[Edit 7/29/18]: Patrick Stuart makes a far better case than I can, read his post here.
In short I feel Story Games spend much of their game time talking about what the story is about while the traditional rpg's I play and run story is happening because we are playing the game. A common refrain I hear about Story Games is “it's about the story”, that somehow without giving PC's valuable session time to bloviate on what their character is about, what they have done, what matters to them a role playing game is terrible and being played wrong. Oh, also no one else at the table (think GM) can say what happens to their PC. I find the structure of a Story Game obliterates the stand out features of traditional RPG's to the point of making them unrecognizable, so much so they have a name; Story Games.
In short I feel Story Games spend much of their game time talking about what the story is about while the traditional rpg's I play and run story is happening because we are playing the game. A common refrain I hear about Story Games is “it's about the story”, that somehow without giving PC's valuable session time to bloviate on what their character is about, what they have done, what matters to them a role playing game is terrible and being played wrong. Oh, also no one else at the table (think GM) can say what happens to their PC. I find the structure of a Story Game obliterates the stand out features of traditional RPG's to the point of making them unrecognizable, so much so they have a name; Story Games.
My
latest game session once again reinforced my opinion that a
traditional RPG delivers
story in so many levels that the fall down for folks who cannot get a
“story” out of traditional mechanics can't rise to the challenge.
Role playing games offer a unique medium with incredible artistic and
creative depth. Underneath the term “game” lies a medium which
has no bottom, no limits to the quality of experienced to be
realized. Therefore, with any artistic exploit, it is not easy to be
good at it. And when I mean good I don't mean enjoyment. As a kid I
enjoyed RPG's to the exclusion of almost any other activity. Doesn't
mean I was any good at it. In fact I was keenly aware that there was
much more to the game than my gaming group could really achieve. The
D&D, Stormbringer and Gamma World rule books would mention this
thing called a campaign? Where the game really shined as over the
course of adventuring a world would be built up and the PC's would be
a significant part of this. A Final Word in
the original Classic Traveller rulebook sums it up nicely; “The
greatest burden, of course, falls on the referee, who must create
entire worlds and societies thorugh which the players will roam…
The players themselves have a burden almost equal to that of the
referee: they must move, act, travel in search of their own goals…
Above all, the players and the referees must work together.”
Story
Games remove and or minimize the Game Master's/Referee's role in a
traditional RPG thereby creating something different. Which is all
well and good, play the game you want. But to say a Story Game is the
solution for not having story in your RPG is rubbish. It's
like saying you can't paint like Picasso because there is something
wrong with paint, canvas and a stick, the tools you paint with. No,
while it is easy to paint it is difficult to paint creatively.
Today's
session went like this; some of the players felt they had a cash flow
problem. One of them didn't. Some of the players thought they should
pursue a dubious means of solving the problem, one of them didn't. On
top of this one of the players had a problem with the relations and
deals the party had made with dubious factions through play at the
present time. One of the players turned to me and asked, “Do I have
to role play this out or can I just roll and try and influence the
other player?” In my game rolls for the results of social
interaction (bluffing, fast talk, intimidation, etc.) are reserved
for NPC's. The players have complete autonomy when it comes to
deciding what choices their PC's will make. “Look, you guys have to
work this out.” And I usually punctuate the moment by clicking off
my mic. This is their time and I want the party to sink or swim on
their own desires, needs, wants, abilities and investment. In fact,
they had a similar situation just the previous session. One character
was not hot on letting the party's surgeon remove his recently
acquired kangaroo tail through amputation. They had to work this out
among themselves. Arguing the risk of death or permanent disability
against the complications such an enchantment would cause for the
party at large in the campaign world. This was all on them. And it
wasn't the first time the subject had been brought up. Anyways, the
tail did come off and the PC survived, but this doesn't mean there
was a kumbaya moment where
they all came out of the barn holding hands. No, the game's story is
being made in real time with their choices and decisions. No one used
an “edge” or a “move to direct the tale. There were no
mechanics to be forced to help them out of a complicated situation.
They argued, decided, and hoped for the best. And the PC's character,
their personality, their “story” was made before all out of
everyone's own imaginative clay. Good, bad, or indifferent as far as
quality of “play”, they got what they got not because they
followed some structured method of resolution, but because they made
it, together.
Now
back to today's session; the dissenting PC (on the cash grab) felt so
strongly about it he refused to participate in the action. Once again
there was no “my character wouldn't do that”, or “my aspect
says I will do this” he played his story in real time, played his
character his way, and surprise, surprise, with high fidelity based
on what has happened to the PC during the course of play within the
overall campaign. Because he was invested, because like everyone else
around the table they put some decent effort into their role. And
this shit happens all the time with the players. No one at the table
is shy about arguing over choice, action and consequence. And this is
the story. Sure we have arch villains, and mind-bending horrors to
battle. Blood soaked combat and PC death, but it is in the session to
session PC on PC interaction which makes each one of them stand out
and a distinct and unique story emerges every session.
Are
the best sessions when they interact with each other for hours and no
dice are thrown? No, not at all. We get the extra icing on the cake
because the campaign world is dangerous and adventure abounds. Sooner
than later the dice must be rolled and catastrophe breathes heavy
over their shoulder. Just because you gamed your balls off doesn't
mean your PC has plot immunity. That just sounds too much like a
Story Game.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Lay it on the Line