What first in your TTRPGing - Story, Game or Character?

[Cadence]

In another thread, @Snarf Zagyg was talking about the game Everway, and had the quote that it was a game "which placed story first, before game or character". [Edit: As Snarf Notes below, these are Shannon Appelcline's words.]

This made me wonder about classifying games based on which is first: story, game, or character. And also how 5e varies between them based on DM and Player desire.

And then I thought about my own playing... and then what the definition of these would be for me, or for anyone else.

I don't know yet. But @payn suggested making a thread, and so here it is.

I think I like character first... And I want the character to get a story, but it doesn't need to be the one I came into the game burbling around in the background of my head. So I want the game to help decide that. I need to think over B/X/1e, 2e, 3.5, 5e, 13A, VtM 2e, Gamma World 1e, Fate, and some others (none of the not-so-new anymore new fangled kind really) to see if I want to amend that or which systems played better and worse with my preferences.

 

[pointofyou]

The players bring their characters. The GM brings the setting. The people at the table do the game. The story is an output of play.

Chronologically the characters come first unless the GM has already made the setting. As a matter of importance though I'm pretty sure the story is why we play. Different people will get different amounts of enjoyment from the game stuff.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Great idea for a thread! Brief note- I was quoting the RPG historian Shannon Appelcline, so credit for the quote goes to him.

As a general rule, I think that when I play games that are more rules-heavy, it's because I'm craving the game experience. I want the rules to matter. I want it to be a game- with roleplaying, and with an emergent story, sure, but a game. And I think that because I'm viewing it as a game, I also get caught up game-like concerns. Is it fair? Is it appropriately challenging?

However, when I'm doing FKR or rules-lite, I really focus on characters and story. I'm not really that concerned with it as a game, so much as a method to allow character moments and story to emerge.

 

[Umbran]

So, I think all of these are important. But I can see some prioritizing in my playing and running RPGs.

When my goal is game-first, I don't reach for an RPG to scratch that itch. I reach for a board or computer game - Gloomhaven, Sentinels of the Multiverse, or the like. The least satisfying RPG sessions I have ever played are ones in which my focus was on the rules of the game, and manipulating them. But in Gloomhaven, that's a highly satisfying session of play.

When I'm picking up an RPG, my priorities become mixed and varied between character and story. When I am playing, I probably lean toward character, and allow the GM to worry about the story. When I'm running the game, I lean more to story, in which the players can deal with character.

Broadly, I think of rules as the framework through which we get to character and story. I then become kind of system agnostic, on the whole - I'll play virtually any system, and find the characters and stories that system supports.

 

[Tonguez]

I think setting first, since characters are designed towards setting parameters (whether Rules-implied of Dm-explicit) Once setting and characters interact then a good DM can express the setting as plot-points from which the story can develop.

 

[payn]

Excellent, thank you Cadence for making this thread!

I think I have adjusted overtime between these items. In the beginning, it was definitely the game aspect that was first. I wanted to learn, explore, and experience TTRPGs through the mechanics. After time, I started wanting to apply those mechanics to my characters. Being able to tell a character's story through mechanics was a keystone of the 3E/PF1 era. Though, setting, and more importantly campaign synopsis, have become tantamount to my ability to engage in TTRPG at this point. My experience with numerous game systems and mechanics have lead to a point I can allow all that to stay under the hood and focus more on the story and character RP.

 

[pointofyou]

When my goal is game-first, I don't reach for an RPG to scratch that itch. I reach for a board or computer game - Gloomhaven, Sentinels of the Multiverse, or the like. The least satisfying RPG sessions I have ever played are ones in which my focus was on the rules of the game, and manipulating them. But in Gloomhaven, that's a highly satisfying session of play.

I agree that TRPGs are not likely to be the best first choice if what I want most is to interact with the rules. That doesn't mean the rules aren't important in a TRPG of course. I have a strong preference that the players be able to understand the rules well enough to make good rules-appropriate decisions.

 

[Teo Twawki]

In our group, the gm sets up skeletal scaffolding and wallpapers the setting, but the players and their characters add the flesh and organs (as it were) to build the setting. Then the game happens. Even planned and/or published scenarios are set inside and active world sandbox so if the plot goes awry, the game continues.

It's worked this way for us for quite a while now.

 

[Xamnam]

I mirror the sentiments of others here where if I am seeking gameplay above all, I will turn to something more consistent and direct than TTRPG play.

Past that, I feel like I generally opt towards Story over Character. I may know what exists for the character that has led them to this point, but that's a fair sight different than feeling like I understand the character, and I don't want to fall into having an expectation of the journey they personally will undergo. So much of that is beyond my control, and only discoverable as the process is in motion. It will be what it will be when it happens, but the story is theoretically moving from the very beginning, and something that I can engage more thoroughly in even when I am in a relative backseat position. Hopefully, at some point down the line, Story and Character begin moving more in tandem, each exerting force on the other.

 

[pointofyou]

I mirror the sentiments of others here where if I am seeking gameplay above all, I will turn to something more consistent and direct than TTRPG play.

Past that, I feel like I generally opt towards Story over Character. I may know what exists for the character that has led them to this point, but that's a fair sight different than feeling like I understand the character, and I don't want to fall into having an expectation of the journey they personally will undergo. So much of that is beyond my control, and only discoverable as the process is in motion. It will be what it will be when it happens, but the story is theoretically moving from the very beginning, and something that I can engage more thoroughly in even when I am in a relative backseat position. Hopefully, at some point down the line, Story and Character begin moving more in tandem, each exerting force on the other.

I think there's a difference between knowing the past of the character and knowing their future. I think it's similar to the difference between the GM knowing the past of the setting or the situation and knowing its future. I think the best experiences I've had at TRPG tables have come when everyone has been surprised.