Telling a Story vs. Having Fun

[wingsandsword]

Okay,

Last night at a cookout, some gaming friends were in a routine discussion about campaigns they were in and gaming in general. A non-gamer heard these and was intrigued by the whole idea and wanted to know more, so, one person decided to take it upon himself to explain gaming to this non-gamer.

The person giving the explanation was a big White Wolf fan, and started to give, what was honestly, a very skewed view of the gaming world, heavily tilted in favor of White Wolf being the only good rules system, the World of Darkness being the only good setting, and WW in general good way of gaming. I stood by, interjecting clarifications (and occasional bickering when the clarifications were disputed), trying to let this potential gamer get a second opinion. This potential gamer was listening to both of us, and did make it clear she was interested in my side of things.

Well, after correcting some blatant revisionist history (like his claim that White Wolf invited the role-playing game in 1991, and before that it was just "miniatures wargames like D&D"), he got down to saying what the game is all about.

He insisted that the whole point of the game is for the GM (or of course, "storyteller") to tell a story as a work of art. The game exists for the GM to execute a form of performance art by directing a grand story which the players take part in and perform their own dramatic acting as a part of the story that is being told to them. It's not about having fun (that's childish), it's about good acting and a story that is fine art.

Hmm, I decide to pipe up and say that some people play for fun. Roleplaying is part of that fun, pretending to be somebody else, pretending to be somewhere else, and so is the mock combat of RPG battles, to some people fun is detailed tactics (miniatures and tactics were a constant source of derision in the speech), and what is important is that everybody enjoyed themselves, since it's a hobby we do for fun.

I realize that this might make for a somewhat loaded poll question, since I know my own opinion here is pretty clear, but I thought it might make for a nice discussion point: Is it really about fun, or is it about the overall story?

 

[Tsillanabor]

It can certainly create a shared cooperatively written story, but when the Storyteller/DM/whatever treats his players as actors in a story he alone is writing games tend to go downhill.

 

[Hussar]

Any story that comes from gaming should come AFTER the game is finished. Not before. Sorry, unless your last name rhymes with apes peer, I am not interested in playing in your story.

 

[librarius_arcana]

I can't have one without the other, they both come as a package

a game without a story would be retarded, and no fun at all

true some stories can be grimm but it can still be fun,

but how the crap could you play a rpg without some sort of story for the characters to get involed in?

 

[Deuce Traveler]

I chose story, but it was a hard choice. I picked story since I remember the games I played in that made me feel my character was a participant in a great story. Other games that became more goofy and lacked a plotline were great fun, but I find it harder to remember their details.

Still, you can't really have one without the other.

 

[Mark Hope]

Fun, first and foremost. If you aren't having fun, why on earth keep doing it? Bizarre.

Like Hussar says, story is what happens when the protagonists take action. The DM designs a compelling scenario, interesting and engaging hooks and NPCs and an entertaining milieu. The players interact with this through their characters. Story is the result.

There are many kinds of gaming, all hopefully fun to one person or another. Story makes for fun gaming, but not all fun gaming need have story.

 

[Melan]

See my sig!

 

[shilsen]

Fun. Which sometimes (but not always) comes from creating/experiencing an interesting story.

 

[Nifft]

I'd vote "Yes", but there is no such option.

Without a story TO START WITH, the PCs will have nothing to do. (If there's no conflict, there's no plot to discover and stop.)

-- N

 

[Psion]

I realize that this might make for a somewhat loaded poll question,

So much so I won't be answering it...

Hmm, I decide to pipe up and say that some people play for fun. Roleplaying is part of that fun, pretending to be somebody else, pretending to be somewhere else, and so is the mock combat of RPG battles, to some people fun is detailed tactics (miniatures and tactics were a constant source of derision in the speech), and what is important is that everybody enjoyed themselves, since it's a hobby we do for fun.

And this is why I think your poll question is wrong. Different people enjoy different things, therefore what contributes to fun is different for different people.

I think my Robin-Laws signature should spell out the things I enjoy in gaming.