To write as fiction, or as a manual.

[Mark Stahl]

Hello again everyone,

I have been thinking about a lot of things since I started 'physically' working on Good Intentions, and one of them is how the text should be read. I have a large collection of RPG books sitting on bookshelves at home (usually bought because they have a different system element that interested me), and I started thumbing through the books to examine the layout and the explainations of the setting.

The main thing that I noticed is that setting is predominately written from the point of view of the author speaking to the reader, in an explanatory fashion.  This type of writing is probably why I have never read an RPG cover-to-cover.

So I had a thought (and I largely doubt an orginal one) to write everything (expect for chargen, and mechanics) from the viewpoint of people in the setting that I am trying to describe. In Good Intentions, this happens to be one man, and the actual RPG book itself represents a sort of journal or notebook meant to be read by others.

Now /my/ thought is definately not the only way to spice up the RPG read, so I ask the community:  How do you, as a customer, prefer to read an RPG text? From what point of view do you write your games? Is your writing more of textbook material, or do you allow a certain amount of subjectivity to take over your writing by posing as a character within the setting?

Thanks everyone.

-M.J. Stahl

[Mike Holmes]

You're going to get all sorts of answers, you know, and no trend.

I, for example, like textbook presentations, and narrative delivery puts me to sleep. I absolutely could not get through the "slice of life" delivery of the game Tribe 8 without falling asleep repeatedly. Give me a textbook presentation, however, and I'll eat it up in no time.

But I'm probably not representative of anyone.

Now, the thing is that what's important is that you get the setting stuff delivered to the reader in some fashion. So given that there are people who have every crazy opinion of what they best like, what I suggest is finding  the method by which you as a writer can best transmit the data in question. And just go with that.

It won't please everyone, but it'll please a higher percentage of people than if you try to do something out of your range, and it's not done well. The gaming world is littered with games that are artistic failures because the authors thought that they could write fiction to match their games. And many of the textbook deliveries are nightmares as well.

Find how you can do it best, and do that.

Mike

[Brand_Robins]

What Mike said.

I've worked on narrated presentation games (Tribe 8) and textbook presentation games (Talislanta) and things in between (Vampire) and worked with a lot of other writers doing the same thing.

Some people have a gift for writing one style or another and suck, suck, suck when they try to go against their strengths. Try it yourself, get some people you trust to read over the different versions, and go with what works for you.

[Alan]

Accessability in the middle of a game session is my rule of thumb.  I want to be able to flip to a page, check a rule, and have the answer jump out at me.  I don't want to wade through narrative.  Even for descriptions of setting, races, etc, I'd prefer to have bullet point presentation so I can refer quickly.

I buy a book in order to play.   Focus on making the experience in use, rather than in reading.

[MarkMeredith]

Reading through the Burning Wheel, I'm liking it's style. It's a lot more relaxed, like a GM explaining to his players how to play, which I like. It's not quite text book, not quite narativist. You can still find the info quickly (Subchapter titles are god) but when you're reading through it, you get the feeling like you're talking to one of your un-annoying gamer buddies (few and far between for me).

[Troy_Costisick]

Heya,

When we created our campaign setting for Ember Twilight, we wrote the entire "source" section in character.  No rules, no numbers, no mechanics what-so-ever.  Sorta the opposite of Purist for System, it was Purist for Setting.  I think it turned out great, personally.  If you're wanting to see a good example of staying in character in a game book check it out here: http://www.embertwilight.com/emberworld.htm

Peace,

-Troy

[Kriegsaffe No. 9]

There's some difficulty in presenting an RPG in a fiction way... particularly the division between IC and OOC lingo.  It'd be a fun experiment, though.  Can you somehow convey how to play the game while presenting it all in-character?  F'rex, in a d20 game, one of the characters is an oracle who rolls twenty-sided dice--"Each fascet bears another portion of the truth."  Imply skill and save/attack.  Stuff like that.

Mind, it'd probably be a lame read as a book, but a fun sort of experiment.

A more sane kind of thing would be to open each chapter with short fiction, ala White Wolf, and use 'em to spill the in-game lingo for any unique setting elements.

Also, give Unknown Armies a look--it's a fantastic balance between a fun read and rules, and the interesting writing helps to remember the rules (great jab at Call of Cthulhu's random insanity table: "Too bad, you're a nymphomaniac now!").

[Eve]

Just to add one more preference: I think it will do if you have some short descriptions of setting etc, to get the feeling of it. Some good fiction will say much more than plain mechanics: it's between the lines. However, also add a lookup card for quick reference during play

[Danny_K]

Nobilis does a better job of IC rules explanations than any other RPG I know, and even so, I'd rather have had solidly OOC manual-like explanations in places... I think this contributes a lot to the reputation of Nobilis as unplayable or "not really a game".  

So my vote is to use both techniques, but keep them separate and distinct.  IC explanation IMO works especially well for delineating setting, attitudes, cultural stereotypes, that sort of thing.  

The best single way to do this I ever saw was the White Wolf corebooks that had a comic strip on one page, and text on the facing page explaining what is happening in the game -- what the GM says, what the players say, who rolls what.  But even White Wolf doesn't use this gimmick any more.