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: History lesson, please: storygames  (Read 6009 times)

Mishihari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • M
  • Posts: 989
History lesson, please: storygames
« on: April 16, 2021, 06:12:18 PM »
Short version:  Why all the hate for "storygames" and associated things on this forum?

I'm a relative newbie here, and I have been noticing references to "storygames" and past conflicts, and was just wondering what it was all about?  I've seen the term in various places refer to RPG-like games where players have some narrative control, collaborative writing projects with a few rules, freeform roleplaying with total GM control -no dice or rules- and lots of things in between.  What does it mean here?  And why all the vitriol?  Also, The Forge.  I read a lot of their stuff, and while I didn't buy into all of their theories, they did have some useful ideas and it made me think more deeply about my own methods of gaming, which is always a good thing, so why the hate?

Not trying to stir anything up here, I'm just very curious.

Omega

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • O
  • Posts: 17093
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2021, 07:02:22 PM »
Im sure someone else will come along and explain it better. But some years ago there was a big "movement" to push storygaming. Along with new terms for games and the idea that everything had to be pigeonholed into some category. Often pushing storygaming as the best, or even the only way to play "real" RPGs.

This was ok on its own. Stoeygaming had been a part of RPGs from practically the start. But eventually a faction came to the fore who started a more stringent, then fanatical, push of storygaming and tried to co-opt pretty much everything from normal RPGs to board games to reading a book to watching grass grow.

The real problems came when they started expousing a nigh pathological hated of GMs and pushed for more and more stringent rules to shackle and control the GM into little more than a vend bot. And then pushed for the removal of the GM totally. Either by making everyone a mini-GM. Or dropping all pretext and declaring storytelling as the really real true RPG.

There was also some covert and overt moves to edit facts or undermine RPGs and try to push their agenda onto other games. Or to co-op sites. Essentially treating RPGs like a fetish.

On top of all that quite a few come across as either obnoxious, or flat out liars trying to "prove" how everyone was actually playing storygames all along or how the evil horrible GM must be abolished. etc ad nausium.


ScytheSong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2021, 10:17:50 PM »
So, strap in and let me tell you a story about storygames from an old Forge hand -- this is going to be a long post, and will differ from the people who consider all makers of storygames or their predecessors, Indie Games, swine. To start out, there were two movements, both championed by the same guy, Ron Edwards.

The first movement was that of Indie role-playing games: the idea that, rather than contributing to a larger publishing house's "supplement treadmill",  someone who was interested in writing for role-playing games should write their own material and publish it themselves, maintaining control over the role-playing material that they wrote.

The second movement was a theoretical one -- the infamous GNS theory, proposed in a series of essays that started out with a deep dissatisfaction with the way the World of Darkness (1.0) promised one gaming experience in it's flavor text and delivered a completely different experience because of the mechanics. The central conceit of GNS theory was that, in order for play to be enjoyable for a play group as a whole, the play style of an rpg had to pursue one of three goals: a Gamist, win against  the system, goal; a Narativist, tell a story, goal; and a Simulationist, reflect a detailed game world, goal. How much of this was supposed to reflect player preferences vs. what was rewarded by the game system vs. a weightless, spherical elephant, was left really unclear in the initial essays. Eventually GNS was morphed into what was called The Big Model, which swapped out the GNS "goals" for a "Creative Agenda" that included G, N, or S as one of its highest levels of preference (now clarified to explicitly talking about game design goals).

Of course, one of the first things that happened was the combination of Edwards' interest in the Narativist goals (and his insistence on a peculiarly rigid definition of "Story") and his promotion of independent games that he liked on his website meant that a bunch of games got labeled Narativist, and found enthusiastic support on the Forge forums. So, you had things that pushed the edges of what an rpg was combining with attempts to build a roleplaying game session that would reflect his particular definition of story: introduce characters, introduce conflict, rising action to a climax, and denoument all around a moral theme that is phrased as a question.

Other people, meanwhile, were trying to figure out what the bones of an rpg even were. Questions of who gets to say what when in a session led to what became called "The Impossible Thing [Believed] Before Breakfast" -- the conflict between the GM being in complete control of the whole game world and the Players being in complete control of their characters  -- and a rejection of such techniques as railroading, the "Roads to Rome" false sandbox, and similar places where game masters use their authority to limit the players choices.

One conflict that came out of this was the people who were like, "but I like my D&D/World of Darkness/Palladium/Hero Games/etc. game, why should I care about what your theory says?" And Ron Edwards, I shit you not, says "If you play this other way, it will cause brain damage such that you won't be able to recognize an actual story when you see it. No, I won't tell you why I think this, because I get paid as a professor to explain it." Which led to a ton of hard feelings.

In another direction, Vincent Baker of Lumpley Games, particularly famous nowadays for the Powered by the Apocalypse games, started a group around the concept of storygames and the Lumpley Principle (Nothing enters the Shared Imaginary Space where a roleplaying game exists without the consent of all of the players) and used his soapbox to push the idea that traditional GM powers could -- and perhaps should -- be divided among the play group. His first rpg, kill puppies for satan put a lot of power into the hands of the players compared to D&D, and Dogs in the Vineyard and Apocalypse World continued that pattern. Other members of the Storygames coalition followed similar experimental paths that led to at least one of them claiming that they no longer considered their work a Roleplaying game, but exclusively a Story Game. Which also didn't help the traditionalist crowd, who thought they were being accused of having "badwrongfun".
« Last Edit: April 16, 2021, 10:22:01 PM by ScytheSong »

S'mon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13315
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2021, 02:19:12 AM »
What I remember from around 2003-4 was that Forgeism was a strange cult that promised a solution to our increasing dissatisfaction with 3e D&D, but led us down a dark path, damaging and even destroying campaigns and groups. Eventually it became clear that Narrativism was a God That Failed, and the OSR was born, bringing salvation to the RPG world.  ;D

This Guy
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 642
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2021, 12:51:45 PM »
A guy whose concept of story came from a moralizing playwright put those ideas to work in RPG land and a lotta people who wanted their games to tell morals and make you a better person thought that was the shit so they all latched onto it, balkanizing the shit out of the hobby.

Games of choice were matters of taste pre-2K but now if you like Castles & Crusades you're an obnoxious MAGA chud and if you like Masks you're a cultural Marxist undermining good morals.
I don't want to play with you.

Rhedyn
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1101
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2021, 02:43:50 PM »
Short version:  Why all the hate for "storygames" and associated things on this forum?

I'm a relative newbie here, and I have been noticing references to "storygames" and past conflicts, and was just wondering what it was all about?  I've seen the term in various places refer to RPG-like games where players have some narrative control, collaborative writing projects with a few rules, freeform roleplaying with total GM control -no dice or rules- and lots of things in between.  What does it mean here?  And why all the vitriol?  Also, The Forge.  I read a lot of their stuff, and while I didn't buy into all of their theories, they did have some useful ideas and it made me think more deeply about my own methods of gaming, which is always a good thing, so why the hate?

Not trying to stir anything up here, I'm just very curious.
It's because OSR games are storygames but go about it a different way than actual storygames. Since they are basically the same, highlighting the minute differences in an emotional manner is common.

For example,
In an OSR game,
"Yeah your ranger can track a deer." or "Well it just rained, but we established you know how to track since you were a ranger of the kingdom, so make an ability check."

In a storygame,
"You have the aspect, 'Last Ranger of my edgy OC elf kingdom' so you get a +2 on your check. Well since you rolled low, you do find the deer but it was trapped by a troll who decided you would make a better meal!"

It's not all that different. The biggest difference is OSR tends to have less rules than story games and considers meta narrative currencies an immersion breaker.

Omega

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • O
  • Posts: 17093
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2021, 03:16:18 PM »
Thats pretty much the diametric opposite of the impressions I got.

Storygamers tend to push for less rules and less anything that breaks their obsession with "muh immershun". Which is normal immersion except taken to oft insane demands. Because of course.

And the old "ha-ha! You was playing a storygame all along!" gag was old years ago and still doesn't fly. Storygamers love to claim -any- storytelling is a really real RPG. Or even just doing something RL. Because thats a really real RPG too.

uh-huh. Suuuuuure.

Instead what was around from the start is something far removed from storygames as they exist now. Which is being pushed more and more towards just storytelling. No game. No role playing.  Normal RPGs can and have been played in all manner of ways from the start. That does not make them storygames unless ones definition approaches "everything on earth" which, surprise, is exactly what some of the far end nuts like to claim.





Eirikrautha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1266
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2021, 03:50:18 PM »
It's because OSR games are storygames but go about it a different way than actual storygames. Since they are basically the same, highlighting the minute differences in an emotional manner is common.

For example,
In an OSR game,
"Yeah your ranger can track a deer." or "Well it just rained, but we established you know how to track since you were a ranger of the kingdom, so make an ability check."

In a storygame,
"You have the aspect, 'Last Ranger of my edgy OC elf kingdom' so you get a +2 on your check. Well since you rolled low, you do find the deer but it was trapped by a troll who decided you would make a better meal!"

It's not all that different. The biggest difference is OSR tends to have less rules than story games and considers meta narrative currencies an immersion breaker.

What?  As a rationalization (from someone I assume likes storygames), that's still not even particularly persuasive.  Both the method and the goal of RPGs differ from what I've seen described as storygames.

So, congratulations.  You've managed to be more wrong on a thread than This Guy (granted, the thread's still short... he's got time to assert his buffoonery  dominance)...

This Guy
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 642
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2021, 04:33:30 PM »
It's because OSR games are storygames but go about it a different way than actual storygames. Since they are basically the same, highlighting the minute differences in an emotional manner is common.

For example,
In an OSR game,
"Yeah your ranger can track a deer." or "Well it just rained, but we established you know how to track since you were a ranger of the kingdom, so make an ability check."

In a storygame,
"You have the aspect, 'Last Ranger of my edgy OC elf kingdom' so you get a +2 on your check. Well since you rolled low, you do find the deer but it was trapped by a troll who decided you would make a better meal!"

It's not all that different. The biggest difference is OSR tends to have less rules than story games and considers meta narrative currencies an immersion breaker.

What?  As a rationalization (from someone I assume likes storygames), that's still not even particularly persuasive.  Both the method and the goal of RPGs differ from what I've seen described as storygames.

So, congratulations.  You've managed to be more wrong on a thread than This Guy (granted, the thread's still short... he's got time to assert his buffoonery  dominance)...

Sorry not this time buddy. Read Edwards's essays on Narrativist, read his primary literary source, shit all flows downhill from there. And if you disagree on the balkanizing you haven't been following the arc of the usual suspects on the Forums of Note.*

*You'd have to be real sad to do that so it fits me perfectly
I don't want to play with you.

Shawn Driscoll

  • Role-Play Purist
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2928
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2021, 04:45:42 PM »
Short version:  Why all the hate for "storygames" and associated things on this forum?

I'm a relative newbie here, and I have been noticing references to "storygames" and past conflicts, and was just wondering what it was all about?  I've seen the term in various places refer to RPG-like games where players have some narrative control, collaborative writing projects with a few rules, freeform roleplaying with total GM control -no dice or rules- and lots of things in between.  What does it mean here?  And why all the vitriol?  Also, The Forge.  I read a lot of their stuff, and while I didn't buy into all of their theories, they did have some useful ideas and it made me think more deeply about my own methods of gaming, which is always a good thing, so why the hate?

Not trying to stir anything up here, I'm just very curious.
Storygames have been around for decades. See DMs running campaigns. It's the same thing. Players want their DM to tell them stories about what their characters do.

Rhedyn
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 1101
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2021, 05:27:39 PM »
It's because OSR games are storygames but go about it a different way than actual storygames. Since they are basically the same, highlighting the minute differences in an emotional manner is common.

For example,
In an OSR game,
"Yeah your ranger can track a deer." or "Well it just rained, but we established you know how to track since you were a ranger of the kingdom, so make an ability check."

In a storygame,
"You have the aspect, 'Last Ranger of my edgy OC elf kingdom' so you get a +2 on your check. Well since you rolled low, you do find the deer but it was trapped by a troll who decided you would make a better meal!"

It's not all that different. The biggest difference is OSR tends to have less rules than story games and considers meta narrative currencies an immersion breaker.

What?  As a rationalization (from someone I assume likes storygames), that's still not even particularly persuasive.  Both the method and the goal of RPGs differ from what I've seen described as storygames.

So, congratulations.  You've managed to be more wrong on a thread than This Guy (granted, the thread's still short... he's got time to assert his buffoonery  dominance)...

I don't particularly care for actual story games.

SHARK

  • The Great Shark Hope
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5039
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #11 on: April 17, 2021, 05:31:33 PM »
Short version:  Why all the hate for "storygames" and associated things on this forum?

I'm a relative newbie here, and I have been noticing references to "storygames" and past conflicts, and was just wondering what it was all about?  I've seen the term in various places refer to RPG-like games where players have some narrative control, collaborative writing projects with a few rules, freeform roleplaying with total GM control -no dice or rules- and lots of things in between.  What does it mean here?  And why all the vitriol?  Also, The Forge.  I read a lot of their stuff, and while I didn't buy into all of their theories, they did have some useful ideas and it made me think more deeply about my own methods of gaming, which is always a good thing, so why the hate?

Not trying to stir anything up here, I'm just very curious.
Storygames have been around for decades. See DMs running campaigns. It's the same thing. Players want their DM to tell them stories about what their characters do.

Greetings!

*LAUGHING* Shawn Driscoll, you know, you are quite right here with this. Your observation made me laugh a lot. I have known and still know--more than a few gamers that very much have tendencies and desires to do just that--have the DM tell them stories about what their characters do.

I have on a few occasions become wrapped up in some players asking me questions about their backgrounds, for example, dealing with various events and people in their lives. Long story short, before you know it, I've been sucked into telling them deep, complex, multi-layered stories about their characters. Such can *easily* go on and on, for hours. Yeah. I've done that. There are some players that absolutely love doing that.

Yes, I have long since learned my lesson. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the façade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security b

This Guy
BANNED

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 642
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2021, 05:34:44 PM »
So were those stories of yours any good or what Shark
I don't want to play with you.

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8330
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2021, 06:02:19 PM »
Short version:  Why all the hate for "storygames" and associated things on this forum?

I'm a relative newbie here, and I have been noticing references to "storygames" and past conflicts, and was just wondering what it was all about?  I've seen the term in various places refer to RPG-like games where players have some narrative control, collaborative writing projects with a few rules, freeform roleplaying with total GM control -no dice or rules- and lots of things in between.  What does it mean here?  And why all the vitriol?  Also, The Forge.  I read a lot of their stuff, and while I didn't buy into all of their theories, they did have some useful ideas and it made me think more deeply about my own methods of gaming, which is always a good thing, so why the hate?

Not trying to stir anything up here, I'm just very curious.
Storygames have been around for decades. See DMs running campaigns. It's the same thing. Players want their DM to tell them stories about what their characters do.

I don't want a DM to tell me a story. I've got books and films for that. I want to participate in an adventure.
And that, dear friends, is the difference between telling a story, and playing in an RPG.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

Eirikrautha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1266
Re: History lesson, please: storygames
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2021, 06:33:30 PM »
Short version:  Why all the hate for "storygames" and associated things on this forum?

I'm a relative newbie here, and I have been noticing references to "storygames" and past conflicts, and was just wondering what it was all about?  I've seen the term in various places refer to RPG-like games where players have some narrative control, collaborative writing projects with a few rules, freeform roleplaying with total GM control -no dice or rules- and lots of things in between.  What does it mean here?  And why all the vitriol?  Also, The Forge.  I read a lot of their stuff, and while I didn't buy into all of their theories, they did have some useful ideas and it made me think more deeply about my own methods of gaming, which is always a good thing, so why the hate?

Not trying to stir anything up here, I'm just very curious.
Storygames have been around for decades. See DMs running campaigns. It's the same thing. Players want their DM to tell them stories about what their characters do.

I don't want a DM to tell me a story. I've got books and films for that. I want to participate in an adventure.
And that, dear friends, is the difference between telling a story, and playing in an RPG.
BINGO!  The DM's job is to tell me what happens when I describe what my character does, not to "tell me stories about my character."  F**k that noise!