Quote from: S'mon;709077One thing I've just realised about first-wave '80s-'90s 'storytelling' (Dungeneer's Survival Guide, White Wolf et al) is that it's all about what the GM is doing - the GM may be setting up 'scenes' 'resolutions' 'dramatic climaxes' etc, but the players are still playing D&D - they're acting as their characters, immersion not story-creation, and trying to achieve their character's goals. Ron hated this 'incoherence' and created games like Sorcerer where the players would also consciously take part in the story-building.

Yeah, the sharing of GM duties is not only a logical step for a game of shared narratives, but also further removes the game from an immersive experience for the players. This also coincided with a generation of game systems designed to limit GM power in a misguided attempt to deter railroady or bad GMs. Which causes some confusion I think when it's a case of a game not setting out to be a Storygame, but ending up with the same effect.

And that ties into the Rulings vs Rules debates, where rulings are viewed with suspicion or utter distaste, on the one hand because players don't trust GMs and on the other, where there's no reason not to share GM duties because he is effectively reduced to one of a group of would-be storytellers and "should be" following the same narrative-creation rules for the sake of a consistent story

If I were to write a Storygame (not that that's likely to happen), Id probably rename the GM "Editor"

OK, so I've heard lots of theory and split a few hairs with some of you over definitions and semantics ... now for some practical application to clarify this stuff in my mind.

From one of the PBP games on this site:

Quote

Quote from: Arkansan;670648You have made your way to the outskirts of the town of Last Keep, a lonely little place that sits north of nothing and south of nowhere. Home to a collection of trappers and huntsmen that supply the towns only trade goods, the pelts and furs of the regions peculiarly sized wildlife. They eek out a hard living in the thick forests that surround a singular mountain that sits three days march to the north. Odd rumors have been trickling out of the area for years, but of late they have reached a fever pitch. Only you and the Gods know what motivations would bring a man to such a rough outpost at the ends of civilization.

The light of day is failing as you arrive outside a small inn, just off the shoddy dirt path that passes for a road in these parts. A weather worn two story stone building with thatched roof, flanked by two small stables on either side lies before you. A warm light seeps through a pair of thin glass windows that sit on either side of the door. Above the door is a crudely painted sign depicting a huntsman clad in green stumbling about, carved in the front of the door are the words "The Huntsman's Hangover".

A strong wind is picking up from the west and a quick glance skyward reveals a thick bank of storm clouds rolling in. Despite the could cover a few stars seem to be blazing particularly bright.
 
Your life of adventure begins here, may fortune favor you.

Quote from: Chugosh;670697Brogar Redshirt, a tall narrow man, even in his armor gladly reaches for the door handle, his feet tired and his back sore, and his old wounds from his time in the Baron's army fighting along the borders in the north bothering him something fierce. He may have great plans for adventure and the glories of treasures, but at this moment, he wants only a good seat and a hot meal out of the weather.

Quote from: AndrewSFTSN;670720Quobbles the halfling, a twitchy specimen of his race with a crumpled appearance suddenly appears from the undergrowth.  A fierce light of intelligence glints in his eyes, tempered with a basic kindness.

He addresses the tall warrior irreverently, but not aggressively:

"Well met, lanky!"

Quote from: Chugosh;670800With a laugh, followed by a cough, the lanky fighter turns and replies, "Well met yourself! Let's get out of this weather, eh?"

He opens the door and steps inside, hoping for the smell of something good to eat.  He holds the portal open for the short guy.

Quote from: AndrewSFTSN;670899"Very kind, and I thought we'd travelled beyond the bastion of good manners to get to this sketchy place."

Quobbles ducks under Brogar's arm and peers around the interior of The Huntsman's Hangover.  He mutters, partly to himself:

"Now, what I really need is a dumm-I mean assistant-to lug around this baggage.  It's been too many miles!"

He pats a bundle under his arm, which clinks quietly.

Quote from: Arkansan;671050Inside you are greeted by the acrid smell of a roaring hearth, the stink of cheap ale and the low rumble of a dozen conversations. A bar runs the length of the back wall, save for the stairs that sit to its left, the right most wall is taken up by the great hearth. Seated at the tables that occupy the center of the room are a gaggle of locals, gruff looking men and a few gaunt, stern featured women. A small group of raucous young men stand round the hearth trading stories of their physical prowess, some of which may even be true.

A tall, lanky man with thinning hair and a smashed nose is moving amongst them all, serving drinks from a platter. He nods in your direction "Welcome to the Huntsman's Hangover, or the Hangover as we call it round here. What can I do for ya lads?"

Quote from: AndrewSFTSN;671134"Hello fellow.  Some grub and maybe even some conversation, if you serve that.  We'll start with an ale apiece, and then whatever you've got cooking."  He looks at Brogar:

"These ones are on me."

Once the drinks arrive Quobbles will approach the rowdies by the fire, and be ingratiating, favouring the stupidest of the group, if one is apparent.

Quote from: Drohem;671191Weary from his long day of walking, Donovan Nevalaps opens the door to the Huntsman's Hangover and walks in lightly as a chilled wind ushers him inside effortlessly.  He turns and pushes the door closed as the last wisps of wind flutter the ends of his church tabard.  He cuts quite a figure with his chain mail armor, shield with church symbol emblazoned on it, and his new mace at his hip.  

As all eyes turned to fall upon him, Donovan gives a sheepish grin and steps up to the long wooden bar that runs the length of the back wall.  He takes off his backpack and drops it at his feet, and then puts his shield over the pack and stands between his belongings and the bar.  He gladly meets the gaze of any patron with a firm, but weary, smile of friendliness.

Speaking to no one in particular, Donovan says in a firm and loud voice, "good night for a warm cider, is it not?"

Quote from: Chugosh;671470"Come take a load off, Father!" Says the lanky fighter, his own spear and shield leaning on the wall behind him, the device on which declares him a muster out of the Baron's service.  For a fearful gaunt face he looks rather friendly.

Quote from: Drohem;671591Donovan smiles at the soldier and picks up his belongings and walks over to his table.  He sets his stuff down next to his chair and sits down.

"Thank you, friend," he says once seated and looking across from the soldier, "it was a long day of traveling and my feet are sore.  This place was a welcome sight as I was not looking forward to a wet camp under the stars this night."

So are these players creating a story, roll-playing, role playing, or engaged in some sort of collective narrative storytelling?

FWIW, it looks like 'fun' to me.

Quote from: atpollard;709083So are these players creating a story, roll-playing, role playing, or engaged in some sort of collective narrative storytelling?

FWIW, it looks like 'fun' to me.

PBP works differently from tabletop or realtime-online play, in that you can take time to craft little vignettes, and it's best written third-person, which tends to naturally put the author in 'author stance' not "I do X" 'actor stance'. But they are still primarily role playing not story crafting; the individual vignettes of each post are not normally aimed at creating a narrative.

Quote from: atpollard;709083OK, so I've heard lots of theory and split a few hairs with some of you over definitions and semantics ... now for some practical application to clarify this stuff in my mind.

From one of the PBP games on this site:



So are these players creating a story, roll-playing, role playing, or engaged in some sort of collective narrative storytelling?

FWIW, it looks like 'fun' to me.

Eh PbP games benefit from clear identification of the characters. You've got three layers of seperation to deal with - the character, the poster, and the actual human being behind them both. Even while interacting with other posters in general discussion, I'd recognise them sooner by their avatar than their usernames.

Functionally this is exactly the same as the first person perspective, it just makes it easier to play in this format by specifying who you are with each post. Especially when things start getting a little more hectic.

Take a look at some of the many RPG sessions on youtube - the same issue doesn't arise, everyone says "I".

Quote from: atpollard;709083OK, so I've heard lots of theory and split a few hairs with some of you over definitions and semantics ... now for some practical application to clarify this stuff in my mind.

From one of the PBP games on this site:

snip great example

So are these players creating a story, roll-playing, role playing, or engaged in some sort of collective narrative storytelling?

FWIW, it looks like 'fun' to me.

I would say that the Players are role-playing. (I'm hoping that my theatre background can help me explain this.) However, while doing so, they are in the moment of the action and the center of that same action, once the action is completed then the Players and GM may relate what has happened. That relation of the action which happened is the story. The story is not the action which is happening, but the story is the resultant reaction to that action.

[Pedantic] Except it's not the "story", its the narrative. If someone were to collect up all the posts of a PbP game, edit them into a comprehensible whole, and present the result for an audience, that would be the story[/Pedantic]

Story is what you tell after the game session, and its not limited to RPGs. After playing Arkham Horror, I can tell a story of our boardgame session.

Quote from: Arduin;708751There's nothing "terrible".  It's just that a HUGE % of experienced RPers dislike railroading.  Which is what HAS to happen to in a Game that has a "story".

There is a tiny fraction of players who truly dislike railroading, some faction doesn't like obvious CRPG-style railroading, but it works fine for the majority of gamers. Otherwise, we would not have seen the decade upon decade popularity of published of organized play and published adventures.

The "popularity" of sandbox gaming is mostly internet bullshit. The vast majority of campaigns are set up by GMs with a sense of beginning, middle and end and the vast majority of gamers want that.

Quote from: Spinachcat;709096Story is what you tell after the game session, and its not limited to RPGs. After playing Arkham Horror, I can tell a story of our boardgame session.




There is a tiny fraction of players who truly dislike railroading, some faction doesn't like obvious CRPG-style railroading, but it works fine for the majority of gamers. Otherwise, we would not have seen the decade upon decade popularity of published of organized play and published adventures.

The "popularity" of sandbox gaming is mostly internet bullshit. The vast majority of campaigns are set up by GMs with a sense of beginning, middle and end and the vast majority of gamers want that.

Yup, hence me describing it as an extreme minority. But it's my minority, an I love it.

It might be true that most people play campaigns with an overall story structure, but I don't see how you could support it. The existence of modules doesn't prove that people play the way that modules work--only a subset of people who buy modules.

I certainly would be surprised if it's an extreme minority who play in something like a sandbox rather than a planned or guided storyline.

Most of the campaigns I've played in could be broken down into:

a) Episodic--a series of adventures which are largely unrelated except for the characters and setting, with occasional appearances of long-term character threads

or

b) Shapeless wandering of the party across the landscape and planes of existence

or

c) An overall quest or mission.

Now, (c) is the closest thing to a story. But the GM in one game used it more as a focusing tool for ongoing adventures than as an overarching story. It never reached a conclusion. The other game did reach a conclusion (after I dropped out of the group), but structurally it was more of an episodic travelogue--a matter of passing through the various locations in between the starting point and the geographically-defined goal.

My impression is that a large number of D&D games, at least, still tend to focus around a series of adventures each of which starts with a hook (a patron or stranger gives you a mission), moves on through action that may or may not be railroaded/storified/encountardized, and finishes with the PCs counting XP. This campaign structure isn't a beginning-middle-end--it's a grind that revolves around endlessly leveling up your character.

Have things really gotten to the point that most gaming is the equivalent of running through Dragonlance, or The Enemy Within, or Masks of Nyarlathotep and then calling the end of the campaign?

Quote from: soviet;708885No it isn't. I play storygames and I do so in the first person.

Note that the people who actually play storygames don't IME call them shared narrative games either. That's a term I've only ever seen used here.

I've seen the term Shared Narrative Game used elsewhere, but not sure where. Possibly BGG. Which wouldn't surprise me really.

Quote from: Omega;709125I've seen the term Shared Narrative Game used elsewhere, but not sure where. Possibly BGG. Which wouldn't surprise me really.

Possibly here or here. Or maybe here. Or one of many other places, several of which have previously been mentioned hereabouts.

I should hope the massive irony of the title of the last site linked and the title of the article it contains is lost on no one.

Daddy Warpig will explain things whenever he can be roused to clarify this subject again.

That said, PbP often runs along the bleeding edge of RPing and another pastime called Simming, as DW will likely clarify along with the rest.

Quote from: atpollard;709083From one of the PBP games on this site:
...
So are these players creating a story, roll-playing, role playing, or engaged in some sort of collective narrative storytelling?

FWIW, it looks like 'fun' to me.

Good example, atpollard.

I take as your point that you don't agree that these should be exclusive categories, which I would agree with. I play both traditional RPGs and newer style story games, and I don't see any definite line between them in typical play. There are style differences - but the core activity is usually (though not always) the same. The players act out their characters, and they do so in a way that is interesting and dramatic for the other players.

Quote from: Spinachcat;709096There is a tiny fraction of players who truly dislike railroading, some faction doesn't like obvious CRPG-style railroading, but it works fine for the majority of gamers. Otherwise, we would not have seen the decade upon decade popularity of published of organized play and published adventures.

The "popularity" of sandbox gaming is mostly internet bullshit. The vast majority of campaigns are set up by GMs with a sense of beginning, middle and end and the vast majority of gamers want that.

On the one hand, linear campaigns are certainly popular, look at the Paizo APs - though IME they get started a lot more often than they get finished. And they are a good consumption-oriented publishing model. Paizo don't care if you actually play their APs as long as you buy their APs.

OTOH a good number of people don't like linear campaigns. People wouldn't discuss sandboxing so much if it wasn't desired. IME lots of players definitely very much do not want an entire campaign to have a pre-scripted beginning, middle and end, since it makes play feel pointless.

Probably the majority of campaigns since the '90s have been set up as you say (probably the majority have been linear-series-of-published-modules), since the GMing advice tended strongly that way, but not the vast majority. And dissatisfaction with the results is real and has led to many more open campaigns especially in the last five years or so, with the OSR contributing to that.

Quote from: Arminius;709122Have things really gotten to the point that most gaming is the equivalent of running through Dragonlance, or The Enemy Within, or Masks of Nyarlathotep and then calling the end of the campaign?

I have good familiarity with several dozen campaigns over the last five years or so at the London D&D Meetup, which includes lots of non-D&D campaigns. I think probably over half the campaigns that are run are of the pre-plotted linear AP type. Certainly if you add the episodic-series-of-published-adventures campaigns. Not the vast majority, though. True open sandbox campaigns are a distinct minority, but have become a lot more prominent in the past couple years as the OSR has matured. There's also semi-sandbox with modules dropped in as appropriate to a fairly open setting around a central theme.

I would say that just as the late '80s saw a move from sandbox to linear, the last five years have seen a move from linear back to sandbox as a common, though not majority, play style.

Edit: 4e D&D seemed deliberately designed to make sandboxing impossible, stripping out all content generation tools such as random encounter tables and treasure tables, and requiring tailored encounters far more than ever 3e. The reaction against 4e seems to be bringing a return to a more open play style. 5e certainly talks about 'adventuring' more, but I don't know yet if it will support 1e style sandboxing.