Quote from: RSDanceyEngineering an RPG to create a great story is just making an existing tool work better as designed and intended.

Which designer on which version of D&D set out to make this the intention of the game?  It wasn't Gygax (1st).  It's not Mearls (4th).

Even if the story is about standing on a featureless plain killing wave after wave of mindless zombies?

See, this is your obstacle.  You're saying that RPG's need to turn into something the majority of them currently are not.  You seem to think they are synonymous - why I have no idea. Do you have anything other than your instincts to make this claim - that people are more interested in telling a story then Stuart's experiential claim?

Or is this simply more of the confusion of people saying they like a story when playing RPG's being mistaken for people saying "My goal is to tell a story"?

Unfortunately, the other thread disappeared before you answered my other question - so I'll rephrase given your new example (of what I can only assume you see as "Gamist" play):

When the characters have finished killing wave after wave of mindless zombies while standing on a featureless plain, and the players point back to the log of what occurred, is that a story?

Quote from: StuartWhich designer on which version of D&D set out to make this the intention of the game?  It wasn't Gygax (1st).  It's not Mearls (4th).

I bet it was that Williams guy.

I mean, c'mon.   "Skip?"

Gotta be a fake name.

Quote from: RSDanceyAbsolutely.  So in Ryan Dancey's Storyteller's Guide to D20 Games, wherein the point is to change a stock D20 game (say D&D) from a Roleplaying Game to a Storytelling Game, players should be rewarded for telling a great story.

So there should be reward mechanisms for:

* Creating & sustaining a premise
* Challenging beliefs & goals
* Changing over time in response
* Moving towards a dramatic climax

Those mechanisms should use D20 mechanics, and should be familiar to players of D20 games.

XP isn't the only reward mechanism in d20.  Staying alive/in-game, avoiding downtime, gaining info, freedom of action/decisions, "power ups", etc. are all rewards.

What happens in a d20-RSDSTG when creating & sustaining a premise (comically luck!) or challenging beliefs & goals (Trolls need hugs) runs into the d20 mechanics that players of d20 games are familiar with?  

What happens if the other players don't dig the premise or beliefs one of the other players has decided to pursue?

Quote from: RSDanceyI'm not making the argument of "intent" vs. "natural".  I'm arguing that what most players want out of the RPG experience isn't just a story.  They want a great story.  And I'm arguing that you can engineer the game to generate that result (within some obvious boundaries).

I don't disagree, but my view on people succeeding at this is by not knowing the rules. In my mind, only the GM needs to know the rules. Only then can you can have gameplay more akin to a great story -- encourage the players to truly portray the roles they are assuming (as opposed to using the rules to win) and you can tell some great stories. Artificially nudging players to use special rules to this end just creates more problems (more rules-lawyering in a different way).

Of course, that it just my opinion.

Quote from: James J SkachEven if the story is about standing on a featureless plain killing wave after wave of mindless zombies?

Story.  Not a great story.

QuoteDo you have anything other than your instincts to make this claim - that people are more interested in telling a story then Stuart's experiential claim?

Things essentially every player we surveyed who expressed a preference for playing RPGs self-identified their desires for those games to include (in addition to 6 other factors):

-> Strong Characters and Exciting Story
-> Role Playing

That is, these players essentially all said "it's not an RPG I would like unless it has Strong Characters and Exciting Story and Role Playing".

That's a pretty strong indication I'm right.

QuoteWhen the characters have finished killing wave after wave of mindless zombies while standing on a featureless plain, and the players point back to the log of what occurred, is that a story?

Yes, it's just not a Great Story.

Ryan

Quote from: StuartWhich designer on which version of D&D set out to make this the intention of the game?  It wasn't Gygax (1st).  It's not Mearls (4th).

I'm in Vegas, a long way from my library.  At hand I all I have is the 3.5E PHB.

From the Introduction (page 4).  Second sentence:

"D&D is a game of your imagination in which you participate in thrilling adventures and dangerous quests by taking on the role of a hero - a character you create."

To use a Forge term, the game would be incoherent if it did not deliver thrilling adventures and dangerous quests.  Note the quality qualifiers.  The point is not "participate in adventures and quests".  The quality of those things matters.

From "The D&D Game" (page 4).  Second sentence:

"It's part acting, part storytelling, part social interaction, part war game, and part dice rolling."

I take that as Designers Intent.  Those 5 things are supposed to drive the game's stated objectives.

I'm willing to believe that if I pulled any version of D&D ever published, I would find something very much like the above at the start of virtually every version.

I'm cheating of course, because I was in the fucking meetings where we made absolutely certain that the game told great stories, and I don't need to read the tea leaves of Designer's Intent.  We had endless discussions about how to make the game more fun to play centered on making sure people could tell the kinds of stories they wanted to be telling.  If someone had suggested "well, this rule is mechanically elegant, and it complies with our design guidelines, but the fact is it just kills the ability to tell a great story, let's put it in anyway", the suggestion would have been dismissed without much debate.  On the other hand, when people said "hey, here's this thing that kind of breaks our design guidelines, and is a little mechanically rough, but we think it promotes a great story approach, let's put it in anyway", we may have debated the topic extensively looking for ways to fix the known problems, but in the end, we'd have likely put it in the game.  Like Paladin alignment restrictions & the requirement that they have a Code of Conduct.

All this handwaving that there's something going on in RPGs other than storytelling has always bemused me.  One of Pundit's extremely valid critiques of Forge theory is that it often does not match observed reality.  Observed reality is that people use D&D in particular, and virtually every other successful RPG in general, as a vehicle to tell stories.  I'm taking that one step further and arguing that the quality of the story matters, and suddenly I'm an apostate.

If there was a large community of people out there using the rules of D&D to run simulations, or to bet on each other's ability to use the rules to win a combat, I'd be more sympathetic to this idea that there's something else going on that matters, but since we all know there are not such communities, I'll just stand here on firm ground of "make the game tell better stories, and you de facto make a better game".

Can it be done?  Unknown.  Result of doing it?  Happier players.  Worth the effort?  I think yes.

Ryan

Quote from: StuartXP isn't the only reward mechanism in d20.  Staying alive/in-game, avoiding downtime, gaining info, freedom of action/decisions, "power ups", etc. are all rewards.

All of those things are designed to enable characters to gain more XP.  XP is the reward mechanism of the game.  Wanna see a game where that's not the case?  Look at World of Warcraft.  At the highest levels, you max XP, and then you play the game of getting cooler gear, because there's nothing else to do in the game.  What happens when the level cap raises?  You immediatley go back to the job of earning XP.

QuoteWhat happens in a d20-RSDSTG when creating & sustaining a premise (comically luck!) or challenging beliefs & goals (Trolls need hugs) runs into the d20 mechanics that players of d20 games are familiar with?

Well now that would be the whole point of trying to write a book about it, wouldn't it.  

QuoteWhat happens if the other players don't dig the premise or beliefs one of the other players has decided to pursue?

That needs to be a part of the process too, obviously.  If you have a player who simply refuses to get with the program, you boot them.  If you cannot get some group consensus on such absolutely critical and key aspects of play, do something else, or get a different group.

Ryan

I think that stories from D&D and other RPGS like it, is an emergent property. Like the stories told about life itself. I'm not interested in concentrating, during play, on making a 'great story'. It sounds way to much like editing and grammar checking and spell checking and, well, work.

Consensus is often unachievable; compromise more often is.

The players to boot and the GMs to leave are those who won't compromise.

A lot of this Forger stuff seems to assume really fucked up groups where nobody compromises, where nobody simply enjoys the other players' having fun, and that this is somehow the fault of the rules.

Quote from: RSDanceyIf there was a large community of people out there using the rules of D&D to run simulations, or to bet on each other's ability to use the rules to win a combat, I'd be more sympathetic to this idea that there's something else going on that matters, but since we all know there are not such communities, I'll just stand here on firm ground of "make the game tell better stories, and you de facto make a better game".

Can it be done?  Unknown.  Result of doing it?  Happier players.  Worth the effort?  I think yes.

The survey you cite describes what the customer want. However there is no data other than antedotes and personal observations on what they actually do. And that is just as important to get a good understanding of what is going on.

They tell you they want good story. But WHY are they getting it. I contend because RPGs since 1990 has focused on two things that hurt it's widespread poplarity.

First there is the focus on precanned plot issued by the company.
Second there is the focus on splatbooks and modules of rules.

They sell there no question about that. But it is a case of short term gain for long term loss. Following a company's story-telling limits the choices you present to your players. Even with the release of dozens of splat books eventually you are going to explore all the options a system has to offer. If your focus is on new and better things for your characters there will come a time when you out run both.

Both this combine to rise the barriers for newcomers. As one needs to invest either a continuing plotline or a large body of rules.

I have observed a lot of players becoming disinterested or bored over the years because of these.

But the hope, for me, is that nearly every RPGs has at its heart a simulation of a world. Something that is open ended where rewards can be more just XP and items. And players choices have meaning and consquences.Players and GMs could do more but with the constant barrage of more story, more rules, more stuff! it hard for them to go beyond all that.

The classic RPGs are classic not just because they were first. But they were toolkits to create anything within that genre. Even in something as focused as Metamorphic Alpha the GM was encouraged to make the Starship Warden their own. More importantly they were given support to that in the form of text and tables.  No two were alike because of that.

We know more today about RPG game design than in the 70s. We need to make RPGs that allow GMs to quickly put adventures and settings down on the table.

Rather than mucking around with how RPGs are run with GMs and Players we should focus on making the games easier to prep and play.

QuoteSo there should be reward mechanisms for:

* Creating & sustaining a premise
* Challenging beliefs & goals
* Changing over time in response
* Moving towards a dramatic climax

"Yes, there MUST be a reward system for it!
Because otherwise it´s not fun to have a good story!"
:confused:

Sorry,

1) hard-coding external narrative structure into a game destroys the possibility of holo-deck-gaming, which is the most common form of gaming.

2) Even the Story-Whores should appreciate a fullfillment of their despicable longings in themselves, without a reward system. The "Story" better be fun without reward!

Ryan, good luck with your project.

I'm outta here, though. I have nothing constructive to offer, because I think it's mixed up in so many ways.

I´ll follow Elliots wise leadership.

Don't you guys like train-wrecks?