[MUD-Dev] A footnote to Procedural Storytelling

[Lee Sheldon]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu
> [mailto:mud-dev-admin at kanga.nu]On Behalf Of
> Raph Koster
> Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 11:18 PM
> To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
> Subject: RE: [MUD-Dev] A footnote to Procedural Storytelling

> This is what I refer to as the divide between a priori
> storytelling and post
> facto storytelling. The difference between a sequence of
> events constructed
> in advance by an author to have narrative shape, and a
> sequence of events
> selected from a constellation of events by an author after
> the fact with the
> purpose of shaping it narratively.
>
> Muds lend themselves very naturally to the latter, and in
> fact we see it all
> the time. They aren't nearly as good for the former. But there is an
> expectation among the playerbase that the former is what
> storytelling IS.
> This expectation also exists among the designers to a lesser
> extent (cf
> Lee's dislike of the "sandbox theory").

lol, Raph, are you saying I'm more plugged into the playerbase than most
designers, or just as deluded?  A more serious question of course is: should
we cater to the a priori expectation, or teach them a new way of
experiencing stories?  For the most part we seem mighty bent on the latter.

> Either way, though, a mdoerately high degree of skill is
> required. It takes
> significant effort and storytelling ability to shape past
> events into a
> narrative structure in the post facto model, just as it does
> to shape them
> in advance in the a priori model.

Skill required of course.  You know I won't argue against that.  I think
many have fallen back on the post facto model because the tools for that are
familiar tools.  The tools for a priori are alien to many designers, so they
either don't make the attempt, or fail, and don't try a second time.

> A very real concern with distributed server models such as
> the Neverwinter
> Nights model/player-run shards model, and a very real concern
> for the post
> facto model, would be whether there are enough "authors" out
> there to supply
> the desired amount of fiction. After all, there's arguably less than a
> quarter million roleplayers total in the world, and a far
> fewer amount who
> are decent interactive storytellers in the pen and paper
> medium. We can see
> the scarcity of quality talent and skill sets in evidence in
> the published
> interactive video games today.

A necessary distinction should be made here (and is implicit) in my
statement above.  There may be more of that "talent" out there than is
obvious because the "craft" has yet to be learned.

> A good counter-question is whether players really care about
> the quality, if
> they get to participate; Murray's example in other words. As
> long as you are
> not merely spectating, the alleged story can be shallow as
> can be and dull
> as dishwater, perhaps? This increases the author pool substantially.

Hehe.  The first story maybe.  But there is an epilogue to Murray's example:
the second improv is not quite as entertaining to the participants, and the
third even less so.

Lee




_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev