Story-Weaver: A "pure" narrativist game?

[Paul Strack]

Story-Weaver: A "pure" narrativist game?

Hi folks,

I have been posting here and there for about 2 months on these forums, but this is my first serious offering in terms of rules. Lately I've have been on an indie-RPG binge and I have been trying to distill the narrativist elements that I love about these games. Through a rather tortured line of reasoning, I decided to attempt to create a "pure" narrative game, in the sense that the game rules addresses nothing except for the narrative itself.

To keep myself from sounding ridiculously arrogant, let me elaborate on what I mean by that.

Any story has both characters and plot. Many traditional RPGs have lots rules for character creation and management but few or no rules for plot creation and management. I want to create a game that is the polar opposite: a game that has no mechanical representation of characters, but whose central game construct are plotlines.

The kernel of the idea is that the players and the GM would create various plotlines: main plots, subplots, etc. Game play would be broken down into scenes framed by either a player or the GM, each of which advances a plotline. Plotlines have a definite number of steps before they end, at which point you would have a climax scene that resolves that plotline.

One of my motives for creating the rules is that they could be used as a set of meta-rules that could be layered on top of another, existing RPG, to give it a narrativist structure.

I have a draft of the rules here:

http://www.learninggain.com/downloads/sw/SW-Draft.pdf

What I would like to know is:

1) Are there other games out there with similar mechanics and goals? I have looked over a lot games that have game mechanics for regulating the beginning, flow and end of plots, including Polaris, With Great Power, My Life with Master, InSpecters and others. I would love to know if there are others that I should be looking at, and whether I am re-inventing the wheel here.

2) I'd also like some feedback on the game idea itself. Good, bad, brilliant, inherently flawed?

[Graham W]

Hi Paul,

It would definitely be worth looking at the story-based entries for Game Chef this year. I particularly recommend The Glass Bead Game and perhaps Play Right as well.

Oh, and have you read Universalis?

Graham

[Paul Strack]

It would definitely be worth looking at the story-based entries for Game Chef this year. I particularly recommend The Glass Bead Game and perhaps Play Right as well.

Thanks. I took a quick look at both of these games, and they seem to have mechanics that might be relevant. I will look them over.

Oh, and have you read Universalis?

I have, but it does not do what I am looking for. I am looking for games that have some kind of mechanic for tracking the progress of the story (or a subplot) itself.

For example, in Polaris, it would be the Zeal/Weariness of individual characters. In My Life With Master, it would be the various endgame conditions that determine the fate of the minion. In With Great Power, it would be the story arc for the main plot and the various aspect tracks for subplots. From mainstream games, Spycraft has a subplot mechanic similar to what I am looking for.

Basically, I am interested in game mechanics that track the progress of a plotline, giving it a clearly-defined beginning and end. I am trying to build a game in which this is the *only* game mechanic.

[MatrixGamer]

Paul

There are some similarities with Engle Matrix Games - thought they are superficial.

Both games have characters that are described by a name and a short written description (rather than as a set of numbers). both games rules focus on how players make the story happen rather than on a statistical model of the world. Both have a relatively strong GM who shares power with the players. Both have a focus on plot line.

As to characters - I stole the idea of written characters from Ned Zuparko and Paddy Griffith (both wargamers active in the 1980's so you've probably never heard of them.) The difference is that I provide a full cast of characters and while the players control one character, they can make any character act (even another player's character.) Your players look like they are all on the same side while EMG players can be and often are opposed to one another.

Making the story happen - You are using a version of the shared narrative idea. Very forge like, very solid. This is certainly the next big trend in role playing. It makes the GM as powerful as the characters. EMGs give the players more power. Each turn the player makes an argument for what happens next. This is a short statement of some action and result, and possible some reason why it happens (thought reasons are not required - actions speak for themselves.) The GM is just a referee. They decide what the player has to roll for their argument to succeed. The GM is the editor to the player's author, rather than a co author.

Controlling the flow of the plot - You use a plot track/victory point track to monitor the flow of the plot. EMG's use a "Plot track" that describes the types of actions that have to happen for a particular story to happen. So for a murder mystery it looks like this: A murder occurs - a body is found, find clues that show who had means motive and opportunity, arrest the subject or do a man hunt, hold a trial.  My plot track doesn't tell players what to do (they can ignore it if they wish) or measure who is winning. It just educates players about what happens in different genres of story. The EMG referee has more control on the flow of the plot by employing a variety of argument tools. They can allow players to make counter-arguments, decide an argument triggers a conflict round that will settle the outcome of the conflict, give players trouble arguments to mitigate the effect of primary arguments, and speed up the game by having all the players make arguments about important points. In these ways the GM can speed up or slow down play to squeeze the maximum drama out of a story.

The rules I have up on my web page are rather old now - I've streamlined the writing since then - but they give an idea of what EMGs can do.

http://www.io.com/~hamster

One thing about narrativist games. The dictionary definition of premise is what I use in EMGs. This is not the meaning that narrativist focused gamers mean with the word. For them the act of grappling with a moral (or immoral) delima is what is fun in play. I think your game could do that (as indeed EMGs can) but I don't see a built in premise - though I could be wrong here - you have player's with subplots and a main plot. It would depend on the specific scenario to provide the premise.

Chris Engle

[Paul Strack]

The rules I have up on my web page are rather old now - I've streamlined the writing since then - but they give an idea of what EMGs can do.

I looked over the EMG rules and I also see a lot of similarities. I especially like the idea of specific "plot points" the story must reach in order proceed (which can be ignored if something more interesting happens). I had a vague idea for pre-planned scenes by both the player and the GM that could be inserted into the story or dropped if they no longer fit.

One thing about narrativist games. The dictionary definition of premise is what I use in EMGs. This is not the meaning that narrativist focused gamers mean with the word. For them the act of grappling with a moral (or immoral) delima is what is fun in play. I think your game could do that (as indeed EMGs can) but I don't see a built in premise - though I could be wrong here - you have player's with subplots and a main plot. It would depend on the specific scenario to provide the premise.

Right now Story-Weaver has no premise in either sense. It has a mechanic for tracking story progress, but says nothing about the kinds of stories that will be told. This is in part because of the super-secret goal of the game (not really so secret, since I mention it on the first page) of leaning on existing RPG for the premise and world-rules.

One of my challenges as both a player and a GM is finding players for more avant-garde games. I am hoping to put together a set of narrative rules I can layer on top of a more traditional game for which it will be easier to find players.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Chris is absolutely correct. I think it's now clear that the answer to your question in the thread title is No. You are not talking about Narrativist play or Narrativist design in any sense.

What you're talking about is imposing or including a particular structure and plan to scenario design. Which is fine, it's a usable technique, and certainly has been a functional piece of role-playing for a long time.

It can be useful in the pursuit of any of the Creative Agendas, depending on the other techniques used. It can also, like other high-level techniques, be mis-used toward several different sorts of dysfunctional outcomes.

So let's put aside all Narrativism talk entirely. It's just not relevant to your project. Instead, let's focus on the project and see how it could be most successful. What comes to mind, Paul, as your first main issue toward that end?

Best, Ron

[MatrixGamer]

Wow! I'm gratified. Having bumped heads for months with GNS terminology I am finally getting it. I have learned that I'm not primarily a narrativist focused player but I see what one is.

I can also see an interesting mechanism (that probably serves a gamist agenda nicely).

What is next in developming it?

The model exists - looks like it is ready for initial play testing. Lots of problems will pop up in these runs that can be looked at here. I'm interested to see how players actually behave when playing the game. By which I mean behavior, like in psychology, rather than behave, like in nice manners. Does the plot track spur people on to get to the finish line first? Do players compete or conflict with one another? How many points of contact does the game end up having and does that work (or does the game grind to a halt?)

Any one of these topic might make a good next thread - or other topics I didn't think of.

Chris Engle

[Paul Strack]

Chris is absolutely correct. I think it's now clear that the answer to your question in the thread title is No. You are not talking about Narrativist play or Narrativist design in any sense.

Thanks for pointing this out. I have gotten a few PMs informing me that I was misusing the terminology. I meant "narrative" with a lower case "n", in the sense of "something having to do with stories". I didn't fully comprehend the GNS article that defined Narrativist with a capital "N". I re-read it, and realize now that my goals are not consistent with the way the word is defined.

Please pretend that the title of this topic is the less inflammatory statement:

Story-Weaver, a "pure" plotline-focused game?

Think of the premise of the game as one who central mechanism is the creation, development and resolution of plotlines, as opposed to creation and development of characters.

I'd still like to know peoples opinions of that idea as a base game mechanic.

[Paul Strack]

What is next in developming it?

It is likely that the next step in developing it is playtesting it. Unfortunately, I won't have an opportunity to do that myself for another couple of weeks at least. I made an effort to convince one of my gaming groups to try it out, but the idea of playing an "avant garde" RPG flew like a lead balloon (their words, not mine). My other gaming group would be willing, but they are in the middle of an continuing campaign that is going very well, and I am hesistant to rock the boat by introducing a lot of new rules structures.

In the meantime, I guess I have to further develop my ideas in a vacuum, until I can get a weekend free with enough people to give the game a shot.

The model exists - looks like it is ready for initial play testing. Lots of problems will pop up in these runs that can be looked at here. I'm interested to see how players actually behave when playing the game. By which I mean behavior, like in psychology, rather than behave, like in nice manners. Does the plot track spur people on to get to the finish line first? Do players compete or conflict with one another? How many points of contact does the game end up having and does that work (or does the game grind to a halt?)

Those are all excellent questions, and definitely things I want to find out through playtesting. I have some concerns over pacing: if some players focus largely on subplots and others mainly on the main plot, will someone get left behind? How to balance group scenes vs. individual scenes, and who gets to decide something should be a group scene anyway.

Another one of my major concerns is that by structuring the plotline explicitly, it takes some of the zest and mystery out of the developing story. You know at any given time where you are in the story. If you are in the middle, you know that there are limits on what can happen, which takes away some of the thrill.

On the other hand, the same can be said of reading a book: you can tell you are halfway just be counting pages, but that doesn't detract from enjoying the story. And most one-shot RPGs have similar limitations: the climax happens at the end of the session. So maybe I am being needlessly paranoid.

[MatrixGamer]

Whither it will work will only be know once it is play tested.

I've been there, having trouble finding play testers. I started working on Engle Matrix Games in 1988, at which time giving players more power than the GM was seen as being real weird. I found I had the best luck finding players for my weird game at conventions. I ran my first game at a small con in Southern Illinois, that first year. You might try looking up local cons. Another venue for play testers is the game room of local stores. You need to get permision from the store owner to do this - but if you use props that they sell (figures, paints, maps etc.) they are usually happy to ablige.

If push come to shove, you can always do what I did - Solo gaming.

There is a group in England called "The Solo Wargamers Association" that puts out a nice journal on the subject. To do solo RPGs it might be helpful to write a story about a game. This way you know what has happened and can delve into the thoughts and impressions of your "players." This may sound silly, but literature is often very predictive. HG Wells (the great grand dad of our hobby) wrote a description of nuclear war in 1914 that was erie in it's accuracy. It even correctly predicted when scientists would figure out how to make the bomb!

Chris Engle

[Paul Strack]

I've been there, having trouble finding play testers. I started working on Engle Matrix Games in 1988, at which time giving players more power than the GM was seen as being real weird. I found I had the best luck finding players for my weird game at conventions. I ran my first game at a small con in Southern Illinois, that first year. You might try looking up local cons. Another venue for play testers is the game room of local stores. You need to get permision from the store owner to do this - but if you use props that they sell (figures, paints, maps etc.) they are usually happy to ablige.

Yeah, cons are a good option there is going to be a nearby con in May. I don't feel comfortable enough with the game to sign up for it as an "official" game slot and I don't want to shell out money for a dealer table, but I could always do the "come play in a playtest session" option.

There is also a very indie-game friendly store nearby, and I was planning on talking to the owner.

If push come to shove, you can always do what I did - Solo gaming.

There is a group in England called "The Solo Wargamers Association" that puts out a nice journal on the subject. To do solo RPGs it might be helpful to write a story about a game. This way you know what has happened and can delve into the thoughts and impressions of your "players." This may sound silly, but literature is often very predictive. HG Wells (the great grand dad of our hobby) wrote a description of nuclear war in 1914 that was erie in it's accuracy. It even correctly predicted when scientists would figure out how to make the bomb!

That's an interesting idea. I did write up a fictious "sample game" for the rules, and found it very helpful. Maybe I will consider this.

I think what I really need to do is finished the "advanced rules" chapter, then knuckle down and pitch the game until I find some people to play.