This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation  (Read 64569 times)

Manzanaro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • M
  • Posts: 531
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« on: February 26, 2016, 03:09:53 AM »
Bit of a flip on another ongoing topic.

So the premise is basically: let's imagine we have a system of rules that cover a bunch of the things that we might find in a novel of the fantasy genre. So there are rules for how to determine the winner of a fight, how magic works, what various monsters can do, and etc. The thing is that none of these rules are geared towards narrative concerns; they don't factor in who the 'protagonist' is in a combat, or how to use the rules to bring drama and tension to the game, or how to get the players of the game's characters to act in a manner consistent with what we might expect from a fantasy novel.

Now, obviously, one may have absolutely no interest in these sort of narrative concerns, and this question would not even be worth considering. You might approach the rules as a framework for exercises in logistics or purely as a game to be won. You might find that, regardless of whether a game's rules are oriented around fantasy, superheroes, vampires, cyberpunk, or anything else, all of this really just boils down to trappings and that "kill them all and take their stuff" tends to be a lot more interesting than trying to emulate genre conventions or to employ narrative principles as rules of gameplay.

But I think that a complete disregard for the narrative that emerges from playing an RPG is rare. I think that, generally speaking, most players would prefer that their game sessions end up telling a good interesting story, rather than, say, just producing a dull series of events completely lacking in drama or any of the other qualities that draw people to fiction.

Now, to show my own cards here? I do not tend to like games where narrative principles are too heavily encoded in the rules of the game. I don't want to know for a fact that the main characters are not actually in danger because they are narratively protected by the rules of the game. I don't want a final outcome that is never in doubt. I don't want to be railroaded along some predetermined plot trajectory. I don't want the villain to always escape because that is how it works in the source material.

But I DO want the events of the game to be compelling, dramatic, suspenseful, involving and all the other things that are hallmarks of a good story. And strict rules of simulation do not 'care' about any of these characteristics. Under rules of simulation, Batman and Tarzan die pretty early on and the Fellowship of the Ring is lost under a tide of orcs.

So what I thought might be interesting to discuss is tools and techniques for doing this. How do you, whether as GM or player, promote a good compelling narrative under rules of simulation?
You're one microscopic cog in his catastrophic plan, designed and directed by his red right hand.

- Nick Cave

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2016, 03:34:55 AM »
There are resource systems that promote a dramatic narrative of rising tension without threatening immersion too much. Ablative hit points are a good example; they can help ensure the PCs probably make it as far as the final battle with the BBEG, while keeping the outcome of that last fight uncertain & thus tense however many hp the PCs have going in to it. Contrast with Fate Points which are (a) anti-immersive and (b) may ensure there is no chance of PC death in any one particular fight, including the climax.

Shawn Driscoll

  • Role-Play Purist
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2016, 03:50:35 AM »
Most players just sit around and do nothing until spoken to by a DM. At which point, much "um..."ing occurs by the players while thinking of something to do according to what their character sheet has listed or checked off and what the game rules will allow.

Obviously, story and narration do not come up during the session. If anything, the players remember more which torrent they downloaded the game's PDF from after a campaign.

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2016, 03:52:19 AM »
You don't.

If what the characters are doing is interesting and dangerous, one of the players who is good at storytelling will tell a great story about what happened years later over a round of beers.  Just like soldiers, cops, firefighters etc do.

Roleplay an interesting character in an interesting world, you get interesting stories told about it after the fact.  Done.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

Manzanaro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • M
  • Posts: 531
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2016, 05:03:22 AM »
Quote from: S'mon;881468
There are resource systems that promote a dramatic narrative of rising tension without threatening immersion too much. Ablative hit points are a good example; they can help ensure the PCs probably make it as far as the final battle with the BBEG, while keeping the outcome of that last fight uncertain & thus tense however many hp the PCs have going in to it. Contrast with Fate Points which are (a) anti-immersive and (b) may ensure there is no chance of PC death in any one particular fight, including the climax.


So is everything leading up to the BBEG fight just basically filler? And if things do take a bad turn and there ends up being a TPK, do you still find the narrative satisfactory? Do the players? Not being facetious here.

The other thing is, that in terms of gameplay, I can see this kind of scenario being fun... you go through the dungeon fighting a bunch of minor encounters and then you fight the big bad. But in terms of enjoying the actual narrative that emerges from play? I have been gaming off and on for over 35 years now, and a series of battles is not going to be enough in and of itself to get me invested in what is going on, even if there is some level of genuine drama purely in watching my characters HP dwindle. Is this kind of formula enough for you to personally feel invested?

EDIT: Regardless, I think you are giving a good answer here, and I think maybe we can broaden this specific example out into a more general principle:

One way of getting a strong narrative out of simulationist rules is by focusing on the drama that is inherent within the rules themselves, such as depleting game resources like HP.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;881468
Most players just sit around and do nothing until spoken to by a DM. At which point, much "um..."ing occurs by the players while thinking of something to do according to what their character sheet has listed or checked off and what the game rules will allow.

Obviously, story and narration do not come up during the session. If anything, the players remember more which torrent they downloaded the game's PDF from after a campaign.


I think I understand why you have "Solo Role Playing" in your sig block now!

Quote from: CRKrueger;881468
You don't.

If what the characters are doing is interesting and dangerous, one of the players who is good at storytelling will tell a great story about what happened years later over a round of beers. Just like soldiers, cops, firefighters etc do.

Roleplay an interesting character in an interesting world, you get interesting stories told about it after the fact. Done.


By narrative I don't mean a hypothetical story that might be told about the game somewhere down the line; I'm talking about the experience of the events as it unfolds. We read a book and experience the narrative of that book. We watch a movie and experience the narrative of that movie. We play a session of an RPG and we similarly experience a narrative of imaginary events.

So in that sense, you are giving something of a non answer here. What kind of things about the characters and world is it that you find interesting? And how do you convey these things in the context of an RPG? Is it important that the rules support you or can you be interested in the characters and world regardless of the game rules and what they tell you about how events turn out?

EDIT: Let me try and give a specific example of what I mean. Let's say that as part of the interesting (to me) world that I create, there is a powerful evil dragon living in the mountains west of the city where the PCs live. The PCs get wind of this dragon and march to the mountains and directly into the dragon's lair. For some reason they thought this was a good idea, but they all end up being killed very quickly by the dragon. Is this a good satisfying narrative? Are there ways to make what feels like essentially a random TPK into a satisfying narrative experience?
« Last Edit: February 26, 2016, 05:24:23 AM by Manzanaro »
You're one microscopic cog in his catastrophic plan, designed and directed by his red right hand.

- Nick Cave

nDervish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • n
  • Posts: 750
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2016, 06:21:26 AM »
Quote from: Manzanaro;881461
Now, obviously, one may have absolutely no interest in these sort of narrative concerns, and this question would not even be worth considering. You might approach the rules as a framework for exercises in logistics or purely as a game to be won. You might find that, regardless of whether a game's rules are oriented around fantasy, superheroes, vampires, cyberpunk, or anything else, all of this really just boils down to trappings and that "kill them all and take their stuff" tends to be a lot more interesting than trying to emulate genre conventions or to employ narrative principles as rules of gameplay.


There is another option aside from "Story Now" and "kill 'em and take their stuff".  I have no interest in narrative concerns and approach my RPGs with an interest in playing the role of a person in an alternate reality.  So explore that reality, find interesting things to do, and do them.

Just like in the real world, if you're doing interesting things, then the experience is interesting.  It's also likely to give you a good story to tell afterwards, and, when you tell it, you're likely to use various narrative devices to enhance the story, but, when you're doing it, you (generally) aren't doing it for the sake of the eventual story and you (generally) aren't actively altering your actions to fit established tropes in order to get a "better" story out of it.  You just do it and let any stories (or lack of them) worry about themselves.

Quote from: Manzanaro;881476
So is everything leading up to the BBEG fight just basically filler?


Personally, I don't even follow a "lead up to the BBEG fight" structure.  There's a place.  There's stuff in the place.  What the PCs do with it is up to them.  It's not "story filler", it's a natural part of the simulated world they're exploring.

Quote from: Manzanaro;881476
And if things do take a bad turn and there ends up being a TPK, do you still find the narrative satisfactory? Do the players? Not being facetious here.


Offhand, I can't recall ever being in a TPK, but it seems like a lot of them generate good stories, given how many people tell crazy stories about times when their character died in a TPK.  I have no idea what proportion of TPKs end up that way vs. how many only produce a bunch of pissed-off players, though.

But I can tell you that one of my most memorable RPG experiences from the late 80s was the time that my character was one-shotted by another PC, completely out of the blue.  And, no, this wasn't him being a jackass or approaching the situation as "purely a game to be won".  On the contrary, it was a good moment of roleplaying - my cleric had just discovered the ghost of his dead ex-lover and was about to destroy her permanently.  It made perfect sense in the alternate reality of the game that he would do whatever it took to stop my character and, as a player, I found that it resulted in a very satisfactory narrative, seeing as I still remember and retell the story today.

Quote from: Manzanaro;881476

I have been gaming off and on for over 35 years now, and a series of battles is not going to be enough in and of itself to get me invested in what is going on, even if there is some level of genuine drama purely in watching my characters HP dwindle. Is this kind of formula enough for you to personally feel invested?


No, because your formula left out role-playing.  Getting into your character and living in the setting through that character is what gives meaning to the battles beyond simple exercises in tactics and/or dice throwing.  (Which is not to say that the battles are at all necessary, only that, if there are battles, role-playing can give them meaning without needing to introduce narrative concerns.)

Quote from: Manzanaro;881476

By narrative I don't mean a hypothetical story that might be told about the game somewhere down the line; I'm talking about the experience of the events as it unfolds. We read a book and experience the narrative of that book. We watch a movie and experience the narrative of that movie. We play a session of an RPG and we similarly experience a narrative of imaginary events.


I disagree with how you're using "narrative" here.  The experience of playing an RPG, for me, is not "narrative" in the same way as reading a book or watching a movie.  When I play an RPG, I am there, making my own decisions and doing what I want to do, the same as if it were real.  I don't experience it as if I'm telling a story and I'm absolutely not consuming someone else's story about the decisions someone else made.  (Incidentally, I really, really hate fiction which is written in second-person for basically this reason.  The character isn't me and I have no influence over their decisions, so don't address me as if I am.)

Quote from: Manzanaro;881476

EDIT: Let me try and give a specific example of what I mean. Let's say that as part of the interesting (to me) world that I create, there is a powerful evil dragon living in the mountains west of the city where the PCs live. The PCs get wind of this dragon and march to the mountains and directly into the dragon's lair. For some reason they thought this was a good idea, but they all end up being killed very quickly by the dragon. Is this a good satisfying narrative? Are there ways to make what feels like essentially a random TPK into a satisfying narrative experience?


Whether the dragon scenario produces a satisfying narrative is all about the context of the events, not the events themselves.

If the players hear about the dragon, say "A plot hook!  We must pursue it!", and dutifully march into the dragon's lair to be slaughtered, then, no, that's not terribly satisfying.

If, on the other hand, one of the PCs is a ruler and his lands are attacked by a dragon, then he discovers that the dragon was enraged by a thief stealing from its hoard, so the PCs prepare themselves to deal with the threat before it causes more harm to those close to them, possibly stopping off along the way to settle accounts and say their farewells in case they don't return, and they slay the dragon, but are mortally wounded in return... then you can get a pretty decent (if tragic) narrative out of it.  (As evidenced by the fact that this is basically the death of Beowulf, translated into a party-based RPG.)

The Butcher

  • Cyborg Shock Trooper
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7183
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2016, 06:23:48 AM »
Let the dice fall where they may. They have a better sense of drama than most of us.

Don't prep plots or stories that hinge on PC action. Your NPCs can and should have lives of their own, start conflicts, etc. but the PCs are the players' to control.

Nexus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • N
  • Posts: 5919
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2016, 07:16:40 AM »
Quote from: Manzanaro;881476

EDIT: Let me try and give a specific example of what I mean. Let's say that as part of the interesting (to me) world that I create, there is a powerful evil dragon living in the mountains west of the city where the PCs live. The PCs get wind of this dragon and march to the mountains and directly into the dragon's lair. For some reason they thought this was a good idea, but they all end up being killed very quickly by the dragon. Is this a good satisfying narrative? Are there ways to make what feels like essentially a random TPK into a satisfying narrative experience?


I think the answer depends on why these things are happening. If the PCs are just heading for the dragon because its there (its plot hook) then its probably not going to be very satisfying.

But if they have reasons. Are they going for revenge, duty, greed? What is the dragon doing. What makes it "evil" aside from being a dragon? Good stories have structure and connections that drive them, a compelling game will too.

I can easily imagine a very compelling, exciting if ultimately tragic story about a group of characters, driven by their pasts, duty or desires and thrown together by fate facing a great evil and, sadly outmatched, dying in the conflict.

I think you can capture that in an rpg too with the added notion that you don't know if the story will be tragic, bittersweet or epic and heroic until the sessions are over.
Remember when Illinois Nazis where a joke in the Blue Brothers movie?

Democracy, meh? (538)

 "The salient fact of American politics is that there are fifty to seventy million voters each of whom will volunteer to live, with his family, in a cardboard box under an overpass, and cook sparrows on an old curtain rod, if someone would only guarantee that the black, gay, Hispanic, liberal, whatever, in the next box over doesn’t even have a curtain rod, or a sparrow to put on it."

crkrueger

  • Hulk in the Vineyard
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12559
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2016, 07:27:29 AM »
I'm not giving a non-answer, I'm saying you're trying to force a narrative specifically into the roleplaying of a "simulationist" system, and I'm saying there's no point because that's not what it's for.

A traditional simulationist system is the physics engine of the setting.  That's it.   Someone wants to accomplish a task, they interface with the system to determine a result. That's it.

If you want an interesting narrative, make an interesting world.  Players will respond to an interesting world by roleplaying interesting people in interesting ways, and the end result will not be satisfying stories, but satisfying events.  As your players talk about how awesome your campaign is, that's where the stories come in.

As Louis Zamperini was living his life, he wasn't telling a story, he was living his life.  Because it was an amazing life with a lot of interesting events that happened, an author can create a story about his life, describing those events that is very satisfying, a good narrative.

Life is not a narrative.  The narrative comes later, literally as the events are recounted.  That's when the story is created, during the telling.  Events, they just happen.

So yeah a group of players waking up one day and for shits and giggles decides to attack a dragon because they think "If it is there, it is killable." then yeah that's not a very satisfying life and afterwards it won't make a very satisfying story except for the Dragon who is probably going to be a hit at the next Dragon get-together as they all laugh their asses off.
Even the the "cutting edge" storygamers for all their talk of narrative, plot, and drama are fucking obsessed with the god damned rules they use. - Estar

Yes, Sean Connery's thumb does indeed do megadamage. - Spinachcat

Isuldur is a badass because he stopped Sauron with a broken sword, but Iluvatar is the badass because he stopped Sauron with a hobbit. -Malleus Arianorum

"Tangency Edition" D&D would have no classes or races, but 17 genders to choose from. -TristramEvans

RosenMcStern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2016, 08:02:41 AM »
Quote from: S'mon;881468
There are resource systems that promote a dramatic narrative of rising tension without threatening immersion too much. Ablative hit points are a good example; they can help ensure the PCs probably make it as far as the final battle with the BBEG, while keeping the outcome of that last fight uncertain & thus tense however many hp the PCs have going in to it. Contrast with Fate Points which are (a) anti-immersive and (b) may ensure there is no chance of PC death in any one particular fight, including the climax.


I think we have discussed the subject to the death in recent threads: "immersiveness" is subjective. Your statement that element x is "objectively anti-immersive" is completely unfounded. They are anti-immersive for you, not for humanity.

Personally, I find much more "immersion-disruptive" the fact that at Level X a .45 revolver cannot kill me at point blank if it hits me, because this rule basically tells me that the physics of the world is not really in effect for high-level characters. I have no problem accepting that Fate Points break your immersion. Please understant that there are thousands of people for whom hit point inflation has the exact same effect: they break suspension of disbelief. Badly. I have plenty of players who simply refuse to play any d20-derived game for this reason, and constantly demand that we go back to d100 whenever I try to run anything D20.

The point is very simple: if you accept the principle of "let the dice fall" and "just emulate how the world goes", as the Butcher and Krueger stated, then hit point inflation are no more "immersive" than Fate Points, because they completely fuck up the emulation of physics in the rules. Just "for the heroes", of course.

The sad truth is, as Krueger said, that there is really no compromise if you are not willing to accept one. Either you accept the "Rurik syndrome", where any character can be killed, anti-climactically, by any blow, at any time - as it happens on real battlefields - or you are not really adopting the "rules as physics" model. It is up to you to decide whether you accept the inherent risk in exchange for the sense of authenticity, or you prefer another approach. If you go the latter way, there is no "more immersive" or "less immersive" compromise, just a compromise that works for you. And not necessarily for anyone else.
Paolo Guccione
Alephtar Games

Manzanaro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • M
  • Posts: 531
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2016, 08:27:10 AM »
But again, what I am asking about isn't "How do you get an experience from rules of simulation that will make a good story later" but "how do you get an experience that makes for a good narrative AS IT IS HAPPENING". If you don't want to call the experience of game events a narrative, call it what you want. But certainly we can describe this experience in terms we would use for the narrative of a book or movie or any other narrative form. A game can be compelling, tedious, immersive, dramatic, anticlimactic, etc.

Now we may indeed plow into a game without the slightest thought towards the qualities of the narrative emerging from play, but that doesn't have much bearing on what I am asking about in the OP.

Dervish mentions immersion as a desirable quality. I totally agree (which is probably surprising if you were assuming my use of the word "narrative" meant I would be spouting a bunch of GNS nonsense). But are you immersed the same way if you are the GM? If not how do you foster player immersion and then use that to draw out a good narrative? As the GM you are their interface with the world. Do you draw them into events? Do you plop down a map and ask where they want to go? Do you just observe as they roleplay amongst themselves aimlessly and hope something interesting develops?

This discussion isn't intended as a trap or an arena for confrontation. It's about ways to run a game that make players FEEL like they are in a book while still retaining the freedom and unpredictability of simulation. No plot railroads. No protagonist immunity. No reliance on narrative conventions of genre as means of determination over riding the rules of simulation.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2016, 08:38:03 AM by Manzanaro »
You're one microscopic cog in his catastrophic plan, designed and directed by his red right hand.

- Nick Cave

estar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10065
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2016, 08:55:22 AM »
Quote from: Manzanaro;881493
But again, what I am asking about isn't "How do you get an experience from rules of simulation that will make a good story later" but "how do you get an experience that makes for a good narrative AS IT IS HAPPENING".


There is no method that does that. Any narrative by definition is hindsight.

Quote from: Manzanaro;881461
Bit of a flip on another ongoing topic.

So the premise is basically: let's imagine we have a system of rules that cover a bunch of the things that we might find in a novel of the fantasy genre. So there are rules for how to determine the winner of a fight, how magic works, what various monsters can do, and etc. The thing is that none of these rules are geared towards narrative concerns; they don't factor in who the 'protagonist' is in a combat, or how to use the rules to bring drama and tension to the game, or how to get the players of the game's characters to act in a manner consistent with what we might expect from a fantasy novel.


That because the rules are describing the reality of the setting of the novel. They don't describe the story of the novel.

The drama and tension of the novel derives from the initial circumstance of the characters of the novel and the sequence of events that unfold from there. Authors have different techniques of presenting that sequence. Each of which leaves a different type of impression on the reader.

The problem is that none that is applicable or able to be replicated in an RPG because players have the freedom to do anything their character can do. The only way to change this is to restrict their choices. Have some rule or mechanic that prevents a Dunedain Ranger from breaking out into a song and a dance routine when encountering orcs pillaging a farmstead in Bree. Yes it is a ludicrous example to illustrate my point. The actual problems comes from when it not so clear cut.

Pushed to extreme the attempts to structure the campaign to be like the stories told by the author results in the campaign becoming an exercise in filling in a elaborate madlib. As a result it ceases to be an RPG campaign and turns into some other type of game.

For example Dogs in the Vineyards is so hyperfocused on it's premise that it is near useless for any other type of campaign in its setting.


Quote from: Manzanaro;881461
Now, obviously, one may have absolutely no interest in these sort of narrative concerns, and this question would not even be worth considering. You might approach the rules as a framework for exercises in logistics or purely as a game to be won. You might find that, regardless of whether a game's rules are oriented around fantasy, superheroes, vampires, cyberpunk, or anything else, all of this really just boils down to trappings and that "kill them all and take their stuff" tends to be a lot more interesting than trying to emulate genre conventions or to employ narrative principles as rules of gameplay.



Well "kill them all while doing interesting thing." has long been a staple of entertainment. How many of Shakespeare's play revolves around people trying to kill each other? Right now the most popular movie in the United State is Deadpool a hyper violent comedy of superheroes.

EVERY RPG has at it's heart a single rule, the RPG campaign. A series of interlinked sessions where players play individual characters interacting with a setting with their actions adjudicated by a referee.

What came first? Why Dave Arneson's Blackmoor Campaign. What came second? The rule Dave used to run his campaign. Why? Because by the time Dave started up Blackmoor the idea of a refereed campaign was firmly established. That some situation would be described, the player would pick something to play and play the game out.

The thing is that nobody had rules for any of this. There were only a handful of publications that were formal rulebooks but even those read more as a collection of notes than anything we are used to today. So what did they do? They looked at the situation and used their experience and knowledge to make a ruling when the player attempted to do something.

Now they didn't make shit up out of thin air all the time. People debated the finer points of which cannon was better and by how much. People took the time to read history and theory books to develop an understanding of how things worked. So there was a pool of knowledge floating around that added consistency so how people handled things from game to game.

All of this is woven into the fabric of RPGs today. Not the focus on violence but the focus on Player A wants to do something, the referee gives him a ruling which may include a dice roll on the part of the player.

What been lost over the years is that people gravitate to focusing on the rules. They think that is the game when it comes to the RPG. Which is false, the rules are just a tool. They describe what a character is capable of in formal terms. They describe a consistent way of handling certain actions the player could do. But they are not the game itself, the game is what I described earlier a group of players interacting with the setting as a character with their actions adjudicated by a referee.


Quote from: Manzanaro;881461
But I DO want the events of the game to be compelling, dramatic, suspenseful, involving and all the other things that are hallmarks of a good story. And strict rules of simulation do not 'care' about any of these characteristics. Under rules of simulation, Batman and Tarzan die pretty early on and the Fellowship of the Ring is lost under a tide of orcs.

So what I thought might be interesting to discuss is tools and techniques for doing this. How do you, whether as GM or player, promote a good compelling narrative under rules of simulation?


Do you know why in the late 60s gamers did a lot of Napoleanic battles, why people asked folks like Wesley and Arneson to run compaigns and Brausteins? Because they involved interesting situations. That the key to a successful RPG campaign, that the players are doing fun and interesting things in an interesting situation.


You can try to get that right from the get go. Or you could try to develop a setting and see where the players go with it.

For example most people don't realize that Blackmoor started more or less as a fantasy medieval wargame campaign. Yes players had individual characters but they were expected to lead or be part of armies fighting out the conflicts occurring across the Blackmoor region. Addition of a focus on individual character meant that the campaign involved more than just showing up with a box full of figurines and fighting a battle. People were scouts, spys, tried to recruit allies, and of course explored the area for treasure and resources to help their cause.

What happened is that one particular element proved to be so interesting and  and so fun that it soon dominated the campaign. The Blackmoor Dungeons. At first Dave didn't like it taking up so much of the player's attention and actually "punished" them for it after they ignored a threat to Blackmoor Town  for too long. But in the end he embraced it and became the central focus of the campaign.

So one path to make your setting a sandbox with some initial choices and see what the players involve themselves in and focus the campaign on that.

Quote from: Manzanaro;881493
It's about ways to run a game that make players FEEL like they are in a book while still retaining the freedom and unpredictability of simulation.


What you are asking is impossible, there is no way to make a game FEEL LIKE A BOOK without making it a railroad of some sort. You can however make a game feel like the SETTING of a specific book without turning it into a railroad.

Again the book is a story with a narrative that all hindsight. It works because the author preordained the outcome and structured the narrative to make it interesting. Or if the work is more of a stream of consciousness it is more or less the story as it played out in the author mind at the time. The book is now relaying that past experience to the reader.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2016, 09:06:32 AM by estar »

RosenMcStern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2016, 09:12:15 AM »
Quote from: Manzanaro;881493
This discussion isn't intended as a trap or an arena for confrontation. It's about ways to run a game that make players FEEL like they are in a book while still retaining the freedom and unpredictability of simulation. No plot railroads. No protagonist immunity. No reliance on narrative conventions of genre as means of determination over riding the rules of simulation.


The point is that these two requirements are incompatible. "Fiction" and "real life" are not the same thing: you are in either one or the other. If the rules and the group are focused on making it "real", they cannot be focused on making it "epic". If you pick a random guy in a random country, you have about one in one billion chances you'll be picking someone whose eventual destiny becomes that of Napoleon or Alexander. And who knows how many strategists better than Napoleon were killed by a stray bullet on their first appearance on the battlefield?  Making it feel like a book implicitly includes that the GM creates a plot for the PCs to become heroes. How much "pre-destination" you can accept before you start to consider it "railroad" is entirely up to your tastes. And also inversely proportional to the time it takes for your adventures to really become "epic".

Personally, I see no real counter-immersivity in fixing the facts that the PCs are "larger than life" in the rules themselves. As long as the outcome of single scenes remains plausible, the fact that I am being pushed towards a glorious destiny does not break my SoD. There is plenty of room for screwing up even with plot protection, so "being the hero" will not really interfere with creating tension and excitement. Leaving room for the "Sean Bean" option where you are "the one who is remembered because of his heroic death" should be, IMO, enough to keep you on your toes and make your adventures feel "real".
Paolo Guccione
Alephtar Games

Madprofessor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 709
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2016, 09:20:58 AM »
I like the flipside of this conversation.  Good idea!

Quote
EDIT: Let me try and give a specific example of what I mean. Let's say that as part of the interesting (to me) world that I create, there is a powerful evil dragon living in the mountains west of the city where the PCs live. The PCs get wind of this dragon and march to the mountains and directly into the dragon's lair. For some reason they thought this was a good idea, but they all end up being killed very quickly by the dragon. Is this a good satisfying narrative? Are there ways to make what feels like essentially a random TPK into a satisfying narrative experience?  


Yes, this can make a good story and will make a good story in an interesting world with interesting characters - if you allow the story to happen organically and it is not forced by the GM or players.

For example, if I were writing a novel (forget the game for a second) where the antagonist was a terrifying dragon, then this scenario could make an awesome prologue if it's told evocatively with the palpable fear, the smells and sounds of the dragon's lair and brash young characters out to prove themselves.  So you start the novel with some developing characters who you have just started to care about.  They foolishly challenge the sum of their fears despite the warnings and cues, and as you are reading you know the situation is tense, but you don't know what is going to happen. The characters get fried, perhaps with only a glimpse of the beast.  It sets the stage rather nicely for the real heroes that follow, perhaps a decade or generation later, or in a far away land where no one believes in dragons any more (or some other set up).  We now have a villain and a problem to confront. In RPG terms, like reading a novel, the group will not realize the story implications until after the event has sunken in, and everybody gets the pleasure of saying "well, I never saw that coming."  George R.R. Martin uses this kind of technique all the time.

You don't need to craft plots and events in a certain way to make a good story. If everyone has some numbers on a character sheet and they walk into a dungeon and die - that's boring and dumb because nobody invested themselves in their imagination - not because the event was un-story like.  Like CRK said, "if you have interesting characters in and interesting world, you will get interesting stories" no matter what event happens and as long as it isn't forced or artificially constructed. Period.

If you have a strong setting and interesting characters, bad stories can only happen when one or more players try to force the story in some unnatural direction and remove the suspense and drama before it even happens.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2016, 09:36:36 AM by Madprofessor »

Bren

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7638
    • http://honorandintrigue.blogspot.com/
How to Get a Good Narrative From Rules of Simulation
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2016, 09:35:19 AM »
Quote from: Manzanaro;881476
EDIT: Let me try and give a specific example of what I mean. Let's say that as part of the interesting (to me) world that I create, there is a powerful evil dragon living in the mountains west of the city where the PCs live. The PCs get wind of this dragon and march to the mountains and directly into the dragon's lair. For some reason they thought this was a good idea, but they all end up being killed very quickly by the dragon. Is this a good satisfying narrative? Are there ways to make what feels like essentially a random TPK into a satisfying narrative experience?
That sounds like a great narrative for the single, surviving NPC mule tender to tell the next group of PCs. Now they may be warned and afraid or challenged and inspired. I wonder what will happen next?
Currently running: Runequest in Glorantha + Call of Cthulhu   Currently playing: D&D 5E + RQ
My Blog: For Honor...and Intrigue
I have a gold medal from Ravenswing and Gronan owes me bee