Quote from: S'mon;1066222and matrix campaigns, which are a hybrid resembling a the Savage Worlds Plot Point campaigns style, an approach sadly under utilised by D&D campaign publishers IMO.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1066264

I assume that quoting the lead paragraph for each style constitutes fair usage, so:
 
Linear: "A linear adventure is one in which the story line advances through a series of encounters that must be played in a certain order.  While the PCs handle each encounter as it arises, they are given little or no choice as to where they go between encounters, unless they want to stop or turn back."
 
Open: "This type of game de-emphasizes the DM's story, and instead relies almost completely on player's choices to determine the course of events.  In an open campaign, it is the DM's responsibility to create an interesting world for the PCs to explore and adventure in."
 
Matrix:  "The matrix campaign allows the DM to create a detailed story with a developed plot, while still allowing the players to choose where they go and how they deal with their challenges."
 
Niles, obviously, goes into more detail about each approach, detailing the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1066218So even the Mighty Gygax thought that story elements were worth using in a game then?  Interesting.  I don't have access to my copy, so I can't verify.

As others have noted, the book was authored by Douglas Niles, and was published in 1986.  If memory serves, Gygax left TSR at the end of '86, so I'm not sure if there was any input by Gygax on the project one way or another.  But I'm not really that informed about the behind the scenes situations of TSR, so someone else would have to answer that.
 
If it's useful for anyone, here's the outline, using Niles' titles, of the story section of the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide:
 
1. PLOT AND COUNTERPLOT: THE IMPORTANCE OF STORY
 
     I. The Story Structure
          A. Exposition
          B. Development
          C. Climax
          D. Denouement
 
     II. Mutilple Story Lines
 
     III. Story Elements
          A. The Villains
          B. Foreshadowing
          C. Mystery
          D. Challenge

     IV. Reward
          A. Magical Items
          B. Wealth
          C. Discoveries
          D. Gratitude
          E. Accomplishment
          F. Experience Points
          G. Moral
 
2. TECHNIQUES OF STORY AND CAMPAIGN DESIGN
 
     I. The Linear Adventure
     II. The Open Campaign
     III. The Matrix Campaign

Quote from: Pendle 1612;1066337I assume that quoting the lead paragraph for each style constitutes fair usage, so:
 
Linear: "A linear adventure is one in which the story line advances through a series of encounters that must be played in a certain order.  While the PCs handle each encounter as it arises, they are given little or no choice as to where they go between encounters, unless they want to stop or turn back."
 
Open: "This type of game de-emphasizes the DM's story, and instead relies almost completely on player's choices to determine the course of events.  In an open campaign, it is the DM's responsibility to create an interesting world for the PCs to explore and adventure in."
 
Matrix:  "The matrix campaign allows the DM to create a detailed story with a developed plot, while still allowing the players to choose where they go and how they deal with their challenges."
 
Niles, obviously, goes into more detail about each approach, detailing the advantages and disadvantages of each.

I dug out my DSG and read the entries. I think my play style is already defaulting to Matrix, with use of Open and Linear as the need arises.
It's interesting that even back at the tail end of AD&D, that Niles seemed to understand the differences between the GM styles, and it's a fair writeup of their strengths and weaknesses. I dislike his focus on adventure as story (naturally) but perhaps it was part of the progression from AD&D to 2nd edition.

I agree RPGs and stories have a relationship.

After we play a RPG, we can tell a story about what happened to our characters.

In RPGs, story happens after the game session as a retrospective, not as a guideline for what will happen during play.

So the GM or the players can be a "storyteller"...after the game.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1066348I dug out my DSG and read the entries. I think my play style is already defaulting to Matrix, with use of Open and Linear as the need arises.
It's interesting that even back at the tail end of AD&D, that Niles seemed to understand the differences between the GM styles, and it's a fair writeup of their strengths and weaknesses. I dislike his focus on adventure as story (naturally) but perhaps it was part of the progression from AD&D to 2nd edition.

As a player, I'm open to any of the styles just as long as I know what to expect going in.  I don't mind being railroaded if I know I'm buying a ticket, you know?  As far as preference goes, I'm more inclined towards Open and that tends to be the most common approach in our group.
 
I'd strive towards open as a GM, but I have to say that with the admission that the only thing I've ran in a few years have been old TSR modules as deliberate one-offs when the others running a game need a break or time to prep.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1065875Out of nostalgia, I prefer the title Dungeon Master or Game Master, but I get why the OSR likes "referee".

I'd never use the term "referee".