Quote from: jhkim;458831What I'm opposed to is morons who advocate a one true way of role-playing - that their way of pretending to be an elf is objectively superior to others.  I apply that equally to story game authors & fans, and to traditional RPG authors & fans.

Cool. What I oppose is assholes who think they are mightier-than-thou shifting goalposts continually, using all the most inane rhetorical bullshit they can come up with to avoid addressing actual arguments, and use politically correct nonsense and internet memes to give them a supposedly higher ground.

Quote from: Benoist;458832Cool. What I oppose is assholes who think they are mightier-than-thou shifting goalposts continually, using all the most inane rhetorical bullshit they can come up with to avoid addressing actual arguments, and use politically correct nonsense and internet memes to give them a supposedly higher ground.

Fair enough.  To summarize, my general position here:

The label "story games" gets used for a lot of games that aren't like traditional tabletop RPGs along the lines of D&D.  However, those games are often very different from each other, and don't have a single focus.  There are many that give players control of things outside their PC, but there are also many that don't.  

I don't think that all the games labelled "story games" are focused on creating a good story.  Once Upon A Time, for example, while it does create a fairy tale, doesn't concentrate on trying to make a good, well-structured one.  The fun of that game isn't in writing a good story - it is in interacting with the other players and riffing off each others' ideas and coming up with some kind of story that touches on the cards you have.

Quote from: jhkim;458835I don't think that all the games labelled "story games" are focused on creating a good story.  Once Upon A Time, for example, while it does create a fairy tale, doesn't concentrate on trying to make a good, well-structured one.

I think this is an important point, so I'm going to highlight it. Defining STGs as the place where "good stories" happen is like defining RPGs as the place where "good roleplaying" happens.

Quality of output isn't really being guaranteed (or even necessarily desired) in either case.

Quote from: estar;458823Sure you can, just like you can use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail. It will get the job done just not very well. Other mechanics are far better suited for allowing a group to create a communal story than those found in a RPG.

I strongly disagree, as I've stated before, the two chief elements of story, character decisions and interesting situations are specifically called out in RPGs as highly important, and placed in the hands of players and GMs respectively.  This is a very powerful story creation mechanic. This mechanic has been recognized throughout the history of the hobby. The earliest game on my shelf that talks about the creation of story is James Bond 007 from 1987. I know there were many earlier than that, too.

QuoteStory Games in contrast focus on plot driving towards an ending. Characters are important only as far as they drive the plot. Individual games focus on specific types of stories. Like Once upon a Time from Atlas Games is a great way of creating fairy tales. It wouldn't have benefited from detailed combat rules, a skill system, or character stats all elements of RPG.

What-you-call story games are not story games if they don't drive towards an ending? So Dogs in the Vineyard is not a story game because it is geared for ongoing campaign play?  With Great Power is not a story game because it is geared for long-term comic book style play?  In A Wicked Age is not a story game because it doesn't even work without many sessions? Universalis doesn't have an ending, in fact the long term of the economy doesn't even turn on if you only play a few sessions. Don't Rest Your Head doesn't have an ending. Sorcerer sure as hell doesn't have an ending. Houses of the Blooded has a season mechanic just so there won't be any endings.

Interesting definition. I agree that one of the key factors of most of what-we-call stories is the ending.  There are very few counterexamples, comic books and soap operas being among them.  I could definitely see a fruitful definition of an approach to gaming that assumes a story with an ending, you might even convince me that it is better than my definition! But I get the feeling you don't really think that, and that you think games like In A Wicked Age, which, though they are specifically designed for very long term or indefinite play, are story games. Oh well.

Quote from: Phillip;458816When and where did he say this?

Dragon? I forget, it was a long time ago. Something about time records. Anyway, my point remains, everyone hates everyone forever, and that's completely normal.

Quote from: One Horse Town;458813Freedom within a game allows you to go in whatever direction you want - creating a story, hexcrawl, sandbox, dungeon-bash, whatever. Narrow systems (what the system matters hardcore produce), and a system that funnels the players towards the designers desired outcomes facilitate a different playstyle.

Yep, not every system is equally suited for all approaches!

QuoteWithin that second group are storygames.

Nope!

Quote from: jhkim;458831(283)

You're using weaselly language of "some fans", when you presumably mean me and JDCorley.  If you're going to accuse someone of hypocrisy, do so clearly.  

I can honestly say that you never entered my mind, John. However, if you want to wear that shoe, be my guest.

Quote from: JDCorley;458840Nope!

You'll have to do better than that.

Quote from: JDCorley;458839Dragon? I forget, it was a long time ago. Something about time records. Anyway, my point remains, everyone hates everyone forever, and that's completely normal.

Yes, I want to say that this is in an early back issue of The Dragon [sic]; I remember reading it--maybe it's in one of the editorials collected for one of the Dragon special editions that re-published early articles. It was more along the lines of, "Play any way you want if you must, just know that you're not playing real D&D any more." I had quite a moment of cognitive dissonance, since the DMG had told me I was in charge.

I actually played some Fiasco over the weekend, to my initial hesitation. It was fun, because I was having a good time with friends. But certainly not my norm, and not something I would seek out again, but I would play it with friends again.

I can definitely see places that it differs from my taste in a "tabletop game in which players take the role of characters". If you want to call that the "storygame/rpg divide", then have at.

As for me, though, I am hesitant to go there. Planting my taste preferences flag and declaring anything that doesn't match this as "not an RPG" seems so "John Wick assailing 4e" to me.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;458859As for me, though, I am hesitant to go there. Planting my taste preferences flag and declaring anything that doesn't match this as "not an RPG" seems so "John Wick assailing 4e" to me.

Six people sit at a table. One is GMing, three are storygaming, two are roleplaying. Is this an RPG or a storygame?

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;458859As for me, though, I am hesitant to go there. Planting my taste preferences flag and declaring anything that doesn't match this as "not an RPG" seems so "John Wick assailing 4e" to me.

Pretty much my own sentiments on the matter, in a nutshell.

Quote from: JDCorley;458838I strongly disagree, as I've stated before, the two chief elements of story, character decisions and interesting situations are specifically called out in RPGs as highly important, and placed in the hands of players and GMs respectively.  This is a very powerful story creation mechanic. This mechanic has been recognized throughout the history of the hobby. The earliest game on my shelf that talks about the creation of story is James Bond 007 from 1987. I know there were many earlier than that, too.

Live action roleplaying and Theater share many techniques. Props, make-up, set setup, directing actors (the people that play non-player characters). But despite the similarities live-action roleplaying is not theater. The reason because it is a game, a sport, and the group of independent characters with their own goals played by the players.  

The closest thing is improvised Theater where the actors are riffing of each other to create entertainment for themselves or an audience. There are rules that the actors may follow to allow some level of coordination, but the absence of the sport and independent players make improve theater its own thing.  A good improv group would have to make many changes to run a live-action event and vice-versa.

The same thing with Story Game versus tabletop roleplaying games.

Each share a many similar techniques but are ultimately are different things because of what they are focused. You mentioned characters and interesting situations are present in RPGs and Stories. And you are correct, but story have a third element is that is a predefined plot. This important element of story is no present in RPGs because the characters played by players are independent actors. The only obligation the player has in-game is to use the mechanics of the rules to interact with the setting as devised by the referee. The player(s) may very well not be interested in recovering the Sword of Wayland, but instead be interested in running a successful mushroom farm.

Quote from: JDCorley;458838The earliest game on my shelf that talks about the creation of story is James Bond 007 from 1987. I know there were many earlier than that, too.

Back in the 80s when RPGs, like James Bond 007, mentioned story it is because everything is new so the designers latched on useful terms from other artistic areas. The big change in the 80s was the realization that fun and interesting RPGs could be constructed around specific themes or scenarios like James Bond 007.

To me and many of my friends in NW PA this looked more like a return to wargame scenarios than any type of story gaming. Basically by agreeing to play James Bond 007, you agree to play a group of secret agents in a Bond type setting with fast cars, hot girls, and fancy gadgets. With mechanics tuned to that type of setting.

My experience with RPGs and games in general tells me that Story Games are fun for many gamers, but RPG mechanics are a poor fit. There are better ways of creating a game based around collaborative story-telling than with RPGs mechanics.

Quote from: JDCorley;458838So Dogs in the Vineyard is not a story game because it is geared for ongoing campaign play?  

As I said above Dogs in the Vineyard would be a campaign module in another RPG. It is marketed as a story game but doesn't make it a story game.

Quote from: JDCorley;458838With Great Power is not a story game because it is geared for long-term comic book style play?  In A Wicked Age is not a story game because it doesn't even work without many sessions? Universalis doesn't have an ending, in fact the long term of the economy doesn't even turn on if you only play a few sessions. Don't Rest Your Head doesn't have an ending. Sorcerer sure as hell doesn't have an ending. Houses of the Blooded has a season mechanic just so there won't be any endings.

Some of these games are like Dogs in the Vineyard which are nothing more than specialized RPGs that would be an adventure or a campaign in a more general purpose RPG. Other, like Universalis, have meta-mechanics that cause the same issues that the D&D 4e in that they distract the player from playing their character as if they were in a setting by forcing them to think about the game as a game.

While the focus of these mechanics, like in Universalis, differ from D&D 4e's emphasis on kewl powerz. Their effect is the same and makes for a poor tabletop RPG. The designers of these games should focus on developing their own market with it's own set of expectations and perhaps they would have more sales than they do now.*

Quote from: JDCorley;458838Interesting definition. I agree that one of the key factors of most of what-we-call stories is the ending.  There are very few counterexamples, comic books and soap operas being among them.  I could definitely see a fruitful definition of an approach to gaming that assumes a story with an ending, you might even convince me that it is better than my definition! But I get the feeling you don't really think that, and that you think games like In A Wicked Age, which, though they are specifically designed for very long term or indefinite play, are story games. Oh well.

What I think is that Tabletop RPGs that introduce meta mechanics in the middle of play are poor tabletop RPGs by breaking immersion. That if they really want make games that focus on world building, story, or whatever other than playing a character in a setting that they should forge ahead and pioneer their own category rather than passing themselves off as an poorly done RPG.

This would free these types of games from the expectations of tabletop RPGs and to experiment with other types of mechanics to better represent whatever they are trying to focus on. Whether it is story telling, world building, or a specific situation.

That what happened to tabletop roleplaying compared to it's wargame predecessors. Rather than make a tabletop RPG some specialized wargame, RPG companies went off and did their own thing.

----------------------------------------------
*-The sales figures of Ramshead as given here

http://universalisrpg.com/index.php?module=Pagesetter&type=file&func=get&tid=4&fid=document&pid=11

are similar to my Majestic Wilderlands which is just a supplement. The first 16 months of Revised Universalis have 584 sales and I have 451 sales.

Quote from: GameDaddy;458864Six people sit at a table. One is GMing, three are storygaming, two are roleplaying. Is this an RPG or a storygame?

Without more information I would have to say they are playing an RPG. Whatever going on the in the individual players head they are pursuing separate goals which need a referee to adjudicate and resolve the conflicts.

Now if you add the observation they have meta-game mechanics and two players are not taking advantage of them because they are roleplaying their character then they probably are playing a story game.

Quote from: GameDaddy;458864Six people sit at a table. One is GMing, three are storygaming, two are roleplaying. Is this an RPG or a storygame?

You just answered your own question? Three people are story gaming.  You seem to think that, after I define it as an approach, that one sentence later I would forget my own definition!

Two people play chess, one is playing casually, the other extremely competitively. Is this a casual game or a competitive game?