[MUD-Dev] RE: Storied Games

Travis Casey efindel at earthlink.net
Thu Nov 29 15:43:41 New Zealand Daylight Time 2001

Thursday, November 29, 2001, 10:24:54 AM, Dave Rickey wrote:
> From: Lee Sheldon <linearno at gte.net>
>> From: Paul Schwanz

>>> The sandbox approach.  Here, the stories are totally up to the
>>> players. The developer may help facilitate player storytelling
>>> by providing in-game medium and forums for such, but when it
>>> comes to the stories themselves, they take a hands-off approach.
>>> Interaction will typically by the main focus, which is fortunate
>>> since the sort of stories that arise from this environment may
>>> leave a lot to be desired. The problem is not only that the
>>> storytellers are amateurs, but also that what they are trying to
>>> tell (whether deliberately or simply through interaction) can be
>>> quite disjointed or even at odds with other stories being told.

>> Please explain this to Dave and Derek.

> I understand it perfectly.  The stories told in a P&P session are
> hardly high drama, either.  Doesn't matter, the players care about
> them, because they are *theirs*.

I think there's something being missed here; much of the appeal in a
story is not in the events, characters, etc., but in the way the
story is *told*.  Take Shakespeare's plays, for example -- most of
them were based on existing stories and plays.  But it's
Shakespeare's version that's remembered -- not because the things
*in* the story are different, but because of the way he told them.

A good storyteller can make even a simple story appealing; a bad one
can make even a complex and meaningful one seem dull and boring.

A log capture from a mud isn't likely to make a good story -- but
the *events* in that capture, filtered through a good storyteller,

Travis Casey
efindel at earthlink.net

MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list