Quote from: BedrockBrendan;623532My reading of that intro (based also on other things I have read by laws) is that he believes Hero Quest is a different category of RPG (but I think in his mind still an RPG) and he makes the distinction clear to the reader because its important to running it in his opinion. He is drawing a clear line between traditional RPGs and what he is offering, but also saying you can cross it easily with some tweaks. If I had to put words in his mouth CRK's 'narrative RPG' sounds like a label Laws wouldn't shy away from.

If that's what's being said about HeroQuest then I totally agree. I'm not arguing that HQ isn't a storygame RPG. I'm arguing that HQ isn't a storygame non-RPG (if that makes sense).

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;623535The quotes:

"HeroQuest emulates the techniques of fictional storytelling."

"this book's objectives is to get under the hood of narrative technique"

"you start not with the physical details, but with the proposed action's position in the storyline."

"You consider a range of narrative factors, from how entertaining it would be for him to succeed, how much failure would slow the pacing of the current sequence, and how long it has been since Joey last scored a thrilling victory."

Story. Story. Story. Story.

That's pretty clear, Sov.

Yeah, I'm not saying HQ isn't about story. I'm asking how it's not a roleplaying game.

Quote from: Phillip;623533Neither is the subject at hand in what I wrote, or (I thought) in what Benoist wrote.

Then you're missing the point of the discussion.

The original quote (to which Ben was responding):

Quote from: Old One Eye;623404When I'm the DM, y'all are saying that I'm not roleplaying whem I'm hamming it up as the slow but good-natured town drunk because I control the world?

The discussion is about narrative control ("I control the world") and roleplaying ("hamming it up").

So...

Storygames = group creation of a narrative. (Simming, in other words.)

Roleplaying game = playing in character.

The part about "game"? That's where the dice comes in.

That's very simple and clear English.

Quote from: soviet;623538Yeah, I'm not saying HQ isn't about story. I'm asking how it's not a roleplaying game.

Because... simming isn't roleplaying.

Let's be more generous, and say that Laws is (in a very unclear way) enjoining what people around here (but not me) call "illusionism".

That is, GM's are responsible for managing the flow of events, so they make an enjoyable gaming experience. Fudge dice, change NPC motivations, whatever is needed to make the game flow. If a player character failed (by the dice), make it so they succeed, so the player can score a victory.

If that's what he's saying, and the mechanics are otherwise utterly lacking in PC narrative control elements, then it's a traditional RPG with illusionist GM advice.

Otherwise, at best its a hybrid storygame-RPG.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;623541Because... simming isn't roleplaying.

Let's be more generous, and say that Laws is (in a very unclear way) enjoining what people around here (but not me) call "illusionism".

That is, GM's are responsible for managing the flow of events, so they make an enjoyable gaming experience. Fudge dice, change NPC motivations, whatever is needed to make the game flow. If a player character failed (by the dice), make it so they succeed, so the player can score a victory.

If that's what he's saying, and the mechanics are otherwise utterly lacking in PC narrative control elements, then it's a traditional RPG with illusionist GM advice.

Otherwise, at best its a hybrid storygame-RPG.

I'm not sure I follow. You seem to be saying that illusionism is roleplaying but non-illusionism isn't? I don't think that's what you mean so help me out here. The opposite of your definition of illusionism is no dice fudging and no arbitrary changing of NPC motivations - which is exactly how games like HQ work.

Please note that this part of the discussion is about whether storygames like HeroQuest are also roleplaying games. If you think that HQ and BW are storygame RPGs, rock on, we agree. If you think that HQ and BW are not RPGs, then we don't.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;623539Storygames = group creation of a narrative. (Simming, in other words.)...

That's very simple and clear English.

No: Your "other words" is a bit of jargon I have never before encountered. "Simming" suggests to me "simulating," which has zip to do with "group creation of a narrative" in the special sense I take you to mean.

Neither has that sense anything to do with the issues that concerned me when I sat down to create a game that turned out very much to resemble what Hero Wars (prototype of HeroQuest) looked like years later when I found it in a store.

The quotation from the HQ book lays out the matter plainly enough, I think, and with reference not to "the group" but to the GM. It is simply one of applying laws of drama rather than laws of physics.

If that alone makes a game not role-playing, then most purported RPGs (e.g., almost any sword-and-sorcery, space opera or superhero game) are not RPGs.

Quote from: CRKrueger;623524I like "Narrative RPG", or as Wil Wheaton described "Storytelling RPG", or maybe just "Story RPG"

The term Storygame however, can apply to some obviously non RPG games, like Flower for Mara.

This is fine and is similar to some common usage.  The Story Games community obviously has no problem with the label of "story game" or variants.  There are plenty of games that have used such variants - like how "Do: Pilgrims of the Flying Temple" identifies itself as a "cooperative storytelling game".  

The problem with this is that "story" has already been widely used within relatively traditional RPGs.  The most obvious example is White Wolf's "Storyteller System" - but lots of other games use similar language.  Given this, I think many games rightly ignore nuanced labels and try to use description that people who don't know anything can understand.  

Given the fuzzy borders and long history of inconsistent usage, I think these labels will continue to be used, but for the foreseeable future, usage will be inconsistent and there won't be any sharp line of division.  

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;623539The discussion is about narrative control ("I control the world") and roleplaying ("hamming it up").

So...

Storygames = group creation of a narrative. (Simming, in other words.)

Roleplaying game = playing in character.

The part about "game"? That's where the dice comes in.

That's very simple and clear English.

I disagree that it is very clear, because in-character action is a part of narrative.  Indeed, you can have narratives that consist solely of in-character action.  For example, as I recall, most of what happens in A Flower For Mara is just characters talking - which is in-character action.  However, I think it is reasonably called a story game.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;623539Storygames = group creation of a narrative. (Simming, in other words.)

Roleplaying game = playing in character.

See, this is too vague. What does group creation of a narrative mean? What does it look like at the table? and what does playing in character mean? Does it have to be all the time? Does it have to be method acting? Can you play in character and think about the story or game tactics at the same time?

Here's a typical D&D situation. My elven ranger walks into town. The GM describes how two thugs appear from an alleyway and then speaks in character to threaten me with harm. I speak in character to give them the brush off and then describe some cool trick shot I'm going to try with my bow. We roll initiative, then trade attack rolls and damage rolls with the GM describing what happens as we go.

Here's how the same situation plays out in HeroQuest. My elven ranger walks into town. The GM describes how two thugs appear from an alleyway and then speaks in character to threaten me with harm. I speak in character to give them the brush off and then describe some cool trick shot I'm going to try with my bow. We talk about what the stakes of success and failure might look like. We roll against our chosen abilities and the GM describes what happens as we go.

Seriously, these two activities are not poles apart.

Quote from: Phillip;623547No: Your "other words" is a bit of jargon I have never before encountered. "Simming" suggests to me "simulating," which has zip to do with "group creation of a narrative" in the special sense I take you to mean.

Phillip - maybe you aren't aware, but "simming" is jargon for online play-by-post role-playing games, where players take turns writing short sections of an ongoing story.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Play-by-post_role-playing_game

Quote from: soviet;623538Yeah, I'm not saying HQ isn't about story. I'm asking how it's not a roleplaying game.

Bingo, and ditto!

Quote from: Phillip;623516Nicely put. Is it not then legitimate (not by the yardstick of your game preferences, but as a matter of reasonable discourse) for someone to say, "I'm role playing subset x of the world, hence I am playing a role playing game?"

It's kind of a backhanded way of saying I'm not being reasonable when I'm making a distinction between games that are meant for role playing and immersion on one hand (role playing games) and games which are meant as means of story building and authorial collaboration on the other hand (story games). I can't agree this is being unreasonable.

Quote from: Phillip;623516In other words, some such term as "story game" (which I agree is useful) might be a subset of RPG -- as opposed to non-RPG.

Narrative and/or story-telling game works fine for me, because it actually means what it says: you collaborate to a narrative building exercise, and the aim of the game is to build a nice story. That's it, as far as I'm concerned.

A role-playing game, to me, implies the act of playing a role, and thereby, the act of immersing yourself into a world and seeing it through the eyes of your character.

Now as we've discussed it billions of times now, these are to me two different categories of games, like role playing games are distinct from wargames, but there are, just like in the case of wargames and RPGs, games which mix role playing with a little narrative building and vice versa. The problem for guys like me is that at some point, the presence of the underlying logic of narrative building and the use of narrative-oriented rules will just impede on my ability to immerse myself in the world and role play my character effectively, because I will be pulled constantly by the game's rules into the position of a guy building a story as an author instead of being that character in the game. That's where it ceases to be a role playing game, as far as I'm concerned.

Now that process I just explained to you is not "unreasonable," and it's not just a function of "game preferences" - I can play games that have narrative mechanics, including story games, if I am so inclined. Less often than traditional role playing games, perhaps, but I don't have a thing against the concept of a game where you'd build a story. Once Upon A Time is a great game, after all. It's a matter of a factual change in my stance as a player when I am playing these games, and since my practical experience of what's going on around the table changes, I consider them two distinct types of games.

Quote from: soviet;623538Yeah, I'm not saying HQ isn't about story. I'm asking how it's not a roleplaying game.

Are the actions of the players as their characters adjudicated by the referee?

Can the players only effect the setting as their characters?

If the answer is yes to both then it is a roleplaying game. If it is no to either then it is a hybrid. If it is no to both then it is something else.

Quote from: estar;623564Are the actions of the players as their characters adjudicated by the referee?

As I understand you, yes. But you might want to expand on that a little to make sure we're on the same page here.

Quote from: jhkim;623558Phillip - maybe you aren't aware, but "simming" is jargon for online play-by-post role-playing games, where players take turns writing short sections of an ongoing story.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Play-by-post_role-playing_game

I was not aware!

I guess a transcript of such an affair would make better reading for a non-participant than the play-by-post D&D / EPT / etc. games in which I've played.

I can also see how the medium would lend itself to a truly collaborative "authorial role" game, similar to the games my childhood friends and I played on long trips.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;623535The quotes:

"HeroQuest emulates the techniques of fictional storytelling."

"this book’s objectives is to get under the hood of narrative technique"

"you start not with the physical details, but with the proposed action’s position in the storyline."

"You consider a range of narrative factors, from how entertaining it would be for him to succeed, how much failure would slow the pacing of the current sequence, and how long it has been since Joey last scored a thrilling victory."

Story. Story. Story. Story.

That's pretty clear, Sov.

Yeah, White Wolf said much the same thing. they haven't managed to make a storygame yet.

The system stands on its own regardless of what pretentious wankery the author writes about it.