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

[Manbearcat]

I'm not sure if I care as much about stated preference as revealed preference-- I think everyone likes to see themselves as above it in a way that makes it less helpful when examining the space in a meaningful way, but I also don't know that I really have an impression of where you personally fall, so if you're looking to lock horns on that as some specific point of etiquette or identity, I don't think I can really help you.

Definitely not interested in locking horns.

I rarely ever engage in meta-conversations. I find them tedious and worse than useless (because they distract from actual analysis of play and related). But here I just wanted to register the disagreement with the framing that I saw in your posts. The first one which I replied to looked to me to be putting the onus on folks to "walk their System Matters talk" (which doesn't fold in the dynamics that my reply lamented). The second one looked to be a kind of "adherents of a movement" are at fault and "everyone is a culture warrior engaged in equal culture war dysfunction" equivalency.

You and I don't engage with each other a whole lot, but I've generally enjoyed your contributions to the threads I've been in. So I figured I'd just try to explain how I very much disagree with that framing of things so, if we engage in the future (in this thread or elsewhere), you at least know where I'm coming from with respect to that framing.

All good. That's all I've got on the subject. If you reply, I'll just hit you with an xp to let you know I read it.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Definitely not interested in locking horns.

I rarely ever engage in meta-conversations. I find them tedious and worse than useless (because they distract from actual analysis of play and related). But here I just wanted to register the disagreement with the framing that I saw in your posts. The first one which I replied to looked to me to be putting the onus on folks to "walk their System Matters talk" (which doesn't fold in the dynamics that my reply lamented). The second one looked to be a kind of "adherents of a movement" are at fault and "everyone is a culture warrior engaged in equal culture war dysfunction" equivalency.

You and I don't engage with each other a whole lot, but I've generally enjoyed your contributions to the threads I've been in. So I figured I'd just try to explain how I very much disagree with that framing of things so, if we engage in the future (in this thread or elsewhere), you at least know where I'm coming from with respect to that framing.

All good. That's all I've got on the subject. If you reply, I'll just hit you with an xp to let you know I read it.

Yeah appreciated, I remember seeing you around in a bunch of threads but didn't have you pinned down in any particular way an generally enjoy your contributions from what I remember?

My focus on system here partially comes from watching Chronicles of Darkness break down for my group because of the juxtaposition between highly specific time based activities with mechanical rewards and implications, and a highly narrative way of framing the passage of time for things like investigations or jumping time between scenes that didn't cohere for my group who aren't used to, nor like the idea of 'holding back' on leveraging those mechanics to their logical conclusions. That seemed highly similar to me to the way FFG star wars juxtaposes it's equipment and granular combat with narrative consequence mechanics, in terms of where OP's player isn't seeing them eye to eye.

Separately, in addition to reading The Elusive Shift recently and using it to contextualize Ron Edward's essays, my impression of movements comes heavily from my background in literature, where one generally reads movements as rejections or developments on previous movements-- one might heavily read the Romantics and the Modernists as in contention for instance in how they approach values like spirituality or history, or how one contrasts different forms of post war literature (the Inklings for a fantasy relevant example, present an interesting contrast to some of their literary contemporaries who were also informed by the World Wars.)

But for me it validates the involved movements, even as it constrains them, they are products of a particular context and so they aren't "the truth" in the way they were intended to be and will be rejected in turn, but simultaneously that rejection doesn't have exclusive purview over them, they can be enjoyed in the same way people still enjoy romantics and modernists both. The key though, is that they don't get along all that well because they are responses to one another, or different answers to the same questions, and that perspective sort of highlights those points of collision for me, particularly since the medium is young enough that there's still a fair amount of vigor for "solving roleplaying."

 

[payn]

I haven’t played the FFG Star Wars games, but it seems weird to have a bunch of detailed gear stuff and not actually incorporate it (and gear progression) into the game. I don’t know whether that’s a design whiff or if the OP wants to run a game that’s a bit different from what the designers intended. It’s okay to tweak a game, but discussing that’s (again) a session zero thing to make sure everyone understands.

Maybe Im reading things that are not there? I;ve seen a few folks pushing back on the OP for not allowing stuff collection in a game that has a lot of stuff. Though, I think the intention was to convince the player that the game has more than a singular purpose of collecting stuff.

 

[Micah Sweet]

OP's player isn't physically present on enworld, but their positions are present in the ideological scope of the thread and represent what OP is challenging, so some people are speaking up as a proxy for them.

That's why I got involved. There's no rule that demands everyone here be a proponent of narrative play (or even comfortable with it).

 

[kigmatzomat]

Part of the disconnect is probably about the nature of the challenge and not the language used.

When people are hoping to level up and get better gear, it’s to better face the challenges that already exist. There is a belief or hope that the world “is” and that they need to be ready for it in contrast to “we will make a good story together” and I will just throttle up or down so it looks good.

This. Right here. It actually causes a visceral negative reaction. Making it "look good" feels like the worst kind of dishonesty. If failure isn't an option, nothing has any weight. Its like the Star Trek film where Shatner leaves the rift because he realizes there's no risk, no consequence, no reality.

It's like being trapped in an art film that Hugh Grant passed on. It's The Truman Show where Truman sees behind the curtain and happily goes back in front of the cameras. It's putting on a Sartre play with no audience on purpose.

I get that some people enjoy it and I am glad I now adequately grok the term "Narrative Style" so I don't have to waste anyone's time being "that guy" in a narrative game before dropping out.

 

[hawkeyefan]

That's why I got involved. There's no rule that demands everyone here be a proponent of narrative play (or even comfortable with it).

No, of course there's no rule about that. People are free to like what they like, and to dislike what they dislike.

But what advice would you offer @innerdude ? What conversations or comparisons or examples have helped you have a better understanding of the kind of play he's talking about?

I mean... here's a chance to help a fellow poster on this site, and some folks seem more interested in trying to help a player they'll never meet or interact with.

This. Right here. It actually causes a visceral negative reaction. Making it "look good" feels like the worst kind of dishonesty. If failure isn't an option, nothing has any weight. Its like the Star Trek film where Shatner leaves the rift because he realizes there's no risk, no consequence, no reality.

It's like being trapped in an art film that Hugh Grant passed on. It's The Truman Show where Truman sees behind the curtain and happily goes back in front of the cameras. It's putting on a Sartre play with no audience on purpose.

I get that some people enjoy it and I am glad I now adequately grok the term "Narrative Style" so I don't have to waste anyone's time being "that guy" in a narrative game before dropping out.

No offense to @Warpiglet-7 , but I don't think that's an accurate take on this style of play. It can very much be about challenge. It's not about dialing things up or down as needed, or failure not being an option, or "making it look good".

There's a difference between not preparing the bulk of play ahead of time and not caring about or being able to create challenging play.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, of course there's no rule about that. People are free to like what they like, and to dislike what they dislike.

But what advice would you offer @innerdude ? What conversations or comparisons or examples have helped you have a better understanding of the kind of play he's talking about?

I mean... here's a chance to help a fellow poster on this site, and some folks seem more interested in trying to help a player they'll never meet or interact with.



No offense to @Warpiglet-7 , but I don't think that's an accurate take on this style of play. It can very much be about challenge. It's not about dialing things up or down as needed, or failure not being an option, or "making it look good".

There's a difference between not preparing the bulk of play ahead of time and not caring about or being able to create challenging play.

My concern was that the player, who clearly seemed to think they were playing their character reasonably, actually wanted to play the narrative game @innerdude wanted to run. As has been said, the player isn't here, and thier perspective is important to consider. I'm also not the only person in the thread who thinks so.

 

[kenada]

Maybe Im reading things that are not there? I;ve seen a few folks pushing back on the OP for not allowing stuff collection in a game that has a lot of stuff. Though, I think the intention was to convince the player that the game has more than a singular purpose of collecting stuff.

I haven’t read the whole thread, so I’m not familiar with all the pushback. My point is if the game is about X (insert jargon for X here), but it provides Y and Z that don’t really (or always) go with X, then it seems a little weird. I’m looking at it from a “how is this put together perspective”.

I don’t think the OP is wrong for wanting to run the game he is, but keeping the gear stuff as-is seems to have caused some confusion regarding what the game is about. Having a conversation about it (as the OP did) is one way to address the issue. Others include replacing it with an automatic progression (or thematically-tied progression) or just dropping it.

 

[hawkeyefan]

My concern was that the player, who clearly seemed to think they were playing their character reasonably, actually wanted to play the narrative game @innerdude wanted to run. As has been said, the player isn't here, and thier perspective is important to consider. I'm also not the only person in the thread who thinks so.

Yes, I get that. My point is that I think that concern is misplaced, since only one of those two people is actually here and asking for help.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, I get that. My point is that I think that concern is misplaced, since only one of those two people is actually here and asking for help.

You don't it's helpful to consider the possibility that the player, once they understand what the OP means by narrative play, might simply not be interested in giving up the kind of play they're used to entirely? If the situation was reversed and I was trying to explain my playstyle to a player that was playing a different way than I want in my campaign I would certainly want to keep that idea in mind.