is done.

I think you'll get a whole lot of pushback on "If it isn't complete yet, it isn't a story."
Like, is Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope not a story? Because there's an Episode V and VI. And I, II, III...

There's a new Star Wars animated series coming out next month, about Maul. Since there's still elements in the overall series of events still not detailed, is none of Star Wars a story?

That, of course, would seem ridiculous, right? So, maybe we need a better basis than "done".

 

[Fenris-77]

I think there some solid reasons why the idea that in RPG play a story is being told hangs around as it does. You have a group of people exploring a shared imaginary space and taking turns deciding (to some extent) what happens next. You also have characters (often heroes and villains no less), and even something that looks a lot like scenes that play out in linear fashion. That all looks a lot like a story. But I don't think those similarities make it so. Perhaps some of the difference might be covered by the difference between story and story telling. The latter might be closer to the truth of what happens at the table. I'll come back to that idea.

The appeal to plot, and its presence or absence often appears in these conversations. We do indeed have some types of RPG play that have a lot of 'plot' preloaded into the GMs prep, and we have others where nothing or only the faintest sketch sits premade. That suggests to me that the activity of roleplaying isn't dependent on pre-plotting (to any extent) but that the activity can support it to some extent. I say to some extent because, first, I feel it's pretty plain that in instances where the GM uses a lot of force to keep the players inside the tracks of the pre-plotted prep that the resulting gameplay is often unsatisfying for some or all of the players involved. Second, I think the sheer number of games that have been designed specifically in part to eliminate this idea of pre-prepped plot suggest that rather a lot of players don't much care for the idea. That said, it's still a very popular style of game. The important point is that while it can be used, it's not necessary.

Admittedly there is a whole lot of nuance between no-prep and massive prep. Things like fronts, or even adventure hooks, are at least plot-ish to some extent. So where does that leave us? I think that actual RPG play contains some story elements but that doesn't actually get us to 'story' proper. So RPG play might be described as similar to story-telling, but not quite the same as even there the participants in collaborative story telling are using their understanding of other stories to craft their elements in turn, but I think it's a stretch to say that RPG players are doing that same thing.

 

[Reynard]

I think there some solid reasons why the idea that in RPG play a story is being told hangs around as it does. You have a group of people exploring a shared imaginary space and taking turns deciding (to some extent) what happens next. You also have characters (often heroes and villains no less), and even something that looks a lot like scenes that play out in linear fashion. That all looks a lot like a story. But I don't think those similarities make it so. Perhaps some of the difference might be covered by the difference between story and story telling. The latter might be closer to the truth of what happens at the table. I'll come back to that idea.

The appeal to plot, and its presence or absence often appears in these conversations. We do indeed have some types of RPG play that have a lot of 'plot' preloaded into the GMs prep, and we have others where nothing or only the faintest sketch sits premade. That suggests to me that the activity of roleplaying isn't dependent on pre-plotting (to any extent) but that the activity can support it to some extent. I say to some extent because, first, I feel it's pretty plain that in instances where the GM uses a lot of force to keep the players inside the tracks of the pre-plotted prep that the resulting gameplay is often unsatisfying for some or all of the players involved. Second, I think the sheer number of games that have been designed specifically in part to eliminate this idea of pre-prepped plot suggest that rather a lot of players don't much care for the idea. That said, it's still a very popular style of game. The important point is that while it can be used, it's not necessary.

Admittedly there is a whole lot of nuance between no-prep and massive prep. Things like fronts, or even adventure hooks, are at least plot-ish to some extent. So where does that leave us? I think that actual RPG play contains some story elements but that doesn't actually get us to 'story' proper. So RPG play might be described as similar to story-telling, but not quite the same as even there the participants in collaborative story telling are using their understanding of other stories to craft their elements in turn, but I think it's a stretch to say that RPG players are doing that same thing.

This is a good post.

 

[Artamo]

I think that RPGs occupy a middle ground between story and game because the two are intertwined. The story is emerging through play, but sometimes it’s set up in advance, and sometimes it’s retroactively applied based on choices that were made during the game. I think there’s some emphasis being placed upon the completion of the story, and I’m not sure I’m comfortable with that being an important part of the definition. If a book or TV show is left incomplete, does it no longer qualify as a story? If an author leaves a story intentionally incomplete, and leaves it to the reader to make the final determination, is it not still a story?

When we play a game, we’re in the process of creating that story. I don’t know if there’s a tremendous amount of value for me to separate the act of creating a story from saying what results is a story. The similarities are greater than the differences to my mind. I don’t think there’s very many games that I’ve played where I didn’t complete the story in my mind even if it didn’t fully play out at the table, say due to a campaign that ended prematurely. I tend to imagine what the ending would’ve been and that’s enough for me.