entries friends calendar user info Previous Previous Next Next
Jason - [Gaming Esoterica] Canon, Metaplot, and Fandom
jadasc
[info]jadasc
Add to Memories
Share
[Gaming Esoterica] Canon, Metaplot, and Fandom
or, I Don't Get Why You Don't Get It

This one's been kicking around my head for a little over three years now. I posted about it a little bit on Pyramid Online around then, when bruceb</a>Bruce Baugh was a more frequent poster, but never took the time to write it out fully. Now, as Gehenna is bringing out the World of Darkness fans in force, it becomes relevant again, as I read RPG.Net and watch lots and lots of authors express their incredulity. ([info]eyebeams, I'm thinking of you, but you aren't alone.)

I can understand not liking the fans' position, or not wanting to support it. But not getting it?

Let me try this.

This Sunday, in America, millions of people are going to sit down and watch the Super Bowl, wherein the New England Patriots will face the Carolina Panthers to determine which team is the best. A couple thousand people will actually go to Houston to see them do so. People have been following the sport all season. They know the statistics of their favorite teams, and may have a favorite player or two. You'll find them wearing their team's colors, cheering at the action on the field, booing the coaching staff and the team management, and waiting with anticipation to see who wins in the end -- who makes good plays, who makes poor ones, the whole nine yards.

None of this has jack to do with any game of football that they may actually play. Most of them haven't played the game since school, and those who do play will play a much more casual game than what's being displayed on the plasma-screen TV. The players on the various teams (more often than not) don't actually hail from the cities they play for, and can get traded back and forth fairly easily. The fandom, aside from the element of showing support, is separate from the game in play.

So why do they do it? Because it's satisfying to choose sides, and show support, and follow the narrative of My Team Goes To The Championship, even if it's no more "your" team than the other one is. It is interesting to watch as the game plays out. And, the next day, people will talk about the decisions made, and the plays completed, and how they'd do it differently, and what'll happen next year, and who won the big game.

If you write a roleplaying game, and you establish a setting, and you populate it with interesting characters, and set those characters into motion with goals and desires of their own... you will create the equivalent of the "professional league" for your game. The NPCs are the ones "who play the game for real," just like professional ballplayers do. And once you do that, you'll attract fans who will follow the narrative of "my x goes to the championship." They'll take sides, and wear the colors, and cheer for their favorites, and boo you when things don't go their way in the same way they boo'd Grady Little and George Steinbrenner when the Sox and the Yankees don't deliver. And they'll want to know what happens next, and they want to know who'll win the big game.

If, at this point, you tell them, "It doesn't matter who wins the big game -- what matters is what happens in your game,"... well, that's a player point of view. It won't satisfy the fans you've attracted. Now, it may not be your desire to please the fans... but they're there. And they're vocal. And they've bought your books, and your t-shirts, and your mugs, and a hundred other things that have nothing at all to do with playing the game. You've courted them for their money; now they want you to deliver the goods.

What are the goods? Fans, from what I can tell, want the perception of a coherent, consistent experience. They don't necessarily want their side to win -- though that'd be nice, on occasion -- but they want to feel like things happen for a reason, rather than editorial fiat, and that the story of the Big Game played by the same rules as the game they might play.

(This is why the game fiction doesn't satisfy; it feels like... well, the difference between watching "The Natural" or "Field of Dreams" as opposed to watching an actual baseball game. It's not the same.)

(Edit: The other thing that fans crave is identification. They want to choose sides. You can see it in every Quizilla test, in every licensed t-shirt. Let people pick favorites and they'll do so.)

It may be "kayfabe," but it's what they want. And, again, you can decide whether or not you want to give it to them, but it's disingenuous after all this time to not understand what they're looking for.
Comments
jeregenest From: [info]jeregenest Date: January 26th, 2004 08:38 am (UTC) (Link)
I think you make an excellent point here Jason, especially about the courting them for their money now produce the goods. Its refreshing to see it put so plainly.
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 09:37 am (UTC) (Link)
Thank you.

(And, if you're going to draw on my work for inspiration, you could post a link back to the entry. I'd do the same for you. ;))
jeregenest From: [info]jeregenest Date: January 26th, 2004 10:09 am (UTC) (Link)
Thought I had. Thats what I get for posting during the middle of audit week. Sorry, made the change.
eddyfate From: [info]eddyfate Date: January 26th, 2004 08:43 am (UTC) (Link)
I can understand that side. However, for every "Man, the Giovanni got screwed..." fan, you have an equal number of "... but not in my game" fans. Pick one side or the other, but you're going to piss someone off.

Of course, I say this because I fall into both camps simultaneously, as I suspect a large number of fans do as well.
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 08:46 am (UTC) (Link)
Oh, certainly. There's a heck of a lot of "smarks" out there in gaming, too, who enjoy the way that the professional game can affect their home games. And this doesn't even touch upon the idea of "gaming fans" who like following their favorite *game companies* as if the struggle to stay in business was one big championship narrative.

I just got tired of people claiming not to understand what the fans are talking about.
eddyfate From: [info]eddyfate Date: January 26th, 2004 08:53 am (UTC) (Link)
Totally. I suppose it helps being "on the inside" of the fan base a bit. :-)
archangelbeth From: [info]archangelbeth Date: January 26th, 2004 08:54 am (UTC) (Link)
I never had understood, myself. Now I do. Hm. Interesting.

Sounds like dodging metaplots might be simpler...... O:>
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 08:57 am (UTC) (Link)
Forgive me, but... heh. :) In Nomine is one of those games that lives and breathes on the strength of its fandom, and seems to know that. (Things like "CDaU" declarations actually help the fans maintain consistency -- they know that it's a mystery, not just an oversight.)
archangelbeth From: [info]archangelbeth Date: January 26th, 2004 09:33 am (UTC) (Link)
Well, true -- but also, I'm not a big fan of metaplot. Or, rather quickly changing metaplot.

Perhaps it's merely that the first Cycle wasn't mine...
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 09:11 am (UTC) (Link)
Sounds like dodging metaplots might be simpler...

It's not only metaplot, although that helps. Almost any factionalisation will do. In IN, you've got heaven v. hell, the war factions v. the peace factions, the greys v. everybody else. Once you make teams, people will pick sides. Once you raise questions, people will tune in for the answers.
archangelbeth From: [info]archangelbeth Date: January 26th, 2004 09:35 am (UTC) (Link)
Mmmmmmm.

Hm...

I suppose each adventure draws from that "metaplot"/factionalism. (Malphas will be happy...)

And the Superior books probably tap into the latter, there...
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 09:43 am (UTC) (Link)

There! Right there!

(Malphas will be happy...)

See? That's it, in a nutshell.

Nobody cares what Vecna or Wee Jas or Hieronyous thinks or feels about anything. They're simply indicators of what Domains a PC cleric gets. D&D has players. In Nomine has fans.
bluegargantua From: [info]bluegargantua Date: January 26th, 2004 11:23 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: There! Right there!


I care about what Vecana thinks and feels. But that's mainly cause I want his hand and eye.

Tom

archangelbeth From: [info]archangelbeth Date: January 26th, 2004 06:21 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: There! Right there!

Hm.

Wouldn't mind a few hundred more players, frankly.

Or fans.

O:>

All buying GIN, yeeeeeaaaaah.
umbran From: [info]umbran Date: January 26th, 2004 08:46 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: There! Right there!

D&D has players. In Nomine has fans.

You'd get that idea hanging around on RPG.net. Come by EN World for a while, and you'll find out that D&D has it's fans, too.

For example - A common complaint is that Greyhawk, D&D's nominal "default" setting, gets little or no development, while all the Drizzt wannabees get to have all the fun in the Forgotten Realms :)
jeregenest From: [info]jeregenest Date: January 29th, 2004 08:17 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: There! Right there!

Thats not a D&D fan, thats a setting fan. Most fans are fans of settings and not of system in my experience.
umbran From: [info]umbran Date: January 29th, 2004 10:08 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: There! Right there!

Then pretty much everything that [info]jadasc is talking about is being fan of the setting, rather than the game.

In referring to In Nomine and WoD, he referred to fans liking characters and fans taking sides in the conflicts that occur in the setting. The fact that IN and WoD games each only have one published setting for each game does not mean that the game and setting aren't different things.

And, in any event, there are also fans of the game mechanic itself, who think that d20 or D&D are the greatest thing since sliced bread, and who will drop anvils on your head if you attempt to impugn the perfection of their favored child :) Similarly, there are fans of the Storyteller mechanic, and of the Shadowrun mechanic, and of the d6 mechanic, and of the GURPS mechanics, all who react similarly when you write "This game mechanic SUXXORS".



jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 29th, 2004 10:32 am (UTC) (Link)

Crunch fandom.

Been listening as you and [info]jeregenest go back and forth on this one. You're both right in varying degrees.

When I consider whether something has a fandom following, I usually try and imagine two fans gathering around a water cooler and discussing the latest developments. When I do that for something like L5R or the World of Darkness games, the topics I imagine concern in-game events: Lucita rejoining the Sabbat, Dante coming out of hiding, Bayushi Kachiko is pregnant and who's the daddy. That kind of thing.

When I picture D&D fans... well, the thing about D&D3.X is that the setting is static from book to book. What changes seems to be the mechanical elements: 3.0 vs. 3.5; the new ranger vs. the old; new WotC books versus independent OGL designs.

I suppose the existence of "my hat of d02 know no limit" and other rallying cries implies the existence of crunch fandom -- people who take sides and follow the narrative of game development rather than story progression. Odd, but comprehensible.
umbran From: [info]umbran Date: January 29th, 2004 01:12 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Crunch fandom.

well, the thing about D&D3.X is that the setting is static from book to book.

I think that's a bit of a misconception; an easy one to come to if you don't personally follow the fiction and adventure modules of each setting. The more popular settings aren't really static.

The Forgotten Realms had it's "Time of Troubles", favored characters and gods and factions have come and gone and undergone change. IIRC, Planescape had it's mighty Modron March, and the death and rebirth of Orcus. Greyhawk has had the rebirth of Vecna as a deity. The Dragonlance setting had so much change that for a while it was represented by the SAGA system, rather than any D&D variant, and then came back to d20. I would not be surprised if the total verbiage of story told in the Forgottn Realms or Dragonlance worlds surpasses that of the WoD.

I think you are partly correct - there are "crunch fans" that have developed in the past few years. That phenomenon is probably based in the OGL and d20 licences and the relatively quick release of 3.5e, allowing for a great variety of d20 crunch out there. Most systems don't have such a selection of mechanics available to them in such a short time. That, however, doesn't eliminate the setting fans from the picture.
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 29th, 2004 04:04 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Crunch fandom.

Hate to nitpick, [info]umbran, but I chose my words carefully on that one. All the examples you cite are from AD&D 2.0 -- it's very much in the design specs of D&D 3.X to have a static setting. (Of course, the Players Guide to Faerun may well prove me wrong....)
umbran From: [info]umbran Date: January 30th, 2004 12:17 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Crunch fandom.

I don't see where you get the "design specs" thing. For D&D, the game mechanics are not strongly tied to the setting, and so the specs on the game design have little to no influence over the advancement of the setting.

This doubly so when WotC no longer directly controls development of many of the settings. White Wolf just put out a new Ravenloft Setting book, and Dragonlance just got a facelift. And WotC has a double-handful of adventures out that represent story advancement.

The examples I gave may have been older, but that's merely because I personally stopped reading the novels. You work in a bookstore - do you want to claim that WotC hasn't been publishing novels in the past three years? Looks like 10 books by "T.H. Lain" alone in the past three years....

You call all this static?
learnedax From: [info]learnedax Date: January 26th, 2004 10:27 am (UTC) (Link)
Interesting. You've explained quite well why I don't get the fan perspective here. I understand that people care about metaplot, just as I understand that people care about the Super Bowl. But neither of them effects me (except as secondary factors, e.g. older source books becoming scarce), and I don't really get the attitude. The correlation between fans of WoD et al and fans of professional sports is apt, and since I do not grasp the psyche of the latter, it's no real surprise that I find the former strange. As you say above, there are Players and then there are Fans - I can't see attaching myself to the tribulations of metaplot groups, because as a Player I only care about the system, not the politics.

Does that make sense? Do you get why I don't get it?
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 10:33 am (UTC) (Link)
Does that make sense? Do you get why I don't get it?

It's tricky. I can comprehend that there are people who don't enjoy the whole "fandom" mentality, and I can extrapolate to people who don't understand why it persists. But even those two groups have to acknowledge that there are an awful lot of them out there, and that their opinions matter.

Moreover, and more to the point, I really don't need you to get it, except as a sort of approbation. You're not developing an RPG and dealing with an aggrieved fan base. It'd be nice if you could understand what the fans are on about, but it doesn't strike me as a necessary sort of lesson.

Thank you for reading it, though. :)
bluegargantua From: [info]bluegargantua Date: January 26th, 2004 11:30 am (UTC) (Link)

Hmmm...


So...theoretically, you could build a "game" that was really nothing but fan base. There'd be sides to pick and stories to follow, but there wouldn't have to be much of a "game" to play. It could even be a really crappy game as long as it reached in and caught your imagination.

I suppose this sort of thing happens with licensed material all the time. I'm thinking Star Wars, Star Trek and Warcraft are the big ones here, but there are certainly others. It's just a lot harder for things to go the other way from game to licensed stuff (and even Vampire didn't cross-over the way outside stuff comes in).

Still, if you could harness it...it'd be a never-ending stream of revenue. You'd keep making stuff and fans would keep buying it. You could sell pure crap and people would buy it like those sports collectable shows on TV.

"Merchandising!"
Tom
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 11:38 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Hmmm...

So...theoretically, you could build a "game" that was really nothing but fan base. There'd be sides to pick and stories to follow, but there wouldn't have to be much of a "game" to play. It could even be a really crappy game as long as it reached in and caught your imagination.

I suppose this sort of thing happens with licensed material all the time. I'm thinking Star Wars, Star Trek and Warcraft are the big ones here, but there are certainly others.


You're not wrong in the least. What you've got in these cases is a situation where "playing the roleplaying game" is one of a number of valid ways toward the goal of "interacting in and claiming identification with the setting." "Watching the t.v. show," "wearing the t-shirt/jewelry," "attending the convention," "buying the graphic novel," "playing the videogame/play-by-post," among others.

It's just a lot harder for things to go the other way from game to licensed stuff (and even Vampire didn't cross-over the way outside stuff comes in). Still, if you could harness it...it'd be a never-ending stream of revenue. You'd keep making stuff and fans would keep buying it. You could sell pure crap and people would buy it like those sports collectable shows on TV.

You could. But there's a certain point of diminishing returns -- if the primary material descends below a certain level of satisfactory content, it no longer makes the fan base feel important or valued for taking part in it. Then, they start to desert the setting. Once could argue that that's what's happening with Star Trek now.
umbran From: [info]umbran Date: January 26th, 2004 08:41 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Hmmm...

So...theoretically, you could build a "game" that was really nothing but fan base. There'd be sides to pick and stories to follow, but there wouldn't have to be much of a "game" to play...

Too late. It's been done. It's called Science Fiction fandom. :)

And in today's Sci-Fi fandom, you see similar frustrations. Fans of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time come to mind - had a couple of books that didn't actually give them much new information about the characters and plots, and they've started getting a little cheesed off. Sounds like the same basic phenomenon.
jeregenest From: [info]jeregenest Date: January 29th, 2004 08:21 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Hmmm...

I'd argue that some of the successful licensed games do that right now. There are several that mechanistically I just don't see what the big deal is.
grimraven From: [info]grimraven Date: January 26th, 2004 12:37 pm (UTC) (Link)
There is something I have noticed over the years. Players of Roleplaying Games have one base thing in common: they want to feel like they are a part of the world they play in.

Sometimes it's as simple as going to a tabletop, or a LARP and having your characters actions make an impact on the nights events, or more obtuse, like having your favorite game do things in it's cannon that you like.

A quick tangent: Continuity. Continuity is a big factor. Life is unpredictable, but in that it is constant. People want thier worlds to be constant, if it isn't, they often get lost. If something has continuity, you can relate with other people almost like it was a shared experience. If you don't have it you get people form factions. Try being a 'Highlander' fan. Tangent done.

Some games are different. D&D is a building block game. You are given the blocks, but you are the one who builds the building. They do have pre-packaged buildings in the form of settings, like Forgotten Realms, or Ravenloft. Both of which I am a FAN of.

I agree with you though; there are PLAYERS and there are FANS. A company who has a strong fanbase should not forget those fans, lest they be doomed in the end.

Just my opinion.



demiurgent From: [info]demiurgent Date: January 26th, 2004 01:32 pm (UTC) (Link)
So... what about the guys who watch the Super Bowl because they want to watch the commercials?

Seriously.

I haven't played Vampire since 1992 -- I have no emotional stake in any of the sides, and I have no chronicle to run, so I neither have a game to resolve nor a team to root for. And yet, I'm interested in Gehenna and the rest of the various Armageddons WW's putting out. I'm interested because I want to see how clever the different solutions are, how many of them are things I could have just as easily thought of myself, and how good the flavortext is.

Had the book been a simple "here is what we've been leading up to all this time and here's the end of it all and now it's over and this is what happened, period..." it wouldn't have interested me at all.

But then, I'm weird.
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 01:42 pm (UTC) (Link)
You might well be. :)

If you're watching the Super Bowl to see the commercials, you're still piggybacking on the fandom of the people who are cheering for one side or the other. If there were no Big Game, the advertisers wouldn't pull out the stops in their commercials for the people who were watching. So, even if you aren't a fan, the fandom benefits you.

I can understand your position. It's sort of like watching the Big Game as a strategy exercise. The plays themselves are more important to you than the teams playing or the players who make them. That's comprehensible. On the other hand, you're less likely to actually buy the book or buy future books than either a player or a fan, so you're hard to design for.
braydz From: [info]braydz Date: January 26th, 2004 02:01 pm (UTC) (Link)
Thank you for differentiating between fans and participants as they apply to gaming (participants being players).
It helps me codify my feelings and responses to different RPGs and gaming in general.

Danke.
jadasc From: [info]jadasc Date: January 26th, 2004 02:04 pm (UTC) (Link)
Bitte. :)

I would like to stress, though, that I consider both players and fans participants in the adventure-gaming hobby. Much love to all y'all.
braydz From: [info]braydz Date: January 27th, 2004 12:22 pm (UTC) (Link)
Oh most definitely, I certainly didn't mean to imply otherwise if I did.
I just find the distinction useful in describing relationships with the hobby, particularly my own

For example I'm a fan of W:tO, a HUGE fan, but not a player.
Mostly that's just because I've never really had a chance to play. Even so though, it's something that's never leaving my bookshelf.
I mean, to be gotten rid of. It does leave on occassion, it just comes back as well. :)
beloitst From: [info]beloitst Date: January 26th, 2004 09:03 pm (UTC) (Link)

This was good

Through both your original post and through the comments, you've captured my position perfectly.

I don't care how I can use Gehenna or Armegeddon in "my" game -- I didn't get interested in Vampire and the rest of the World of Darkness for it's flexibility. If I wanted that, I would play GURPS or DnD.

I care about story, and more importantly, I care about definative story. White Wolf put out literally hundreds of titles in the the Vampire line, all (supposedly) based of a single story....and then, when it comes time to end it, gives you 4 endings to choose from.

Screw that. I don't want to choose how the game ends. I want to know how the game ends. And then, when I get together with my game group, I can take or leave that ending, use it, lose it, abuse it, ignore it...but that's a choice I can make based on the end.

I have to admit -- I'm a fan. I'm a fan of the World of Darkness, which is why I was excited to hear it was ending, because the quality of product and story was declining. And because of that, I am very disappointed in the Pix Mix armegeddon. I feel, from a sotry perspective, that it's a let down. All the hype for no big secrets at the end.

Which is kind of a let down in itself -- you mean, all this time, you didn't KNOW? You just made it up as you went along? This was all just the product of people saying, "Well, maybe it would be cool if..."

And that's a let down to.

So yeah -- from the point of gamer fandom, I feel cheated. They're not telling us how the world ends. They're just writing supplements for STs who haven't bothered to write their own ending to the story.

I only bought Gehenna because I had a gift certificate and didn't need to spend my own money on it.

But I still look forward to what comes after, because I do have confidence in the Storyteller system and mechanics, and I have confidence in White Wolf's ability to put out good product.
fhionnuiscetine From: [info]fhionnuiscetine Date: January 27th, 2004 04:34 am (UTC) (Link)
Heh.

See, not to be one-upping but... this kind of shit is EXACTLY why I took a step back from the game... It's why I sold my books and decided not to buy anymore of them.... (I still am undecided whether we actually need a second Revised...thoughts?). Also why I do not know the fable-y stuff as well as you... At one point I was all into it and then I made this mental leap from "this part seems like they did it really shoddily" to "they're just raping me for money" to "what are they gonna do when it gets boring?"

Admittedly that was a slice. Maybe 45%. Another 5% was never finding a good game till now (LARPers at SLC are SCARY!!!), 10% was time, and 10% was the culmination of every freaky person I didn't like who I met through gaming, and how many wasted braincells went to them, and all the drama (I told you my stupid Daughters of Cacaphony story, right? With the player who was completely unhinged and was my domitor IC? :P) and how, when I played, I got WAY too into it (Just trust me on that one.)

So... all I'm sayin' is.... Thank you for being the ST so I don't have to read the story arc that will never finish nor buy more books nor re-learn so so so so so many dice rolls, nor any of the other stuff.

I get to just be a Vampire.

And it is fun.

And there was much rejoicing.

Except that it all still reminds me of how I got completely addicted to ST:TNG watching episodes airing over in Ireland which were several seasons behind, and coming home to the evil empire (us, unfortunately) to learn the show was being canceled in about 4 weeks.

But hey. You didn't write the timeline. And you are certainly not a lazy ST. In my tiny little corner of the vamp world, life is good. :)

By the way, I could have sworn I heard your [info]tikva say "Ssh!" to her alarm clock just now, and it was very cute. ;)

*back in corner now*

*pause*

Wait, no.

*back in corner, Obfuscated* ;)

umbran From: [info]umbran Date: January 27th, 2004 11:01 am (UTC) (Link)
(I still am undecided whether we actually need a second Revised...thoughts?)

Whether or not players and fans need it, White Wolf probably needs it. There is a point where the small RPG market gets saturated with the old stuff, so that sales drop and cease to be able to support the company. New versions re-invigorate sales.

Plus, in a game with such strong metaplot, there's a point at which the meta-plot becomes a burden. There's so much of it that one neds to refer to and be consistent with that it begins to stifle creativity and get in the way of new and refreshing content.
36 comments or Leave a comment
profile
Jason
User: [info]jadasc
Name: Jason
calendar
Back November 2008
1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30
links