Vincent Baker on narrativist RPGing, then and now

[Piperken]

Another way to look at these two statements across time: the first statement is much more structural, the second less so.

Of these two, the second feels more refined to me (and FKRish. ha!)

It's the same mountain, but looked at two different times.

 

[pemerton]

Another way to look at these two statements across time: the first statement is much more structural, the second less so.

I agree with this.

Of these two, the second feels more refined to me (and FKRish. ha!)

I'm less sure about ths!

 

[pemerton]

I think there might be a question of how “fit” a character out of certain conventional games is to pursue passionate goals, at least early on?

Agreed.

A lot of RPG design and play also inclines towards something other than rising conflict across a moral line. White Plume Mountain (as an example of the dungeon crawl paradigm) is an example; so are the CoC-esque mysteries that I have on my shelf.

An interesting example is something like the Lamentations of the Flame Princess module Death Frost Doom. It begins with a NPC who seems to promise rising conflict across a moral line:

This adventure module describes the abandoned shrine and burial location of an old death cult which is located on the side of a mountain. . . .

Just below the treeline of the mountain lives Zeke Duncaster, and he is a nutty old coot. . . .

If anyone draws weapons against him or in any way acts as if they intend to inflict even potentially lethal harm on him, Zeke’s eyes will sharpen and he will say with eerie clarity: “I know what becomes of the souls of men who slay men. Do you?” . . .

“When I was a youth, there were evil people that lived up this mountain. Eventually they were driven off, but before then they had killed a lot of people. A lot of them! Buried them up there, without a proper gravesite or nuthin’. Everyone else seemed happy that the bad people were gone but didn’t give a hoot about all the innocent people that had been killed. That’s when I vowed that I would give them all proper headstones so folks could know that they used to all be real people. When I was younger I’d build fancy cairns and statues for ‘em … nowadays I just do headstones, but I’ll be long dead before I ever get to half of ‘em. There are just so many…”

He says that the bad men kept a list of their victims, and that list is still found in their old meeting place in the mountains. Duncaster goes up there with a ton of furs and animal blood and copies 100 names at a time. He doesn’t dare take the list (“Everything there is cursed! Cursed, you hear me?”) . . .

If the PCs begin to travel up the mountain in his presence, he will at first tell them it’s a bad idea, and then command them to stop, and finally he will attempt to physically restrain them. He will not ever use deadly force, but will attempt to wrestle and hold people until they agree to not go up the mountain. If by some circumstance he watches the PCs depart (he’s tied up, for example, or proven to be physically incapable of restraining everyone after a few tries, or people are willing to drag him up the mountain with them), he will give the classic, “You’re doomed… you’re all doomed!” line.​

But because of the structure and expectations of play for LotFP, this ends up being a colourful means of backstory exposition, but not more than that. The game only progresses if the players (and their PCs) essentially sideline Zeke and his concerns and passions.

Whereas a NPC like Zeke would play a pretty different role - in terms of game play - in something like Prince Valiant, or Stonetop, or (based on my reading and intuitions) Mythic Bastionland.

 

[Lanefan]

Sure, I agree the emphasis in both passages is on technique and mindset (one might say principles and agenda) over mechanics. The more recent passage, however, doesn't have a lot to say about the GM, whereas it does address the players of PCs in narrativist play rather directly.

In reading the OP and subsequent discussion about required player effort, I'm left wondering: where does the truly casual player - the player who just wants to show up to the game every week, have a laugh, roll some dice, chow down on some snacks and a beer, and not put any real mental effort into any of it - fit in?

I ask because, whether any of us like it or not, those players make up the vast majority of the RPG playerbase; thus moving toward (or even catering to) those players would seem to be essential if the type of play being discussed is ever to become more than a small niche within the greater RPG realm.

 

[Piperken]

I agree with this.

I'm less sure about ths!

That's fine! Am looking forward to seeing what discussions come out when AW: Burned Over when it is released.

 

[darkbard]

In reading the OP and subsequent discussion about required player effort, I'm left wondering: where does the truly casual player - the player who just wants to show up to the game every week, have a laugh, roll some dice, chow down on some snacks and a beer, and not put any real mental effort into any of it - fit in?

I ask because, whether any of us like it or not, those players make up the vast majority of the RPG playerbase; thus moving toward (or even catering to) those players would seem to be essential if the type of play being discussed is ever to become more than a small niche within the greater RPG realm.

I wasn't aware we were limiting discussion here on EN World, a niche website frequented by a minority of players of this already-niche hobby, to "truly casual players."

I don't think it's inaccurate to say that what Baker writes, and the games he designs, is targeted to passionate audiences, those with an investment beyond an excuse for a social gathering.

 

[zakael19]

I would also say the causal gamer doesn’t give a crap about RPG theory, in the same way the causal runner doesn’t care about Strava scores, or the causal coffee drinker has no idea what a TDS count or water recipe is.

 

[Pedantic]

I would also say the causal gamer doesn’t give a crap about RPG theory, in the same way the causal runner doesn’t care about Strava scores, or the causal coffee drinker has no idea what a TDS count or water recipe is.

I asked my friend the other day if the coffee he'd given me was a natural process (he's normally a dark roast guy and I was surprised to get some acid), and he said "no, I just use like a pour over, and I added some pumpkin spice seasoning" and I realized we were not coming from the same place.

 

[zakael19]

Obligatory:

 

[Lanefan]

I wasn't aware we were limiting discussion here on EN World, a niche website frequented by a minority of players of this already-niche hobby, to "truly casual players."

Not trying to limit discussion in the least, merely asking if casual players have a place at the table.

'Cause sure, we here are the hard-core nutballers. No argument there. That said, I think it also behooves us to consider the interests of - and occasionally speak up for - the great majority who aren't so hard-core.

I don't think it's inaccurate to say that what Baker writes, and the games he designs, is targeted to passionate audiences, those with an investment beyond an excuse for a social gathering.

Which is fine as long as he willingly accepts that by doing so he's severely limiting the potential size and scope of his audience. Just seems an odd tack to take for a revolutionary trying to get his message to the widest audience possible, is all.