Adept wrote :
> :Three problems here :
> :
> :1. Guamata's vision IS a narrative. It may be a logical narrative, firmly
> :grounded in the logic and reality of the world, but it is still a
> :narrative. It has a beginning, a middle and an end.
>
> I have to go with Mike on this. I didn't see it as narrative either. I saw
> it as a situation that exists in the village. I took the interesting
> situation (that fit's very well in Glorantha and Sun County, bravo),
> fitted it into the era I tought best (1400 ST, solitude of testing), and
> run an "introduction to Glorantha" game called "Evil Dreams" based on
> it. I definitely didn't have a narrative bias with it. I just knew what
> was going on in the village, and I knew what resourses vere available to
> the young templar trainee, Minos Firespeaker, who had to go investigate my
> version of the vision.
>
> I had no idea what would happen, and I definitely had no desire to fudge
> with the results. I'm happy to say it hooked three more people to
> Glorantha, and was one of the best games I've run. My compliments to the
> person behind the original writeup (don't have my books here)
>
But its still a narritive - you can now sit down and say this happened, then
this, then this.
Its a narritive where the actual story is largely determined by the actions
of the players, but it is still a narritive. When people talk about story
telling in rpgs they do NOT mean "the GM talks for four hours, and we listen
patiently", or "you can't do that, it doesn't fit the plot". I already said
I HATE that kind of game.
You could, I suppose, run a non-narritive game. The roleplaying equivalent
of a Jackson Pollock painting. Don't think I'd enjoy it though. All I'm
trying to say is don't criticise those of us who talk about narritives and
storytelling when you are using a much stricter definition than we are.
- --
Graham Robinson
gjrobinson_at_ntlworld.com