Quote from: Dumarest;980546You forgot Rule No. 1 of the Internet.

"The answer is porn, what's the question?"

Despite the thread title?  lol...

Sure, it's a manifestation of human nature.  Gronan had it right.  But it isn't necessarily one side or the other expressing all the hate.  There's a large contingent of the story game crowd that "hates" trad rpgs.  And when one group or the other expresses their feelings the wrong way in a public forum things can get messy...

It's not just "story vs trad," though.  It's the same as edition wars.  When I came back to gaming after a 15 year hiatus a lot of forums were talking about "latest and greatest," and any time I said I liked OD&D I got responses that would get somebody punched in a face to face conversation.  And there may be someone who, when told "Those rules suck and you're an idiot for playing them," responds calmly.

But that person would be not me.

I don't know who started it, but it's not just "story vs trad".

Oh absolutely it's not just story vs trad.  Hell it's literally EVERYWHERE!  Gran Turismo vs Forza.  Playstation vs Nintendo.  Marvel vs DC.  

But that one sentence there is the full and complete explanation for the OP's question.  Because some people don't respond calmly when told "that thing you enjoy sucks and you're an idiot for enjoying it."

Quote from: trechriron;980501When the storygames movement first began, there was a prophet. He proclaimed "the old ways" as brain damaged and predatory and exclaimed the new ways as sacred. Many heard his words and followed him.

Some who loved the old ways also followed, intrigued by the passion and movement following this new prophet.

But the games did not play anything like the old games. In fact, they were unto themselves a new type of game. But the prophet hated the creators of the old games and wanted them to be cleansed from the Earth. The new games would be described as better versions of the old games. They would replace the old games and make the world of games better for it.

Some of the people who appreciated the old games, and were tricked by the demagoguery of the new games, grew angry at the new games prophets for trying to destroy the old games' ways.

And so the Story Games Wars began!

Amongst the traditional gamers arose a counter-prophet. His truth rang hard and direct. He fought in front, with courage, taking the slings and arrows of his enemies in stride, never relenting.

The war was long fought, with many casualties on both sides - the memes plumed thick across the InterTubes, the rhetoric spewed vitriolic fire that sapped the enthusiasm from the most dedicated of adherents. The Prophets and their adherents waged holy war across every corner of the web, no forum was untouched, no user-group unturned! The battle raged so fierce that many worried ALL games would be consumed by it's rage!!

But alas, as all wars go... a ceasefire settled across the empty battlefields. There was nothing left to give.

ALL gamers gained clarity on the truth. There is not one true way. Story Games are of their own kind and traditional RPGs remain of their own kind. You can play either or both, and enjoy either or both. Equally. If one discusses their passion with enthusiasm without trying to erase or ruin the other, then that sincerity reigns true, and peace can be known across the gamer-verse.

And so it was written. The Story Games Wars came to a close. Each side claiming victory and yet no side gaining triumph.

And we were all wiser for it.

Thats good stuff but in my experience the two sides developed more or less along side one another over the years rather than one growing out of the other. Most of the gamers I know have run their games very similarly, granted with some tweaking, for years - some not realizing until recently that there was a Whole Other Way to do it.

Yes, humans being incredibly competitive and critical of anything they dont like personally is probably the root of the whole thing of course - but I was kind of hoping to read some of what appeared here...that is personal explanations of why one approach or another is so distasteful that it inspires wrath. Somebody posted something about feeling "cheated" if they believe they are playing one way and find out they were actually playing another. Thats  completely understandable, as is the comment that some supporters of one or the other approach claim superiority - intellectually or due to experience or whatever. I get that too, nobody wants their favorite shiny thing compared to shit in the light of another even better shinier thing.

I will add that some of what has crept even into this thread is what I believe to be a general misunderstanding between the two camps. Many times what is described in someone's post as a reason for them liking/disliking one approach to gaming simply isnt present in many games of the supposed designated type. Off the cuff accusations such as not allowing a character to die or not having any notes whatsoever to follow while GMing may well have their place in someone's game but certainly not all, maybe not many. And yet these kinds of assumptions form our thinking.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;980557I don't know who started it, but it's not just "story vs trad".

Good point. I forgot all the folks who are operating under some version of "Baggins likes something I don't like or Baggins dislikes something I do like so now we hates it, we hates it, we hates it forever!"

Quote from: rgrove0172;980569Yes, humans being incredibly competitive and critical of anything they dont like personally is probably the root of the whole thing of course - but I was kind of hoping to read some of what appeared here...that is personal explanations of why one approach or another is so distasteful that it inspires wrath. Somebody posted something about feeling "cheated" if they believe they are playing one way and find out they were actually playing another. Thats  completely understandable, as is the comment that some supporters of one or the other approach claim superiority - intellectually or due to experience or whatever. I get that too, nobody wants their favorite shiny thing compared to shit in the light of another even better shinier thing.

I will add that some of what has crept even into this thread is what I believe to be a general misunderstanding between the two camps. Many times what is described in someone's post as a reason for them liking/disliking one approach to gaming simply isnt present in many games of the supposed designated type. Off the cuff accusations such as not allowing a character to die or not having any notes whatsoever to follow while GMing may well have their place in someone's game but certainly not all, maybe not many. And yet these kinds of assumptions form our thinking.

As to paragraph 2, that too is an extension of human nature; people go off half-cocked with incomplete information.

As to why I personally don't like it, my experiences have been a) it's predictable when I like surprises.  This is why I also don't like the whole "player tell me what the inn is like" sort of thing.  2) you can't deviate; if something more interesting to you comes up, too bad.

Mileage et cetera.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;980572As to paragraph 2, that too is an extension of human nature; people go off half-cocked with incomplete information.

This is part of point #5 in my post. What happens when people elevate opinion over reality. An opinionated person wants to spew opinion at any opportunity. Someone who prioritizes reality over opinion wants to actually make sure they know the reality of what they're responding to before deciding what to do or say.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;980572As to paragraph 2, that too is an extension of human nature; people go off half-cocked with incomplete information.

As to why I personally don't like it, my experiences have been a) it's predictable when I like surprises.  This is why I also don't like the whole "player tell me what the inn is like" sort of thing.  2) you can't deviate; if something more interesting to you comes up, too bad.

Mileage et cetera.

So, my General, you played in my Barsoom game at Free RPG Day - was it 'trad' or 'story'? Inquiring minds want to know, especially after all the grief I've gotten for the way I game; I'd like to know what it is that I do that seems to cause them to break out into a rash...

Quote from: rgrove0172;980495Where do you think the apparent hatred for story gaming by the pure sandbox guys comes from and for that matter, visa versa?

As a veteran of the GNS wars, I have given the matter some thought. I think there are a bunch of causes, all interacting.

Here are 2 main ones

1) A lot of people want a game that would make a good story
I think one of the most foundational causes of the conflict is a relatively common desire for a game that would make a decent story if you wrote it up after-the-fact butting up against some common advice that does not work for people who want to play mainly immersively, In Character (IC).

2) Asinine online dialog around role-playing v. roll-playing
Even by online standards the dialog around different preferences was pretty abysmal--particularly when certain parties wouldn't publicly admit that they were slamming perfectly functional styles of play they didn't care for. This was especially bad for GNS, and the Great Brain Damage spurt of honesty really helped clear the air, but it's been lousy across all kinds of dimensions.

I think the second reason speaks for itself, but I'll unpack reason 1 briefly (I can do more if anyone cares):

People want a game that would make for a good story!?
I think the most popular mode for playing rpgs is immersive-in-character. It's why role-playing is called role-playing. You're playing "your guy." But even with that stance, it's very common for people who care about how the game goes and would prefer a game that has elements that would make a good story if you wrote up the game after the fact. These are things like
* Good characterization and character-driven action
* A relative lack of "dead air" where nothing's happening
* Rising action toward a climax (versus random action and random anti-climax)
* Strong themes woven through the game
* Etc.

The popularity of games like Vampire which promised a game with literary elements and structure, is one point of reference. Another would be GDS-Dramatism in which the GM prioritizes actions that would "make a good story" -- there are others.

So great. People want a game with a recognizeable literary structure.

The problem: The #1 way to try to achieve this is to have the GM railroad the shit out of the game to enforce a literary structure. This does not work for a lot of players, and creates all kinds of problems. Even the subtle version where you pretend you're not railroading but do, anyway (sometimes called "Illusionism") is problematic since it's usually not sustainable over a long term.

For people who want IC, immersive play, feeling constrained by invisible, narrative forces sucks and ruins the game.

Solution #2 was to design games that make the players co-authors in the story and maybe use some mechanics to encourage a literary structure. Which is fine for people who care a whole lot about that structure but tends to ruin IC-immersive play for the majority. The story-games approach just doesn't work for a lot of people who like tabletop RPGs.

None of this would be a huge problem if not for the online nonsense -- they would just be solutions and games that don't work for most roleplayers... but the online discussion was pretty toxic for a long time, and there are still people who feel strongly one way or the other.

Cheers,
-E.

Not sure where the idea that you can't deviate from a storyline in a narrative or storygame comes from. Or that you can't die in them. Many of the more popular game systems, like PbtA games, can be quite deadly.

It is better to get a lot less abstract. What games, whether 'RPGs' or 'storygames' are we talking about?

AW is almost a completely freeform sandbox for example, as are most DW games. A true storygame like 1001 nights can take off in any and all directions (as is appropriate for the source material) but has a simple mechanic that helps bring the game to a close (which is not the same thing as a predetermined ending).

To me the weakest storygames I've encountered don't have enough mechanical support for the storytelling and come too close to 'make some stuff up' without any structure of how to do so. Archipelgo strikes me as one example. Dread has a great central mechanic but the actual instructions are too vague for my tastes. On the other hand Final Girl has a terrific card based mechanic that works really well.

Quote from: rgrove0172;980564Thats good stuff but in my experience the two sides developed more or less along side one another over the years rather than one growing out of the other. Most of the gamers I know have run their games very similarly, granted with some tweaking, for years - some not realizing until recently that there was a Whole Other Way to do it.

I certainly fall into this category.
I DM'd the same way for decades, and it wasn't until I started actively participating on this forum that I found out that  these "camps" existed.

What the hell? Don't you know there is a war on??!! It is our duty to shut up, hate the bastards, and kill as many as we can so we can eat their rich,tasty courage!!!! Now get out there and hate, soldier!

Added - Damn it! I posted this in all caps, and the forum 'fixed it' for me!

As someone who loves a good story, but also loves the immersion and role-playing character aspects of RPG's, I sort of am in the middle in a lot of ways. But I think the reason why narrativism and "Story Games" get so much hate on here is because of the sheer pretentiousness of the fandoms associated with them.

Even traditional RPG's that have a narrative slant like World of Darkness are especially infamous for this, and the "Story Game" movement that came out of the Forge was even ten times worse in that regard.

Not saying there isn't pretentiousness or elitism coming from the OSR (because there is) but it's nowhere near as prevalent or hard-coded into the fandom like with Story Games or White Wolf/Onyx Path RPG's, where condescending pretentiousness seems to be mandatory.

I've never been told I was playing OD&D "the wrong way" because I invoked Rule Zero in my games, whereas if I had a dollar for every time some pretentious Goth or Punk told me I was playing World of Darkness "the wrong way" for invoking Rule Zero, or leaving out elements I didn't like such as personal horror, post-modernism, or metaplot, I'd be a wealthy man.