Trying to Describe "Narrative-Style Gameplay" to a Current Player in Real-World Terms

[billd91]

The way I see it, there isn’t just a trad/narrative conflict, but an outright genre conflict. You want to play Star Wars while he wants to play murder hobo D&D. Now, there are Star Wars variations more focused on eking out a living by making a score and being on the hook in debt (Edge of the Empire). But even then, the theme is managing the debt more than scavenging up personal upgrades.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

To quote Kingpin, "It's not always about the money, Spiderman."

"IT'S ABOUT THE METS BABY OH YEAH LOVE THE METS"

 

[dbm]

I had a similar thing running Firefly a few years back. The party were in a saloon on some planet and a fist-fight started. One of the players reached for his gun to open fire because “that’s the highest attack skill I have” but I stopped the scene and explained that ‘bar brawls and fist fights are a genre staple’ for western-style games like Firefly. When you watch a bar fight in Firefly, even Jane doesn’t reach for his gun and he’s the gun-bunny in the group.

My player got it, and the game went on to be more evocative of the feel of Firefly the TV series.

So, while ‘wanting to get better stuff’ might be a reasonable in-genre motivation for a PC, the method of getting it through looting most certainly is not. If the PC wants cash, he should be looking for high-pay-out deals with crime lords…

 

[payn]

Obviously not quoted word-for-word, but the substance is mostly there, I hope. But I'm curious if others out there might have approached this conversation differently, even if (or perhaps especially if) the game in question isn't Star Wars: Edge of the Empire.

I've had this conversation a few times myself. Im gearing up for a Traveller game that is launching on Sunday. I've been having a lot of talks with my group about Traveller's flatter progression and lack of body looting need. My experiences are that the flatter progression actually catches on pretty quickly for a lot of folks and they break the D&D loot and power template. However, usually there is at least one person who just sees gaming as collecting powerful stuff and gaining powerful abilities. We even see 5E's move away from loot importance as an irritation amongst some in the community.

I dont have nearly the irritation to game jargon that a lot of folks seem to have. What I do have is an understanding that only about 10% of gamers care enough about gaming to actual learn and make jargon up to explain it. So, yes, naturally its not going to be helpful to shout trad, OC, story game at people if they dont know what you are talking about. I spend a good deal of time with folks not familiar with my style explaining how I envision play. I usually do this with a lot of examples of situations from past games to illustrate how it worked for player and GM so the players can get the gist of what im expecting.

One other thing that has occurred to me over time is my focus on character in gaming. I dont tend to form an idea of what type of character ill be playing is at the beginning. I've found having an archetype like Solo's hard to be a saint in the city reluctant hero bit hard to bring to life. You need to have the right intuition of when its time to be a scoundrel and when its time to be the unlikely hero. An RPG isnt like a fictional story in that the moments are custom tailored for the characters as they need to be. So, its always felt a bit backwards to me to try and do that in an RPG thats less predictable and static. Thats before even mentioning that multiple other players are also trying to character arch at the same time often in disparate ways. I tend to start blank slate and let the game progression take me were it organically goes.

The point of all this, is that players have different styles and expectations. Its pretty rare that everybody will be on the same page. TTRPG gaming is often an exercise in compromise amongst the group. The big question is how far a bridge do you need to build to make it work. There is a point too far I think where it just doesnt work. I think your conversation was fine, but there is also going to be a certain amount of just doing it at the table. You will find out eventually if you can provide the type of game the player finds satrisfying. You might not, and dems da breaks. Just be cool about it if it happens there is no right or wrong way to do this, just a preferred way for each person.

 

[Emerikol]

I don't know the right way to communicate player preferences but we need something. We should desire players and DMs get together with similar goals. Total newbs can of course try out a variety of things. I think they should because some try roleplaying don't like it and quit without ever having tried another variation on it.

I think for experienced players, who really love a certain style, playing other styles is just unsatisfying. That is not true for experienced players who like a variety of styles.

I'm not a story game type guy. I know you all are shocked. There are a few narrative games like Monte Cooke's cyber system that I don't see myself ever liking. A game like Fate though could be brought back away from narrativism with some tweaks. I like systems I admit. At any given time, I am working on a D&D clone and another totally different game as a side hobby. It's fun to think about such things.

I don't like plot coupons so that would be the thing in Fate I'd have to strip out somehow. I don't mind rulings vs rules though in the right context. So I could see myself liking more than one game. I do like C&C for simple D&D. I like core 3e for complex D&D. Pathfinder just gives us too much of a good thing. I like Fate but with my adjustments.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

A big part of what you're running into is that your players (and honestly, most players in the greater context of the hobby, as far as I've ever been able to tell) prefer to roleplay by being aligned with the character emotionally-- Han never meant to get caught up in the story of star wars, he did want to do his smuggler thing, and your players want to feel that fantasy, the one that Star Wars references but doesn't depict because the almighty plot swooped in, they want to start from that context.

They might be willing to do a Star Wars plot, but they want to start from the position of Han Solo and what he wants at the beginning of the story and develop into it organically by existing within the context of the universe-- and the context of the universe is the lore of Star Wars, rather than the plot structure of the movies.

The goal of 'getting better stuff' is a place where their character's interest aligns with something that means something to them personally, because they can feel 'better stuff' in their ability to solve problems like 'those stromtroopers over there' in the same way that Han can feel the way making upgrades to millenium falcon or picking up a new model of blaster can help him get out of trouble, even if the movie doesn't focus on that.

If they get involved in A New Hope, they want it to be because they too, wanted what Obi-Wan was paying to pay off their debt to Jabba the Hutt, the debt they incurred to get something cool, and then meet the princess and the jedi and decide they don't want to abandon these people, even once they get the chance. They want to feel like Han Solo, not George Lucas, and you're asking them to feel like George Lucas-- someone who is interested in Han Solo's life only insofar as it gets him into the plot.

 

[GobHag]

As someone who's a George Lucas but loves progression, my own personal take is that I want it to feel a good change in power and capabilities over time.

Also because I don't care about the fictional world, I respect it ofc, but It's a polite respect.

 

[Blue]

The real question, @innerdude (or @dbm) is how do we get into your games.

 

[Pedantic]

The goal of 'getting better stuff' is a place where their character's interest aligns with something that means something to them personally, because they can feel 'better stuff' in their ability to solve problems like 'those stromtroopers over there' in the same way that Han can feel the way making upgrades to millenium falcon or picking up a new model of blaster can help him get out of trouble, even if the movie doesn't focus on that.

I think it's worth drilling in on this, because I think it's generally too reductive to cut the player motivation down to just "get better stuff." Stuff, progression, all that is nearly always in service to other goals. Personal power is directly correlated with agency; better stuff is very rarely the end goal of what a player wants, it's a sub goal that makes them better able to consistently get whatever it is they do want, and it's universally pursuable, even if other goals aren't currently clear. Our Han may not know yet that he wants to join the rebellion, but if he was independently wealthy it would be much easier to do so, once he's decided to become a revolutionary.

If there's any progression in a system at all, and the player wants to orient themselves to align with the character's desires, then there's always a mechanical incentive to try and get better.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

@innerdude

Tough. I feel for you. I often recall what happened with me when I ran across Amber Diceless RPG the first time- I kept reading it, but I could not understand it even though I was already using some of the techniques from it. It wasn't until I just took the plunge and rand it with a group that what didn't make sense on the page to my brain actually made sense to me and the group when we did it.

In a similar vein, I have a group of older players that likes 1e and 5e. But we also do a lot of one-shot rules-lite games (think, e.g., Honey Heist). I think that trying to explain the games to them would fail, but when they play the games? All in.

IMO, one of the things to look at is if you can get the group to play a seriously narrative or rules-lite game to shock the player's normal outlook and re-orient them to a different way of looking at things.

But yeah, as we see repeatedly on these threads, explaining things to people who haven't done it is often an exercise in futility.