Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 9507552" data-attributes="member: 70468">The stuff on games as story generators reminds me of the Story Machines series of videos.[MEDIA=youtube]WJfVUnFH6m4[/MEDIA]I think the idea of games as story generators is a good idea. Given a set of systems, the resulting play can generate a series of events that can be turned into a story. However, I balk at describing games generally as a storytelling medium because it assumes the consequent (that the story generator properties of games are why they are played), but it’s easy to find examples of games that are played for other reasons (competition, challenge, etc).Particularly in the RPG space, it’s common to find claims that RPGs are about group storytelling. I particularly dislike the claim in this space because it either uses a definition of “storytelling” that is so broad that it’s not very meaningful (that the game generates a fiction without having anything to say about authorship, audience, structure, etc), or it’s actually incorporating the speaker’s unstated biases about what constitutes correct RPG play.⁂Regarding the section on railroading, the aside about PbtA games seems unnecessary. It’s true that they focus on a specific premise (which is fine), but they’re not the only games that to do that. Fiasco was already mentioned, and once you pick a playset, play is focused on that playset. It would be difficult to completely abandon it because the structure of Fiasco is going to force you to respond to what is happening according to the playset. Another example might be journaling games like Thousand Year Old Vampire.⁂I found the use of “Playstyle Reinforcement” a bit confusing. There’s a separate pattern called “Playing Style Reinforcement” described by Adams and Dormans (in Game Mechanics: Advanced Game Design, which you introduced to me) that is about avatar customization. This usage appears to be different from that usage. Is there a better way to describe this for clarity?⁂Otherwise, I found this post helpful for understanding what you mean when you talk about “improv game”. However, I’m still not convince about treating the game as a player.You ask, “What does the Game in RPGs do, if not provide Consequences?” My answer would be: the Game provides structure and procedures of play; players provide Consequences. The Game on its own doesn’t provide Consequences because it doesn’t do anything. It’s just a text (or video or etc). Much in the way that the actors in Whose Line Is It Anyway? have to do something, the players in an RPG have to actually play the game. If the MC in Apocalypse World is not framing provocative scenes, it doesn’t matter what Baker has to say on the matter in the game’s rules.</blockquote>

Verification