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

[soviet]

The example wasn't about the GM deciding a Thing must Happen. It was about a player deciding A Thing Must Happen, which is an act of agency but it trades later agency not just once, but continuously until The Thing Happens.

By way of example, let's say you want to play The Princess Bride as an adventure. If you are playing Indigo, backstory is saying you will hunt down the 6 Fingered Man to get revenge, and the GM promises to include the 6 Fingered Man for you. Great! But if the player says, "And I have to have a duel with him where I almost lose but eventually my resolve wins out" that is pre-writing a thing that should happen naturally in play.

Is this something that happens? Are there games that make this happen?

 

[Umbran]

That's certainly your perogative. Personally I really don't like events set up ahead of time like that. Bugs the heck out of me.

Sure. That's fine. You get to play as you want.

 

[Piperken]

...Where do you stand? What is your preference when it comes to TTRPG play and story?

At my table recently, I had a player who for lack of better phrasing, has some friction in the campaign. That is, they had a character who's personality clashes some what with the party.

e.g. They want to set fire to things (tm).

Trying to steal loot for themselves (often, right in front of others).

Gain leverage on a simp or peon if it seemed feasible.

Attempting to convince their party members to make the choice that is probably, less ideal, more selfish, etc. etc.

At one point, I did have a conversation with them out of the game just to check in?

I explained that if they really desired to do those kinds of things, it was doable, but they had to bear in mind that if they weren't careful, the consequences as a result of getting caught and convicted were quite high.

On top of that, if the party were to discover they were responsible, it wouldn't go over very well.

After which, I did offer them an opportunity to do an undertaking which would involve those kinds of things mentioned above.

I ended up homebrewing a short, personal side mission (they decided to take one other member of the party with them) that yes, involved the potential of setting something on fire. There were also a couple hooks I added that tie into the main campaign, that they are now pursuing.

Anyways, their character got to set something on fire, and nearly succumbed to poison (stupid trap!).

 

[Deset Gled]

If a player comes to me, and says, "Look, I've got this nemesis, and I think it would be really cool if we have a confrontation and plummet from the top of Reichenbach Falls...," far be it from me to demand that can only happen by the roll of the dice.

Just as an author may occasionally discard the rules of grammar for effect, so can gamers. I'm fine with sticking to the rules most of the time, but those rules are my servants, not my master, and I'm okay with occasionally deviating from them.

And that's before we consider games that explicitly allow for player agency manifesting in similar ways.

For me, the big question is: What about the other players?

IMNSHO, it's fine if this is just a cutscene that goes by quickly (~5 minutes or less?) where someone is giving backstory, background, updates on things that happen out of sight, whatever. That's fine. Narrate it. Or even better, just give it out as text between sessions. In any case, move on to the story people are allowed to play as quickly as possible.

But if this is supposed to be a combat everyone actually plays out, then it can be a major problem. It means every other player is just an NPC. They're not allowed to try to assist and succeed. If you tell me this is going to happen before a battle starts, why should I even bother rolling initiative? I might as well sit out of the gaming session. OTOH, if you don't tell me about this ahead of time (and I find out), I'm also going to be upset. Do I get back every hitpoint, every spell slot, and every piece of meta-currency, and the time that I wasted? How often can you pull this as a DM before the players stop caring?

That's one of the issues with story based games that are also multi-player games. One player's "narrative based play" can become another player's railroad. It's not just a DM-to-player issue, it's a player-to-player issue.

Why, yes, I have had to quit games before because one player had major main-character-syndrome and the DM played into it. Why do you ask?

 

[TiQuinn]

Maybe it's just because of the way I grew up, but I don't see a huge amount of difference between a Fighting Fantasy or Choose Your Own Adventure book and TTRPGs. There are, obviously, differences in terms of the amount of freedom you have as a player of the latter, but I've always looked at it as playing a part in a particular story that I'm shaping.

 

[Reynard]

Is this something that happens? Are there games that make this happen?

There are people advocating for it in this very thread.

 

[Reynard]

Maybe it's just because of the way I grew up, but I don't see a huge amount of difference between a Fighting Fantasy or Choose Your Own Adventure book and TTRPGs.

This

There are, obviously, differences in terms of the amount of freedom you have as a player of the latter, but I've always looked at it as playing a part in a particular story that I'm shaping.

Does not square with this.

I mean, you admitted the difference in Agency. THAT is the difference. A fighting fantasy book is more akin to.a CRPG.

 

[TwoSix]

There are people advocating for it in this very thread.

There's a big difference between giving agency towards what kind of scene will be presented versus how the scene will be resolved. Many games and playstyles give the former, far less the latter.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There's a big difference between giving agency towards what kind of scene will be presented versus how the scene will be resolved. Many games and playstyles give the former, far less the latter.

They both involve giving the player influence over the game in play beyond their PCs, so neither work for my interests.

 

[pemerton]

I believe this is true even in more narrative or "story"-based games, like Fate, Quest, PbtA, Sorcerer or what have you. These games often have an element of collaborative story-telling

There's no "collaborative storytelling" in Sorcerer or Apocalypse World, if played in the way the rulebooks set out.

For instance, from AW (p 109 of the original rulebook):

Apocalypse World divvies the conversation up in a strict and pretty traditional way. The players’ job is to say what their characters say and undertake to do, first and exclusively; to say what their characters think, feel and remember, also exclusively; and to answer your questions about their characters’ lives and surroundings. Your job as MC is to say everything else: everything about the world, and what everyone in the whole damned world says and does except the players’ characters.​

There's also this, on p 113:

• Ask provocative questions and build on the answers. Start simple: “What’s your living space like?” “Who’s known each other longest?” But as play proceeds, ask for immediate and intimate details of the characters’ experiences. . . . ask questions like “Why can you only fit two people in the cabin of the Tank?” “How do the people of the Tent City make you feel?” “How do her lips feel under your palm?” Very good stuff.

Once you have the player’s answer, build on it. I mean three things by that: (1) barf apocalyptica upon it, by adding details and imagery of your own; (2) refer to it later in play, bringing it back into currency; and (3) use it to inform your own developing apocalyptic aesthetic, incorporating it - and more importantly, its implications - into your own vision.

It’s especially important to ask, the first time each character opens her brain to the world’s psychic maelstrom, what that’s like for her. Maybe it’s the same for everybody, maybe it’s different. And after the first time, always, always add details of your own.​

It's nevertheless the case that the play of these games will reliably produce something like a story, in the sense that it will have protagonists in some sort of conflict, with rising action and climax/resolution. But that's not because of any "collaborative storytelling". That's because of the rules for (i) framing of scenes/situations, and (ii) resolution of declared actions.