What makes an TTRPG a "Narrative Game" (Apocalypse World Discussion)

[thefutilist]

Plot Now may be a more accurate term for what these folks are after. As I related in the other thread, games work best as a medium for story when they're about story making rather than story telling, because games inherently provide for story making. Even baseball.

Game 3 of the 1932 World Series didn't become Legendary when Babe Ruth called his shot in the 5th inning just because it was cool. The entire game of Baseball and how it was designed allowed for the emergent narrative that came when a nation of different baseball teams competed over a year of games, leading to Babe Ruth pointing that bat towards center field. Such a story doesn't come from people telling stories, but simply playing the game.

Now, these folks take issue with that because they read too much into how all of that makes their games sound bad, especially when I point out that they're all about story telling (and is clearly what they want), but even their style of games aren't incompatible with storymaking. I've never not praised Ironsworn and its descendent games for doing this well, and I'd throw Fellowship in there too.

Exactly. Now you just have to figure out why deep game play loops don't provide objective fun and you'll have got it. Remember that it's a social activity we're after, not 'just' story making.

 

[Emberashh]

Now you just have to figure out why deep game play loops don't provide objective fun

I don't know, may be play more games and widen your horizons?

Course, if I opt to read into why you said this, I'm guessing you're just using the word "deep" as synonym for "crunchy and obtuse" which isn't what it means. Uno has a deep gameplay loop, for clarity.

Remember that it's a social activity we're after, not 'just' story making.

If you can't be social while playing a game then I can't imagine why you're even into RPGs at all.

I mean, I've had the misfortune of giving FATAL an honest try, and I never had a problem being social when I did, and from the perspective of this topic, its more than a little biased to be painting what I'm talking about as being so beyond the pale that they're supposedly worse than FATAL and completely block all ability to be social with one's friends while playing.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

So, every creative agenda is seeking a kind of payoff. What would you say the payoff is for addressing a thematic premise? What happens when you address a thematic premise, in the context of a game that makes stories?



I say the agenda is addressing the thematic premise, "What peril are you willing to face for gold or glory?" etc. There's no "plot," nothing but characters and their motivations (alignments) and an escalating danger meter (level). "What does it mean to be a lawful character in a canyon overrun by goblins?" That's your Story Now, right there.

I'm telling you, it's integral to the RPG experience. If you retreat too much from the promise of unexpected narrative events, you just aren't playing an RPG any more. Anything that meets the criteria for being a bona fide RPG has "story now" in its bones. It's implicit in the promise of free will.

No, because when the GM then exercises the seven steps of arrow crafting so that you can shoot more goblin's eyes out, there's no more thematic premise here. Really, take it from me, having had ALL the experience ever needed with that sort of play. Yes, trad style play can address themes, but it can't really guarantee that they align with anything the PCs care about or that would matter to them at all. Classic play deals with that by assuming one single thematic possibility, treasure hunt, and thus one motivation for PCs to win the treasure and power ups. With any set type of plot though, you have lost something.

 

[pawsplay]

You've got it wrong. Edwards is calling a particular agenda Narrativism. You're confusing an element of play for an agenda. Does that clear things up?

How am I wrong? What do you think I'm confused about? I'm criticizing the model.

 

[pawsplay]

No, because when the GM then exercises the seven steps of arrow crafting so that you can shoot more goblin's eyes out, there's no more thematic premise here. Really, take it from me, having had ALL the experience ever needed with that sort of play. Yes, trad style play can address themes, but it can't really guarantee that they align with anything the PCs care about or that would matter to them at all. Classic play deals with that by assuming one single thematic possibility, treasure hunt, and thus one motivation for PCs to win the treasure and power ups. With any set type of plot though, you have lost something.

The mere presence of alignments mean there are actually a diversity of thematic possibilities.

 

[pemerton]

The mere presence of alignments mean there are actually a diversity of thematic possibilities.

You may find my old thread about this interesting: "Narrativist" 9-point alignment

 

[pemerton]

No, because when the GM then exercises the seven steps of arrow crafting so that you can shoot more goblin's eyes out, there's no more thematic premise here.

The seven steps of arrow crafting sounds kind-of cool. Like a descriptor for a HeroWars/Quest PC, that gets used as an augment for an epic bow shot.

But maybe that's not what you had in mind?

 

[thefutilist]

How am I wrong? What do you think I'm confused about? I'm criticizing the model.

The agenda part of the model is about social reward. So in theory you can’t discern what happens in the fiction, which is observable, with reward which is internal. In practice it’s more complicated because of course you can see what excites people and what they talk about and so on. Also, if you have a certain reward you’re going for, that’s most likely going to influence the type of fiction as well.

So in theory you could have a bunch of people with a gamist agenda play Apocalypse World and be unable to tell they have that agenda. Vice versa with 1E.

Or

It’s not about the stuff, it’s about why the stuff is fun to you.

 

[soviet]

The mere presence of alignments mean there are actually a diversity of thematic possibilities.

Possibilities, sure. But 'includes' and 'occasionally' are not 'focuses on'. The characters have an alignment but the entire rest of their character sheet is about how they fight monsters and explore old ruins. Play isn't driven by the characters' moral positions. The GM isn't focusing their prep on testing and exploring the limits of each alignment. There's no feedback loop from these moral dilemmas back into the mechanics of the game; the player characters don't change in any mechanical sense other than becoming more powerful.

 

[pawsplay]

Possibilities, sure. But 'includes' and 'occasionally' are not 'focuses on'. The characters have an alignment but the entire rest of their character sheet is about how they fight monsters and explore old ruins. Play isn't driven by the characters' moral positions. The GM isn't focusing their prep on testing and exploring the limits of each alignment. There's no feedback loop from these moral dilemmas back into the mechanics of the game; the player characters don't change in any mechanical sense other than becoming more powerful.

Then why do people worry so much about baby goblins? According to your analysis of the play, they should be nothing more than tiny little blobs of XP.