I went to Game Developers Expo this weekend and one thing you have to say about these conferences; they have some tasty food and fun Swag. You have to love chocolate croissants and mini-Frisbees.

The presentations were very good and were all very intriguing and thoughtful, but when Armando Troisi talked about his work on Mass Effect 2 he brought up a particular topic I had been thinking about quite a bit lately, Story Perspective.

Story Perspective as Armando called it, or Narrative Mode includes the point of view of the audience or players. Armando talked about the PoV of the player in Mass Effect 2 and compared it to other games such as Dragon Age. He talked about the difference as Subjective vs. Objective gameplay.

In Subjective Gameplay the player is their avatar they decide everything it does at a micro level; it is a first person narrative mode. (Not necessarily 1st Person Camera though) In this mode the player decides every word the avatar says (usually without voice acting) He had several example of these games, including Dragon Age and Knights of the old Republic.

In Objective Gameplay the player is not their avatar, but they control many of the avatars choices. They make choices on a more macro level; it is a second person narrative mode. Mass Effect 2 is his example of the mode; the player decides what sort of dialogue choice Commander Sheppard makes, his intent rather than his exact words.

Narrative Mode in RPGs

These ideas are very applicable to Traditional RPGs, both for the Gamemaster and the Player. Some Gamers consider these different modes as play styles and many games will move between these different modes depending on the situation. For RPGs, I will break Narrative Mode is two categories: PoV and Scope.

Most players have a conscious preference about their roleplaying Point of View. Those who like to speak in their character’s voice use First Person Point of View; they refer to their character as “I”, and state exactly what their character says. Other players prefer to play in Second Person Point of View, they tend to explain what their character says, and refer to their characters as “he” or “she”.

Few Gamers realise the scope used during their play and often consider it merely a function of pacing. Roleplaying Scope ranges between the Micro and Macro. The most common Micro choices are made in actions like tactical combat, which describes every exact action chosen by the round. Common Macro actions are used in contemporary games, where players choose the intent of their actions without choosing the individual actions to arrive at that intent. To increase the narrative, the Player or Gamemaster will sometimes describe the scene and the actions cinematically that lead to the chosen result.

All ranges of Narrative Mode can be of good use in RPGs. Even the most 2nd Person Players may like to perform a 1st Person scene, if provided with enough support. 1st Person Players may also enjoy 2nd Player scenes, perhaps to speed up scenes. Gamemasters should feel free to vary Scope, choosing a different scope for every scene or task. Some tasks will work better at a micro scope like conversation, but others are more macro scope tasks, such as trade or long distant travel. Gamemasters may even find interesting effects or efficient mechanics by changing scope, a chase scene or negotiation may be even be more exciting at a more macro level , while adding a micro scene to trade may make the normally mundane activity seem more real.

Can you play a social game with 4th edition? Or use WoD for a dungeon crawl? Does System Matter? Of course, you can use any system to play any sort of game, but should you?

Cross Purposes

Is it so bad to play at cross purposes; most systems are designed to have mechanics to handle any situation. So why does it matter?

Well, take D&D 4e for example; when you perform non-tactical combat actions you use a secondary system to perform skill challenges. If your game uses mostly this light unrefined quick skill challenge rule set, PCs will wander around with a great many relatively useless detailed powers while they use an under powered and unbalance system instead.

Would it not be better to use a system that did what you wanted it to?

House Rules

Many GMs solve this issue with house rules. House rules are a double edge sword as a good house rule can sometimes make thing work just the way you want, but house rules may also have horrible side effects. Well designed games are balanced for a specific array of gameplay and a bad house rule can often change this balance having many unforeseen effects.

Ironically, house rules seem to show how much system does matter; for the group to have type of fun they want, the GM has to change the rules.  The system provides the structure for the setting.  The rules give players abilities and tasks they can perform.  Combat heavy ruled games structure encounter creation to produce many of opportunity to fight.

Generic Systems

Does any of this really matter in a generic system game though?  Is it possible to create a rules system that allows players to do anything and GMs to create many different settings without the breaking the system.  A game like GURPS seems to head in that direction, but the GURPS rules still set the underlying reality. Due to the way GURPS systems work, GURPS settings tend to have similar deadliness and allow PCs to do the things in the same ways. It seems to me that the system, while broad, has a great deal of effect on the play setting.

Rules Light

Story games and rules light systems are all the rage now. Games like Inspectres or FUDGE have simple rules, a small list of character attributes, and a list of special skills you get to make up yourself.  You roll one dice that results in the story moving forward.  Less framework, more imagination. This affects the setting and gameplay a great deal. The game is less consistent and relies on GM/player views rather than a codified system. Gameplay slows to examine a moment of Roleplaying rather skill testing, combat, or caper planning clearly making that the most important aspect of the game.

Indeed, Systems do matter and the system you choose should concentrate on the type of gameplay that fits your group’s preferences. The perfect system is the one that supports the essential aspect of the setting with its core mechanics.

Nearly every Roleplaying Game book has a very strange section in it; called “What is a Roleplaying Game?” Like most gamers I just took this for granted, but when I started to plan Free Spacer, I started to wonder if this section was even necessary. I’ve never run across a novel with a “What is Narrative literature?” section or a Cookbook with a “What is a Recipe book?” section. Although, back in the day they had a similar chapter in Choose your own Adventure books; so does this mean that “What is…”sections are only for oddities? Are Roleplaying games so strange that every book requires a section to explain itself?

Is it evangelism? Are we trying to spread the word and bring others into the hobby? Still doesn’t make sense that RPG books have a “What is…” section. You’re already holding the book, perhaps you looked at it out of curiosity in the store, but are you going to flip to the “What are…” section?

So yes, Free Spacer won’t have a “What is a Roleplaying Game?” section. Instead it will have a treatise on Science Fiction RPGs.

Although I still don’t know why so many people want to tell you what a Roleplaying Game is when you already bought the book, I to tell you here, first the Dictionary Definition, then my definitions:

  1. RPG or TRPG; Referring to Traditional Roleplaying games, Table-Top RPGs or Pen & Paper RPGs. A TRPG is played by a group of people each taking the role of a Player Character (PC) with one as the Game Master (GM). Each player declares their actions and dialogue as it pertains to their characters role in the world and story. The GM is responsible for describing the fictional world, people, and creatures around the PCs and the results of their actions.
  2. Story Games; these are also sometimes called RPGs, but have a much simpler game mechanics centred on giving players more narrative control.
  3. LARP; Live Action Role Playing refers to a RPG where players get up and act out their roles. Game Mechanics are even simpler than Story games and players often dress in costumes and use props.
  4. Wargames; never called RPG, but important to know about. Wargames are the genesis of RPGs; Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson invented RPGs as a way to play out battles and tell stories with a single character rather than an army. Besides their historical link, some RPGs use miniatures in the same manner as Wargames do.
  5. CRPG; Often inaccurately called RPGs, Computer Roleplaying Games require little roleplaying, but trace their mechanics back to the TRPG.
  6. MMORPG; a Massively Multi-player Online Roleplaying Game is basically a CRPG that you play online with massive number of players. MMORPGs usually have less story, but online player interactions.

Do you want more definitions? Try John H. Kim’s excellent “What is an RPG?” website or if you like Podcasts you can try Fear the Boot’s seven part series on RPGs for “non-gamers”: Ep#1, Ep#2, Ep#3,Ep#4, Ep#5, Ep#6, and EP#7.

© 2010 Free Spacer Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha