Quote from: Justin Alexander;458413Hint: When you're using a definition of "narrative" which would result in describing Newton's Laws as a model of narrative, your definition is wacky.

Okay...not sure what that has to do with anything, you seem to have pulled that out of thin air, it has nothing to do with anything I said.

But you do agree that whether a character hits someone can be relevant to a narrative, right? And if I am trying to decide if a fictional character hits someone, a mechanic that tells me to roll a die, add some stuff up and compare some numbers will directly control the narrative at that point, right?

QuoteYou're the one who said it. Try to keep up.

Nope, review the thread. I said your definition was garbage, because it meant that we were merely dividing game products, which was unhelpful to players trying to converse about the experiences they liked or didn't like. You then triumphantly replied that players might like or dislike different experiences.  Since this absolutely supports what I said, I pointed that out. To which now you fold your arms and give the smuggest smile possible, I assume, with no sense of irony.

Wait, people actually engage with JDCorley over here?

Huh, I would have thought you guys had figured out his shtick by now.

Quote from: Benoist;458343"Narrative"...

Just using the regular old dictionary definition here, folks, it's nothing crazy.  Just a normal old narrative, story, account of events or experiences, a chronicle, tale, account, recital, history or report.

Quote from: misterguignol;458416Wait, people actually engage with JDCorley over here?

Huh, I would have thought you guys had figured out his shtick by now.

I have no shtick, I am merely a mean old man.

Quote from: JDCorley;458418I have no shtick, I am merely a mean old man.

See, you do agree with me.

Quote from: Aos;458422See, you do agree with me.

If you called me mean or old or a man, yep!

Quote from: JDCorley;458379"When trying to classify what people do, it's disingenuous to ask us to look at what they do."

What does that have to do with anything. You might be trying to classify what people do, but I'm not. But then you know that, because I've told you repeatedly, you're just being disingeneous.

QuoteNo, you just made it up out of whole cloth, but I won't harp on it, everyone in the thread can see you invented it out of nothing, there's no need to discuss it further.

Indeed. Everyone reading the thread can see whether I made it up out of whole cloth or not. If you're willing to accept that as settled then so am I.

QuoteAgreed!



Also agreed!

Now we're getting somewhere.

QuoteTo me, it would make the most sense to have "story games" be the things that produce "story gaming."  Otherwise we enter Forge-style jargon territory, where "narrativism" has nothing to do with narrative, "simulationism" has nothing to do with simulation, "the impossible thing before breakfast" is neither impossible, nor a thing, nor before breakfast, and "advocacy" is not advocacy.  But if you want to concoct a new piece of jargon and advance it, I can't argue that there isn't an audience for such things.

To me it makes the most sense to have "story games" be the things purposefully designed to produce "story gaming".  I don't see how defining a thing by it's purpose is the sole purview of the Forge. Did they invent the internet too?

QuoteAnyone can see it, they just have to look up the thread. I said "hey, dialogue, there's an example of a rule in D&D that can help someone interested in story" and you said "oh well it can help all kinds of other people too", as if that had anything to do with the point I was making at all.

Really? Where did you do that? What does that have to do with pointing out where my definition is "truncated and useless"? I don't recall actually writing the words "Oh well it can help all kinds of other people too". I assume you're referring to dialogue (once again as if it were a person or something).  You seem to be obsessed about dialogue, as if it somehow proves your point that D&D is a story game. This leads me to believe that you believe that "dialogue" only takes place in a purposely constructed story. Is that in fact what you believe? You realise that folks really can and are reading the thread, right? Because you say that as if somewhere else in the thread you have actually made some sort of point when in fact you have not. You provide no actual examples to illustrate your point. You fail to directly address my points. You simply keep saying the same thing over and over again, in different and odd ways and are then apparently expecting folks to understand what the fuck you're talking about. Don't get me wrong, it's mildly entertaining, but it's nowhere near a coherent point. I doubt the shit you're spewing has ever even met a coherent point before. It's like you're ramblings are just wandering aimlessly down the street, and my coherent points are running them down at high speeds and your ramblings just keep getting back up and continuing to wander down the street. They're a little more beat up and incoherent each time, but they keep failing to change direction or even get out of the way. It's sad, really.

QuoteLet's discuss this a little further, actually this is one of the most important story game rules in roleplaying games, the rule of "who gets to say what the characters say".

The GM says: "The king looks very grave. 'The orc attacks are still on the rise. We must find out what demonic force is compelling them to attack.'"

Player A, in this situation, says, "My guy spins his dagger around his fingers and flips it nonchalantly into its sheath. 'No problem, amigo.' he says confidently, 'We'll handle the orcs and you handle setting up the victory celebration. Gentlemen prefer blondes, so why don't you have a lot of redheads on hand?'"

Player B, in this situation, says, "My guy lowers his head somberly, 'So many have been lost, my liege. We must do everything we can!'"

Both players are utilizing a rule in D&D that says that players get to decide what their characters say and how they say it.  In fact they are using that rule in a very similar way - they're both using third-person narration and directly saying the words the character would say.  However, they are creating very different moods and experiences by their choice of what to say in this situation.  

Now, if you're not playing for story, there's no reason why one of these is preferable to the other. Plenty of D&D games I've been in, this choice doesn't matter at all.  It's just color, or maybe we're exploring a social situation and seeing-what-happens, we're not really concerned with story stuff.

But if you are concerned with story, the rule that players get to say what their character says is probably the most powerful tool to directly affect the narrative ever devised by the mind of man.  This is because the expression of character through dialogue is so well-developed throughout the history of literature.

Ah HA! A valid argument at last! Very good points too. I agree with everything you have said here.

QuoteSo when you try to divide mechanics into those that "directly affect the narrative" and those that don't, and divide games up based on whether they have such mechanics or not, you've already gone right past the real question which is whether the narrative is of interest to the players at all.  If the answer is that it's not, then you aren't story gaming no matter what choices you make.  If the answer is that it is, you are story gaming no matter what mechanics you use to affect the narrative.



The thread stands as a monument to the unbelievable wrongness of this statement.

It is only here that you are mistaken. I'm not even sure why you believe this, actually. It makes no sense. How does dividing up games based on their mechanics "go right past the real question which is whether the narrative is of interest to the players at all"? If "the narrative" is of interest to a player, how would what type of game a given game is classified as make any difference at all? A player interested in playing D&D for the purpose of creating a story is most likely not giving to give a fuck what I or anyone else classify it as, and why should they? You continue to assert that calling a game a certain type of game has some magical power over how the game can be used by it's owners, which is absolutely not the case, as you have readily pointed out. Folks have been using D&D to make games of creating stories since before anyone even started talking about "story games", despite most of D&D's tools being ill-suited to the task. This, I would gather, is the very reason story games have been written. They are purposely designed to provide the experience of collaboratively creating a story, with tools much more suited to this task. That is what I am classifying. That is also why WoD can be called a "storyteller" game by it's writers, but not actually be a "story game" as we know them today. Despite it's stated goal, most of it's tools are ill-suited to the task. This is also, I imagine, why many story gamers dislike WoD. I could be wrong there, but I doubt it.

Quote from: One Horse Town;458414Odd how some storygame authors have spent years creating dividing lines in the hobby in order to make themselves sound different to the mainstream (and been fucking insulting about it, to boot) and this is perfectly fine to their fans, yet when someone else has the timerity to discuss a different dividing line to these self-styled auteurs, some of the fans of said authors cry bloody murder.

It baffles me.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;458409See folks, I'm not responsible for every flame war around here.

Yeah well. Til next time, though!

Quote from: JDCorley;458417Just using the regular old dictionary definition here, folks, it's nothing crazy.  Just a normal old narrative, story, account of events or experiences, a chronicle, tale, account, recital, history or report.

Precisely. Now learn to read. Words have meaning.

Quote from: Benoist;458459Precisely. Now learn to read. Words have meaning.

To add to this PSA, buy the Oxford Concise Dictionary of Literary Terms.  Turn to the N section.  Find "Narrative" therein.  Read it, learn it, never look back.

Quote from: JDCorley;458415Okay...not sure what that has to do with anything, you seem to have pulled that out of thin air, it has nothing to do with anything I said.

But you do agree that whether a character hits someone can be relevant to a narrative, right? And if I am trying to decide if a fictional character hits someone, a mechanic that tells me to roll a die, add some stuff up and compare some numbers will directly control the narrative at that point, right?

It depends. It can come close, if you're doing it in the context of creating a "narrative"".  However, I would say that the mechanics you describe would not truly directly affect "the narrative". They influence "the narrative". However, the raw numbers can actually be narrated in many different ways while still being consistent with the numerical result.

QuoteNope, review the thread. I said your definition was garbage, because it meant that we were merely dividing game products, which was unhelpful to players trying to converse about the experiences they liked or didn't like. You then triumphantly replied that players might like or dislike different experiences.  Since this absolutely supports what I said, I pointed that out. To which now you fold your arms and give the smuggest smile possible, I assume, with no sense of irony.

And I say your definition is garbage, because it's so vague and encompassing that it actually says very little. Now that I know how you use the term, when you write "story game", I anticipate being forced to search for a great deal more information just to divine what style of game you're referring to, and that's before I even get to the specifics. It would actually be more helpful if you don't use the term "story game" at all.

Quote from: Benoist;458458Yeah well. Til next time, though!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBDF04fQKtQ

Buy It? It's available online... for free;

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_us1270505#m_en_us1270505

a spoken or written account of connected events; a story:the hero of his modest narrative

the narrated part or parts of a literary work , as distinct from dialogue.


Dialogue involves an exchange of concepts and values. Narrative doesn't, as  it is the sole purview of the storyteller.

That's really why I don't like storygames. There is only one active participant at the gaming table... The rest are merely voyeurs.

Quote from: GameDaddy;458467Buy It? It's available online... for free;

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_us1270505#m_en_us1270505

I was talking about a different book that is specific about what "narrative" means as a literary concept, not a general dictionary.