Ryan Dancey on Redefining the Hobby (Updated: time elements in a storytelling game)

[MerricB]

Instead of "storytelling game" I suggest "adventure game." That sounds cooler and covers more groups...those that like to tell stories about adventures and those that like to smash things on adventures. Everyone likes adventures, except Hobbits.

I prefer that term too. The existence of the "Storyteller System" also causes problems with calling the genre Storytelling Games.

Cheers!

 

[Zaruthustran]

The absolute hatred of "story" among many at this site is fine, it's opinions after all, but to insist it can't be financially successful is to ignore the success of White Wolf, which very explicitly is about telling stories, even going so far as to rename RPG elements in line with that: Storyteller, Chronicle, etc.

If "story" doesn't work for you, fine. But you are not the market. None of us is, whatever we like or don't like.

Whoa, whoa. White Wolf's Vampire game was very much a superhero game. It had a very cool setting, sure. But the mechanics were 100% "power up and smash". People hitting each other with manhole covers or hurled automobiles. "Soaking" a clip's worth of bullets. Punching someone through a wall, having a garou tear off an arm, and so on. Nature and Demeanor weren't really used that often, and many (most) games encourage players to pick behavioral traits anyway.

Just saying that WW's storyteller system, well, wasn't a system that--from a systems/mechanic standpoint--did all that much to encourage or enable storytelling.

 

[Shawn_Kehoe]

I prefer that term too. The existence of the "Storyteller System" also causes problems with calling the genre Storytelling Games.

Cheers!

ESPECIALLY since they rebooted the line back in 2004, when the "Storyteller System" was replaced by the "Storytelling System"

 

[Lanefan]

Holy exploding thread, Batman! That's a lot of reading!

D+D needs at least *some* amount of story to make it playable...if only to give a rationale for going on to the next dungeon after finishing the last one...and this is usually (but not always) supplied by the DM. However, any DM worth her-his salt has to be able to hit the curveball and allow the players to take the story in different directions...to me this goes without saying, but from things I've read here and elsewhere some DMs can't hit anything, never mind a well-placed nasty curve.

Should the game morph so as to *revolve* around the story? Though I think story should get a bit more mention in the core rules, this proposed morph might be overkill. Also, if you have the dream situation of 5 or 6 or 7 player/DMs all very and equally creative and imaginitive, I can just see the result: "My story next!" "No, *my* story!" That said, having not DMed 3e I can't say I'm in any great hurry to try, given what I've heard about the work involved; reducing that would be a good step.

D+D also needs at least *some* amount of rules to make it playable. 0-1e probably didn't have enough. 2e maybe had enough but they weren't very good. 3e has too many. A few more editions and with luck they'll find the bullseye!

I also agree with those above who have said the 3e core books are just a little too dry and textbook-like. Love them or hate them, Gary Gygax's quirky turns of phrase gave the game flavour and atmosphere it just doesn't have now.

As for sales numbers, I cannot for the life of me understand why direct collateral sales (dice, mini's, etc.) aren't counted in the sales figures. They sure as hell count in my purchase figures!

Lanefan

 

[Toben the Many]

I'll tell you exactly what the problem is with RPGs. I speak as a "power gamer" that does not play WoW or MMORPGs.

In fact I think the "trend" of power gamers leaving tabletop for WoW is overrated.

I think this is an excellent point. While there are certainly people who are leaving D&D for World of Warcraft and etc...not everyone will. More importantly, I'm not convinced that a vast majority of power gamers will.

For me, my skepticism comes with the massive time sink it takes to get into an MMORPG. I know, I know. You can schedule a weekly game with your buddies on the old WoW server. However, I know very few people who are willing or capable of doing that. Usually, one person in the group is home sick from work for a day, levels up and then everyone scrambles to catch up...and all of the sudden your "we'll only play on Thursdays" vow goes right out the window.

More importantly, the stats don't reflect this. The average WoW player plays for 17 hours a week. What if I don't have that much time? How can I get my fix? Gee, there's this game called D&D and I only need to play it for 4 hours a week to get my fix.

As of late, I've seen many MMORPG players coming back to the table after getting over their addicition.

 

[Toben the Many]

Going back to the Original Post, however....

We can talk about the state of the industry all we want or TRPGs vs. MMORPGs. It's all been said before.

Ryan Dancey makes some intriguing points. Basically, what if D&D were more like Warhammer Quest or Arkham Horror?

Both of these board games are cooperative and require no DM. Yet, in Arkham Horror, the game very much follows the "plot" of a Cthulu Adventure. The players can decide upon the main villain or threat, or it may be chosen randomly. Then, various encounters are decided upon by cards being drawn. As the players progress through the story, they find clues, put them together, and shut down gates to other dimensions. There is rising action as the Elder God in the scenario grows closer to coming to earth. Warhammer Quest follows the outline of a basic dungeon crawl, complete with an end room featuring a final boss and mounds of treasure.

Either of these formats would only need a slight push to turn them into full-blown communal storytelling type games.

My only problem with such a proposal is how NPCs would be handled. For example, if you head into a tavern and decide to talk to the barkeep, who plays the barkeep? One of the players? This to me, presents more problems than one of having a bad DM. Because it now requires all of the players to be really good roleplayers. In a typical D&D game, if the DM is at least halfway descent at roleplaying, and most of the players are not...the game can still cost along fairly well.

In a true DM-less game, there really is no roleplaying, because the DM's role is determined by random card draws or chart consulting. The players might have to convince a barkeep of something, but that barkeep is merely stats on a card, and the player needs to make a role to convince him. The idea of taking on a "role" is absent, because there is no one to reflect or respond with the player.

Anyone want to tackle this? In a true DM-less game, how do you handle NPCs?

 

[SHARK]

I'll tell you exactly what the problem is with RPGs. I speak as a "power gamer" that does not play WoW or MMORPGs.

In fact I think the "trend" of power gamers leaving tabletop for WoW is overrated. Most of my tabletop group used to play WoW a lot! Hours every night. Now, most of them have cancelled their WoW accounts and show no inclination of going back. Why? Because they have been there. Done that. They have done every quest. Hit max level with multiple character classes. There is just nothing there for them anymore. Now they are all playing LotR online, and when they get tired of that they will quit that and move on. However, our multiple D&D games involving these players are going strong. We have to turn players away in fact.

What keeps them interested in D&D? Its simple, its the fact that there is no computer imposed limit on their character or the things they can do. There is no "grinding" for levels, no raids that become little more than an excersize in resource management.

In my experience D&D is fun because you get to hang out with your friends in person. No MMORPG can match this. Ever.

D&D is also fun because you have a personal investment in a character that is often an integral part of a campaign. If your character is part of killing a big bad, then he stays dead. It is not instanced ad infinitum for a thousand other players. This ability to make unique and persistent changes to the campaign is one advantage of TRPGs that MMORPGs by their very nature cannot match.

Likewise, I can make any character I want. I can do anything I want. No computer arbiter can ever match face time with a human DM. Just not going to happen.

So in a nutshell, I see the following pros to tabletop:

1) Freedom of action
2) Unique and persistent world experience
3) Face time with your friends

I see the following cons to tabletop:

1) Bad DMs can create an inconsistent play experience or impose artificial rules restrictions
2) complex calculations or resource management can take extra time when done manually
3) lack of graphical appeal

For MMORPG's I see the following pros:

1) neutral computer arbiter ensures a consistent experience and speeds up play
2) graphical appeal
3) can play any time and stop any time

I see the following cons:

1) You can't really play with your friends, unless everyone gets their computers together in the same room and on the same LAN
2) Your experience is neither unique nor persistent. No matter what quests you have done, what items your character has, or what class abilities you choose as you level up. Guaranteed that 100 other players out there have the same abilities and stats as you, and guaranteed that thousands of other players have all done the same quests and garnered the same items.
3) You can't really do whatever you want, you are confined to the limits of game engine.

In a nutshell, I think the cons of tabletop play can be mitigated or reduced, whereas the cons of MMORPG's cannot be due to their very nature. Likewise, many of the advantages of MMORPGs can be incorporated into the table top experience. The threads on using projectors and the NWN engine to make a graphically beautiful dungeon effectively eliminates the graphical appeal problem. Likewise, the dungeon tiles provided by WotC and Paizo also help in that regard.

DM consistency is a tough issue to tackle but a lot of it can be mitigated by making the DMs job easier. Reworking high level play so that power gamers feel that they have gotten more powerful, but also providing more tools to the GM, like quick and easy NPC generators to allow them to come up with equal challenges in seconds or minutes instead of hours.

Likewise, I think treatises on high level adventure design and how to work with instead of nerfing high level PC abilities is much needed. One big problem with high level play is the burden placed on the DM. Most DMs avoid it altogether because it is such a burden. This leads only to player frustration and is a major reason why so-called "power gamers" migrate to MMORPGs in the first place!!

Greetings!

Outstanding points, Dragonblade! Just excellent, my friend! I would add a few additional comments.

(1) Time Laborious: WOTC fumbled a glorious opportunity with E-Tools. That, right there--was a salient opportunity to revolutionize the hobby. Not so much to make it into a video-game; but rather, they could have established a robust and powerful software program that could grow with the DM and needs of the campaign; and take care of 90% of the math, tables, research, and configuring that DM's need to do to make not only a game session and module fly, but also a campaign to get off the ground and really soar.

So many people complain of the time constraints, of making up characters, npc's, monsters, etc, etc. All of that could have been taken care of by WOTC. Instead...we got E-Tools, and then...*nothing*. That coup alone could have juiced the hobby like little else.

Why?

Because in one mighty swoop, DMing would become far easier, and far less time consuming.

This then, would have allowed it to develop that it would be much easier to gain and interest more people into DMing--which increases the hobby.

In addition, with so much more time on the hands of the average DM, I submit that you could also see a significant increase in their skill/plot/character/campaign development abilities, which in turn translates into MORE FUN for the players; which in turn contributes to a stronger, healthier hobby.

Instead, they choked. They had the money. They had the prestige. They had the talent pool, and the resources.

And they CHOKED!!!!!

Much to the chagrin and disappointment of many, many people.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[pawsplay]

D&D cannot compete with this, no way. D&D needs to be whatever the players and DMs want it to be, but officially WoTC needs to play to the strengths of the game ie. the social element, the playing of a role and the potential to have an immersive experience in a world of infinite possibiliy. If one is going for the thrill of the kill, cool magical effects, great visuals and a more superficial experience, CRPGs beat D&D any day.

Sure, if you want to play a wizard that looks like a quarterback in a dress. Or you like watching gnomes run by going "choo choo!" and doing the locomation. Or if you really get a sense of heroic adventure by CaptainCrunch announcing "xp 2 low, loot sux" after you nail a difficult boss. Or you are forced to discard the coolest looking armor because no one will group with you unless you wear the Ugly Gray Breastplate of Plusses to Everything.

 

[JustinA]

The goal of most of the people in the hobby is not “play a role”. The goal of the hobby community is “tell a great story”. Roleplaying is a tactic, not a strategy. Some participants want to play roles, and that’s fine. Others want to provide narrative structure. Still others want to create systems for interaction and adjudication. And another group wants to generate environments. All of these people need to be made co-equal for the hobby to succeed long term.

Therefore, I think we need to engage in metamorphosis from “roleplaying games” to “storytelling games”. And in that change lies the seeds of our success.

Didn't we already have this revolution? Did Mark Rein*Hagen hack Dancey's blog or something?

Dude....I have not met anyone who buys or uses Mongoose products in 2 years. That may just be my area, but from conversations on ENW and CM, I believe you're smoking crack.

Mongoose appears to be the new Palladium: Online communities are filled with people who swear they've never seen a Mongoose gamer, and yet Mongoose is -- almost without a doubt -- the most successful company to emerge in this industry in the last decade. They run dozens of profitable game lines, and continue to expand their range of offerings at a rapid pace. And they're doing all this during a time period when most of the industry is in a period of severe retreat.

I, personally, haven't seen anything to convince me that they've meaningfully improved their offerings from the early days of the D20 license when they churned out virtually unedited schlock as fast as they could secure time on the printing presses. I consider their success to be predicated entirely on clever branding and saturation distribution of mediocrity. More recently they seem to have extended this strategy by securing popular, well-recognized licenses and then using those licenses to continue churning out their mediocrity.

Although, like a stopped clock, they're right some of the time: Amidst all the garbage I've seen from them, they've had a few really good Mike Mearls supplements, for example. On the other extreme, though, this is the company that produced a first edition of the Conan RPG so dreadful that it was completely unusable. But its a testament to their channeling of P.T. Barnum that they managed a customer relations coup by offering anyone who bought the flawed first edition the "unbeatable" opportunity to buy a copy of the second edition at the same price point that they would sell the books to their distributors (in other words, at a price point that guaranteed them full profits from the second edition). And they were widely thanked throughout the many fan forums for their generosity!

(I wish I could convince my customers to buy a pre-alpha copy of a product at full price and then buy a copy of the final release all over again at full price. And thank me for the privilege.)

But, as much as I may look at the quality of their offerings with askance, there's no questioning their success.

And let me be honest: As much as I may mutter under my breath about the failures I see in Mongoose as a company, I'm taking notes on what leads to their success.

My hat's off to Matt and everybody at Mongoose. Bravo and keep up the good work. (And hire an editor. )

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net

 

[pawsplay]

In my view, the beauty of RPGs is that when the Joker faces Batman, there is a real possibility of the Batman getting killed. Is that a "great story?" Or how about Legolas getting critted by an unnamed Harad?