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

[MoogleEmpMog]

Just a few thoughts regarding the growth of games such as WoW vs. the decline of table top games:

The fundamental differenced between CRPGs (massive or not) and table top rpgs is that of pacing. Computer games will never be able to adjust pacing on the fly to keep the interest of players. Never. It isn't a computable problem. At best you might be able to set some sort of interest measures along with some sort of narrative generation to heuristically alter the flow of game-time, but it will always be weaker than the table-top version, since computers are notoriously bad at detecting player boredom

This is what table top games should be emphasizing: teaching gm's how to on-the-fly alter the narrative flow (time granularity, etc.) as the players gain or lose interest; providing support for quick changes in narrative flow (i.e. quickly resolved rules for when players are bored, detailed rules for when players appear intensely engages, etc.). I should be able to quickly and easily convert a mook into a boss, and vice versa.

Everything else will be evenetually duplicated by CRPGs. This includes story, tactical challenge, avatar advancement, socialization, even player empowerment re: setting, persistence.... The only thing a computer cannot and will never be able to do is to look you in the eye and decide to hurry up the description of a journey from Random-Rpg-Town to Random-Rpg-dungeon.

Whether or not this distinction will be sufficient to maintaining a viable rpg market will be determined in time (I certainly can't speak to the facts on that).

Actually, I think that's one of the EASIEST things for a computer, or at least a game, to do. Not to decide the pacing for you, but to let you decide it.

Might and Magic games have been doing this since the late '80s, courtesy of the town portal and Lloyd's beacon spells. Final Fantasy games have been doing it since the introduction of the airship.

By contrast, player created content that is as EASY to implement as it is in a tabletop game will be a huge design hurdle, one that may not be overcome in our lifetimes.

 

[Glyfair]

This is what table top games should be emphasizing: teaching gm's how to on-the-fly alter the narrative flow (time granularity, etc.) as the players gain or lose interest; providing support for quick changes in narrative flow (i.e. quickly resolved rules for when players are bored, detailed rules for when players appear intensely engages, etc.). I should be able to quickly and easily convert a mook into a boss, and vice versa.

In don't feel this should be the thing you want to push to differentiate RPGs from online games. The problem is that only good or better GMs will be able to handle this well. Even with a game designed to make it easier, it requires skill and experience. Pushing a game based on something that only a fraction of GMs will do well is a mistake, in my opinion.

Even Ryan has been pushing in the direction of taking much of the responsibility of running a good game off the GMs shoulders in this series. On flaw of the current game is that the GM has so much of the weight of the game on him that the game's success requires access to something they have little control over, great GMs.

That doesn't mean that having these tools isn't a worthwhile feature of a roleplaying game I agree that it would be.

 

[subrosas]

Actually, I think that's one of the EASIEST things for a computer, or at least a game, to do. Not to decide the pacing for you, but to let you decide it.

Might and Magic games have been doing this since the late '80s, courtesy of the town portal and Lloyd's beacon spells. Final Fantasy games have been doing it since the introduction of the airship.

By contrast, player created content that is as EASY to implement as it is in a tabletop game will be a huge design hurdle, one that may not be overcome in our lifetimes.

There is a world of difference between a VCR looking you in the eye, realizing that you are bored, and finding a way to spice up or speed up the story and you hitting a fast forward button.

Likewise there is a world of difference between having WowW altering how long it takes to walk from Mulgore to Durotar for an individual based on how much interest you show on your face and providing flight paths as a device to speed travel.

Think about it.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

There is a world of difference between a VCR looking you in the eye, realizing that you are bored, and finding a way to spice up or speed up the story and you hitting a fast forward button.

Likewise there is a world of difference between having WowW altering how long it takes to walk from Mulgore to Durotar for an individual based on how much interest you show on your face and providing flight paths as a device to speed travel.

Think about it.

Yes.

One is subject to the whim of an individual who may misinterpret my expression and fast-forward through something I was interested in because I just bit down on a bad snack.

The other is under my control and will never, ever get wrong what I want to do.

Lloyd's Beacon > GM Fiat.

 

[NemesisDragon]

dito lol (sorry for a useless post, somehow i got posted in the wrong thread, sorry guys )

 

[Korgoth]

On flaw of the current game is that the GM has so much of the weight of the game on him that the game's success requires access to something they have little control over, great GMs.

That's one of the game's greatest assets... it's not a flaw at all. The game is as good or as bad as the DM.

If he's really good, then the game surpasses expectations. If he's bad... well that's a self-correcting problem.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

That's one of the game's greatest assets... it's not a flaw at all. The game is as good or as bad as the DM.

If he's really good, then the game surpasses expectations. If he's bad... well that's a self-correcting problem.

In that you... either happen to have another great GM waiting in the wings, or you don't game?

How is it an ASSET that a bad GM can ruin a session?

 

[subrosas]

Yes.

One is subject to the whim of an individual who may misinterpret my expression and fast-forward through something I was interested in because I just bit down on a bad snack.

The other is under my control and will never, ever get wrong what I want to do.

Lloyd's Beacon > GM Fiat.

<Shrug /> It doesn't matter if you or I like it or not. At the end of the day the difference between rpg's and crpg's will come down to the ability to on-the-fly alter narrative flow and the granularity of the story. It's not accidental that all the examples you've provided deal with travel. In a table top rpg we can hurry through battles and linger over a conversation, or vice versa. Where's the Lloyd's Beacon for a diplomatic dinner in WoW? Or a zepplin that will hurry us through a boring battle in EQ?

My argument wasn't that this is the best quality of table top RPGs, just that in the long run it will be the primary distinctive quality.

 

[Korgoth]

In that you... either happen to have another great GM waiting in the wings, or you don't game?

How is it an ASSET that a bad GM can ruin a session?

No matter what rules or business models anybody adopts, nothing will change the fact that roleplaying games are played in and DMed by human beings.

An irritating human can even ruin the fun of a game of Chess. Every option beyond that limited set that you add which increases the game's "possibility horizon" amplifies the effects of the human element. For example, the guy that takes forever to take his turn, or who hums tunelessly while you're taking yours, or who throws a fit when things go against him, or who eats nachos and makes a mess out of the components, or ... you get the idea.

In D&D, the brilliance of a game session can go beyond the potential of the written rules to express the brilliance of the individuals who are playing. As a game of the imagination, it can go far beyond the letter of the written rule. This open-ended nature allows for imagination, creativity, vision, knowledge and even common sense to supplement the rules and create an infinitely more complex play experience.

The "human element" is what makes D&D great.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

<Shrug /> It doesn't matter if you or I like it or not. At the end of the day the difference between rpg's and crpg's will come down to the ability to on-the-fly alter narrative flow and the granularity of the story. It's not accidental that all the examples you've provided deal with travel. In a table top rpg we can hurry through battles and linger over a conversation, or vice versa. Where's the Lloyd's Beacon for a diplomatic dinner in WoW? Or a zepplin that will hurry us through a boring battle in EQ?

In WoW or EQ, I have no idea. Such games hold no appeal to me.

In Final Fantasy, however, a) is covered by hitting the start button and b) is covered by using a GameShark code. Not that I want to skip either in a game I like, but if I did, I'd have the options.

My argument wasn't that this is the best quality of table top RPGs, just that in the long run it will be the primary distinctive quality.

I disagree. User created content, including on the fly, is more likely to remain the primary distinction.