RPG Play Style Model (Cinematic, Tactical, etc)

[M.T. Black]

When Matt Colville announced he was creating a fantasy RPG that was "cinematic" and "tactical," I immediately wondered what a "non-cinematic" and "non-tactical" RPG would look like. I've been playing around with a four quadrant graph to try and model this sort of play style, and here's what I've come up with. It seems to be that Tactical ultimately describes how conflict is resolved, while Cinematic describes how the ongoing game narrative unfolds.

Anyway, your comments and suggestions are very welcome.

 

[darjr]

I think tactical largely means a grid with game artifacts that primarily change things on that grid and placement is highly important.

I think the opposite of that is pure theater of the mind with game artifacts that primarily change objects and character perspectives annd feelings and placement almost doesn’t matter.

I think cinematic means, “like the movies”. Or more precisely like action movies. Leaning towards Crouching Tiger and John Wick.

The opposite being more like Arrival and Interstellar or The Green Knight.

Maybe.

 

[Lanefan]

"Non-cinematic" might somewhat equate to "realist", perhaps.

 

[Wolfpack48]

You can still describe tactical combat (or any action, really) in a dramatic, cinematic voice. The referee and players can add a lot of flair to nearly any system, it doesn’t need to be embedded in the system itself.

 

[darjr]

You can still describe tactical combat in a dramatic cinematic voice. The referee can add a lot of flair to nearly any system, it doesn’t need to be embedded in the system itself.

True. But the point was to have the “system” be tactical.

 

[Wolfpack48]

I like the range of realist vs cinematic. One is focused on what is realistically possible (and rules for such) and the other allows for more “amazing” feats (go wild within reason).

I do like the narrative structure scales - those make sense.

 

[Anon Adderlan]

So how does this ontology help us design/define games? Can you provide an example for each?

 

[overgeeked]

I would also push back against the idea that cinematic and emergent are opposites. Emergent play is the opposite of railroading. I’d also +1 the proper pairing of opposites as realism/realistic vs cinematic.

 

[Celebrim]

I have hard preferences here not just in RPGs but in other forms of narrative mediums. Basically, if your dramatic action isn't also your tactical action, then you are doing it wrong. And if your cinematic narrative doesn't feel like it naturally emerged, then you are doing it wrong.

 

[M.T. Black]

I would also push back against the idea that cinematic and emergent are opposites. Emergent play is the opposite of railroading. I’d also +1 the proper pairing of opposites as realism/realistic vs cinematic.

Cinematic can be used in a lot of different ways. To my mind, a narrative structure is cinematic when it is scripted and moves you from one big beat to another in a serial manner, like a movie does. The emergent narrative structure gives players choices around how the narrative unfolds, and tends to allow exploration of the game world.

I'm not much of a fan of the "railroad" terminology because it is usually used in such a pejorative manner. Did you see this blog post by Travis Miller, by any chance? “Sandbox vs. Railroad” Is a False Dichotomy