Getting into Story Now
Andre Canivet:
Dear Forge :)
I'm wondering: Can anyone recommend some good games to start trying out story now / narrativist play?
I've read many different systems, but my actual play experience is limited to Rifts, Palladium Fantasy, and D&D 2e & 4e. Over the past couple of years I've read through some Indie games, Forge posts, and design blogs; and listened to podcasts, all talking about this thing called Story Now. It sounds pretty cool, but that's the extent of my knowledge.
Here's the thing: Both of the groups I play with have fairly well-established gaming habits.
The first group (which I see rarely) has also only played the Palladium system and some of my own designs. All of these have so far been fairly tactical / combat heavy--or, if I understand the nomenclature: Gamist in terms of beating lots of faceless enemies, and simulationist in the sense of realistic but streamlined combat rules. (I actually really screwed up my party during a playtest when I hit them with a social challenge... they'd optimized their characters for combat and hadn't even thought about social skills).
The second group I see regularly, but I don't know so well. It's about 50-65% old school power-gamer types. We're currently playing a very combat heavy D&D 4e campaign.
Despite this, I think both groups might be willing to try some Story Now, but I don't want to hit them (or myself) with anything too crazy. I've considered trying Shock: Social Science Fiction. I also have a copies of Dogs in the Vineyard, Zero, Hero Wars, and Everway. But I'm wondering: do any of these games stand out as particularly good introductions to Narrativist play, or are there are one or two games I can pick up that would be better suited to that purpose?
Jasper Flick:
Here's some thoughts.
"I think both groups might be willing to try some Story Now."
Do you only think so, or did you actually ask them (including cummunicating what Story Now might be)?
If you did ask, I think you'll get more guidance from their answers than our shots in the dark at this point. There exist lists of must-play or learn-Story-Now-in-this-order games, but they're subjective and whether they're of any use for your case is anyone's guess.
I think the biggest choice is whether you go regular with some new tricks, or jump in deep with something radically different. In any case, communicate your intentions and propose the thing as an experiment. You're totally new to it yourself, so the first game you run might well go awkward. The first time you sit on a bike you'll likely crash, but that experience tells you very little about biking in general.
In case your groups are used to an entertainer-GM vs consumer-players model of play, it's a good idea to reconsider this attitude for Story Now play. D&D adventuring can survive quite a while in that mode, but Story Now play shrivels and dies fast (at least, that's my experience).
Andre Canivet:
"Regular with a few tricks" is probably what I'm looking for.
I've asked the one group (the one I see rarely)--they're very reluctant to leave their comfort zone, so I don't want to present anything too far out.
The other group I haven't asked yet, but I'm fairly certain they'd be up for trying a new game. I'm also fairly certain that play would quickly drift back into the gamist arena unless the game explicitly encouraged Story Now play. I don't want to try using a screwdriver only to wind up trying to use it like a hammer--so, I'm trying to get a sense of which games are reasonably "vanilla narrativist"--something that can be played over a couple of hours after a main session of a traditional game.
I hope this wasn't a stupid question--I just wondered if anyone more experienced could suggest a starting point, so I have something to present to them when I do ask. Even those subjective lists would be helpful at this stage.
But indeed, I'll discuss it with both groups and see what they're up for.
Christoph Boeckle:
Hello Andre
What did one of your last sessions look like, with either one of the groups? Could you describe a scene or two, tell us how the rules helped you arrive at that, what job the GM had and how the players where discussing the stuff of play (aka "meta-game", at least in French)? Also, what parts did you like, and why? What parts seem to be like a burden to either the players or the GM?
This way we will be able to discuss your needs much more clearly, even if it's a recommendation to do something completely different.
Cheers!
Andre Canivet:
Thanks for your help guys!
Okay--
Christoph, here's a brief outline of the last couple of sessions of D&D 4e with my regular group:
After wandering through a forest, and later through a dungeon, the group was transported to the shadowfell with no way home. The group consists of a human cleric (me), a dwarf warrior, a draconic sorcerer, a human wizard, and a halfling rogue. Once in the shadowfell, we started walking in search of a way back to the material plane.
In the first scene of that session, we came across a keep, where we bargained with an unknown (but presumably undead) entity behind a curtain for information about the way home. This was handled in the standard way, with one or two rolls of semi-relevant social and knowledge skills, made by the players with the best chance of success.
After gaining the information, and a map to a city where a way home might exist, in the next scene we set out across the shadowfell again. Night fell, and we wound up in combat with several skeletons and some sort of extremely agile undead centipede monster. Several party members were reduced to less than 0 hit points, but we prevailed. This combat took about three hours to resolve.
In our next session, we stayed in a small town, where we were attacked in the night by an angry ghost. She almost wiped out several party members, before we were able to talk to her and convince her that we weren't the people she was angry at. The next day, the party held a seance to summon the spirit and put her to rest, led by the cleric. This was also handled by a few die rolls--although I rolled quite badly for most of them and only succeeded due to the aid of four other party members and the generosity of the GM.
-----
To analyze things a bit; the rules are definitely geared toward combat tactics--there's not much support or reward for roleplaying outside of combat; and the system of powers, special abilities, and automatic effects for each class and monster seems to discourage (or at least, don't encourage) much in the way of improvisation or creative thinking even within combat--it almost always seems to be about dishing out as much damage to the enemy as possible.
The GM's role covers almost every aspect of narration--even down to player character reactions in some cases. The notable execption is player announcements of their characters' attempted actions. Also, the GM has frequently described his role as trying to kill the PC's. Although I think he's half joking, that's what the game system seems to encourage (direct competition / opposition between GM & players). There's quite a lot of trash talk at the table, which seems to almost border on abuse at times, although everybody seems laid back enough to let it slide. Most of the other discussion seems to be focused on combat effectiveness--how much damage somebody did in the last attack, or plans for the next move.
To describe the parts I liked the most: the seance to put the ghost to rest was good, there was some roleplaying involved, and despite "whiffing" my rolls it was a situation where my character was actually useful in a way other than recharging people's hit points. To be frank, that's about it. The combat parts of the game are often quite tedious, and for the last couple of fights I find my character so close to death that I wonder if I'll have to roll up a new one... and then I realize that my new character will be almost exactly identical to the old one--there's nothing tangible about my cleric that distinguishes him from any other cleric, other than a few choices as to feats & prayers. At least, nothing that comes up in play, and nothing that is rewarded by the rules.
It just doesn't seem very deep to me.
The others seem to be fairly happy with the way things are--they don't seem burdened, really--and I don't want to take away a game that's working for them or try to "change" them as players or a group. I'm just hoping to throw in a pick-up game after the D&D stuff goes away, and try out some different modes of play.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page