Quote from: Mishihari on October 16, 2022, 11:26:44 PM

Quote from: Effete on October 16, 2022, 10:14:00 PM

Quote from: Mishihari on October 16, 2022, 09:26:25 PM

Quote from: Effete on October 16, 2022, 02:46:13 AM
Counter-question: Who really gives a shit?

Me. 

There's nothing inherently wrong with either type of game, but they're different, with different methods of play, different strengths and weaknesses, different ways of playing, and different techniques to make them work well.  If we're going to chat about games here, it's pretty important that we know what type of game we're talking about, as things that apply to one type won't apply to the other. 

And some folks don't care for the one or the other.  It's useful to know what type of game you're looking at upfront so you don't put time and effort into something you're not going to be interested in.

Yeah, I've pretty much said all of this already. You aren't refuting anything I've said. You've only taken one snippet of my post out of context and responded to that.

Try this...
Question: What is Story Gaming in your opinion?
Counter question: Who gives a shit?

The first few responses to this thread couldn't even agree with each other, so how helpful are those opinions really? That was the extent of my post. This isn't even a hill I'm willing to die on; I just figured I'd clear the air before someone else decides they want to try to read my mind instead of read what I wrote.

Huh.  Not actually sure what you're talking about.  You asked a question, which I answered.  The very clear point of your post was that the difference between rpgs and storygames is unimportant.  I gave the reasons why I disagreed with this.  I'm not sure what you imagined you said, but based on others' responses, everyone else understood your post exactly the same way I did.

I think he is just a crazy person, like a bad example of Zak, kind of crazy.

Quote from: Lunamancer on October 16, 2022, 10:36:31 AM

Quote from: Trond on October 16, 2022, 09:58:44 AM
This so much. We've had fun with a game many would call a "story game".

But then, I inadvertently once used the term "story game" when trying to explain what an RPG is. And it kinda makes sense. Not sure why some use the term for games with greater player influence on the setting.

Because you almost have to.

There's a dirty little secret, but it's really a universal truth. You can tell someone what to do, or you can tell them what you want done. You don't get to have both. Because the first challenge you hit, where the results the method produces does not match the results you want, you do have to decide which it's going to be. Are you going to stay the course no matter the outcome? Or are you going to abandon the method and do whatever you have to to get the result.

Since games are more or less a set of rules for play, there's a strong tendency (by which I mean is almost exclusively the case) that they provide methods. But not the outcome. Take chess, for example. I could play it as a means of keeping my mind sharp. Or I might play it because I believe it teaches greater lessons about strategy. Or I could play as a way of staying connected with an old friend who also enjoys the game. Or I could even play competitively. What the aim or goal or purpose of playing the game is up to me.

Now do the same with RPGs. Some people use it for socializing. Some to play as a character different than themselves. Some to play a character like themselves but in a different time and far away place. Some just like coming up with backstories. Some like world building. Some just want to kill things and take their stuff. And you know what? Some people use it as a means of making stories.

If you to say the aim of the game is collaborative creation of these stories, there's more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak. I would make a strong case that AD&D helps facilitate better stories than most of the games ostensibly designed to do so. So if you want to say this type of game is something different from games like AD&D, the difference has to be in the method. And not anything involving the aim. Not, "Well, these games are for creating stories, and D&D is for simulating a fantasy world." It would be news to a lot of people playing D&D a long, long time that it actually isn't good for making stories and it's only for creating some kind of virtual reality.

Not sure if I get it. Are you giving an answer to "Not sure why some use the term for games with greater player influence on the setting"? Or are you saying why we have to use the term "story game" for any RPG?

Quote from: Lunamancer on October 17, 2022, 12:57:02 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 17, 2022, 10:32:18 AM
I don't take facts personally. You're being an arrogant twat:

"If you don't know how to get those results out of AD&D, that's fine."

I acknowledging the fact that different people have different experiences, and your response is to say I'm being an arrogant twat? But you don't take facts personally?

When you make universal claims about peoples experiences, you're confessing those are your experiences. You volunteered it. I have no problem that you see things that way. I'm not going to argue your experience. I literally think that's fine. I've given you nothing to pick a fight about, and yet you have.

Perhaps you don't realize that you pose questions and make statements that presume agreement with a premise, i.e,. do you still beat your wife?

Do you have experience with Microscope, The Quiet Year, Fiasco, or other "RPGs" that commonly fall into the story game category? (RPGs in quotes because these games are marketed as RPGs but many people here would not consider them RPGs.)

Quote from: Trond on October 17, 2022, 03:06:28 PM
Not sure if I get it. Are you giving an answer to "Not sure why some use the term for games with greater player influence on the setting"? Or are you saying why we have to use the term "story game" for any RPG?

Answering the first question. My answer is because games are almost always differentiated according to their rules, and that story games are no exception. What it's used for is ultimately going to be up to the people playing it, and that's going to muddy the waters.

And that's not to say there isn't a lot of cross pollination in terms of methods. I think a lot of people would be shocked at how many newer ideas were lurking hidden in the 1E DMG all along.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 17, 2022, 06:00:08 PM
Perhaps you don't realize that you pose questions and make statements that presume agreement with a premise, i.e,. do you still beat your wife?

Sure. For example, if I'm going to take the time to give a thoughtful and detailed response to something, I'm presuming I'm dealing with people who are literate enough to read my responses and honest enough to respond in good faith. And sometimes I'm disappointed to find I was in error. It's not even because I think I'm necessarily correct on that presumption. It's more because the presumption of good faith is necessary for meaningful dialog.

But on the other hand, I would never presume that just because I can cite a cliched example of an intentionally loaded question that therefore I can just accuse people all willy nilly of inadvertently asking loaded questions without pointing to a single example of them doing so. Because that would be an example of responding in bad faith.

QuoteDo you have experience with Microscope, The Quiet Year, Fiasco, or other "RPGs" that commonly fall into the story game category?

Why, yes. Yes I do.

Quote(RPGs in quotes because these games are marketed as RPGs but many people here would not consider them RPGs.)

Next phase new wave dance craze, anyways it's still rock and roll to me.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 16, 2022, 11:44:58 AM
Eh, well, broadly speaking there are two kinds of stories: 1) The 3-act structure and 2) Rambling shaggy-dog stories.

Some games are designed to elicit stories in 3-act structure. Let's call them story games. They provide incentives to generate introduction, confrontation, and resolution. Sometimes this advice enters into non-story game territory, such as advice that every scene (or every room of a dungeon) in a traditional RPG should pose a narrative question to the characters or that we should track torches with usage dice.

Some games are great at generating rambling "stories" that would make terrible movies. This kind of story only makes narrative sense to the players.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 17, 2022, 06:00:08 PM
Do you have experience with Microscope, The Quiet Year, Fiasco, or other "RPGs" that commonly fall into the story game category? (RPGs in quotes because these games are marketed as RPGs but many people here would not consider them RPGs.)

Hi, rytrasmi.

Your implied claim here is that Microscope, The Quiet Year, and Fiasco produce stories in the 3-act structure, but that is the opposite of my experience. As I've played them, all of those games produce rambling shaggy-dog stories that have very little structure. Microscope doesn't have anything resembling a storyline, since characters are only invented on the spot for rare cards. It produces a timeline that is closer to a setting document than a story. The Quiet Year produces a map and disjointed projects and events. Fiasco is cinematic so there are at least characters going through a plot, but because players are alternating scenes with no pre-planning, it makes extremely messy plots that don't have any structure.

Conversely, some traditional RPG adventures come much closer to three-act structure by the design of the adventure elements. Many published modules are designed with a setup in the town, a twist in the middle of the dungeon, and then a final climactic boss fight. There is deliberate escalation, twist, and further escalation that intentionally resembles the 3-act structure. And even outside of published modules, there are some GMs who design adventures this way. When I would run cinematic genre RPGs like Star Wars D6 or Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I'd often have such a structure.

Many other traditional RPGs get even more explicit. Adventures in games like White Wolf's Storyteller or West End's Torg have sections explicitly labelled "Acts" and "Scenes" within those.

There is a definite divide between traditional RPGs and the storytelling game category (Microscope/The Quiet Year/Fiasco) based on whether players can only control their characters, or if players can control wider story elements. But giving players greater power over elements doesn't make things more into the 3-act structure.

And there are also a lot of other games that aren't close to Microscope - but are still widely considered story games like Burning Wheel, Dogs in the Vineyard, or Good Society.

Quote from: Mishihari on October 16, 2022, 11:26:44 PM
Huh.  Not actually sure what you're talking about.  You asked a question, which I answered.  The very clear point of your post was that the difference between rpgs and storygames is unimportant.  I gave the reasons why I disagreed with this.  I'm not sure what you imagined you said, but based on others' responses, everyone else understood your post exactly the same way I did.

Not quite. My point was that generalizations were unhelpful. I never said that individual games couldn't be distinguished from others based on their mechanics or gameplay. In other words, your disagreement was with a premise I never made. The actual question was largely retortical, intended as a prelude to my statement. Not really intended to be answered literally. If that was unclear from my post, that's probably my fault, but it doesn't mean I said something I didn't.

Quote from: the crypt keeper on October 17, 2022, 01:57:05 PM
I think he is just a crazy person, like a bad example of Zak, kind of crazy.

Nice! So we can include Ad Hominem to the list of logical fallacies you use, along with Special Pleading, No-True-Scotsman, and Tu Quoque from your previous post. If you don't like a certain style of game, fine, don't play them. But that doesn't mean there is anything objectively wrong or bad about them. They're just different. I just don't think slapping a lable, with all the baggage it contains, onto a game because it shares one or two traits with other games is all that helpful. It only serves to poison the well.

Quote from: Effete on October 17, 2022, 08:28:13 PM
If you don't like a certain style of game, fine, don't play them. But that doesn't mean there is anything objectively wrong or bad about them. They're just different. I just don't think slapping a lable, with all the baggage it contains, onto a game because it shares one or two traits with other games is all that helpful. It only serves to poison the well.

If Game Type A works poorly for Playstyle Type B, and Game Type B works poorly for Playstyle Type A, then a label indicating This Type A Game contains 3 Type B elements is useful information. However, labeling it one or the other when it is a mix of the two, is not helpful.

I postulate that Fiasco is not a roleplaying game, and should not be directly grouped with a a roleplaying game like AD&D anymore than AD&D should be grouped with a miniatures wargame like wh40k. Yes, they are all games, but that does not help me pick the one I am looking to play.

Perhaps the the real distinction is RPG/Story-RPG vs Non-RPG/Whatever. A soda is a soda, but if I am craving a cola, a lemon-lime fizzy drink will not do, and I expect the container to tell me what is inside it.

Quote from: Tasty_Wind on October 15, 2022, 12:01:58 AM
I'm just curious what y'all would consider a "story game" or "story gaming". There seems to be no small amount of contempt for the concept among those in the OSR scene, but what qualifies?

Story game RPGs are just as bad as board game RPGs.

Quote from: Lunamancer on October 17, 2022, 06:55:49 PM

Quote from: Trond on October 17, 2022, 03:06:28 PM
Not sure if I get it. Are you giving an answer to "Not sure why some use the term for games with greater player influence on the setting"? Or are you saying why we have to use the term "story game" for any RPG?

Answering the first question. My answer is because games are almost always differentiated according to their rules, and that story games are no exception. What it's used for is ultimately going to be up to the people playing it, and that's going to muddy the waters.

So....."it's just a name"?

Quote from: jhkim on October 17, 2022, 08:09:47 PM
Hi, rytrasmi.

Your implied claim here is that Microscope, The Quiet Year, and Fiasco produce stories in the 3-act structure, but that is the opposite of my experience. As I've played them, all of those games produce rambling shaggy-dog stories that have very little structure. Microscope doesn't have anything resembling a storyline, since characters are only invented on the spot for rare cards. It produces a timeline that is closer to a setting document than a story. The Quiet Year produces a map and disjointed projects and events. Fiasco is cinematic so there are at least characters going through a plot, but because players are alternating scenes with no pre-planning, it makes extremely messy plots that don't have any structure.

Conversely, some traditional RPG adventures come much closer to three-act structure by the design of the adventure elements. Many published modules are designed with a setup in the town, a twist in the middle of the dungeon, and then a final climactic boss fight. There is deliberate escalation, twist, and further escalation that intentionally resembles the 3-act structure. And even outside of published modules, there are some GMs who design adventures this way. When I would run cinematic genre RPGs like Star Wars D6 or Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I'd often have such a structure.

Many other traditional RPGs get even more explicit. Adventures in games like White Wolf's Storyteller or West End's Torg have sections explicitly labelled "Acts" and "Scenes" within those.

There is a definite divide between traditional RPGs and the storytelling game category (Microscope/The Quiet Year/Fiasco) based on whether players can only control their characters, or if players can control wider story elements. But giving players greater power over elements doesn't make things more into the 3-act structure.

And there are also a lot of other games that aren't close to Microscope - but are still widely considered story games like Burning Wheel, Dogs in the Vineyard, or Good Society.

You make some good points and it's useful to have more data points in the games you mention.

Microscope scenes, in my view, aims for the 3-act structure. There's a background/intro and the posing of a narrative question, then role play which normally includes some conflict, then the question is answered and the scene is stopped. It felt to me that the author was aiming for that sort of structure. Events and periods felt like fractal layers above scenes. As for The Quiet Year, the seasonal structure and the different events that could occur felt like a loose adherence to this structure, though I only played that one once.

And I fully agree that many modules are build with a narrative structure in mind, more railroady modules definitely.

As for players able to control things outside their character, yes I agree that's a common quality of story games.

Do these rules exist or are they imposed by adventure modules in more stimulative games? Yes. You can play AD&D with a strong story structure. Want to play a traditional dungeon crawl in Microscope? That would be much more difficult.

Quote from: Trond on October 18, 2022, 10:31:49 AM
So....."it's just a name"?

I do get the impression the designers generally presume their system will be used to create stories. And I do find assuming the outcome to be misguided. But insofar as their rules and methods do play with or address narrative elements and structure as such, the name is still fitting.

Just as a quick example, Mythic has a random events table, just like all good, true, red-blooded tabletop pencil & dice games do. But it gives me things like "PC-negative", "PC-positive", "Neutral event", and we're supposed to figure out what that means in terms of tangible details. Whereas AD&D's tables generate me the tangible details--a specific person or creature, type of terrain, weather, etc--and from that we'll figure out whether it's good, bad, or neutral for the PC.

So the rules and methods of the two games are addressing different things for sure. I just think it's an error to say, "Well, these games create stories, and those games create simulations." I think different people with the same aim may just find it easier to work one way over the other.

Quote from: Lunamancer on October 17, 2022, 06:55:49 PM
Sure. For example, if I'm going to take the time to give a thoughtful and detailed response to something, I'm presuming I'm dealing with people who are literate enough to read my responses and honest enough to respond in good faith. And sometimes I'm disappointed to find I was in error. It's not even because I think I'm necessarily correct on that presumption. It's more because the presumption of good faith is necessary for meaningful dialog.

But on the other hand, I would never presume that just because I can cite a cliched example of an intentionally loaded question that therefore I can just accuse people all willy nilly of inadvertently asking loaded questions without pointing to a single example of them doing so. Because that would be an example of responding in bad faith.

Oh, very clever: a subtle insult that is plausibly deniable. "Oh, I didn't mean you, I was speaking generally." Perhaps I am illiterate or perhaps you face challenges in expressing your thoughts in an organized and concise manner.

Your opinion appears to be there's no such thing as story gaming because AD&D and the DMG already covered that ground ages ago. This despite the fact that a lot of people do think there is such as separate beast called story gaming. Kids these days and their newfangled terminology for the same old thing! I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, just trying to synthesize something succinct from your posts. What is "story gaming" in your opinion?

Quote from: Lunamancer on October 17, 2022, 06:55:49 PM

QuoteDo you have experience with Microscope, The Quiet Year, Fiasco, or other "RPGs" that commonly fall into the story game category?

Why, yes. Yes I do.

I asked because I did not gather that from your posts. My unfortunate illiteracy again!

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 18, 2022, 12:31:26 PM
Oh, very clever: a subtle insult that is plausibly deniable. "Oh, I didn't mean you, I was speaking generally." Perhaps I am illiterate or perhaps you face challenges in expressing your thoughts in an organized and concise manner.

Whatever floats your boat.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 18, 2022, 12:31:26 PMYour opinion appears to be there's no such thing as story gaming because AD&D and the DMG already covered that ground ages ago.

Quote from: Lunamancer on October 18, 2022, 11:59:51 AM
Mythic has a random events table. . . it gives me things like "PC-negative", "PC-positive", "Neutral event". . . AD&D's tables generate me the tangible details--a specific person or creature, type of terrain, weather, etc [. . .]

So the rules and methods of the two games are addressing different things for sure.

Note the time stamps. Just 32 minutes before your post, I am pointing out the differences, even contrasting with AD&D by name to something you claim I'm saying there's no such thing as. All my posts on this thread have been saying basically the same thing. Story games are differentiated from RPGs by their methods. But this one you didn't even have to go looking for. This is why I can't take you seriously. This is the kind of nonsense that arises when you're not discussing in good faith.

QuoteThis despite the fact that a lot of people do think there is such as separate beast called story gaming. Kids these days and their newfangled terminology for the same old thing!

Even though I'm not saying anything like that at all, it's at least conceivable that a lot of people could be wrong about something. But there's no way you can attribute to me a position that I'm actively arguing against. What you're accusing me of thinking is far less absurd than what you actually think.

QuoteI'm not trying to put words in your mouth,

Actually, that's exactly what you're doing.

Quotejust trying to synthesize something succinct from your posts.

No. You're not. You cut out the entire posts twice in a row and replied with something non-responsive, and have been trying to feign being insulted ever since.

QuoteWhat is "story gaming" in your opinion?

It's all upthread. Tell you what. Stop posting for a minimum of 24 hours. Go back and re-read this entire thread. Read all my posts twice. Three times if you have to. If I see you post anything within 24 hours, I'm going to assume you didn't take the time and do that, and I'm going to continue to not take you seriously.

QuoteI asked because I did not gather that from your posts. My unfortunate illiteracy again!

32 minutes, dude. 32 minutes before this shit post of yours I cited a specific example from a specific game showing specifically what's different. Have you done that?

You said I was not able to elicit story with AD&D. It's very subtle and I thought I was reading too much into that comment. So I went back and reread your posts, concluded you were making it personal, and told you this. Your response: "Why are you taking fact X personally?" That is the very definition of a loaded question. You claim to never have asked loaded questions and that you've been discussing the topic in good faith this whole time. Okay, sure, yes, on page 4 you finally make a specific point about a game that is not D&D responding to someone else and make a big fuss over a time stamp.

And now you present an ultimatum! I'm not to be taken seriously unless I meditate on your musings for 24 hours. I did call you arrogant, so I suppose that fits.

Lunamancer, despite all the above, I read this site, yes including your (long) posts, to learn things and learn from the experiences of others. I don't know 10% of what there is to know, and I am wrong more often than I'm right. So I apologize to you for making you flip out or whatever, and will try to give you the benefit of the doubt in the future.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 18, 2022, 04:05:33 PM
You said I was not able to elicit story with AD&D. It's very subtle and I thought I was reading too much into that comment. So I went back and reread your posts, concluded you were making it personal, and told you this. Your response: "Why are you taking fact X personally?" That is the very definition of a loaded question. You claim to never have asked loaded questions and that you've been discussing the topic in good faith this whole time. Okay, sure, yes, on page 4 you finally make a specific point about a game that is not D&D responding to someone else and make a big fuss over a time stamp.

And now you present an ultimatum! I'm not to be taken seriously unless I meditate on your musings for 24 hours. I did call you arrogant, so I suppose that fits.
...

This has all already been gone over on an earlier thread:

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/telling-a-story-versus-presenting-a-situation/150/

As many are unwilling accept the actual dictionary definition of the word 'story' when making or defending their claims - any kind of productive discussion is impossible.