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

[THEMNGMNT]

In answer to the original question... I am a DM with a strong focus on narrative.

For example, I love the idea of playing in a true sandbox without a metaplot, or even a hexcrawl with procedural dungeon generation. But as a DM I bounce off it every time I try. It's like I just can't not create a big a story for my campaigns. As a player, though, I don't really need that. I'm a highly motivated player looking for adventure anywhere I can find it.

Anyway, my typical campaign goes something like this:

• I generate 2 or 3 factions.
• Each faction gets 1 or 2 main villains, a few lairs, maybe a signature magic item or ability.
• They all typically want something similar, like conquering a kingdom or getting a McGuffin.
• I outline a few steps which advance their scheme.

Then the players show up.

And all those plans go to hell.

And that's where the fun is.

 

[Reynard]

Well, on this we fundamentally disagree.

Games like Maelstrom Storytelling, HeroWars/Quest, Sorcerer, The Riddle of Steel, Burning Wheel, Apocalypse World - as well as some earlier proto-examples, like Prince Valiant and Over the Edge - make huge innovations in RPG design. The rules innovations that are found in these games are what make it possible to have RPGing that will reliably produce something like a story, without anyone having to author a story.

So what do you give up? How, for example, do those games enforce a 3/5 act structure without limiting agency?

 

[TiQuinn]

This

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.

It squares for me in that I don't see this as a zero sum question. That there is a difference is not necessarily the biggest factor. How much agency is given is more of the difference maker IMO. There are plenty of campaigns that are a lot more linear and have a structure that is not too much different in choice from a Fighting Fantasy book, particularly as that style of book got even more advanced as it went along.

 

[pemerton]

So what do you give up? How, for example, do those games enforce a 3/5 act structure without limiting agency?

None of the games that I mentioned enforce a 3/5 act structure.

As to 'what do you give up?", I don't really follow the question. They're games, they have rules.

 

[Deset Gled]

Spotlight hogging is a general issue, not narrative game specific. If you have players who don't respect the other players, that's going to be a problem whatever kind of game you are playing.

Very broadly, I agree. But I would also say it manifests differently.

In a more tactical, combat based game issues of spotlight hogging more commonly present as balance issues. In more narrative games, and in the specific example you gave, it presents as a problem of agency.

 

[John Lloyd1]

So what do you give up? How, for example, do those games enforce a 3/5 act structure without limiting agency?

Maybe we should be using a literature definition of 'story', but rather a history definition of story. I.e. connected events, etc to to create meaning.

 

[gban007]

You won't get a story out of AD&D 2nd ed, played according to the rules - that is, protagonists in a conflict with rising action, and climax/resolution - unless someone authors .

While I may agree with not getting that outcome naturally, I don't think that is only definition of story, and that you can have stories without conflict / rising action, and that dnd 2e cpuld generate those sorts of stories.

 

[Reynard]

None of the games that I mentioned enforce a 3/5 act structure.

As to 'what do you give up?", I don't really follow the question. They're games, they have rules.

Let me restate: for a game to specifically provide for telling a story in play, it must have mechanics that enforce that playstyle. What do those games do to do that? What player choices or actions are curtailed or prohibited, if any?

 

[thefutilist]

Let me restate: for a game to specifically provide for telling a story in play, it must have mechanics that enforce that playstyle. What do those games do to do that? What player choices or actions are curtailed or prohibited, if any?

At minimum you need:

Some kind of organisational question which we’re answering

The principle that you are actually playing to find out what happens as it relates to the question

Attentiveness to the ethos of the characters involved


If you strip out the GM section of GURPS 4 and replace it with those principles, you’d get story orientated play. Well ok in practice you’d need to expand on those principles and probably offer some help setting up a situation but that’s the bare minimum required to distinguish it from a GURPS sandbox.

mechanics in and of themselves do nothing. It's the organising agenda that uses the mechanics that is the thing. Which is why the agenda and principles are so important, more so than the mechanics by far,

 

[Blue]

My contention is that during the process of play, something like "experience" fits better than "story."

I see what you're saying. But I think it comes back to the fact that the players are not the characters. Yes, it's an experience, that's definitely true. But the players are expecting things beyond just an experience. You will commonly find things like a plot that makes sense, a BBEG for closure, recurring side characters (NPC), and other story elements. And the players enjoy that.

Not saying you can't run an RPG just as a sandbox hex crawl exploration that is mostly experience. But most adventures and campaigns weave story elements in because of player expectations and enjoyment. And they are enjoying them as they happen, not just in stories told afterwards. Rescuing the favored NPC from the bad guys, a classic story beat, can bring cheers around the table.

I also want to add, think about a good book made into a good movie. They aren't the same because each leverages the strengths of their medium. Same with the story from an RPG -- it doesn't have to follow a written, or oral, or movie format. You mentioned how forcing story parts mechanically can be bad, but that's like forcing a book 1:1 into a movie, where you can easily run into weaknesses of the medium. That doesn't mean it isn't a story.

Is it an experience? Yes. But that isn't something exclusive that prevents it from being a story.