Author: Weber (---.Stanford.EDU)
Date: 10-04-2001 15:28
Hi, Conan
That was a nice column. You remind us of several good points, including the fallacy that anyone who doesn't play our way is playing wrong.
I suggest that in this column you fall prey to a different fallacy:
The greatest flaw to a story-driven game is that if it is too story drive, why not read a book instead[?]... Sure, there needs to be a plot to move the game along -- but not at the expense of the players' ability to interact.
"Story-driven" does not necessarily imply "GM's story" (or metaplot), although this is very common and can sometimes lead to a perception of railroading. I would say that your above statement applies to games which go too far over to the "GM's story". There have been efforts in recent years (eg, Sorceror) to develop games which are driven by the players' storytelling. These sorts of games have their own set of strengths and weaknesses, but being "too story driven" in this sense does not reduce to being a passive audience, such as someone who reads a book. A player's participation includes more "author" in the mix with "audience". (And railroading actually becomes less likely in these sorts of games.)
However, your underlying point was that there are tradeoffs in the balancing act between "realism" and "storytelling" as goals, and I do not disagree with you there, even accounting for an expanded allowance of what "storytelling" games are like.
Still I do note with some interest that there is a distinct lack of guides for freeform roleplaying. In fact it has even been my experience that there is a certain hubris among gamers and designers that everyone knows how to roleplay already.
Hallelujah, brother! You are preaching to the choir, here! (Extended ranting removed out of compassion for other readers. =)
Pax,
Weber
|
|
