Quote from: atpollard;708802Is this the general consensus on what a “Shared Narrative” game is

No it isn't. I play storygames and I do so in the first person.

Note that the people who actually play storygames don't IME call them shared narrative games either. That's a term I've only ever seen used here.

Quote from: Benoist;708739Nothing, assuming that is what you and your players around the table enjoy doing.

Not everyone plays role playing games to tell a story, and some people's games have nothing to do with storytelling, however. Some gamers out there actually don't like to play role playing games construed as "storytelling," and that should be cool too. These people are not fiction, they are not lying, or misunderstanding what you really mean. They exist, and when they tell you how they construe their own games and play them for their own enjoyment, you are faced with a choice. Either you (1) accept that is where they are coming from and that it is how they enjoy playing their games, or (2) deny their own experiences and pretend to know better than them what's going on in their own heads as they play the game, which is boneheaded and stupid.

Your choice.

This.

The way I like to play, and ref, is to provide several adventure hooks.  The players may choose some, all, or none.

 The OD&D books talk about going to taverns and inns and buying drinks, etc, to look for rumors. It's exactly the opposite from "A stranger approaches you in an inn."

But the situation is that there is a WORLD. So if my players investigate, they find:

* a caravan going to Far Khitai is hiring guards
* a mercenary band is recruiting for a skirmish in West Nowhereistan
* the Temple of the Eager Virgin reports that somebody has stolen the Golden Hootercups of Eternal Perkiness and is offering a reward
* the King is offering a reward for the head of the notorious highwayman Celerus the Nutpuncher
* the village of Post Hole has been attacked by gargoyles and three sheep killed

So what do you do?

Note that there is NO RIGHT ANSWER!!!  So if the players decide to take off after Celerus the Nutpuncher, they could never find him, they could fight him and get punched in the nuts, they could throw in with him and join his Squeaky Men, or one of the PCs could punch HIM in the nuts and declare that SHE is the new Celerus the Nutpuncher!  Like Dread Pirate Roberts, only with more nut punching.

Or, the PCs could say, "Sod this, we're going to hire a boat and look for the Island of Concupiscent Redheads to find the shy and gentle Huge-Hootered Winklekisser."

Or the female PCs could say "To hell with you, WE're going to sail to the Island of Male Swimmers and Gymnasts who Cook and Give Foot Rubs."

Or something else.

I don't want "A STORY" from my game.

Mileage, vary, yours.

Quote from: atpollard;708772At the risk of straying too far from philosophical into the theological, if God orders the lives of men, guiding the broad pattern of history, then reality has a story that is yet still unfolding ... and it doesn't get any more real that reality.

But I agree that railroading generally sucks.
I just prefer to entertain the possibility that a plot can be created more like a pick-a-path book so that the characters have complete freedom to go where they wish and do what they wish and their actions will shape the details of the plot which will (after the fact) define which of the possible stories ultimately unfolds.

First off, what you've stumbled upon here, as Im sure you can already tell, is a volatile subject these days. There is a number of posters here, including the Pundit himself, who believe that "storygamers" are a group actively seeking to undermine the hobby. I don't share quite that view, and think narrative-based play is just one of several approaches to RPGs that's existed since around the beginning of the hobby, or at least when the hobby started attracting players that didn't come from a wargaming background, and nobody really knew how to play. This probably wouldn't have been a problem except for 2 changes to the hobby in the interim: the aforementioned Forge theory, which proposed RPGs should be made to focus specifically on one style of play to the exclusion of all others and the advent of forum culture, wherein a bunch of gamers who otherwise never would have encountered each other now are constantly in contact, and people being the xenophobic, self absorbed creatures they are, this has led to the endless fights about the OneTrueWay, with many incapable of even understanding other playstyles and thus reacting as if the other people are lying about how they play, or at least just plain Wrong.

There are also those who participate in the "arguing about RPGs" hobby w/o actually participating on the hobby itself, as has been mentioned. And let's ignore the SJWs for now, since they are not really pertinent to this discussion.

TheRPGSite is specifically home to a number of players whose style is as described by Benoist: namely, a focus on immersion and sandbox play, myself included. While most of us don't think there is anything wrong in playing RPGs by any other style, were also as a group (if I may be so arrogant to suppose to speak for anyone else), somewhat weary of the vast number of posters we've encountered online who don't accept our style of play as valid, make no effort to comprehend it, and generally seem to troll the site to tell us how we're all having Badwrongfun and their method of play is the only True Scotsman. To the point anyone who brings up the Ted "narrative play" or "story" tends to raise a few heckles around here. We also have some pretty aggressive posters hereabouts, and to be fair, some of the posters who share my playstyle tastes also can be guilty of engaging in OneTrueWayism from time to time.

For my part, sometimes I just get sick of telling other people that its OK for them to not share my tastes. But, if Im not in a bitchy mood, I'll generally give people the benefit of the doubt, until the "Badwrongfun" speeches start to pop up, or derogatory phrases like "magic tea party" start getting flung around.

To go back to the Forge theory, as I said, the underlying concept that's somehow made it into the publishing side of the hobby, is that an RPG is only "comprehensible" ( Ron Edward's word) if a game focuses on appealing solely to one playstyle. This has led in the years since to the advent of "Storygames": games that largely identify as RPGs, but are vastly different from traditional RPGs not only in that they are designed specifically to enable Narrative Play, but the rules actively enforce it. I would not say, based on your posts, that's what you're talking about. There is also a number of payers here who have differing definitions about what constitutes a Storygame vs a traditional rpg.

The definition I personally use is that any game that forces a player to view his PC from the third person "authorial perspective" by way of the mechanics is a Storygame. I think it is possible to play ANY RPG in this manner, the distinction for me is if the system actively interferes with my immersion. This is a somewhat seperated concept from railroading, where its the GM themselves that is actively interfering. This is a tricky subject though, because there are matters of degree. Many RPGs include elements of narrative play, and "disassociated mechanics", but I would not consider Storygames.

I also think that my preferences are a minority extreme, and most players don't really care if there's some Storygame elements in thier RPG.

This issue also gets confused with Illusionism (a method of GMing wherein the GM alters the setting based on or in reaction to player choice, in ways that don't represent 'natural' or sensible cause and effect, and another style of play, wherein an RPG system is engaged by players to the exclusion of role-playing.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708941There is a number of posters here, including the Pundit himself, who believe that "storygamers" are a group actively seeking to undermine the hobby. I don't share quite that view

Been reading wikipedia lately?

Quote from: The Traveller;708953Been reading wikipedia lately?

Case in point. I simply don't see storygaming= conspiracy, I don't think human beings work that way, for the most part. I do OTOH think pig-headedness, Badwrongfun, and OneTrueWayism are very human traits, so the Wikipedia thing doesn't surprise me in the least.

But I haven't regarded Wikipedia as an accurate source of info for over a decade, anyways. It's about as "fair and unbiased" as Fox News. Plus, there's a lot of morons out there who are convinced they are smart.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708941First off, what you've stumbled upon here, as Im sure you can already tell, is a volatile subject these days. There is a number of posters here, including the Pundit himself, who believe that "storygamers" are a group actively seeking to undermine the hobby. I don't share quite that view, and think narrative-based play is just one of several approaches to RPGs that's existed since around the beginning of the hobby, or at least when the hobby started attracting players that didn't come from a wargaming background, and nobody really knew how to play. This probably wouldn't have been a problem except for 2 changes to the hobby in the interim: the aforementioned Forge theory, which proposed RPGs should be made to focus specifically on one style of play to the exclusion of all others and the advent of forum culture, wherein a bunch of gamers who otherwise never would have encountered each other now are constantly in contact, and people being the xenophobic, self absorbed creatures they are, this has led to the endless fights about the OneTrueWay, with many incapable of even understanding other playstyles and thus reacting as if the other people are lying about how they play, or at least just plain Wrong.

There are also those who participate in the "arguing about RPGs" hobby w/o actually participating on the hobby itself, as has been mentioned. And let's ignore the SJWs for now, since they are not really pertinent to this discussion.

TheRPGSite is specifically home to a number of players whose style is as described by Benoist: namely, a focus on immersion and sandbox play, myself included. While most of us don't think there is anything wrong in playing RPGs by any other style, were also as a group (if I may be so arrogant to suppose to speak for anyone else), somewhat weary of the vast number of posters we've encountered online who don't accept our style of play as valid, make no effort to comprehend it, and generally seem to troll the site to tell us how we're all having Badwrongfun and their method of play is the only True Scotsman. To the point anyone who brings up the Ted "narrative play" or "story" tends to raise a few heckles around here. We also have some pretty aggressive posters hereabouts, and to be fair, some of the posters who share my playstyle tastes also can be guilty of engaging in OneTrueWayism from time to time.

For my part, sometimes I just get sick of telling other people that its OK for them to not share my tastes. But, if Im not in a bitchy mood, I'll generally give people the benefit of the doubt, until the "Badwrongfun" speeches start to pop up, or derogatory phrases like "magic tea party" start getting flung around.

To go back to the Forge theory, as I said, the underlying concept that's somehow made it into the publishing side of the hobby, is that an RPG is only "comprehensible" ( Ron Edward's word) if a game focuses on appealing solely to one playstyle. This has led in the years since to the advent of "Storygames": games that largely identify as RPGs, but are vastly different from traditional RPGs not only in that they are designed specifically to enable Narrative Play, but the rules actively enforce it. I would not say, based on your posts, that's what you're talking about. There is also a number of payers here who have differing definitions about what constitutes a Storygame vs a traditional rpg.

The definition I personally use is that any game that forces a player to view his PC from the third person "authorial perspective" by way of the mechanics is a Storygame. I think it is possible to play ANY RPG in this manner, the distinction for me is if the system actively interferes with my immersion. This is a somewhat seperated concept from railroading, where its the GM themselves that is actively interfering. This is a tricky subject though, because there are matters of degree. Many RPGs include elements of narrative play, and "disassociated mechanics", but I would not consider Storygames.

I also think that my preferences are a minority extreme, and most players don't really care if there's some Storygame elements in thier RPG.

This issue also gets confused with Illusionism (a method of GMing wherein the GM alters the setting based on or in reaction to player choice, in ways that don't represent 'natural' or sensible cause and effect, and another style of play, wherein an RPG system is engaged by players to the exclusion of role-playing.

Pretty good summary of the politics around here.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708955Case in point. I simply don't see storygaming= conspiracy, I don't think human beings work that way

Wikipedia works that way. If you've ever tried to edit it, you'd realise it takes a concerted and persistent effort by quite a few people to make any definitive changes. I know this because I've done it. Politics, endless hours of entertainment.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708955But I haven't regarded Wikipedia as an accurate source of info for over a decade, anyways. It's about as "fair and unbiased" as Fox News. Plus, there's a lot of morons out there who are convinced they are smart.

Nobody really gives a shit.

Quote from: Old Geezer;708917This.

The way I like to play, and ref, is to provide several adventure hooks.  The players may choose some, all, or none.

 The OD&D books talk about going to taverns and inns and buying drinks, etc, to look for rumors. It's exactly the opposite from "A stranger approaches you in an inn."

But the situation is that there is a WORLD. So if my players investigate, they find:

* a caravan going to Far Khitai is hiring guards
* a mercenary band is recruiting for a skirmish in West Nowhereistan
* the Temple of the Eager Virgin reports that somebody has stolen the Golden Hootercups of Eternal Perkiness and is offering a reward
* the King is offering a reward for the head of the notorious highwayman Celerus the Nutpuncher
* the village of Post Hole has been attacked by gargoyles and three sheep killed

So what do you do?

Note that there is NO RIGHT ANSWER!!!  So if the players decide to take off after Celerus the Nutpuncher, they could never find him, they could fight him and get punched in the nuts, they could throw in with him and join his Squeaky Men, or one of the PCs could punch HIM in the nuts and declare that SHE is the new Celerus the Nutpuncher!  Like Dread Pirate Roberts, only with more nut punching.

Or, the PCs could say, "Sod this, we're going to hire a boat and look for the Island of Concupiscent Redheads to find the shy and gentle Huge-Hootered Winklekisser."

Or the female PCs could say "To hell with you, WE're going to sail to the Island of Male Swimmers and Gymnasts who Cook and Give Foot Rubs."

Or something else.

I don't want "A STORY" from my game.

Mileage, vary, yours.

OK. I want to play in this campaign as Neb the Drunkard, and sail for the Black Isle of Everflowing Food Drink, where I would hope the archmage Ssenniug could teach me the secret of the Dark , thirst-quenching Brew and the lip-licking Creamy Foam of Sustenance.

Quote from: The Traveller;708958Wikipedia works that way. If you've ever tried to edit it, you'd realise it takes a concerted and persistent effort by quite a few people to make any definitive changes. I know this because I've done it. Politics, endless hours of entertainment.

Okay, are you trying to convince me there is a conspiracy? Because I wouldn't waste your time with that, lets just say you have your theory/belief about the underlying motivations of people, and I have my own.

QuoteNobody really gives a shit.

About what? Seems to me like most people online give a shit about something, otherwise the forums wouldn't be the hotbeds of arguments and flamefests they are these days.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708962Okay, are you trying to convince me there is a conspiracy?

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, you were last seen comparing yourself to an offcolour racist joke. I'll ask your opinion when I want the opinion of a very, very select minority.

Carry on.

Quote from: The Traveller;708963I'm not trying to convince you of anything, you were last seen comparing yourself to an offcolour racist joke. I'll ask your opinion when I want the opinion of a very, very select minority.

Carry on.

Been hitting the sauce pretty hard these days huh? Even your insults have stopped making sense. Shine on you crazy diamond

Quote from: Benoist;708956Pretty good summary of the politics around here.

Thanks, gave it my best shot. Will be a while before I attempt a post that long on my iPhone again. Even going back to correct my typos would just be too much effort.

I should follow Vulmea's lead and just start a blog to link to when this stuff inevitably comes up again.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708965Been hitting the sauce pretty hard these days huh? Even your insults have stopped making sense. Shine on you crazy diamond

Quote from: Rincewind1What do you call a sophisticated Irishman? A Scot.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708965I resemble that remark.

The Pundit, The Butcher, CR and Rince among a few others, these are powerful intellects, men of renown.

You should probably just go draw something.

Incidentally my apologies to those less familiar with Tristram's MO, trust me when I say this is the swiftest course to a peaceful resolution.

Quote from: The Traveller;708967The Pundit, The Butcher, CR and Rince among a few others, these are powerful intellects, men of renown.

You should probably just go draw something.

Incidentally my apologies to those less familiar with Tristram's MO, trust me when I say this is the swiftest course to a peaceful resolution.

Your still butthurt about the RPGs vs videogames thread, huh?

Well I'll get on with my "MO", you have fun with your powerful intellectualizing.

Quote from: TristramEvans;708968Well I'll get on with my "MO"

Good for you.