Quote from: rabalias;568964So, I don't really get it, because I don't really understand why you think D&D is an RPG but Fiasco isn't.

Here ya go:

Roleplaying Games vs. Storytelling Games

Quote from: Benoist;569020Just dozens of discussion threads we've had about this over the years.

Here, I'll give you a primer: RPGs do not tell stories.

Heh. Perils of joining a new forum I guess.

Having read some of that thread (not all, admittedly) I'd have to say that, while I accept there's a difference here between playing for story, and playing to be your character for the day, I don't really agree that D&D is more conducive to one than to the other. Sure, it doesn't have the same mechanics as Marvel Heroic Roleplaying, and nothing like the same mechanics as Fiasco. But I reckon you can play Fiasco to be your character, and I reckon you can pay D&D with a focus on story.

Most importantly for the point I was making earlier, both are games that involve playing a role, so it's kinda hard to argue that one's an RPG and the other isn't. In fact I think you can play D&D without any actual roleplaying happening (i.e. play it like a board game), whereas with Fiasco that's actually impossible; so if one has a better claim to be a "role playing game" it's Fiasco, though of course I'm not trying to argue that D&D isn't an RPG, that would be insane.

At any rate, they're very different kinds of roleplaying games, I don't think anyone would argue with that; and as I say, I agree that there's room to be disappointed if you come expecting one and end up getting the other.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;569181Here ya go:

Roleplaying Games vs. Storytelling Games

Nice article. I mean, as a veteran roleplayer I don't really agree with the terminology you're using (as outlined in my previous post) but I can't disagree with the distinction you're making, and it's very well explained in your article.

I'd be interested to know how you'd classify a game my other half has created called When the Dark is Gone (available here for free: http://blackarmada.com/free-games/). It is fully immersive, almost a LARP in fact, but has no mechanics at all for resolving conflicts. None. Nor does it have any story mechanics. In my head it's a story game, but your article made me feel like perhaps you'd classify it as an RPG because it's totally immersive.

Also: WFRP was cited at the top as a proper roleplaying game, but it includes Fate Points, which are essentially a "dissociated" mechanic. Obviously it was Benoist who gave the example so maybe you just disagree on that point - er. What do you think?

Quote from: Benoist;569149I don't mean to be rude. It's just that there has been dozens of threads on this board talking about the difference some gamers see between traditional role playing games and story games. We've debated the issue over and over again. By now it must be clear that some people don't feel like it's relevant or noticeable for them in play, while others do feel like it is important to them and their enjoyment of a traditional role playing game.

And yet there's always been this assumption, explicit and implicit, coming from some of the people who don't see any difference between a trad RPG and a storygame, that people who do see a difference and don't want narrative and overtly metagame mechanics in their RPGs hate storygames, hate all sorts of games but the role playing games they play. That they just don't want these in their RPGs because they just hate the mechanics, and that's it.

This thread was my way of saying that's not my case. I do like all sorts of games: I like wargames, I like games like Chess or Abalone, I play Trivial Pursuit and Cranium, ... and I could play a storygame too, provided I'm interested in the premise of the game and feel like building a story with friends tonight.

That's fair enough, but I think there's a lot of bad faith on both sides of that particular debate: people who like story games are trying to destroy the hobby from within, they're a threat to the entire concept of role playing games, swine, blah blah.

Like you I'm pretty philosophical about games: I'll play anything. I just have a broader definition of what a role playing game is. It means the argument is ultimately about taxonomy and actually excruciatingly pointless at the end of the day.

I came here originally to get away from the GNS evangelists who were dominating other boards with their gibberish - the games they were promoting were largely secondary, it seemed, to convincing you that they were right and you were wrong.

Quote from: GrimGent;568947That would be Nicotine Girls, by the author of My Life with Master.

yep, that's the one.

Quote from: rabalias;569192I'd be interested to know how you'd classify a game my other half has created called When the Dark is Gone (available here for free: http://blackarmada.com/free-games/). It is fully immersive, almost a LARP in fact, but has no mechanics at all for resolving conflicts. None. Nor does it have any story mechanics. In my head it's a story game, but your article made me feel like perhaps you'd classify it as an RPG because it's totally immersive.

Immersion during play really has nothing to do with whether or not something is a roleplaying game. You can engage in immersive roleplaying while playing Arkham Horror, but that doesn't make Arkham Horror a roleplaying game.

QuoteAlso: WFRP was cited at the top as a proper roleplaying game, but it includes Fate Points, which are essentially a "dissociated" mechanic.

This is addressed in the essay you said you read. Short version: Seeking ideological purity is not necessary. Believing that a lack of ideological purity means that the distinction between STG mechanics and RPG mechanics doesn't exist is like believing that the existence of Reese's Pieces means that there's not difference between chocolate and peanut butter.

QuoteI'd be interested to know how you'd classify a game my other half has created called When the Dark is Gone (available here for free: http://blackarmada.com/free-games/).

After skim-reading the rules, my conclusion is that it is neither. It is, in fact, barely a game at all. It appears to have only three rules:

(1) You need to define and agree on close relationships with two other players.
(2) Write down one agreed upon shared memory.
(3) Once the Therapist calls Time In, always talk in character.

There are no associated mechanics and there are no narrative control mechanics. Therefore, it is neither a roleplaying game nor a storytelling game.

What it appears to be, primarily, is a brief primer describing and encouraging the creation of a semi-specific freeform improv environment focused on creating scenarios around a generalized premise.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;569085cool story bro

Screeching Stalker Strikes!

Quote from: rabalias;569183Sure, it doesn't have the same mechanics as Marvel Heroic Roleplaying, and nothing like the same mechanics as Fiasco. But I reckon you can play Fiasco to be your character, and I reckon you can pay D&D with a focus on story.

The question for some people when this kind of thing comes up isn't whether a game can support multiple playstyles or "stances" to use an old term, but whether the mechanics force you into a particular playstyle, particularly games that force you to make decisions from an "out of character point of view(OOC POV)".  For people who prefer to make their decisions from an "in character point of view (IC POV)" whenever possible, the core mechanics of the game making them do otherwise means that for them such a game is fundamentally different from one that does not require the OOC POV.

Quote from: rabalias;569183In fact I think you can play D&D without any actual roleplaying happening (i.e. play it like a board game), whereas with Fiasco that's actually impossible; so if one has a better claim to be a "role playing game" it's Fiasco, though of course I'm not trying to argue that D&D isn't an RPG, that would be insane.

Now we're back to the definition of roleplaying.
If I'm Vince Gilligan and I'm writing an episode of Breaking Bad, and deciding what Walter White is going to do and say: am I roleplaying Walter White?  Am I being 100% true to the character, or am I putting in some lines or scenes where Walter might not be acting true to character but I do it for dramatic effect, because it might make for a good story.
Did Michael Cimino cry when he wrote scenes in The Deer Hunter because he was experiencing the character's emotions?  Robert DeNiro, 20 years after the fact cried when thinking about this character, he had identified with and immersed so deeply into that character. (Now admitted DeNiro is about as pure a Method Actor as there is, but I hope you see the point.)  Directing a character in the story does not necessarily mean you're roleplaying the character.  You could play Fiasco from the POV of a Director, just like I could play AD&D like a videogame.

Most games using narrative mechanics also have roleplaying so that you are caring about the IC POV as well as the story.  Some storygames however, do not, and I'll give them credit as some of them don't call themselves RPGs.

Quote from: rabalias;569183At any rate, they're very different kinds of roleplaying games, I don't think anyone would argue with that; and as I say, I agree that there's room to be disappointed if you come expecting one and end up getting the other.

Some roleplaying games include IC POV, but a large chunk of the game's mechanics are dissociated from the character's point of view to provide a boardgame or cardgame-like tactical challenge.  D&D 4e is one of these types of RPGs.

Some roleplaying games include IC POV, but a large chunk of the game's mechanics are dissociated from the character's point of view for the purpose of dramatic effect, and creating a story.  Some RPGs with narrative mechanics fall into this subcategory.

Some roleplaying games simply function as simulation or "physics engines", so when the character decides to climb the wall, there's a way to figure out whether he succeeds or fails, simple task resolution.  These types of games do not require you to roleplay at all.  However, if your view of roleplaying is IC POV, the simple "physics engine" games provide, by definition, no impediment to IC POV, because they include no mechanics that force a decision from an OOC POV.

Quote from: rabalias;569192I'd be interested to know how you'd classify a game my other half has created called When the Dark is Gone (available here for free: http://blackarmada.com/free-games/). It is fully immersive, almost a LARP in fact, but has no mechanics at all for resolving conflicts. None. Nor does it have any story mechanics. In my head it's a story game, but your article made me feel like perhaps you'd classify it as an RPG because it's totally immersive.

What is the point of this? A teaching tool for psychotherapists?  It seems to require decent knowledge of psychological disorders.

There's not any "game" in this.  I don't know enough about the medium to classify it, but I would suggest you google up Jeepform, that's what this seems more like to me.  It's definitely not a Storygame, there is no creation of Story here.

Quote from: CRKrueger;569633Most games using narrative mechanics also have roleplaying so that you are caring about the IC POV as well as the story.  Some storygames however, do not, and I'll give them credit as some of them don't call themselves RPGs.

I think we're agreeing. Most story games are roleplaying games. I'm prepared to accept that some are not, though I struggle to think of any.

Quote from: CRKrueger;569633What is the point of this?

It is a form of structured entertainment for multiple participants, a "game" if you will.

Quote from: CRKrueger;569633There's not any "game" in this.

An odd thing to say. I think we're wasting time debating definitions, but it seems rather arbitrary to say there's no "game" in it.

Dictionary.com: game [geym]
an amusement or pastime: children's games.
the material or equipment used in playing certain games
a store selling toys and games.
a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators.
a single occasion of such an activity, or a definite portion of one: the final game of the season; a rubber of three games at bridge.
the number of points required to win a game.

Quote from: CRKrueger;569633I don't know enough about the medium to classify it, but I  would suggest you google up Jeepform, that's what this seems more like to me.

It has a lot in common with Jeepform, I agree.

Quote from: CRKrueger;569633there is no creation of Story here.

You self-evidently haven't read the game if that's what you think. The entirety of the game consists of the players discussing their recollections of dramatic events - practically the definition of telling a story.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;569604Immersion during play really has nothing to do with whether or not something is a roleplaying game. You can engage in immersive roleplaying while playing Arkham Horror, but that doesn't make Arkham Horror a roleplaying game.

I guess I misread the essay as referring to immersion as opposed to playing a role. Still, it seems rather arbitrary to say that a game which includes elements of what you call dissociated mechanics isn't a roleplaying game and, indeed, you seem to step back from this at the end of the article by pointing out it's really a spectrum.

QuoteThis is addressed in the essay you said you read. Short version: Seeking ideological purity is not necessary. Believing that a lack of ideological purity means that the distinction between STG mechanics and RPG mechanics doesn't exist is like believing that the existence of Reese's Pieces means that there's not difference between chocolate and peanut butter.

The thrust of your article seems to be that you have to have mechanics that are concerned with character action to be an RPG, and any other kind of mechanics moves you away from being an RPG. I personally agree that there's a spectrum there, and I think that any game which contains a significant element of roleplaying is a roleplaying game. The bit at the end of your article tips the hat to that but hardly takes away from the fact that the article is primarily concerned with separating roleplaying games and story games.

QuoteWhat it appears to be, primarily, is a brief primer describing and encouraging the creation of a semi-specific freeform improv environment focused on creating scenarios around a generalized premise.

Hmmm. Well, thanks for your view. For myself I reckon as per my response to CRKrueger above it is a game, albeit one with little in common with (say) D&D, and indeed since each player plays a character (roleplays) in it, it's hard to get away from the idea that it's a roleplaying game. Similarly see my comments re "story" above.

But it doesn't seem likely that dickering over definitions will get us anywhere. As per my first comment in this thread there are clearly different kinds of game on what is commonly called the roleplaying games market, and it's reasonable to have preferences between them and/or be disappointed if you're expecting to play one and get the other. As to the definition of terms, perhaps we should agree to disagree.

Quote from: rabalias;569674It is a form of structured entertainment for multiple participants, a "game" if you will.

:rotfl:

Welcome to the adult swim, rabalias, and may Gawd save you, if it is right that he should do so.

Notice I said "creation of Story" (cap intended), not "telling a story".  If each character basically retells their own experience, without there being a "shared narration" where we can create and affect each other's stories, or a shared story then it's not really a Storygame.  If there's no way to resolve any conflict, no randomization element at all, no way to win, then it's hard to really call it a game at all.  It's one thing to not possess certain game elements, it's another to have none of them.

By the definition you are using, sex with rules is a game.

Apologies if this borders on threadjacking; Benoist, let me know if you want a different thread for this and I'll be happy to oblige.

Justin, a question:  how many dissociated mechanics does it take to make a game a storytelling game instead of an RPG?  (I feel like I just made a light-bulb joke there.)  I ask because you pretty clearly call out Apocalypse World as being a role-playing game, despite the fact that it has a couple of dissociated mechanics (in particular, the GM can ask the player to choose from a list of broad outcomes based on the player's dice results).

More on-topic, this is why I'm personally unsure of how useful the distinction is:  how does one know where to draw the line?

Thanks!