Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 9508203" data-attributes="member: 85870">So coming back to this thread after not having had time to fully engage (work stress will do that to you).First thing, I know Emberashh has stated repeatedly that he doesn't believe that PbtA as a whole presents a viable gameplay loop for what it actually says on the box (create narrative/dramatic tension as a byproduct of play). Though oddly, I seem to recall he does like Ironsworn, which is my primary, #1 go-to PbtA-adjacent system (frankly probably my favorite system at the moment).I know Emberashh has also previously stated that attempting to create narrative-style play in RPGs goes against what RPG rule structures generally provide, which is that playing an RPG will create a &quot;story&quot; but not a &quot;narrative.&quot;Semantically I separate the two in a specific way. In fictional terms, the &quot;story&quot; is just the set of in-fiction events cognitively associated as a chronological sequence--- i.e., &quot;We did this, and then we did this, and then we did that, and finally we did this! Isn't that cool?&quot;Narrative, on the other hand, is the deeper, more resonant emotional overlay/progression/character arc that goes along with &quot;the story.&quot; Narrative is driven by an evolution of the character's emotional state / beliefs / actualization within the fiction, and that evolution can be described and qualified by a reader / player / GM who interacts within the ongoing fictional states.In Emberashh's argument, if I'm remembering correctly, attempting to initiate a narrative component during the actual play loop is impossible without resorting to some contentious/disagreeable gameplay structures, primarily railroading and general GM fiat if memory serves. That could be railroading/fiat via premise, via &quot;taking control of characters away from the players,&quot; via scene framing, via NPC reaction/interaction, etc.Per Emberashh, without those contentious gameplay elements, true character arc / emotionally driven / thematically driven elements are almost certainly not going to arise, other than retroactively as the players reflect later on the &quot;story&quot;.I have some more thoughts on how Ironsworn tries to bridge this divide, but I'll have to come back to it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 9508203, member: 85870"] So coming back to this thread after not having had time to fully engage (work stress will do that to you). First thing, I know Emberashh has stated repeatedly that he doesn't believe that PbtA as a whole presents a viable gameplay loop for what it actually says on the box (create narrative/dramatic tension as a byproduct of play). Though oddly, I seem to recall he does like [I]Ironsworn[/I], which is my primary, #1 go-to PbtA-adjacent system (frankly probably my favorite system at the moment). I know Emberashh has also previously stated that attempting to create narrative-style play in RPGs goes against what RPG rule structures generally provide, which is that playing an RPG will create a "story" but not a "narrative." Semantically I separate the two in a specific way. In fictional terms, the "story" is just the set of in-fiction events cognitively associated as a chronological sequence--- i.e., "We did this, and then we did this, and then we did that, and finally we did this! Isn't that cool?" [I]Narrative, [/I]on the other hand, is the deeper, more resonant emotional overlay/progression/character arc that goes along with "the story." Narrative is driven by an evolution of the character's emotional state / beliefs / actualization within the fiction, and that evolution can be described and qualified by a reader / player / GM who interacts within the ongoing fictional states. In Emberashh's argument, if I'm remembering correctly, attempting to initiate a [I]narrative[/I] [I]component[/I] during the actual play loop is impossible without resorting to some contentious/disagreeable gameplay structures, primarily railroading and general GM fiat if memory serves. That could be railroading/fiat via premise, via "taking control of characters away from the players," via scene framing, via NPC reaction/interaction, etc. Per Emberashh, without those contentious gameplay elements, true character arc / emotionally driven / thematically driven elements are almost certainly not going to arise, other than retroactively as the players reflect later on the "story". I have some more thoughts on how [I]Ironsworn [/I]tries to bridge this divide, but I'll have to come back to it. [/QUOTE]

Verification