What game always makes a good story when you play it? What game seldom does? I've been involved in plenty of DnD campaigns that were also great stories. The best stories in fact. I just don't see what is inherent in DnD that causes it to lack in the "story" department. I've been RPing for 28 years, so I've seen a few games come and go, but I've never had a bad gaming experience solely based on the game system. Or a good one based on the game system. CoC was fun, as was Mechwarrior, Werewolf, Dragonquest, GURPS (western, traveller, and WWII), Deadlands, TOON, Marvel Superheroes, Champion, Alternity, Gamma World, Boot Hill, Top Secret, MERP, Harnworld, James Bond, Stormbringer, and even DnD (all versions). There are some games whose flavor or feel I like or dislike, but I can't say I couldn't have fun playing even the ones I dislike with the right players.

I wonder how one can play a RPG and not have some kind of story result.

Sigmund --

The point is not that there are RPGs that don't produce story, but if you as players don't care about the quality of the story you produce, then the quality of that story doesn't matter, does it?

For instance, in the D&D game I'm playing right now, story isn't the focus.  (And I'm talking about this specific game, not D&D in general.)  So our story isn't that great.  I wouldn't read it if it were a book.  That's okay, we're having a blast anyway, because story isn't what we're looking for.

I think some of the real damage of the 90s is the idea that story is somehow a "better" or "more pure" goal in role-playing than, say, tactical combat.  That's just silly.  It's a recreational activity.  The goal is to have fun.

yrs--
--Ben

My take is this. When you have a group of people sitting down together, with dice in hand (or whatever conflict resolution system), they are getting ready to play characters with backgrounds and they are going to interact with denizens of a make believe world...something is going to happen. Call it story, a tale, whatever. Something does happen.

See that dungeon over there. Sitting all musty and evil. For whatever reasons the players go there, wether it's to save the village, defeat an old enemy residing there whatever..that sucker is going to be explored one way or another. And when this happens, the seed of a story is planted(when nobody is looking)

RPGs are basically  sets of rules. To me there is no way around that. And really why should you want to get around it. It's a game. But once it gets into the hands of the consumer, it has the potential to be something more, if one so wishes. I think of it this way. The industry produces product, the gamer/consumer produces the story...or art, if one is so inclined.This is why rpgs are such interesting creatures...its potential is limitless, or limited, depending on the rules and the manner of play, all of which is entirely up to the players.

In my opinion all RPGs do this. They create a situation in which a story might evolve. I mean every rpg adventure i have read has some dramatic device to get the players involved in the enfolding events. Sure call it plot whatever, but this whole rpg thing is dripping with "story potential".

Some systems encourage a certain style of play...perhaps more into the role playing aspect, others concentrate on the more tactical aspects of the game, but all rpgs i think at its core are vehicles in which various different kinds of stories could be told.

And yet story is not the goal. It is just something that happens along the way. Nobody can ever have any real control over it. Sure you can have systems designed to ensure that story becomes a goal and what not...but really story is what happens when a group of friends sit down and explore a make believe world....story happens when you are playing the game, story happens - when you least expect it.

Regards,
David R.

Quote from: SigmundI agree, welcome to Nukinland , and my answer is no. I don't like RPGs, for the most part, whose primary goal is to "create a story". I like RPGs whose main goal is to play a game. Having a fun story arise out of the game playing is just a nice bonus as far as I'm concerned.

I call story a beneficial by-product of gaming. In other words, story happens.

-mice

Quote from: Ben LehmanThe point is not that there are RPGs that don't produce story, but if you as players don't care about the quality of the story you produce, then the quality of that story doesn't matter, does it?

I don't think that reflects my mindset.

I'd rather phrase it this way: "I don't expect an RPG to always produce a quality story".

Thus I'm always rather happy when play it *on it's own* of the RPG does.

Let me trot out one of my favorite D20 stories and see if I can make a point with it (I have no idea if this will actually work).

We were playing in the Eberron campaign setting and were at the Big Fight At The End wherein we were taking on an epic level Lich. The climax to the whole fight was when Rend, our big bashy character, leaps through the air with a chain artifact we'd found along the way (which prevents the use of magic if you're bound by it) past Destructo-orbs (can't remember their actual name right now) and lands smack dab in the middle of an air elemental summoned up by the Lich. Rend uses his considerable strength to punch through the elemental and throws the chains around the Lich which promptly binds said Lich. (He breaks out by smashing apart his own artifact and chaos ensues but, frankly, that was pretty much the end for him. The only question was whether or not he could take anyone else with him.)

Now, that makes for a great story. The thing is, the gameplay wasn't like that at all. We spent way too long hashing out exactly how the air elemental held Rend, whether or not it was possible to use momentum to go through the damn thing, how punching through an air elemental would work, the exact position of the Lich, blah blah blah. The end result turned out to be a cool story but all the details to make that story happen? Boring.

I like games that can bring the "OMG taht wuz so kewl!!!11!" closer to the mechanics of the game. That's what I think of when I think of games that have story as a goal.

Quote from: Lady LakiraI like games that can bring the "OMG taht wuz so kewl!!!11!" closer to the mechanics of the game. That's what I think of when I think of games that have story as a goal.

I suggest the use of the the word "story" is a whole bucket of red herring then.

D20 is great and a boon to the entire industry. Why? Because it is well crafted general purpose RPG that has a low entry barrier and does a good job of resolving combat conflict in it's native setting, a passable job in a lot of others, and has passable mechanics for conflict/tension resolution outside of combat. It is certainly provides the ability for story.  That makes it a great entry point for new to gaming customers, and provides a general use common tongue to speak across a wide swath gamers. The later is important because to run a game you need a critical core of people, and in areas where the potential set of gamers is small it is important to have something to fall back on to bridge background gaps.

Drawbacks? Off the top I'd say:

- It is very easy to let yourself get bogged down in the mechanics. At the core they are simple and thus easy to get into, but there is a lot of bulk you can get lost in...partially because it is inviting bulk because there is coolness to be found there.

- Combat orientated, weaker outside combat. Which is true to it Chainmail ancestory.

- Related to the last; The Alignment system promotes caricature characters. To the point that it beats you with a stick if you try to encorporate more dimension to your character.  Fortuntely the system is fairly modular, and it's pretty easy to just ignore Alignment outright.


However none of these are at the degree of magnitude that they are even approaching fatal flaws. Hammers are pretty simple to operate, and with some imagination can cover an incredible territory of job.  If you have specific jobs that require a bit more finesse that's fine. Go out and get that tool too if it is important enough for you. But that trusty old hammer will get a hell of a lot done for you....which is why so many people own hammers.  There are a lot of things out there that need wacking.


D20 is a trusty stout hammer. Only a fool discounts the power and utility of the hammer.

Quote from: blakkieD20 is great and a boon to the entire industry.

I have to note my disagreement here.

IMO D&D was first to market and thus the creator of that market. It has always and currently holds majority market share- this by itself makes it the intro game of choice, and this by itself will keep it on top.

That is the beginning and end of it's boon.

Quote from: gleichmanI have to note my disagreement here.

IMO D&D was first to market and thus the creator of that market. It has always and currently holds majority market share- this by itself makes it the intro game of choice, and this by itself will keep it on top.

That is the beginning and end of it's boon.

Just being first to market doesn't guarantee you majority share holder. As pointed out before when TSR was doing a nose dive nobody was able to step up and capitalize and take over the industry and lead it to greater heights. Why?  Because any players in a position to try do so were looking down the wrong damn path to find that large bulk of customers.

Combat sells. Dice sell. Simple architecture, structured, general use rules sell. Light hearted entertainment sells.

They are the archor store to the RPG Mall, generating the customer traffic that helps put the bread on the table for the other stores.

Quote from: blakkieJust being first to market doesn't guarantee you majority share holder. As pointed out before when TSR was doing a nose dive nobody was able to step up and capitalize and take over the industry and lead it to greater heights. Why?

For the simple reason that they didn't have the D&D product line.

D&D had a mental lock on the market, it just had to do something to grab it's attention again. All part of the normal business cycle in a niche market.

Quote from: gleichmanFor the simple reason that they didn't have the D&D product line.

D&D had a mental lock on the market, it just had to do something to grab it's attention again. All part of the normal business cycle in a niche market.

What you are talking about is Brand name.  But hey, history is littered market leaders fallen that couldn't back up the brand name talk with something people actually wanted before a competitor showed up and provided it and took over.

Nope. Sorry, the reason was that nobody addressed desires of that big ass chunk of people that were willing to buy RPG stuff.  After all 3e isn't exactly AD&D. They had the marketing advantage of name, but with good salesmanship and a product to back it up you have more than a real chance to topple the king's palace.

If someone else would have done it first, and lifted all the boats in the harbour with the tide they could have been the boon. But they didn't and the weren't, and crying "but we just didn't have the name to do it" is a lame excuse for at the very least WW and a couple down from them.

Quote from: blakkieWhat you are talking about is Brand name.  But hey, history is littered market leaders fallen that couldn't back up the brand name talk with something people actually wanted before a competitor showed up and provided it and took over.

And it's also littered with cases of a brand name holding on when there was not logical reason for it to.

There's no way to prove this issue one way or the other, so we're just talking in circles giving our opinions.

I know that with respect to my own personal experience, that D&D became unless to me somewhere around 5-10 years ago. None of the various players who came through our group had significant D&D experience if any. TORG, yes. HERO, yes. White Wolf, yes.

Doesn't mean anything outside my own experience. But it's a hint as to where I'm coming from. It could die tomorrow and I would care not one bit.

Quote from: Ben LehmanI think some of the real damage of the 90s is the idea that story is somehow a "better" or "more pure" goal in role-playing than, say, tactical combat.  That's just silly.  It's a recreational activity.  The goal is to have fun.

Precisely.

The 1990s saw an endless parade of worthless games because of this thinking. You had designers spouting off about story, while producing rules that had nothing to do with it.

It's interesting to look at what the Forge is doing in this light. I think in a lot of ways, the Forge produces tools that you use to create a group story. They're closer to that, IMO, than they are to games.

Quote from: gleichmanAnd it's also littered with cases of a brand name holding on when there was not logical reason for it to.

There's no way to prove this issue one way or the other, so we're just talking in circles giving our opinions.

I know that with respect to my own personal experience, that D&D became unless to me somewhere around 5-10 years ago. None of the various players who came through our group had significant D&D experience if any. TORG, yes. HERO, yes. White Wolf, yes.

Doesn't mean anything outside my own experience. But it's a hint as to where I'm coming from. It could die tomorrow and I would care not one bit.

Ah yes, the "my product is better than that POS market leader, but because those damn illogical people won't buy it i'm not running this town". Cry of many a loser.  While people may be somewhat driven by irrational thoughts, and this can influence purchases, hand waving away orders of magnitude with it seems rather....weak.

But you are right about the circles in that it doesn't even matter. Nobody else picked up the ball. Nobody.

If D&D is a boon because it was the "original" or because it is actually giving a huge number of people what they are looking to buy is pretty much irrelavant. As is andetotal "well I know people that played other games and had no D&D experience". It isn't that D&D is the only game in town, but it is the one that is the major entry point for new gaming customers.

And when it was sucking turds nobody else stepped up to take it's place.

And diceless remains a niche of a niche, and WW which has had years and years to build a brand....well they did. They unfortunately built a brand of "we are freaking serious about STORY, so serious that we don't really trust it to any sort of randomness or interlopers so it needs to get set straight up front that this is what is going to happen...beginning, middle, and end of STORY".

And the marketplace says that dog don't hunt like the playing a game dog does.

Then D&D stopped sucking so many turds, got fundementally repaired, and it was back to anchoring the Mall. (EDIT: Not to say that it couldn't have used a bit more tuning, and it has been tuned in various ways, but it was a dramatic step forward.)  You don't have to shop at the anchor store yourself to benefit from it's ability to make the specialty store you want economically feasible to exist. Dismissing the anchor store's existance as a benefit to you by enabling your choice is myoptic.

Quote from: mearlsThe 1990s saw an endless parade of worthless games because of this thinking. You had designers spouting off about story, while producing rules that had nothing to do with it.

To be fair to them, I think the understood at some level that you didn't need rules to produce story.

I wouldn't as a result call them worthless for this reason.

Quote from: mearlsIt's interesting to look at what the Forge is doing in this light. I think in a lot of ways, the Forge produces tools that you use to create a group story. They're closer to that, IMO, than they are to games.

IMO, they should have taken the leap and stated that as their goal. It would have prevented a lot of hard feelings if their work didn't come across as "we're improving the RPG".