What VOICE Do You Write With?

[Nathan]

I have a random question.

As I am working on the Cross, I always struggle with the voice I write with in the game. When I say voice I mean specifically - how do you present the game material? Do you write it in encyclopedia form? Do you write a first person narrative of some kind? Do you try to make it a sort of fake top secret document or something?

My problem is - I find myself almost exclusively mixing between first person and fake top secret document style. I simply cannot bring myself to write encyclopedia like entries. It doesn't make sense to me... But, I wonder if my own stuff turns out silly because of the first person stuff...

Tell me - what does everyone prefer? Is it easier to read game material in encyclopedia form or some sort of narrative style? What voice do you use?

Thanks,
Nathan

[Seth L. Blumberg]

IMO, fake top secret documents/first-person narrative/etc. are incredibly annoying unless the writer is a great deal better than most game writers.

I couldn't even read all the way through the Tribe 8 rulebook precisely because it was written mostly in scraps of first-person narrative (plus occasional second-person narrative) and faux-historical documents.

[Laurel]

3rd person for the core text.   Consistent tense is important too.  My writing needs some brushing up; the quality has degraded in the five years that I've been out of college.  

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GameWriting/ is a yahoo group specifically for discussing the "writing parts" of being a RPG designer or Game Master as opposed to design and theory.  The group is sort of quiet but friendly and might be a good resource for you.

[Clinton R. Nixon]

I'll give a dissenting view. I like an informal first-person - not first-person narrative, though. I like the game designer to talk specifically to me - tell me why he did X, or what I should do next.

This isn't going to differ from normal game text most of the time: "In order to create a character, you first select X and then Y..." When giving examples, though, it differs a lot. Compare:

"This example setting is about Knights Templar. Knights Templar were a martial Catholic sect..."

vs.

"To create my example setting, I chose the Knights Templar. They were a martial Catholic sect..."

I dunno. It seems more personal, like the game was written by a person instead of a cooperative.

[Matt Machell]

IMO, fake top secret documents/first-person narrative/etc. are incredibly annoying unless the writer is a great deal better than most game writers.

Damn straight.

That said, it can be done well, it's just a case of analysing the purpose of the text, and how it benefits from being first person. Often it doesn't, which is where many games fall down.

There was a great piece of parody game fiction on RPG.net a while ago, which showed some of the typical mistakes (to my mind) made in this kind of writing. here



Matt[/url]

[Ron Edwards]

Hi there,

People seem to be confounding two wholly separate things under the term "first person."

1) The game author speaking directly to the reader, during the course of explaining rules or whatever. I do this to a small extent throughout all three Sorcerer books.

2) A fictional character writing autobiographical prose. A lot of color text is like this, whether simply "in the character's head" or as some kind of in-game document like a mission report. I don't do this in game texts at all.

Best,
Ron

[Matt Machell]

People seem to be confounding two wholly separate things under the term "first person."

Yeah, I assumed he mean't setting colour material. For rules, I don't think a friendly authors voice is a problem.

Matt

[Seth L. Blumberg]

it's just a case of analysing the purpose of the text, and how it benefits from being first person. Often it doesn't, which is where many games fall down.

Indeed. Someone please tell me how the Mage: the Ascension supplement "Blood Treachery" benefited from being written in the form of a Greek tragedy, complete with chorus. (It would have been less annoying if the authors had engraved the words "Mages are prone to hubris" on an iron spike and driven it through my skull.)

[Valamir]

Indeed. Someone please tell me how the Mage: the Ascension supplement "Blood Treachery" benefited from being written in the form of a Greek tragedy, complete with chorus. (It would have been less annoying if the authors had engraved the words "Mages are prone to hubris" on an iron spike and driven it through my skull.)

Well annoying as it may be, I give bonus points to people trying things I've never seen before.  I thought it an absolutely fantastic idea if only from a "damn, its nice to see someone try something not chained down to convention" perspective.  Whether it worked or not, is another question entirely, but once in a while its nice to see something new.

[Blake Hutchins]

For what it's worth, I liked the way Tribe 8 presented its setting.  At first it annoyed me because as a collection of first person tales, prophecies, journals, stories, and spy reports, it's not terribly linear, but as I proceeded through the book, I found the narrative presentation increasingly appropriate to the milieu.  The setting took shape in my head like a jigsaw puzzle, and a very clear picture it turned out to be.  What bothered me about it initially was how unconventional it was.  Once I got past the need to have everything laid out in a neat, cut-and-dried conceptual grid, I really liked the setting and had no problem absorbing the material.  Further, it gave me a solid grounding in "Tribal voice," little euphenisms and slang demonstrated in use that worked a lot better than a dense lexicon in Chapter 1.  I'll even argue that many setting details stuck with me because they came in a narrative rather than a prosaic third person description.

Best,

Blake

[Seth L. Blumberg]

once in a while its nice to see something new.

I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree here. I class "novelty for novelty's sake" with "stupid game designer tricks."

Blake, it's not the non-linearity of Tribe 8 that bothered me--I liked Maelstrom.

Actually, it occurs to me that I may be displacing some of my thundering vexation at the way Tribe 8 appropriates all this ultra-powerful religious symbolism and then doesn't do anything worth speaking of with it onto the writing style, where it doesn't belong. So I'll retract my earlier comment as it pertains specifically to Tribe 8, and just say that the vast majority of first-person color text in RPGs isn't IMO even suitable for bathroom reading because the paper isn't absorbent enough.

[Mike Holmes]

Well, being weird, I like dry-as-a-bone third person rules that read like a technical manual. Tribe 8 bugged the hell out of me. I kept reading everything and saying, where the heck are the rules! I gave them the benefit of the doubt that it was important to read the game in order, which is another odd habit of mine. And I just got more annoyed and more annoyed. I remember actually getting a headache.

Don't get me wrong, I actually like the game, and would like to play it or at least in the setting some time. But I just despised the presentation. I also dislike a too familiar tone. Give me a textbook every time. My favorite is GURPS style presentation. No, really.

I think it's pretty obvious that there are a number of different preferences. Given that, I'd go with what you like best, Nathan. You're original idea might be fine, give it a try. Or work with an editor who's good in that area.

Mike

[Paganini]

Well, being weird, I like dry-as-a-bone third person rules that read like a technical manual. Tribe 8 bugged the hell out of me. I kept reading everything and saying, where the heck are the rules! I gave them the benefit of the doubt that it was important to read the game in order, which is another odd habit of mine. And I just got more annoyed and more annoyed. I remember actually getting a headache.

I'm with Mike here. When I read a game, I want the rules, and I want them *now!* I don't like to have to sift through many many many pages of material just to filter out a set of mechanics that can be summarized in a single page. OTOH, "straight" dry technical writing can be a little grating. I tend to write games this way, and reading over my own stuff makes me cringe sometimes. As much as I dislike S. John Ross, I have to point to Risus as an excellent example of focused game presentation that offers classy conversational writing. Sovereign Stone (original system) is an example of very focused presentation that suffers from the "technical writer's" syndrome. It's clear and to the point, but it is a bit tedious to read.

I personaly would like to temper my own writing style with conversational elements. I'd like my writing to be focused on the matter at hand, but I'd like it to do so with an easy, flowing style.

[Blake Hutchins]

Hrm, that's funny.  Tribe 8 separates the rules nicely.  I just looked 'em up in the ToC and turned to the page I wanted.  Are y'all saying you think the rules should be presented before any of the setting material?

Best,

Blake

[Paganini]

Hrm, that's funny.  Tribe 8 separates the rules nicely.  I just looked 'em up in the ToC and turned to the page I wanted.  Are y'all saying you think the rules should be presented before any of the setting material?

Actually, yes, that is my preference. Mainly because I read games for the systems and play ideas, having plenty of setting ideas of my own. The most important thing about this to me, though, is that the rules and setting information be *separated.* Of course, there are always exceptions. I *really* like the way Epiphany presents its setting material. Some bad examples are T&T and the D6 Herc & Xena game (AAAUGH! HX don't even have all of the mechanics in the same BOOK!).