Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What makes an TTRPG a "Narrative Game" (Daggerheart Discussion)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="thefutilist" data-source="post: 9333071" data-attributes="member: 7044566"><p>I made a bit of a hash of that last post. I’ll try and explain more thoroughly but it’s a hard subject and to write diplomatically would take too long. So I’m going to have to attack a huge amount of Narrativist play.</p><p></p><p>Hidden backstory is stuff given fictional positioning that the players aren’t yet aware of.</p><p></p><p>This became an ‘apparent’ problem because of the important papers in the safe. There are some important papers in the safe and the character tries to pick the lock, is successful and opens the safe. Yet there are no papers to be found. (cue the tears)</p><p></p><p>Everybody who has ever had a problem with that has massively misdiagnosed why their play was dysfunctional. So they do the really silly thing and try and fix it at the mechanical level.</p><p></p><p>A common resolution system break down goes as follows. There is an intent (get the papers from the safe), there is an execution (use my lock picking tools to open the safe). And there is an effect (the safe is open and I can get the papers)</p><p></p><p>That seems to solve the problem because now we’re rolling for intent, not for execution. The GM can no longer welch us.</p><p></p><p>This basically leads to ‘solving’ the tyrant GM problem by ignoring the actual problem and then destroying the fundamentals of the medium. You’re ignoring fictional positioning and using the resolution system as a back story generator. Everybody is having great fun, lots of hi-jinx. The GM can even get in on the action. You failed a roll so goons kick down the door. The resolution system is at this point just giving narrative control. Everyone is rolling to force their version of events into being. You can see this most clearly by how people use ‘on a miss’ in PbtA games.</p><p></p><p>Or the other version. You roll for intent and it has be situationally binding. You have to meet the princess which means you have to skip straight to meeting her. It basically cuts the scene (stops escalation as well but that’s almost incidental at this point).</p><p></p><p>If you don’t immediately cut the scene you have to try and railroad each other towards a preset destination. Nothing of consequence can happen in case it messes up the stakes, that you’ve earned by rolling for them.</p><p></p><p>If you’re familiar with Apocalypse World you’ll see people who think intent is binding get really confused by the seize by force move. They’ve rolled for it and yet the GM can immediately take it away again.</p><p></p><p>Anyway on the creative level what starts to happen is that there’s just a push and pull over the course of the story. The fundamental dysfunction hasn’t been fixed and if you’re not 17 then you’ll almost inevitably have to change the role of the GM. Or in games without a GM everybody becomes the GM.</p><p></p><p>This new GM ends up being a facilitator of the players. They’re not actually answering premise because their job is to challenge the players characters. They have the same (or similar) relationship to the players as Brennan Lee-Mulligan or Matt Mercer has to their players.</p><p></p><p>So that’s my issue.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Now I’ll talk about what the original dysfunction was/is for anyone who finds my ranting at all compelling.</p><p></p><p>Yeah it is kind of the GM having story control but probably not in the way most people think.</p><p></p><p>The basic act of role-playing is that I say something, you listen to what I say and use that when you say something in return.</p><p></p><p>Creative agenda pay off is the shared social reward between two people. If there’s an agenda mismatch. Say you open the safe and there’s nothing there and the GM grins at you like you’re an idiot (which is rewarding for both people with a G agenda). Then if you’re playing for story you’ll be really confused as to what’s going on. There is no communal reward, you just do actually feel like an idiot. If the GM is exerting plot control as well. You’re already in the bad creative relationship I outline above, just a different version of it. The GM is still and always will be a tyrant but now you have system tools to wield against them.</p><p></p><p></p><p>So what should the relationship look like?</p><p></p><p>You’re both interested in where the fiction leads by fundamentally disinvesting your control of it. You shouldn't want to meet the princess (as author), it should simply not be a concern. As audience, yeah, you can want your character to meet her all you want. In fact play is a failure if you aren’t emotionally invested in certain things happening. That just has no impact at all (or very minimal) in how you utilise the fiction and system. That’s both of you. Even in a gmless game that should be the attitude. As author you do not care.</p><p></p><p>So what do you do as author? Well you make creative decisions in line with what has been established with no regard to the outcome. One common way of doing this is known colloquially as ‘Doing what my character does’ or as GM ‘doing what my character does (as NPC)’ (I'm dumbing this down but that’s the basic gist of it)</p><p></p><p>Then we’re both in this together, looking at how the game fictions internal logic and causality drive play.</p><p></p><p>So back to the safe. You open it and there’s nothing there. Your character might be annoyed, you might be annoyed on behalf of your character. But if you’re annoyed as a player, you’re doing it wrong.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="thefutilist, post: 9333071, member: 7044566"] I made a bit of a hash of that last post. I’ll try and explain more thoroughly but it’s a hard subject and to write diplomatically would take too long. So I’m going to have to attack a huge amount of Narrativist play. Hidden backstory is stuff given fictional positioning that the players aren’t yet aware of. This became an ‘apparent’ problem because of the important papers in the safe. There are some important papers in the safe and the character tries to pick the lock, is successful and opens the safe. Yet there are no papers to be found. (cue the tears) Everybody who has ever had a problem with that has massively misdiagnosed why their play was dysfunctional. So they do the really silly thing and try and fix it at the mechanical level. A common resolution system break down goes as follows. There is an intent (get the papers from the safe), there is an execution (use my lock picking tools to open the safe). And there is an effect (the safe is open and I can get the papers) That seems to solve the problem because now we’re rolling for intent, not for execution. The GM can no longer welch us. This basically leads to ‘solving’ the tyrant GM problem by ignoring the actual problem and then destroying the fundamentals of the medium. You’re ignoring fictional positioning and using the resolution system as a back story generator. Everybody is having great fun, lots of hi-jinx. The GM can even get in on the action. You failed a roll so goons kick down the door. The resolution system is at this point just giving narrative control. Everyone is rolling to force their version of events into being. You can see this most clearly by how people use ‘on a miss’ in PbtA games. Or the other version. You roll for intent and it has be situationally binding. You have to meet the princess which means you have to skip straight to meeting her. It basically cuts the scene (stops escalation as well but that’s almost incidental at this point). If you don’t immediately cut the scene you have to try and railroad each other towards a preset destination. Nothing of consequence can happen in case it messes up the stakes, that you’ve earned by rolling for them. If you’re familiar with Apocalypse World you’ll see people who think intent is binding get really confused by the seize by force move. They’ve rolled for it and yet the GM can immediately take it away again. Anyway on the creative level what starts to happen is that there’s just a push and pull over the course of the story. The fundamental dysfunction hasn’t been fixed and if you’re not 17 then you’ll almost inevitably have to change the role of the GM. Or in games without a GM everybody becomes the GM. This new GM ends up being a facilitator of the players. They’re not actually answering premise because their job is to challenge the players characters. They have the same (or similar) relationship to the players as Brennan Lee-Mulligan or Matt Mercer has to their players. So that’s my issue. Now I’ll talk about what the original dysfunction was/is for anyone who finds my ranting at all compelling. Yeah it is kind of the GM having story control but probably not in the way most people think. The basic act of role-playing is that I say something, you listen to what I say and use that when you say something in return. Creative agenda pay off is the shared social reward between two people. If there’s an agenda mismatch. Say you open the safe and there’s nothing there and the GM grins at you like you’re an idiot (which is rewarding for both people with a G agenda). Then if you’re playing for story you’ll be really confused as to what’s going on. There is no communal reward, you just do actually feel like an idiot. If the GM is exerting plot control as well. You’re already in the bad creative relationship I outline above, just a different version of it. The GM is still and always will be a tyrant but now you have system tools to wield against them. So what should the relationship look like? You’re both interested in where the fiction leads by fundamentally disinvesting your control of it. You shouldn't want to meet the princess (as author), it should simply not be a concern. As audience, yeah, you can want your character to meet her all you want. In fact play is a failure if you aren’t emotionally invested in certain things happening. That just has no impact at all (or very minimal) in how you utilise the fiction and system. That’s both of you. Even in a gmless game that should be the attitude. As author you do not care. So what do you do as author? Well you make creative decisions in line with what has been established with no regard to the outcome. One common way of doing this is known colloquially as ‘Doing what my character does’ or as GM ‘doing what my character does (as NPC)’ (I'm dumbing this down but that’s the basic gist of it) Then we’re both in this together, looking at how the game fictions internal logic and causality drive play. So back to the safe. You open it and there’s nothing there. Your character might be annoyed, you might be annoyed on behalf of your character. But if you’re annoyed as a player, you’re doing it wrong. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What makes an TTRPG a "Narrative Game" (Daggerheart Discussion)
Top