What is a "Narrative Mechanic"?

I'm not sure that it having something to do specifically with their own character's personality or motivations in inherently necessary. I mean, conceivably a mechanic could be designed in such a way that participants are expected to use it in relation to other characters or even world building situations.

So, for example, my off-the-cuff idea in the Star Wars thread, where Droid characters could (perhaps by spending a resource) declare that they have found a data port. Something like that?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

So, for example, my off-the-cuff idea in the Star Wars thread, where Droid characters could (perhaps by spending a resource) declare that they have found a data port. Something like that?
Or, just for clarity, the smuggler says he finds one and tells the droid to jack in. To me, though, that feels like a typical metacurrency spend and I'm still not sure that counts as "narrative" for my own internal definition.
 

A narrative mechanic is a means for both the players and GM to add new information to a scene in order to influence ongoing roleplay.

in games like DnD the mechanic is baked in at character creation (eg I have the skill to pick locks) but the DM decides if there is lock to open. Whereas in games like Fate the mechanic allows the player to declare that there is a door
 
Last edited:

If we go with the most basic idea of a mechanic that effects the narrative, then that's basically all mechanics in the game.

The opposite would be the infamous disassociated mechanic, i.e. the mechanic that is not connected to the narrative.
 

I think that one problem is that mechanics are often labeled "narrative mechanics" not by fans of such mechanics but, rather, by detractors of story or narrative games as a quick and easy way to identify mechanics they don't like. So the metric of what can make something a "narrative mechanic" sometimes reads as criteria with a low bar:

🤷‍♂️
As a fan of such mechanics, I wouldn't even call them "narrative"*: That term to me implies I have a fixed idea of how things must shake out. I far prefer thinking in terms of taking risks to achieve goals within a given context, that risk being open and clear, apparent in advance of resolution, of how things will not go my way if I don't win the die roll. In other words, when I say I want to do a thing, the GM responds with okay, but if you get a mixed win† on the roll, this will happen, and if you outright lose† on the roll, that will happen—NOW roll those bones.

* I think "narrative game" is itself bespoke and ill-fitting jargon.

† Bespoke terminology, perhaps, but I've long felt that saying "succeed" & "fail" in what some folks call narrative or Story Now games really give people the wrong idea. Such rolls aren't about character competence, they are about the total situation, including competence but also including potential confounding factors (perhaps think of it as a wondering monster check built into an action resolution :-) ).
 

Any mechanic that moves the nexus of causality away from an action taken by the player's character.

I don't think it's generally helpful to treat this as a binary though, there's clearly a spectrum at play that differentiates "I spend a Willpower token from that earlier mishap for a +4 bonus" and "I use 'find an edge' to locate a rope to swing across the pit."
 

Any mechanic that moves the nexus of causality away from an action taken by the player's character.

I don't think it's generally helpful to treat this as a binary though, there's clearly a spectrum at play that differentiates "I spend a Willpower token from that earlier mishap for a +4 bonus" and "I use 'find an edge' to locate a rope to swing across the pit."
Oh this is a bit different from what I first thought of on seeing "narrative mechanic". But yeah I see people use the term for that, too. And I really like "nexus of causality"! It presents a central desideratum right up front.
 

If we go with the most basic idea of a mechanic that effects the narrative, then that's basically all mechanics in the game.

The opposite would be the infamous disassociated mechanic, i.e. the mechanic that is not connected to the narrative.
That's a misreading of the disassociated mechanic. The reason a disassociated mechanic is disassociated is because it's the player doing something outside of the point of view of the PC - like the spending of metacurrency to modify a situation or assert narrative control outside of the PC point of view.
So dissociated mechanics are, based on Jason Alexander's definition, generally narrative mechanics.


 


I haven't fully decided how useful I find the term "narrative mechanic", and thus also not settled on an exact definition.
My working definition is pretty close to what @Pedantic writes: a narrative mechanic is a mechanic that allows people to influence the narrative directly (instead of indirectly through actors in the scene). This would include techniques like establishing new facts about the current scene (e.g. helpful features of the environment), retroactively establishing facts about past scenes (e.g. flashbacks in which useful gear is acquired) or deciding on the development of the scene (e.g. defeating an enemy, but at the cost of reinforcements arriving later).
I'm unsure if I consider things like spending some sort of token for re-rolls a narrative mechanic or not (I tend towards not, but to a certain extent this would still qualify).
 

Remove ads

Top