Quote from: J ArcaneI've just been told, for the second time, by a second poster, that apparently D&D is only good for telling stories and is totally awful as a game.

Context? What sort of site is this? An MTG site?

Quote from: KrakaJakNot on the internet, but at work recently someone asked me if RPG's were "those games where you kill your parents?".

You should have responded.  "Yes.  Yes they are.  If you give me $40, I can hook you up with a subscription."

I hate going all Webster's on people but:

game
1. an amusement or pastime
.....
3. a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators.
......

You don't need a win/lose for a 'game'. *shrug* You can have one, and yeah I enjoy it too. But it isn't entirely necessary.

Quote from: blakkie3. a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators.
......

You don't need a win/lose for a 'game'. *shrug* You can have one, and yeah I enjoy it too. But it isn't entirely necessary.

Try going all Webster on compete. :haw:

Quote from: StuartOr even a game in which you win or lose based on your storytelling ability (rather than your resource management skills and luck with dice).

I'm not sure how that fits in.  The only time I've seen that is where a Character is trying to accomplish something via their rhetorical skill becuase of some situation in the game.  For example, Gorgar is sent on a dipomatic mission to Zor to try to gain an ally, and so the Player is expected to sound reasonably convincing when he says "My Character Gogar says... "Lo and behold Mighty Zorvold, thou hast goodly nostrals and thine eyes are like the rolling hills!"  ... awkward pause ... "And we have much Gold to bring you!"   ... joyful cheering from one and all and the aliance is made.   So the Character's speach, being stated by the Player, is of importance to the Win.  However, if the Win relies on the Player describing his Character's sword chops eloquently... I would say, no, that should not effect the winning or losing of an encounter.   I make a distinction between the Player and the Character in this regard, and don't hold the Character's advancement accountable to the oratory skill of the Player unless it is directly germane to the story itself.   Otherwise it would strike me as unfair to those Players who may not be great orators.  Does that make sense?

Quote from: StuartTry going all Webster on compete. :haw:

Yes. If you intend for the game to be competitive one. But competition is NOT a requirement for having a game. I included that #3 definition entry to show you where you were scoped down to.  EDIT: How fitting that you cut out #1 in your quoting of my post.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadContext? What sort of site is this? An MTG site?

Vidgaming.

By two seperate posters who both claimed to have been big roleplayers, oddly enough.

Quote from: VBWyrdeI'm not sure how that fits in.

I'm suggesting an actual "storytelling game" would involve some sort of benefit to you as a player based on your storytelling ability.  Once Upon A Time is a real storytelling game, while an indie / storygame in which winning is based on dice / resource management is not.

It's like how a "strategy game" requires you to employ good strategy to win.  A storytelling game should include some sort of evaluation based on how well you can... you know... tell a story.

Quote from: blakkieYes. If you intend for the game to be competitive one. But competition is NOT a requirement for having a game. I included that #3 definition entry to show you where you were scoped down to.  EDIT: How fitting that you cut out #1 in your quoting of my post.

O RLY?

Quote from: Stuart early in this very threadI don't agree with that statement (particularly the first half), but it really does depend on what your definition of "a game" is.

If your definition of a game requires a way to win or lose, then there are some questions to ask about how you do that in D&D (or any RPG).

So it depends on whether you think "playing house" is a game, or if you think a game is something more structured, like chess.

1. an amusement or pastime  -- playing house

3. a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators.  -- playing chess

So... you're making the same point as me.

Quote from: StuartI'm suggesting an actual "storytelling game" would involve some sort of benefit to you as a player based on your storytelling ability.  Once Upon A Time is a real storytelling game, while an indie / storygame in which winning is based on dice / resource management is not.

It's like how a "strategy game" requires you to employ good strategy to win.  A storytelling game should include some sort of evaluation based on how well you can... you know... tell a story.

I see.  Ok, well, first off I didn't say "StoryTelling Game".  I said "Story Game".   You added the "Telling" part.  However, that said, yes I agree with you... if you want to make/play a Story Telling Game then you should be rewarded for your Story Telling ability.   After all, that would be the point of a Story Telling game.   But the point of a Story Game, in my view, is not about the individuals Telling a good story (ie using their oratory skills as players) but about the group creating via the game-actions of their Characters an Good Story within the context of a fascinating World.   To me that's a Story Game.   And as far as my personal experience has been, D&Dish games like mine do an excellent job at that.

Quote from: VBWyrdeBut the point of a Story Game, in my view, is not about the individuals Telling a good story (ie using their oratory skills as players) but about the group creating via the game-actions of their Characters an Good Story within the context of a fascinating World.   To me that's a Story Game.   And as far as my personal experience has been, D&Dish games like mine do an excellent job at that.

That's a great definition of a Story Game in which the group works together to win the game by "creating via the game-actions of their Characters a Good Story within the context of a fascinating World. "  If the opposite is true and a bad story in a boring world can be considered "losing" then you can be doubly sure you know the goal of the game your group has sat down to play.

That makes it a kind of competitive game (group vs system / group's own ability) rather than just the amusement / pastime definition of game.

Where I think some game groups run into trouble is when some of the players think the goal of the game is something else -- like supremacy in combat (resource management and luck with dice), or personal ability in improvisational acting.  While those players are pursuing their alternate game goals, they overall goal of the entire group (telling a good story in a fascinating world) can suffer.

Quote from: StuartSo... you're making the same point as me.

Yeah, but Abyssal Maw wasn't paying attention.  (( I missed that post too but then I'm not talking to you...now :snooty: :blahblah: ))

Quote from: KrakaJakNot on the internet, but at work recently someone asked me if RPG's were "those games where you kill your parents?".

Seriously? Seriously.

Why, yes!

It's all well-documented:
http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Games-Signet-Jerry-Bledsoe/dp/0451403444
http://www.amazon.com/Cruel-Doubt-Joe-McGinniss/dp/0671775391
http://www.amazon.com/Cruel-Doubt-Blythe-Danner/dp/6304219601

I once heard a boardgamer at GenCon UK suggest that roleplaying games were for people who didn't have any friends.

Seemed like an odd thing to say.

Quote from: KrakaJakNot on the internet, but at work recently someone asked me if RPG's were "those games where you kill your parents?".

Seriously? Seriously.

Yeah, but you can only play it once [unless you are really bad at it!].
















:deflated:

I'll get me coat.