Narrative aspects of D&D(3e)

[Alnag]

I think, there is one big narrative element and that is the change of a common folk into mythical heroes. That is something the myths are usually about. And the levels really do this job. So I believe that this is narrative element in D&D.

 

[Ourph]

Wut he said.

Just as another point though, is permanent death more or less likely in other editions really? I know that in 1e, my characters died fairly regularly, but, we had such a mountain of cash, getting raised was never really a problem. Heck, we had nothing better to do with that money.

I do recall rods of resurrection featuring in more than one old school module as well.

IME this is true, although if you go strictly by the book (random generation of magic items and treasure hauls found in published modules) your character was much more likely to be revived as the result of a Wish than by any other spell or magic item. This is confirmed by many of the recountings of early participants in the Lake Geneva campaign as well. Wishes seemed to be quite common as a reward (and quite necessary as a strategic tool for overcoming otherwise insurmountable obstacles).

To address the OP, I think many of the new character classes (Sorcerer, Warlock, etc.) which provide suggested origins for a character's powers (dragon heritage, demonic heritage) contribute to the narrative aspect of the game (if the players choose to use them).

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I think, there is one big narrative element and that is the change of a common folk into mythical heroes. That is something the myths are usually about. And the levels really do this job. So I believe that this is narrative element in D&D.

I would argue that this is neither something myths are usually about (indeed, I can't actually think of a single example from Chinese, Egyptian, Greek or Norse myth, those being the ones I'm most familiar with), nor something D&D actually models.

D&D player characters are already well above the norm at first level - they have heroic classes, the elite array (often better, with high point buys and various rolling systems), and max hp at first level. It's just that when it comes to basic skills, D&D characters (PC or NPC) are really, really incompetent.

(Saga, incidentally, corrects the latter; a 1st level nonheroic character can have a +12 or +13 bonus to a skill.)

 

[fusangite]

Hmm. At first blush, it strikes me that most of the character creation/developing options don't really encourage a narrative style.

Terms like "narrative" and "narrativism" are often bandied-about by gamers with little shared idea as to what they mean. Before I respond, I would like to get a sense of what you mean.

Sometimes "narrative" means that players can act of plot unmediated by the actions of their characters. Sometimes it means that the GM can subsume all play within a totalizing general storyline out of which the players cannot break through their characters' actions. Given that these two definitions are essentially opposites, I really need clarification before responding.

 

[Alnag]

I would argue that this is neither something myths are usually about (indeed, I can't actually think of a single example from Chinese, Egyptian, Greek or Norse myth, those being the ones I'm most familiar with), nor something D&D actually models.

I would recommend reading Campbell's The Hero of Thousand Faces, for what I speak about is the monomyth. Which is something you will in lot of forms found in any culture. Now, I don't argue, the myth D&D produce is its own version nor that it is just a shadow of actual myth. But nevertheless, this is a narrative method.

D&D player characters are already well above the norm at first level - they have heroic classes, the elite array (often better, with high point buys and various rolling systems), and max hp at first level. It's just that when it comes to basic skills, D&D characters (PC or NPC) are really, really incompetent.

Sure. They are above the norm. But the hero in myth is always above the norm. He just does not know it yet. And he will grow and cross the tresholds one by one... I belive this is hidden narrative element of D&D, which is just missed for it is not proclaimed to by "narrative". Because it is also a simple method of rewarding and also something which is usually disputed etc. But I believe it is acutually a tool with more than one use...

EDIT: Oh and BTW: Intressting work on Narrative in D&D and other RPGs you can find here: http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/theses/available/etd-03262005-191219/unrestricted/etd.pdf But be warned, because that is not that "new-speak RPG Theory" but plain old science!

 

[TerraDave]

KM's points 1) & 3) above really hold for all editions, and 2) kinda does, but they do distinguish D&D from other games.

In terms of narative:

If its backstory, the challenge is to get it to actually match the charecter, and not just come from the players, er, lets call it imagination.

If its identification and investment in the charecter, D&D does this in spades. Though for some other games that in other ways have more "narative", like CoC, you actually don't want to identify with the charecter too much, cause you won't be playing him that long.

If its the "story" created by the game, this just depends, but remember its a team effort, charecter becoming to focused on what makes themselves special will actually undermine the collective narrative cranked out by game play.

If its some forge/rpg.net/story teller concept, nah, D&D doesn't really fit, but who cares?

 

[Alnag]

If its some forge/rpg.net/story teller concept, nah, D&D doesn't really fit, but who cares?

If it should be the last one, I must admit, that I would be really happy, that D&D doesn't fit. Call me traditionalist, but I somehow can not chew these so called nar. games. They don't work for me.

 

[maddman75]

To me, narrative means the game facilitates the creation of a good story. Not in the forge sense, I usually avoid the term to avoid confusion.


A story has a beginning, middle, and an end. It is focused on the actions of one or more characters. Thus, pretty much all RPG games ever played create stories. 3e doesn't care about this structure, at all. In fact it is actively hostile to it. The default assumptions of the game include a spacial base of character actions rather than scene based, making it harder to set up introductions, rising actions, and climax, the concept that the game will continue until it is time to quit then pick up again at the same spot, regardless of the actual flow of the game. The players have no metagame mechanics to influence random outcomes, the only type of script immunity lies in the hands of the DM. The combat system strongly rewards tactical play, so that doing a tactically unwise thing if it makes for good story is likely to not only hurt your character, but the character of everyone around you.

D&D is great at archetypes and tactical combat. If you want something else, use a game that's good at something else.

 

[RFisher]

What do I mean by "narrative"?

Well, I could say that Kamikaze should tell us since I'm building off of his statement. I don't know that I want to limit the discussion in that way though. Defining it yourself for your own response works for me.

I think for me--in this context--it's about "making decisions based on game mechanics" v. "making decisions based on developing a story". Which I guess does kind of tie into the threefold model more than I'd realized. (At least the original. I haven't kept up with how the Forge crowd has further developed it.)

I think for me, giving me more game mechanics tends to make me make decisions based more on mechanics rather than roleplaying/building a narrative. Even the flaws-for-feats or traits kind of mechanics from UA. Sure, I come up with narrative rationalizations, but it tends to be my mechanical choices shaping the narrative rather than my narrative choices shaping the mechanical choices.

 

[buzz]

I think for me--in this context--it's about "making decisions based on game mechanics" v. "making decisions based on developing a story".

To give you a totally Forge-y answer (not that I am a spokesman by any means), you're presuming that the former can't be the same as the latter. The spiffy thing about Nar games and System Does Matter is that you can have games where a mechanical decision does in deed drive "story", in the premise-addressing, thematic sense.

D&D, by the RAW, doesn't really have any rules that directly address the story/premise stuff that GNS-Nar is concerned with. The only variants I can think of that touch upon this are the Hero Points from Monte Cook's AE, which are basically "This next action is important to me and I want it to happen pretty much exactly as I narrate it" points. There are also things like the Sweet20 Keys, which modify the XP system to reward PC goals rather than monster-hunting.

However, I'd say that there are lots of D&D bits that support GNS-Sim, i.e., mechanics that are tied into setting elements (like PrCs). Those are essentially "what the character would do" kind of decisions.