Quote from: jhkim;1077329On the definitely story games side are GMless and rotating GM games like Polaris, The Quiet Year, Microscope, Fiasco, and A Thousand and One Nights.

Games out of The Forge are very likely to be considered such as well - like Sorcerer, Dogs in the Vineyard. Hillfolk is likely to be lumped in with these.

Then there are various GMed games which may or may not be considered story games, depending on who you talk to - Burning Wheel, Mouse Guard, FATE, Apocalypse World (and derivatives), Cortex Plus (Smallville, Marvel Heroic Roleplaying).

In general, the story games community tends to be very broad in what is called a story game - but others are typically more narrow.

Rotating GMs is common in dnd, I dont think that has much to do with a game being a Story Game?

Ok.  I might have a better understanding of the animal now...

If the significance and integrity of the Die Roll is more important than the Story; you might be playing an RPG.

If the continuity of the Story is more important than the Die Roll; you are playing a Story Game.

Quote from: Dan Davenport;1078668That's somewhat correct. What I mean when I say "first person" is immersive roleplaying -- seeing the world through the senses of your character.

A "third person" game is one in which you're telling the story of what happens to your character. Rolls in such games are less about success/failure and more about "narrative control". You're seeing your character from the "outside".

So, in a first person game, you might roll to have your PC kick open a door, and if you succeed, the GM would tell you what's waiting on the other side.

In a third person game, you might roll to see whether you or the GM get to describe the results of your PC's attempt to kick open the door, up to and including what's waiting on the other side.

That's very helpful, thank you.

Quote from: Razor 007;1078675If the significance and integrity of the Die Roll is more important than the Story; you might be playing an RPG.

If the continuity of the Story is more important than the Die Roll; you are playing a Story Game.

Which I've seen both in D&D, Rules Cyclopedia.  Hell, by this definition the AD&D 1e game I started back in the mid-80s, where the two girl DM's were running an intrigue heavy game involving Drow was a Story Game.

Quote from: Dan Davenport;1078659To my mind, the player experiences a traditional RPG in first person and a storygame in third person.

Yeah, this is Edwards/Forge "actor stance" 1st person vs "author stance" 3rd person - being the character vs talking about the character.

"Storygames" are really "Story Making" games, and participants normally take an author-stance to the characters.

As you know but some don't, this has nothing to do with Storyteller games, where the GM tells players (who are in actor stance/1st person) a pre-written story. That is railroading and is associated most strongly with White Wolf, but applies to all the series-of-pre-written scenes adventures popular in the '90s.

Quote from: jhkim;1078663You're muddling the issue here. If a published adventure has branches, then it isn't a linear railroad. Likewise, if it has multiple locations which can be taken in different order, it isn't a linear railroad. However, an adventure which is laid out as a series of scenes in order is pretty definitionally a railroad. What was surprising to me was just how many modules in the 1990s were literally a list of scenes in fixed order.

I'll buy that there are trade-offs between having branches versus having locations versus having random events. But a linear list of scenes in order pretty directly leads to railroading.

I don't think I am doing that. If you would kindly reread what has been said above, there was a reference to preplanned railroaded adventures (are there any preplanned adventures who are NOT railroaded? seems muddy). And then this was tied to whole games, the middle school of RPGs, more simulationist games, if you will. And then you came in and mentioned three role-playing games as examples for this, one of which I can competently speak about: 90s Shadowrun. And using 90s Shadowrun's published scenarios as an example for the above is generally false. In fact, the whole existence of the Legwork section in SR scenarios contradicts a linear succession of scenes: in general, PCs visit some kind of contacts to get information, leading to non-pre-planned scenes, and the information acquired in these scenes generally leads to the unlocking of more locations - in SOME order.

And it is my impression that more complex games and games with pre-planned adventures, the 90s school, have been declining in popularity in part because the people who like these games do not do very much to defend them online. Derogatory things are being said about them by by both gamists (usually connected to D&D in some form or another) and storygamers, as a part of gaming politics about which is the best way to play (yes, politics in gaming is not just about SJWs versus the alt-right). I am not sure if either of these groups is any longer used to getting any kind of pushback.

Which is also why I asked in the GURPS thread which prominent figure in RPGs is left defending more complex games.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1077332Anything Pundit doesn't like.  That's it.  Don't believe anything else.  The list isn't consistent or even makes sense.

I'll pop in to agree with this.

Quote from: Razor 007;1078675Ok.  I might have a better understanding of the animal now...

If the significance and integrity of the Die Roll is more important than the Story; you might be playing an RPG.

If the continuity of the Story is more important than the Die Roll; you are playing a Story Game.

No. Do not take the local hive mind as gospel. "Role Playing Game"...you're playing a role...in a game....it's a Role Playing Game...

It's that simple. The rest is overly-wrought, Internet-speed "debate" collected to protect the local darlings from things they feel threaten their world.

Wait... is the idea that Story Games are NOT RPGs?

...that doesn't make any sense.

Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1078739Wait... is the idea that Story Games are NOT RPGs?

...that doesn't make any sense.

Welcome to Pundit's World.  

Quote from: Razor 007;1078675Ok.  I might have a better understanding of the animal now...

If the significance and integrity of the Die Roll is more important than the Story; you might be playing an RPG.

If the continuity of the Story is more important than the Die Roll; you are playing a Story Game.

I think these can both by rpgs, but for the first Gameplay > Plot, and the second Plot > Gameplay. My firm preference is #GameplayFirst

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1078750Welcome to Pundit's World.  

Yuuuuuup!

Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1078739Wait... is the idea that Story Games are NOT RPGs?

...that doesn't make any sense.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1078750Welcome to Pundit's World.  

Story games are the games Pundit doesn't like

Quote from: Trond;1078994Story games are the games Pundit doesn't like

Pretty much then we are told by Pundit that is not true at all.

Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1078739Wait... is the idea that Story Games are NOT RPGs?

...that doesn't make any sense.

For a more serious answer, I have found that many "sand-boxy" games, no matter which system, often take on some characteristics of "story games". For instance when I have played in such campaigns, the players sometimes suggest things that the GM will actually use to flesh out the world further. Of course, the "story games" tend to have an actual mechanic for this, but the overall difference is not as great as some might think. It's actually great if you as GM have no time (or are too lazy) to prepare for the game. As far as this "story game" style goes, I found Houses of the Blooded was great fun.