Storytelling Games

[Tinker Gnome]

I have noticed some threads(okay, maybe just one) talking about whether a game is an RPG or a Storytelling game. I am having trouble myself telling the difference between the two. The only main difference I can think of is that in Storytelling games the players and GM (Or Storyteller?) have agreed upon a set plot. Now, I could be completely wrong on this one. I am wondering what an RPG game would be called if the GM let the players do what they wanted to, whether it be following his or her plothooks, or going off and creating their own goals, but the GM never killed any PCs. Would that be a Storytelling game? Or an RPG?

And what about the role of randomness in both? I know that there is lots of freeform RPGing on the net, but would that more appropriately be called a Storytelling game? Do things like dice rolls ultimately matter in a Storytelling game?

I am not familiar with any of White Wolf's Storytelling games, so I do not know how they are like.

 

[Crothian]

Terms like these are so universally ill fully defined that it really makes discussions like this hard. I think these games focus on the over all story and that can take precedence over individuals, but I'm sure other people think differently.

I don't see White Wolf's Storytelling system to be any more of a Storytelling game then D&D or M&M or GURPS or other mainstream games. It's really the group that emphasizes how the game is going to be played more so then the game.

What I think of when I hear Storytelling game though is something like Baron Munchhausen which is not really an RPG in my mind and more of a fun game to sit around the table and tell stories with your friends under their rules. Once Upon a Time is like that as well and it certainly is no RPG.

 

[Janx]

from the 1 time I played Vampire, my impression of the "Storyteller" rules is that they're just rules for conflict resolution, no different than D&D. The system places an emphasis on telling a story and setting and mood and such, but that's not tightly bound into the rules. You could follow the same style in D&D/d20 (as Monte Cook's d20 World of Darkness demonstrates).

As for telling a story, I don't advocate running some tight rigid script. I simply advocate that the GM can make a story out of how he uses those elements in a game. It's flavoring.

Instead of the PCs wandering around killing evil monsters and taking their stuff, they are attacking Lord Evil's monster minions and taking their stuff. Lord Evil used to be Lord Passe, but he changed his name and turned to wearing black when the party thwarted his plans to become sherriff by taking the job for themselves.

the key difference? The use of cause and effect, and motivation and continuity. Defining WHY the NPCs do things, and giving motivation for the PCs to react to it generates a story.

You can still run a hack-n-slash game. I just prefer it to make sense and have some value in the retelling.

 

[maddman75]

Its part of a move to make games that aren't old school dungeon-bashing 'not count' as RPGs. Don't worry about it - it generally means 'Games I don't like.'

 

[Umbran]

from the 1 time I played Vampire, my impression of the "Storyteller" rules is that they're just rules for conflict resolution, no different than D&D.

Well, White Wolf's system and the term as used here don't have much to do with each other.

I generally agree with Crothian that the term is ill-defined. Different people mean different things by it. In general, it refers to a game that specifically gives support to the story - so, for example, a game that gives a bonus to or awards for an action because it is cinematic or dramatically appropriate might be more "storytelling" than one that does not.

 

[Desdichado]

Strictly speaking, "storytelling games" are games that use the Storyteller system, house system of White Wolf, and the engine under the hood of such games as Vampire, Werewolf, Mage, Exalted, etc.

"Storygames" is a label I've seen pop up recently. Honestly, I've only ever seen it used by sandbox One True Way prophets as an attempt to denigrate other playstyles by creating a separate label for them which is different from "true roleplaying games." At least until very recently. I'm not sure that the label as such dignifies usage. However, I've also seen this usage just in the last month or two start to get used straight, as a legitimate label. I'm still not 100% sure what is meant by the term in this case, though, so you're not on very firm footing if you want to go off and start calling someone's game a "storygame."

 

[Raven Crowking]

There is no real difference, AFAICT. Hobo's sniping aside.

Both have a framework, and both have a system of task resolution to determine the elements of story that are in doubt (i.e., the victory conditions). The major difference seems to be confusion over whether or not a task resolution system exists, or victory conditions exist, or whether doubt over outcome exists, all of which seems odd (to me, anyway) as they are prominent in the sample game I have examined. Indeed, they are prominent in any game I have ever examined, from the relatively simple Snakes & Ladders to the most complex RPG.

Some games allow a greater leeway for players to shape the framework, the victory conditions, and other story elements. However, all games rely upon players using whatever means are at their disposal to shift themselves toward victory, in some cases while shifting others toward victory as well (as in a cooperative game), and in some cases while shifting others away from victory (as in a competitive game).

Such leeway does allow for exploration of themes and adventure motiffs that might be difficult to pull off in a game like D&D. However, the idea that the outcome as relates to the victory conditions is already known is, IMHO, obviously false and is the source of confusion.

YMMV.


RC

 

[Desdichado]

I'm not sniping, I'm accurately describing the evolution of the term from my perspective. I first saw it about a year ago in a thread on another messageboard which turned into a complete dogpile in short order because the person trying to coin the term had an elitist "only sandbox OD&D is actually roleplaying" attitude.

Other than that, the term had some currency at theRPGsite where RPG Pundit coined it along with his poorly formulated "SWINE theory". Until very recently, I've only seen the term storygames associated with a militant fringe OSR community that rejects any other playstyle as heretical and needing a new label so as not to sully the label of "roleplaying game" with blasphemous ideas.

For the most part, that's still where I see the term nine times out of ten, but in very recent months, it's finally apparently gained some traction as a legitimate label. I'm still not very clear on what it's supposed to mean, though.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Then I apologize for leaping to conclusions. The other person on the other messageboard was obviously wrong.

Role-playing does not have to involve a game, and therefore cannot be limited by type of game. Any sort of resolution engine, intended to resolve any set of victory conditions along any type of theme, is a game. It is almost inconcievable that there is a limitation on the variations of role-playing games possible! So long as both "role-playing" and "game" exist within a given variation, it is a role-playing game.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I agree with Crothian. Once Upon A Time and Baron Munchausen are storytelling games but not roleplaying games, because the players don't play a character, they tell a story.

White Wolf games have rules that are essentially the same as those of most rpgs, they attempt to model real life (at varying degrees of abstraction) with some fantastical elements such as vampires. The 'storytelling' in the Storyteller System isn't actually in the system, it's outside the rules, in the advice given to the GM.

Then there are what one might call 'story' or 'narrativist' games. Examples include Prince Valiant and My Life With Master. These games are different from White Wolf because the rules are primarily focused not on simulating what would happen, but on creating a story.

However, imo, these story games are still roleplaying games. The participants still control a character, even if that character is used not to find out what would happen if he were real, but to tell a story.

The other big reason, for me, that they are roleplaying games is - that's what they are called by most people. I have a massive reluctance to go redefining terms that are in common usage as this greatly hinders communication. Communication on the internet is difficult enough without deliberately obfuscating matters.