Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony
If I replay the narrative of a game session to an uninvolved third party, without extensive editing, they will probably be bored and confused for at least 90% of the time, not entertained. That makes it not a story.
|
Interesting. I think you've qualified what you said (by including the phrase about "extensive editing") in way that it's probably literally true, but I still disagree with the spirit of your conclusion.
It seems correct to me that a six-hour game wouldn't be entertaining if told as a six-hour story. It also seems correct to me that the experience of playing in a game shouldn't be reduced to the same kind of entertainment as being told a story. If it is, then it probably isn't a very good game.
In spite of that, my games through the years *have* generated a number of stories that I find to be pretty interesting in the retelling, and if I'm honest, the sessions and campaigns that I remember most fondly are the ones that created the best stories.
Mark said: "RPGs are a form of collaborative storying telling. It’s my job, as GM, to weave the events of the party together into a coherent narrative."
I think this is correct. Just off the top of my head, a session of an RPG is composed of a series of connected events in an interesting setting where players make decisions for their characters (and those decisions are influenced by the traits, backgrounds and motivations of the characters) and where the outcomes of those decisions are ruled upon by a GM, whether using dice or fiat to determine the outcome.
It seems to me that that description fits the basic definition of "story", but I do see better where you are coming from I think.