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

[soviet]

Because what I am saying is that when you play an RPG, you are generating a story. That's different than trying to "play through" a story in the same way you might in a linear video game.

I don't think all RPG experiences are the same in this regard. It seems to me that you are talking about 'story now' versus 'story before'. I think you can absolutely 'play through' a story in a TTRPG in a similar way to a video game. This is exactly what modules are.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure. But then we are picking and choosing how small is still valid, and we are all going to pick differently.

Which is fine, in one sense - each of us is free to do what they want.

But, in another sense, in terms of this discussion, it leaves "when it is done" not really indicative of anything in particular, and does not enhance understanding. It really becomes, "It is a story when I say it is a story," which elucidates nothing clear about the relationship between games and stories in general. It only informs us of the speaker's preferences.

"When I say so," is also at risk of being a post hoc justification, which would make the logic circular if you use it as support for the point you want to be seen as true or correct.

All in all, it only kicks the can down the line as we ask, "Okay, so why do you say it is a story at Point B, and not Point A?"

Again, this is an opinion thread. You're not going to get definitive answers. My opinion is that nothing is a story until it's retold, and then whatever part is being retold is a story. I don't really see it as relative. A story has either been related after the fact, or it hasn't and therefore is still just a bunch of stuff that happened. The act of organizing the events, real or fictitious, into a narrative of whatever media is what makes it a story IMO.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think there’s advice in the book for the GM to turn to the players if they’re struggling with ideas. I don’t think it’s meant as standard practice, but its presence certainly implies at least a more permissive attitude toward this type of thing. Combine that with other elements… Devil’s Bargains, Flashbacks, players choosing Actions… and I can understand why some folks take a more loose approach to that kind of thing.

Personally, I don’t like the “writers’ room” label because I think there are a lot of things being overlooked.

I’ve recently started playing a game of Ironsworn. It’s me and two other players and we’re playing GMless. We figured it’d be an interesting thing to try. It’s turned out to be a lot more fun and engaging than each of us was expecting.

It involves collaboration between the three of us and some input from the different Oracles the book provides, which are random tables to help shape the fiction. Even this game, which necessarily involves collaboration, doesn’t feel like a writers’ room to me. Yes, we shape situations and we determine what NPCs may do and the consequences of actions and all that… but the system has so much say that it does not feel like things are in our control.

We’re also collectively much tougher on the PCs than any of us would be as a GM… which is kind of surprising.

What exactly makes your Ironsworn experience feel like an actual game to you? To me all that sounds like a few folks telling a story to each other. I don't see any "game" there.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't think all RPG experiences are the same in this regard. It seems to me that you are talking about 'story now' versus 'story before'. I think you can absolutely 'play through' a story in a TTRPG in a similar way to a video game. This is exactly what modules are.

Modules are a set of connected situations, usually including one recommended way those situations can be strung together into a narrative. But a series of suggestions isn't a story, because there are no characters until the game begins and no defined plot, no sequence of events that actually occurred, until after the play is over. So again, no story until afterward.

Modules are just tools to help tell a story. They're not stories themselves.

 

[soviet]

Modules are a set of connected situations, usually including one recommended way those situations can be strung together into a narrative. But a series of suggestions isn't a story, because there are no characters until the game begins and no defined plot, no sequence of events that actually occurred, until after the play is over. So again, no story until afterward.

Modules are just tools to help tell a story. They're not stories themselves.

Doesn't all of that apply to a video game?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Doesn't all of that apply to a video game?

Sure. Video games aren't stories until they're played through either, and then that particular playthrough is the story. Admittedly video games are often much more on rails, but the principle's the same.

 

[soviet]

Sure. Video games aren't stories until they're played through either, and then that particular playthrough is the story. Admittedly video games are often much more on rails, but the principle's the same.

Wait, I realise the disconnect now. I wasn't saying that a module as a published artefact is a story*. I was saying that [playing] a module can be 'playing through a [pre-cooked] story' in the same way that playing a video game is.



* Not saying it isn't either